5. 1950 In fifteen years the housing shortage will be solved by a "breakthrough" into new technology which will make every house now standing as obsolete as privies.
1965 Here I fell flat on my face. There has been no breakthrough in housing, nor is any now in prospect - instead the ancient, wasteful methods of building are now being confirmed by public subsidies. The degree of our backwardness in the field is hard to grasp; we have never seen a modern house. Think what an automobile would be if each one were custom - built from materials fetched to your home - what would it look like, what would it do, and how much would it cost. But don't set the cost lower than $100,000 or the speed higher than 10 rph, if you want to be realistic about the centuries of difference between the housing industry and the automotive industry.
I underestimated (through wishful thinking) the power of human stupidity - a fault fatal to prophecy.
1980 I'm still flat on my face with my nose rubbed in the mud; the situation is worse than ever. See A BATHROOM OF HER OWN on page 244. And that figure of $100,000 just above was with gold at $35 per troy ounce - so change it to one million dollars - or call it 2700 troy ounces of gold. Or forget it. The point is that it would be very nearly impossible to build even a clunker automobile at any price if we built them the way we build houses.
We have the technology to build cheap, beautiful, efficient, flexible (modular method) houses, extremely comfortable and with the durability of a Rolls Royce. But I cannot guess when (if ever) the powers that be (local bureaucrats, unions, building materials suppliers, county and state officials) will permit us poor serfs to have modern housing.
6. 1950 We'll all be getting a little hungry by and by.
1965 No new comment.
1980 Not necessarily. In 1950 I was too pessimistic concerning population. Now I suspect that the controlling parameter is oil. In modern agriculture oil is the prime factor - as power for farm machinery (obviously) but also for insecticides and for fertilizers. Since our oil policies in Washington are about as boneheaded - counterproductive - as they can be, I have no way to guess how much food we can raise in 2000 A.D. But no one in the United States should be hungry in 2000 A.D. - unless we are conquered and occupied.
7. 1950 The cult of the phony in art will disappear. So - called "modern art" will be discussed only by psychiatrists.
1965 No new comment.
1980 One may hope. But art reflects culture and the world is even nuttier now than it was in 1950; these are the Crazy Years. But, while "fine" art continues to look like the work of retarded monkeys, commercial art grows steadily better.
8. 1950 Freud will be classed as a pre - scientific, intuitive pioneer and psychoanalysis will be replaced by a growing, changing "operational psychology" based on measurement and prediction.
1965 No new comment.
1980 This prediction is beginning to come true. Freud is no longer taken seriously by informed people. More and more professional psychologists are skilled in appropriate mathematics; most of the younger ones understand inductive methodology and the nature of scientific confirmation and are trying hard to put rigor into their extremely difficult, still inchoate subject. For some of the current progress see Dr. Pournelle's book, cited on page 325.
By 2000 A.D. we will know a great deal about how the brain functions ... whereas in 1900 what little we knew was wrong.
I do not predict that the basic mystery of psychology - how mass arranged in certain complex patterns becomes aware of itself - will be solved by 2000 A.D. I hope so but do not expect it.
9. 1950 Cancer, the common cold, and tooth decay will all be conquered; the revolutionary new problem in medical research will be to accomplish "regeneration," i.e., to enable a man to grow a new leg, rather than fit him with an artificial limb.
1965 In the meantime spectacular progress has been made in organ transplants - and the problem of regeneration is related to this one. Biochemistry and genetics have made a spectacular breakthrough in "cracking the genetic code." It is a tiny crack, however, with a long way to go before we will have the human chromosomes charted and still longer before we will be able to "tailor" human beings by gene manipulation. The possibility is there - but not by year 2000. This is probably just as well. If we aren't bright enough to build decent houses, are we bright enough to play God with the architecture of human beings?
1980 I see no reason to change this prediction if you will let me elaborate (weasel) a little. "The common cold" is a portmanteau expression for upper respiratory infections which appear to be caused by a very large number of different viruses. Viruses are pesky things. It is possible to immunize against them, e.g., vaccination against smallpox, a virus disease. But there are almost no chemotherapies, medicines, against viruses. That is why "the common cold" is treated much the same way today as in 1900, i.e., support the patient with bed rest, liquids, aspirin to make him more comfortable, keep him warm. This was standard in 1900 and it is still standard in 1980.
It is probable that your body makes antibodies against the virus of any cold you catch. But this gives you no protection against that virus's hundreds of close relatives found in any airport, theater, supermarket, or gust of dust off the street. In the meantime, while his kinfolk take turns making you miserable, virus #1 has mutated and you have no antibodies against the mutation.
Good news: Oncology (cancer), immunology, hematology, and "the common cold" turn out to be strongly interrelated subjects; research in all these is moving fast - and a real breakthrough in any one might mean a breakthrough in all.
10. 1950 By the end of this century mankind will have explored this solar system, and the first ship intended to reach the nearest star will be a building.
1965 Our editor suggested that I had been too optimistic on this one - but I still stand by it. It is still thirty - five years to the end of the century. For perspective; look back thirty - five years to 1930 - the American Rocket Society had not yet been founded. Another curve, similar to the one herewith in shape but derived entirely from speed of transportation, extrapolates to show faster - than - light travel by year 2000. I guess I'm chicken, for I am not predicting FTL ships by then, if ever. But the prediction still stands without hedging.
1980 My money is still on the table at twenty years and counting. Senator Proxmire can't live forever. In the last 101/2 years men have been to the Moon several times; much of the Solar system has been most thoroughly explored within the limits of "black box" technology and more will be visited before this year is out.
Ah, but not explored by men - and the distances are so great. Surely they are... by free - fall orbits, which is all that we have been using. But there are numerous proposals (and not all ours!) for constant - boost ships, proposals that require R&D on present art only - no breakthroughs.
Reach for your pocket calculator and figure how long it would take to make a trip to Mars and back if your ship could boost at one - tenth gee. We will omit some trivia by making it from parking orbit to parking orbit, use straight - line trajectories, and ignore the Sun's field - we'll be going uphill to Mars, downhill to Earth; what we lose on the roundabouts we win on the shys.
These casual assumptions would cause Dan Alderson, ballistician at Jet Propulsion Laboratory, to faint. But after he comes out of his faint he would agree that our answers would be of correct close order of magnitude - and all I'm trying to prove is that even a slight constant boost makes an enormous difference in touring the Solar System. (Late in the 21st century we'll offer the Economy Tour: Ten Planets in Ten Days.)