What are yours? (You can also dispute others' predictions -- this is TGD -- but I'm especially interested in hearing new ones, and the reasons for them.)
They can be contingent on events (if so-and-so gets elected... if EU keeps the Euro...).
Here are some of my own.
* We'll start seeing longer wait times and higher prices for medical treatment, as we have a growing doctor shortage. Could be fixed if Obamacare became TrainingMoreDoctorsCare. See the "Insurance Revisited" thread near the end for a source on that.
* The beginning of a trend, which won't be noticed yet, toward less technical development, as universities meet new White House Title IX guidelines the only way they can: by shedding male engineering students. This will greatly reduce the number of engineers. It'll take a while for this to hurt those who aren't college-age, but we'll all feel it later. Maybe we'll be fortunate and would-be engineers can be educated abroad. Or maybe Congress or the courts will intervene.
* The recession either continues -- it would be surprising based on past recessions; this one should be over, but the unprecedented explosion of regulation can be expected to have some unprecedented effect -- or, if it recovers, we'll get inflation, as the money printed for TARP and the past 4 years of deficits starts being spent.
* Europe continues to put off the collapse of the euro until Germany's debts start looking like Spain's, and then it collapses, and we get a double-dip.
Regarding the Title IX. I doubt they will shed male engineering students. The liberals have some background in this area specifically in fire departments around the country. The trick is to simply lower the requirements that keep out who ever can't get accepted. Having to take Calculus I, II and III will need to be scrapped. Long division is also too hard so we need to get rid of that also. They new math requirements will be to point out the number 0-9 on your cell phone. Some may think that having engineers who can't do math design our bridges and elevators might be dangerous. If you are one of those racist sexists then you should stop thinking about results and outcomes and think about how those people feel who don't like math but still want to be an engineer. It will work it's self out.
So, in the end with Title IX we'll have American women working with green carded men to design and build our infrastructure and technology. American men will be in the military, emptying trash, or driving trucks. Then it's going to be "Not enough women are doing those things", and we'll have unfair competition for those jobs as well. This is a whole 'nother debate.
All three of which are integral to success in DiffyQ I and DiffyQ II which basically governs all engineering.
Calculus, long division and knowing numbers 0-9?
Essentially. With calc I-III and an understanding of trig and algebra, you can figure out DiffyQ I and II
What are the practical applications of that field?
Let's start with Calc I:
Using the critical and extreme value theroems I can find a local maximum or minimum which can then be used to optimize some process.
Onto Calc 2:
With a Taylor's series I can approximate a function such as sin(x). Most personal calculators use a taylor's series to do this. Furthermore I can use the shell method (or others) to determine the volume or an irregular shaped solid whcih from a known density of a material can be used to determine the mass of that object.
A flux integral is extremely useful in physics and engineering. They have applications in determing heat flow an electrical fields, etc.
Basically everything that ever had to do with a mathematical model or formula to calculate anything. No joke. Think of bacterial growth and such.
Any of your engineering or science fields use differential equations. They are used to describe physical processes in mathematical form. Even some of your business math is derived using calculus and differential equations but have been distilled into simple algebraic math or graphic representations.
It's a big change. Maybe the admin won't be able to accomplish it. My experience in higher ed is that women are more gifted academically, on average, than our men students. They just don't want to be engineers.
Or that women naturally do better in lecture environements compared to oh say application environments as reflected by multiple studies.
I find that hard to believe.
I am aware of these studies, but up until I see that the best students or professors in pol sci - the only field of which I have enough experience to talk - are women, the statistics will not persuade me.
If it should happen in the next generations that excellence beyond the basic academic criteria (entry, grades, graduation) is claimed by women, then I'll believe it.
My experience in the liberal arts, philosophy courses, & pol sci suggests that the teaching ('lecture environment'?) runs away like mad from things that might interest young men. I do not mean it's done intentionally; but that does not matter when you see the results...