Early start of technology

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by wet1, Jul 14, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. wet1

    wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    It is now estimated that farming began centuries earlier than previously thought. The advent of farming is thought to be second only to the discovery of fire in importance to the human race and it’s development.

    After looking at areas in modern Syria where farming has been for exceeding long times it is believed that farming started around 13,000 years ago. That is 1,200 years earlier than the previous estimate. This is the result of 27 years of study.

    Early farming allowed the hunter-gatherer more social time as less time was spent hunting for the next meal. They knew where the next meal was. It also encouraged the development of defense, as other groups of hunters, hungry, would be looking for a food source. Looking to take it from where ever and whoever had it. This development still affects the way we live today. And to some extent how the world is today. What would have happened had this had been a failure? I doubt that we would be where we are today. Without a steady source of food we would be left to the mercy of weather in the efforts of gathering such. All it would have taken would be one good disaster of long lasting nature to snuff out the hunter-gather of the area. With the ability to store food came the ability to outwait the weather to some degree.
     
    wet1, Jul 14, 2001
    #1

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. kmguru

    kmguru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,757
    Does this findings take in to account early civilization in China at the time they crossed Alaska and came to America whose progeny are known as American Indians? Somewhere I read that it goes back 40,000 years. Also the civilization at Indus valley could easily go back 10,000 to 18,000 years.

    I do not think we have good data from the chinese side.
     
    kmguru, Jul 15, 2001
    #2

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. wet1

    wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    No it does not. It only takes into account the Euphrates region. Here we find that redundancy occurs on it's own worldwide. Similar problems lead to parallel solutions.

    With the Chinese viewpoint of secrecy comes lack of good and dependable data and lack of independent verification of the same.

    How could better communication with the Chinese be achieved given the current political viewpoints?

    And please, expand upon these other earlier peoples.
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2001
    wet1, Jul 15, 2001
    #3

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. kmguru

    kmguru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,757
    Several years ago, I spent some time in China - comingling with the locals, specially in northern provinces. I learned a great deal about the culture. One thing that surprised me is that everybody thinks silk technology came from China. According to them, it came from the old India (that included Afganistan to Burma). Western scholars place Vedas to be around 5500 BC. I was told that the trading partneship between China and India goes back to 12,000 BC that they have records based on the early tombs.

    Which means early technology could be much before. The Indian epic "Mahabharat" describes a great war long ago. While the writing can be recent, the story arc is set many thousand years before. Is it a pure science fiction? Science because it has gadgets, nuclear bombs, guided missiles, infrared weapons, thermal weapons (that absorbs energy), teleportation, telecommunication - you name it.

    It is also possible that if we could send man to the moon from being an agarian society in only 2000 years, a proir civilisation could have come and gone 20,000 years ago, we would not know.

    Today, there is a lot of information in written form in India and China, that we refuse to accept.
     
    kmguru, Jul 15, 2001
    #4
  8. Tristan

    Tristan Leave your World Behind Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,358
    ___________________________________________________
    "It is also possible that if we could send man to the moon from being an agarian society in only 2000 years, a proir civilisation could have come and gone 20,000 years ago, we would not know. "
    __________________________________________________


    Does this not bring up the "Stories" Of the lost city of Atlantis?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Tristan, Jul 15, 2001
    #5
  9. kmguru

    kmguru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,757
    It is very easy to dismiss something whose proof is not handed to us on a platter. Then we can sit back and say - show me!. If they find it then we can say: Oh! great, we knew one of these days you will find our heritage....

    It takes some work and imagination to think in possibilities and search for those possibilities until all are exhausted. Atlantis is one of them. Assuming they existed, we could find out what happened? If they did not, at least the exercise will prepare us so that same fate (the scenario) does not happen to us.

    The theory of probability is a strange one. While 20 million people do not win the jackpot in a lottery, one ticket does. It must be worthwhile for the rest to play the odds everytime!
     
    kmguru, Jul 15, 2001
    #6
  10. wet1

    wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    Should some calamity happen to us today, what proof would there be in 100,000 years that we existed? Most of our records have now been converted to electronic media. Writings, artwork reproductions, knowledge, records, etc. A notoriously non-durable media, I might add.

    Would there be just legends to such existence? Legends by whom? Who would pour over the fragments of our remains to try and discover whom this early civilization was? Sound familiar to some degree?
     
    wet1, Jul 15, 2001
    #7
  11. kmguru

    kmguru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,757
    Thinking in the same direction, let us move slightly ahead to 200 years with the following assumptions.

    1. We have teleportation technology so that the present roads, cars, trucks and planes are obsolete.
    2. We have replicator technology, so that massive factories are obsolete. The Transporters and Replicator are done in a small factory (a big replicator but smaller than a steel plant).
    3. We still use computers but they are the size of a cell phone. Terminals are holographic projections.

    In essence I am eliminating every large artificial object including Mormon temple (just kidding). Now whatever is left, if we have a natural calamity where we have to go back to survival status:

    We can not use the basic, simple items because they are no longer there (except may be in Smithsonian). Wait a minute! by jove, I got it. We should be looking for a Meuseum in early advanced civilizations. That is the only place where we can get the missing links.

    If Atlantis had very advanced civilization where they could move 50 ton rocks by remote control, then we need to look for those clues.

    If we move forward another 5000 years, all the material wealth you know will disappear from the landscape except people. The entire civilization could be based on the holographic principle (sorry to bring StarTrek in to it - just for analogies). Once the power source loses its molecular cohesion, everything is gone.

    Besides, once you have teleportation technology, why stay on earth, let us move to a prestine planet and rough it....

    Do we have any ladies in our membership to put a spin on this?
     
    kmguru, Jul 15, 2001
    #8
  12. wet1

    wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    And there you have it. An answer to why we would not find a trace of a bygone civilization. Other thoughts?
     
    wet1, Jul 17, 2001
    #9
  13. kmguru

    kmguru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,757
    In the last 30 years, my personal observations are that we explain difficult ideas with the present day technology. Because that is what we know. You would think that people would have learnt by know that technology will change and the theories will be modified to explain whatever.

    Now why is that in 2001, we still try to explain stuff with today's technology. Are not we smart enough to look a little beyond and speculate a theory?

    When doctors were explaining (mostly the shrinks!) how brain works, depending on the era, they were:

    1. Works like a telephone exchange
    2. Works like a mainframe computer
    3. Works like a modern day computer
    4. Stores memory like a hologram
    5. Works like a quantum computer (at least this one
    will take 50 years to change)
     
    kmguru, Jul 17, 2001
    #10
  14. wet1

    wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    We constantly filter what we see and experience through the brain with what we know or believe. It is amazing when examined the conculisions that we arrive at based on such scanty and slim data. (Which no computer is capable of yet)

    Likewise we are guilty of trying to understand the world we experience using the most modern (at the time) technological base that we are aware of. Which changes. (as I believe you have already stated) This as a (what we know) is a reference base that someone not there may have a chance to pickup on from a relayed description. (Words are so poor for this type of info relaying)
     
    wet1, Jul 17, 2001
    #11
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page