What has SF NOT predicted?

[Steve Jordan]

It was recently brought to my attention that no SF author accurately predicted the live televising of our first Moon landing. (Supposedly Heinlein predicted it would be possible, but that the equipment would be too heavy to be brought on a Moon mission.)

It was then suggested that no SF author accurately predicted the reigning-in of our space program after the Moon landings, leaving us with unmanned probes, no lunar settlements, and no further human visitations to any other planets by 2000.

I've done some light research, and as far as I can determine, no SF author predicted the lowly transistor before its discovery at Bell Labs in 1947. Although its cousin, the semiconductor crystal, was demonstrated as early as 1906, no one made the "quantum leap" beyond the technology of vacuum tubes to solid-state transistors until Bell developed the first device out of numerous studies and patents, some of which had been around for decades. SF stories of incredibly-miniaturized "transistorized" electronics all appear to have come after that.

Does anyone know EITHER of any refutations to the above examples, OR of any other modern developments that were not predicted by SF writers?

[chrispenycate]

The reigning in of the space program for different reasons, not just the "well, we've done that, clever, weren't we? now we don't need to do it again" argument occured both in Heinlein's "Blowups happen" (because the technical meansof doing it had become too unsafe) and Blish's "Cities in flight" (because an authoritarian government couldn't allow people to fly out of their infuence)

Transistors (and definitely integrated circuits) might not have been specifically predicted, but some forrm of solid state electronics can be assumed for Asimov's robots (all right, positronics) and a number of logic devices in "golden age" stories used crystals in their logic (I don't know if that was a hangover from crystal set radios, or just that they were nice and glittery.
Nobody predicted the democretisation of the ENIACs and Leo giant computers, the reduction of size and price that has lead to them getting into everything, or the same thing happening to make televisions cheap enough to watch while you starve to death.
In fact, apart from things that have specifically been invented for a story (Waldo, the slug in the dragon in the sea) most of the predictions have been suficiently imprcise that, like any fortune teller, the author can say "Lasers? I had death rays in my stories decades before.
And authors are still using crystals because they're nice and glittery, and trying to incorporate recent gadgets into their stories so we'll say "Verne, he invented the submarine, he couldn't possibly have known that experiments were going on with prototypes in his own country.
ButI'll admit, when I saw the recent report or the japanese origami reentry vessels I did think "Robor the conqueror".

[Lith]

The omnipresence of cellphones and texting. Communicators don't quite cut it; they're still used too sparingly and seriously.

[iansales]

Seems a bit of a pointless argument. Science fiction is not futurism. You might as well ask why techno-thrillers never predicted 911.

[Steve Jordan]

Originally Posted by chrispenycate

Transistors (and definitely integrated circuits) might not have been specifically predicted, but some forrm of solid state electronics can be assumed for Asimov's robots (all right, positronics) and a number of logic devices in "golden age" stories used crystals in their logic (I don't know if that was a hangover from crystal set radios, or just that they were nice and glittery.

Yes, it was a reference to crystal radio semiconductors, the sort of cousin to the transistor. Asimov was deliberately vague about his "positronics," as he was about most of the technology he wrote about (one of the things that make his work so timeless). All the same, I'm not sure that implies a "prediction" of solid-state electronics based on transistors. (His play on words to create "positronics" was similar to Star Trek's use of similar words, like "duotronic," "neutronium," and "dilithium" to imply better versions of familiar processes.)

(Edit: Asimov's "I, Robot" was published in 1950. Bell announced the transistor in 1948. Although some of Asimov's robot stories may have been written prior to 48, they also had some editing done when compiled into the collection published in 50. Being interested in science, Asimov may have also been privy to some of the research into solid-state electronics being done at the time. Where does that put "positronics?" I honestly don't know.)

Originally Posted by chrispenycate

In fact, apart from things that have specifically been invented for a story (Waldo, the slug in the dragon in the sea) most of the predictions have been suficiently imprcise that, like any fortune teller, the author can say "Lasers? I had death rays in my stories decades before.

That's why I was thinking specifically of technological advances/developments that SF authors did NOT guess at before they happened, like the televised Moon landing. Yes, it's often easy to point to something that happened, like the invention of the laser, and say, "Well, my story had vacuum-tube particle emittor beams, and that's like lasers." But as Lith pointed out, texting on a device designed for voice communication was certainly missed (the omnipresence of cellphones itself, has been suggested by many authors... just not the texting part).

@Ian: No, I wouldn't expect authors to predict something that esoteric. I'm just talking about the kind of historical events and details that SF authors are known to expend a lot of thought on divining in advance (like flights to the Moon, the Internet, atomic power, life on other planets). Yes, it's a very nebulous thing.

Another example: I believe no SF author predicted the discovery of life on this planet in some of its most harsh environments, specifically the microorganisms that have been discovered at the edge of sub-oceanic volcanic fissures, with temperatures in the multi-hundreds of degrees, crushing ocean pressure, and highly toxic and corrosive chemical exhausts. The discovery was hailed by many (notably Arthur C. Clarke) as being strong evidence that life is hearty enough to find purchase in the most harsh environments, and therefore may be more common in the galaxy than we might think.

[Dave]

I think that last example is a little different to the others.

It may be easy to be writer, because you don't need a research budget, and there are no committees that you have to run ideas past, and no shareholders and stakeholders to please, so you are allowed to purely brainstorm, and use any throw-away ideas. However, good inventions, and innovative uses of new technology, they are money-making ideas, and why waste those ideas on a story when you could become the next Bill Gates?

In contrast, I too am surprised that no one predicted the deep ocean micro-organisms you described before they were found. Possibly, it is because alien life seems so much more interesting, that we overlook the wide variety of life that already exists on Earth. If you look closely, in detail, at a spider or a crab, there is nothing more 'alien' when compared to a mammal.

[andrew.v.spencer]

Nobody predicted my development of the snorkwrangler.

[Steve Jordan]

Originally Posted by Dave

I think that last example is a little different to the others...

Yes, it's not a technical idea, but the same principal applies.

Originally Posted by Dave

In contrast, I too am surprised that no one predicted the deep ocean micro-organisms you described before they were found. Possibly, it is because alien life seems so much more interesting, that we overlook the wide variety of life that already exists on Earth. If you look closely, in detail, at a spider or a crab, there is nothing more 'alien' when compared to a mammal.

I, myself, have always believed that insects and arachnids are actual alien species, hiding in plain sight among us on Earth...

(...and when it's proven that they are, you can say that I predicted it first! Ha-ha!)

[RVM45]

.....Has any science fiction writer yet predicted that when vacumn tubes truly come of age; that transisters will be but a temporary abberation?

.....It's true, you know.

.....RVM45

[Sire Of Dragons]

LOL What the hell is a snork wrangler? is that anything like a smurf wrangler? HAHA

[matt-browne-sfw]

Quantum entanglement

[andrew.v.spencer]

SF didn't predict my uncle would explode.


...or that I would have extra strong coffee for breakfast.

Stoopid science fiction writers.

[Steve Jordan]

Originally Posted by matt-browne-sfw

Quantum entanglement

Ah, yes... there's so much of quantum physics that SF has never managed to work out... primarily, I think, because there's still so much of it that quantum scientists don't even understand.

Our last 50 years of electronics and integrated circuit designs are based on quantum theories, despite the fact that scientists and engineers can't actually agree on specifically what's happening in there... just that the results are consistent and measurable...

[Tobytwo]

I think what SF (espeically Gold Age stuff) sometimes doesn't predict is that society can go back as well as forward. Just because time passes doesn't mean either people or technology will get better or even more sane. Twenty years ago, who would have predicted that the main threat to democracy would come from theocratic loonies whose beliefs come straight from the Middle Ages? (Well, maybe Frank Herbert).

The big exception is apocalypses. That said, post-apocalyptic stories are often not directly realistic, but use armageddon as a way of wiping the slate clean to allow major changes to be discussed in the story without other factors intruding.

[Anatedhrai]

The Pill.

Well, genre SF did have the excuse that it was generally quite prudish about sex until at least the mid 60s, although Philip José Farmer did break a few taboos the decade before.