40 ms·
IMO this book does a rather good job of that. And the problems you describe is an ongoing theme throughout the series. For example, they learn that they canno
by rmah 5y ago
IMO this book does a rather good job of that. And the problems you describe is an ongoing theme throughout the series.
For example, they learn that they cannot even make WW1 level weapons (they settle on a sort of hybrid civil-war era rifles + flintlocks for mass production because of problems making percussion caps, IIRC). And they learn quickly that they can't make antibiotics at more than small lot lab amounts. A lot of their retooling is cannibalizing parts from existing equipment for different uses.
- ghaff 5y agoIt's been a long time since I read that particular book. It was more of a general comment about how it often seems in these sorts of books that one smart person with some instructions can basically advance technology by hundreds of years in a month or so.
- rmah 5y agoUnderstood. But that doesn't happen in 1632.
- LanceH 5y agoNot saying they got all tech decisions right, but they did handle it by falling back many steps, using current knowledge to build crude antique tech. They had more concern with bootstrapping than jumping straight to launching satellites. They were also concerned with the scarcity and value of rather mundane things in our lives today, like rubber tires, plastic bottles, etc... Some low hanging advances like clean sheets and washing your hand among doctors.
- eru 5y agoThat's exactly why the author sends back a whole small town (with libraries etc), instead of just a single smart person.