5 ms·

Knowledge builds on knowledge, and (so far as we know) there's no shortcut to the gradual acquisition of knowledge. I think this is best exemplified by one par

Knowledge builds on knowledge, and (so far as we know) there's no shortcut to the gradual acquisition of knowledge. I think this is best exemplified by one particular episode of the YouTube "Primitive Technology" series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVV4xeWBIxE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVV4xeWBIxE . In this video, the creator builds a forge blower from sticks, leaves, stones, and vines. All materials that would've been available to primitive man 40,000 years (or more) ago... ...but the forge blower wasn't known to human kind until the 1600s! In other words, the creator of the "Primitive Technology" videos was able to build a forge blower because he knew about the concept (and, presumably, the principles of pressure and centrifugal force that make it all work). Those had to be discovered through thousands of years of an arduous process of trial, error, analysis, and teaching. So, the Einstein of 40,000 years ago likely existed, but he may have only been able to discover and convince others to, say, pre-burn wood to generate charcoal. In terms of an advancement over existing technology, I'd argue such an advance would be even more significant than General Relativity, and yet it's technology that we can run down to the corner store and procure for $5 a bag today.

TeMPOraL 8y ago
Then there was economics that also complicated things. Crude steam engines were already constructed in the ancient world. From what we know, those people couldn't figure much need for them, beyond spicing up your temple experience with magically moving statues. They lacked both the necessary knowledge to make good use of their invention, as well as an immediate practical use for it.
- bhtru 8y ago
  There weren’t the necessary economic conditions to allow for the development and use of steam engines in antiquity. See Steve Theodore’s answer on Quora for more: https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-the-industrial-revolution-occur-in-ancient-Rome-or-Greece?share=1 https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-the-industrial-revolution-oc...
travmatt 8y ago
But that still doesn’t explain why. Hero of Alexandria created a rudimentary contraption that was an obvious predecessor to the steam engine nearly 2000 years before the invention of the steam engine. Why did it take two millennia to build upon his ideas?
- opportune 8y ago
  Education levels were low and the population was much lower, essentially everybody lived in poverty, the scientific method hadn't been adopted and people in general did a very poor job separating religion/superstition with the workings of the natural world. Also information travelled slowly/not at all, and books were very expensive - so in the case of the steam engine, only very few people probably ever even heard about the engine after Hero's death for many hundreds of years. There are tons of reasons. Really the past 250 years have been the extreme exception to the more "normal" state - it might be more appropriate to ask what we did in this time that changed things so much
- canhascodez 8y ago
  James Watt was able to go around England installing steam pumps in coal mines. Why was Hero of Alexander not able to do the same thing?
  - animal531 8y ago
    Because even though he invented a basic steam engine they still didn't have nearly the material science we do. Their engines wasn't able to create and safely contain enough pressure to do anything useful.

TeMPOraL 8y ago

Then there was economics that also complicated things. Crude steam engines were already constructed in the ancient world. From what we know, those people couldn't figure much need for them, beyond spicing up your temple experience with magically moving statues. They lacked both the necessary knowledge to make good use of their invention, as well as an immediate practical use for it.

bhtru 8y ago
There weren’t the necessary economic conditions to allow for the development and use of steam engines in antiquity. See Steve Theodore’s answer on Quora for more: https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-the-industrial-revolution-occur-in-ancient-Rome-or-Greece?share=1 https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-the-industrial-revolution-oc...

travmatt 8y ago

But that still doesn’t explain why. Hero of Alexandria created a rudimentary contraption that was an obvious predecessor to the steam engine nearly 2000 years before the invention of the steam engine. Why did it take two millennia to build upon his ideas?

opportune 8y ago
Education levels were low and the population was much lower, essentially everybody lived in poverty, the scientific method hadn't been adopted and people in general did a very poor job separating religion/superstition with the workings of the natural world. Also information travelled slowly/not at all, and books were very expensive - so in the case of the steam engine, only very few people probably ever even heard about the engine after Hero's death for many hundreds of years. There are tons of reasons. Really the past 250 years have been the extreme exception to the more "normal" state - it might be more appropriate to ask what we did in this time that changed things so much
canhascodez 8y ago
James Watt was able to go around England installing steam pumps in coal mines. Why was Hero of Alexander not able to do the same thing?
- animal531 8y ago
  Because even though he invented a basic steam engine they still didn't have nearly the material science we do. Their engines wasn't able to create and safely contain enough pressure to do anything useful.