Heros of Alexandria discovered the steam-engine principle in his experiments very early on. Is it possible that if the Romans had been a bit more forward looking, they could have developed the steam-power idea and created the Industrial Revolution in, say, the 2nd-3rd Century A.D.?, thus keeping their civilisation from being overrun by barbarians in the 4th-5th Centuries A.D.? Comments?

Heros of Alexandria discovered the steam-engine principle in his experiments very early on. Is it possible that if the Romans had been a bit more forward looking, they could have developed the steam-power idea and created the Industrial Revolution in, say, the 2nd-3rd Century A.D.?, thus keeping their civilisation from being overrun by barbarians in the 4th-5th Centuries A.D.? Comments?
Sure. When looking at anything in retrospect, anything is possible. But they only saw his spinning ball as a curiosity - and as they say, the rest is history.

Has anyone read the Belisarius series? Pretty well addresses this issue.

I think at the time the Romans had everything they thought they needed. As Light says, they saw only a curiosity, not needing anything else. And maybe Heros just wasn't much of a marketer. How long did it take Bill Gates to convince us that we couldn't live without a personal computer? We really didn't need them, but when he pushed them, by golly we found a need.

The Roman economy operated on the basis of a continuous harvesting of slave labour from perpetual border wars. Had the economy depended on steam power in place of slaves, the Roman army would not have enjoyed the support of slave-owning entrepreneurs, and would have found its funds reduced to cut taxes or to divert funds elsewhere. Without the requirement of continuous warfare, the army's combat experience would rapidly diminish.

In short, the adoption of steam power would have speeded up the fall of Rome.

It would have required alot of iron and coal, and although they did have the spinning ball, that's not the same thing as a piston engine, which can produce more torque. Mostly, I think the industrial revolution didn't happen sooner due to the dark ages- blame the pope.

Comments?
I know the ancient Greeks drew plans for a steam powered shovel , what really killed steam power back then was the abundance of slave labour .

Brian Foley: I think you made up the following. know the ancient Greeks drew plans for a steam powered shovel

Brian Foley: I think you made up the following.
No not at all here is the translation of Hero's Treatise on Pneumatics, includes his design for a steam engine.
THE PNEUMATICS HERO OF ALEXANDRIA. (http://www.history.rochester.edu/steam/hero/)

Brian Foley: I see no mention of a steam powered shovel in your citation. From your earlier post:I know the ancient Greeks drew plans for a steam powered shovelFrom your later post, a more modest claim now that you have been challenged:No not at all here is the translation of Hero's Treatise on Pneumatics, includes his design for a steam engine.I did see a description of the well known device which merely rotated due to a steam jet. As far as I know there was never any suggestion to use such a device as as a power source for some useful machinery. It hardly merits the title of Steam engine.

Brian Foley: I see no mention of a steam powered shovel in your citation. From your earlier post:From your later post, a more modest claim now that you have been challenged:I did see a description of the well known device which merely rotated due to a steam jet. As far as I know there was never any suggestion to use such a device as as a power source for some useful machinery. It hardly merits the title of Steam engine.

Fair enough--a spinning ball is hardly a steam engine. However, the idea of using steam as a source of motive power was there to see for anyone with enough imagination in that century. But as you say, it was a slave state.

Brian Foley: I see no mention of a steam powered shovel in your citation. From your earlier post:From your later post, a more modest claim now that you have been challenged:I did see a description of the well known device which merely rotated due to a steam jet. As far as I know there was never any suggestion to use such a device as as a power source for some useful machinery. It hardly merits the title of Steam engine.
Whatever mate , I was joining in on the thread discussion not entertaining a historical debate .

You could say the same thing about the Greeks several hundred years earlier. They developed very sophisticated mechanical devices but they only built them as children's toys.

How about the Chinese discovery of gunpowder? They could have held off the Mongols if they'd thought to use it for weaponry.

Rome didn't fall to the Germanic tribes because of lack of technology. It was lack of organization.

Speaking of gunpowder. Have you ever watched the BBC show Connections? They had one that talked about the invention of the cannon. How it had to do with bell foundries. I forget what the beginning and end of the particular episode was... I don't think it was as simple as gunpowder to firepower. They were just intermediaries.

It's quite interesting to see the tenuous path of discovery that has led to our own time.
It's quite easy to disparage the Romans for not realizing the potential of the steam engine and the Chinese for using gunpowder for crackers at religious festivals, but innovation is something rare and beautiful in our history. It's not at all immediately apparent to the uninitiated that that spinning ball could be changed into a driving piston that would power machinery which could reshape the world. Or that the black powder could be channeled not for a flashy noise but to propel ordinance long distance to kill your enemies.

These things are apparent in hindsight. But to come at it from the other side, it takes a huge intuitive leap. A leap so huge that we can lay no blame for the failure to make that leap.

rubbish
the chinese and romans are alleged to have failed. therefore, blame is assigned
rather than countenance revisionism, lets look at facts...

Along with the silk and paper, gunpowder is another invention by Chinese and the Silk Road helped it spread to the west. The dating of gunpowder is as early as 850 A.D. This invention seems to have been discovered in China by accident - by alchemists seeking the elixir of immortality. This earliest account reported the experiment: "some have heated together the saltpeter, sulfure and carbon of charcoal with honey; smoke and flames result, so that their hands and faces have been burnt, and even the whole house burnt down."

The gunpowder used for military purpose was first recorded in 919 A.D. By the 11th century, explosive bombs filled with gunpowder and fired from catapults were introduced and used in China. The words "fire cannon", "rocket", "missile" and "fireball" appeared time and again in the official Song history as well as two other books written during the same period. The first detailed description of using "firing cannon" in warfare was in connection with a battle fought in 1126 when the Song army used it against the invading Nuchens. The so-called fire cannon was a tube made oif bamboo filled with gunpowder which, when fired, threw a flaming missile towards the enemy. Since the barrel was made of bamboo, the flying missile could not cover a long distance. According to a description of a battle scene in 1132, it took two persons to carry a "fire cannon", and the cannons were fired from a moving platform after it had been moved close to the wall of the besieged city.

The Chinese invention of gunpowder never went much beyond its crudest form, and it was abandoned as a military weapon shortly afterwards. It reached Japan, Islam and then Europe in the 13th century and the Arabs improved gunpowder for military use. In 1280, the Syrian al-Hasan ar-Rammah wrote the Book of Fighting on Horseback and with War Engines. Herein introduced a rocket device, which he called "Chinese arrow." The early account of gunpowder in Europe was recorded by English philosopher Roger Bacon in the 13th century. One century later the Arabs used it to attack the Spanish town Baza and the very next year in 1326 Florence ordered the manufacturing of cannon and cannon balls. From Italy the making of gunpowder soon spread to other European countries, and by the 1350s it had become an effective weapon on the battlefield.

The Chinese adapted their primitive catapults to eventually develop a true gun with a metal barrel, gunpowder and a projectile by the 12th century. It is believed that the first gun was found in the early 1970s at Pan-la-ch'eng-tzu village, Manchuria, and dated to around 1290 A.D.

rubbish
the chinese and romans are alleged to have failed. therefore, blame is assigned
rather than countenance revisionism, lets look at facts...
A fact that amazes me is Greek Fire no one knows exactly what it was made of and has been lost to history , same as the medieval alcholic beverage mead the recipe is lost !

Funny. I had considered mentioning Greek Fire but decided against it.

Anyway. As to the Chinese use of gunpowder... True. There was some use of gunpowder by the Chinese in warfare, but from my understanding of it, it was limited both in use and in effectiveness. But, it's quite possible that both of these improved and would have continued to improve even without western minds taking the ball and running with it.

Gunpowder didn't come into its own until it was combined with the manufacture of bells. I'm not saying the bamboo cannon couldn't do some damage, I watched an episode of mythbusters where they made a cannon from a log. But, the cannon could only be used so many times before being rendered useless. The use of bells in the creation of cannons made the use of gunpowder reliable for sustainable periods.

As far as I know, rockets were more common in Chinese warfare (common being meant in a relative way here) and weren't really that effective.


As an aside:
I recall watching a documentary years ago that conjectured the origins of gunpowder being an alchemical search for a potion of immortality. All the ingredients of said formula were symbolic and most were unnecessary for the manufacture of gunpowder, but it just so happened that by some lucky coincidence the critical three were present in close enough proportions without being too diluted by unnecessary elements to form a weak and crude gunpowder. Supposedly, the mixture was to be boiled over a fire with constant stirring. And when it reached the critical state, it would suddenly burst into flames emitting a jet of fire which would, ironically, end the alchemist's life rather than extending it...


By the way, I've found a page that lists the connections in the episode of Connections I was talking about. It doesn't go into detail, but the list is interesting and shows what I was talking about with the tenuousness of the trail of discovery. Connections was a true masterpiece series (even if it should be taken with a grain of salt.)


Connections - Episode 3 - "Distant Voices"
The introduction of the saddle stirrup at the Battle of Hastings by the Normans, triggered a whole series of innovations in the science of warfare; the armor, the shield, the very concept of knighthood. The cannon and a silver strike, spawned the serendipities of Galileo. The vacuum pump and air pressure were discovered in Galileo's attempt to extract silver from deep mines. Widespread experiments ultimately led to the discovery of magnetism, electricity, radio, radar and promise to help unravel the mysteries of deep space communications.

Traces the connection between medieval advances in the science of warfare, the discovery of large silver deposits in Czechoslovakia, the discovery of natural laws, and the invention of modern telecommunications.

1. nuclear bomb
2. Battle of Hastings
3. stirrup
4. family name
5. identifying marks
6. Agincourt - Welch long bow
7. plow
8. crop rotation
9. gun powder
10. bell making
11. bombard
12. silver mines
13. tallers
14. water wheels
15. blast furnace
16. metal mining
17. sump pumps
18. vacuum study
19. barometer
20. electrical charges
21. Galvani
22. Volta
23. battery
24. electro-magnetism
25. telephone
26. inter-stellar communication
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/billotto/Connections.html

hmm
watch the connections i make...

i gotta reiterate that an eureka instance does not arise in a vacuum

for instance if my brilliant mind solved an previously intractable math problem and receive the nobel prize for my efforts ........

extracts of my acceptance speech

thank you (a) my colleagues a,b & c for the long nights working this thing
(b) wife for her patience (without you.........)
(c) my math teacher
(d) mathematics made simple by mr x
(e) my buddies for the cram sessions
(f) arabs for spreading the word
(g) panini, aryabhata indians, babylon etc
(h) stone agers for twiddling their fingers

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=10533

Gustav:

Along with the silk and paper, gunpowder is another invention by Chinese and the Silk Road helped it spread to the west. The dating of gunpowder is as early as 850 A.D. This invention seems to have been discovered in China by accident - by alchemists seeking the elixir of immortality. This earliest account reported the experiment: "some have heated together the saltpeter, sulfure and carbon of charcoal with honey; smoke and flames result, so that their hands and faces have been burnt, and even the whole house burnt down."

The gunpowder used for military purpose was first recorded in 919 A.D. By the 11th century, explosive bombs filled with gunpowder and fired from catapults were introduced and used in China. The words "fire cannon", "rocket", "missile" and "fireball" appeared time and again in the official Song history as well as two other books written during the same period. The first detailed description of using "firing cannon" in warfare was in connection with a battle fought in 1126 when the Song army used it against the invading Nuchens. The so-called fire cannon was a tube made oif bamboo filled with gunpowder which, when fired, threw a flaming missile towards the enemy. Since the barrel was made of bamboo, the flying missile could not cover a long distance. According to a description of a battle scene in 1132, it took two persons to carry a "fire cannon", and the cannons were fired from a moving platform after it had been moved close to the wall of the besieged city.

The Chinese invention of gunpowder never went much beyond its crudest form, and it was abandoned as a military weapon shortly afterwards. It reached Japan, Islam and then Europe in the 13th century and the Arabs improved gunpowder for military use. In 1280, the Syrian al-Hasan ar-Rammah wrote the Book of Fighting on Horseback and with War Engines. Herein introduced a rocket device, which he called "Chinese arrow." The early account of gunpowder in Europe was recorded by English philosopher Roger Bacon in the 13th century. One century later the Arabs used it to attack the Spanish town Baza and the very next year in 1326 Florence ordered the manufacturing of cannon and cannon balls. From Italy the making of gunpowder soon spread to other European countries, and by the 1350s it had become an effective weapon on the battlefield.

The Chinese adapted their primitive catapults to eventually develop a true gun with a metal barrel, gunpowder and a projectile by the 12th century. It is believed that the first gun was found in the early 1970s at Pan-la-ch'eng-tzu village, Manchuria, and dated to around 1290 A.D.

These are not your own words.

If you are quoting material from another web site, please include a link to the relevant page in future.

Otherwise, you are plagiarising somebody else's work. Steps will be taken to discourage such actions if necessary.

Gustav:



These are not your own words.

If you are quoting material from another web site, please include a link to the relevant page in future.

Otherwise, you are plagiarising somebody else's work. Steps will be taken to discourage such actions if necessary.
Gustav put those words in an italic form so as to show he was quoting a source , I hardly call it plagiarising , anyone including yourself saw that these werent his words it was plainly evident .

;)

why thank you, brother foley
while i am at fault for not providing link; while it is quite appropiate to ask that a link be posted, it is a stretch to to imagine that i am indeed passing that shit off as my words.

the italics have been a standard for my quotes from... from...day 100 maybe? ;)
the formatting should have been a clue that there was no deliberate attempt to decieve.

james, you stickler you
you suck ;)

here you go buddy......http://www.silk-road.com/artl/gun.shtml
i have a few ideas what you can do with it
wanna hear? ;)

;)

why thank you, brother foley
Anytime ;)