4 ms·
The first amplifying vacuum tube was patented in 1908 and you could produce a crude computer from that, even if terribly inefficient. I imagine civilisation wo
by Tade0 3y ago
The first amplifying vacuum tube was patented in 1908 and you could produce a crude computer from that, even if terribly inefficient.
I imagine civilisation would wind back to around the 18th century, because we would understand things like fertilizers, calculus and how to make steel, but could not immediately use that knowledge to produce steam trains, bicycles or saxophones.
So, assuming an accelerated pace of development thanks to some of this knowledge surviving I'd say 50 years give or take.
- progbits 3y agoOne hurdle is that the easy to mine materials have already been mined. We have been using progressively more sophisticated methods of ore finding, mining and purification. Doing that the second time around would be harder. Though we can probably recover good quality materials from scraps.
- samwillis 3y agoExactly, second time round it's going to be a civilisation built on recycling. It's crazy to think that by going slightly backwards the whole way forward would be so different. Early civilisation was hunter-gatherers, scavenging for food and resources. Imagine a new civilisation where we scavenge the remnants of where we're are now. The progress forward would be very quick, but also so very different.
- Two4 3y agoDuring the Christian dark ages, the occupants of Constantinople lived within walls they did not have the knowledge or skill to engineer and build. I imagine that a post-apocalyptic society may feel the same.
- flashgordon 3y agoAlso in the event of an apocalypse - the first generation could have all the awareness of technology, knowledge etc but the people who are experts may die out? Even if experts exist the transfering of what to build into "how" to build may need a lot of nurturing - Eg a chip-design expert knows it all - but may not be an expert in building a fab (not even considering the resources needed) to build this chip. But in the world where survival is paramount chip-design is just now a luxury skill and very few incentives exist to urgently preserver/pass down this knowledge? My guess is if apocalypse doesnt turn into anarchy and a rort, you need stability and peace during which technological experimentation/building to florish. SO yeah 50-100 years seems reasonable.
- Tade0 3y agoPersonally I don't believe in an utter apocalypse like in some zombie movie. There are too many solar panels and car batteries scattered around the globe for them to be all destroyed. Just the base transceiver stations, which commonly have backup power, would be enough to maintain some degree of civilisation.