Roman Empire: The reason of the lack of technology
-
Well, I think I've a response for this, but the situation in the Roman Empire was not too different from the 18 century in Europe, but curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution, a knowledge explosion an so on. The reason, for me, was a tiny actor they lacked, one of the two main characters in computing. What do you thing could be the reason?
-
Well, I think I've a response for this, but the situation in the Roman Empire was not too different from the 18 century in Europe, but curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution, a knowledge explosion an so on. The reason, for me, was a tiny actor they lacked, one of the two main characters in computing. What do you thing could be the reason?
Probably, they didn't need technology as they had a very, very cheap labour force: slaves. Both the Greeks and Romans knew of the steam engine* for example, but they didn't use it (except to make the gods look more exciting) as slaves did a better job, cheaper. * Or at least, a "starter engine": Aeolipile - Wikipedia[^]
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
Well, I think I've a response for this, but the situation in the Roman Empire was not too different from the 18 century in Europe, but curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution, a knowledge explosion an so on. The reason, for me, was a tiny actor they lacked, one of the two main characters in computing. What do you thing could be the reason?
-
Well, I think I've a response for this, but the situation in the Roman Empire was not too different from the 18 century in Europe, but curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution, a knowledge explosion an so on. The reason, for me, was a tiny actor they lacked, one of the two main characters in computing. What do you thing could be the reason?
One of the things that seems to have made the industrial revolution so successful was developing machines to create machines. It seems that if you can do this, you can then start to miniaturise and mass produce products with a similar quality. Also the prior invention of the printing press meant that accurate information could be shared fairly easily.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
It's obvious: Their number system lacked a zero. So they had no way to terminate their C programs.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
I think so. It came from India. Can you imagine the speed of light represented in roman digits? Is is philoshopically interesting that an item devoid of existence, in fact it represents the opposite of existence, has such importance: "Please, add some zeroes to my wage !!!" "No,no the opposite side"
-
Well, I think I've a response for this, but the situation in the Roman Empire was not too different from the 18 century in Europe, but curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution, a knowledge explosion an so on. The reason, for me, was a tiny actor they lacked, one of the two main characters in computing. What do you thing could be the reason?
If you're referring to "1" and "0", at low levels computers don't actually use ones and zeros, that's simply a modern mnemonic for representing two states. It is actually on or off, high or low, and can be represented by anything we want. They could have used "1" and "2", or "A" and "X", or even "+" and "-".
-
Probably, they didn't need technology as they had a very, very cheap labour force: slaves. Both the Greeks and Romans knew of the steam engine* for example, but they didn't use it (except to make the gods look more exciting) as slaves did a better job, cheaper. * Or at least, a "starter engine": Aeolipile - Wikipedia[^]
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Good try, he, he. Well some modern banks like Lloyd's made great part of his wealth from slavery, till late 18 century. Some people could argue their job is slavery nowadays ... Now seriously speaking, I think the actual reason was the lack of "0", half of our binary system. This one came from India, like software stuff nowadays. I can´t image Oliver Heavyside building some foundations of engineering without a good supply of zeros.
-
If you're referring to "1" and "0", at low levels computers don't actually use ones and zeros, that's simply a modern mnemonic for representing two states. It is actually on or off, high or low, and can be represented by anything we want. They could have used "1" and "2", or "A" and "X", or even "+" and "-".
I think that's not the point, but a numerical system with or without zero. For example. You can calculate the volume of a pool, or the weight of a rocket oxidizer easily in binary, hexadecimal o decimal system, both in metric or imperial, using a computer or a dirty piece of paper buy try to the same thing with romans. In you withdraw the zero from a numerical system, you wipe out all engineering, I think
-
Well, I think I've a response for this, but the situation in the Roman Empire was not too different from the 18 century in Europe, but curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution, a knowledge explosion an so on. The reason, for me, was a tiny actor they lacked, one of the two main characters in computing. What do you thing could be the reason?
altomaltes wrote:
curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution
An industrial revolution? In Roman times?? Didn't even happen during the enlightment, ages later, wich had much better foundations to do so. Makes me doubt wether your question is serious. The revolution required education and freedom, and periods mixed of peace and war.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
I think that's not the point, but a numerical system with or without zero. For example. You can calculate the volume of a pool, or the weight of a rocket oxidizer easily in binary, hexadecimal o decimal system, both in metric or imperial, using a computer or a dirty piece of paper buy try to the same thing with romans. In you withdraw the zero from a numerical system, you wipe out all engineering, I think
Romans were pretty good engineers. There are aqueducts that maintain a steady 4 degree angle, even through tunnels. Not to mention things like the 100 foot unreinforced concrete dome over the Pantheon in Rome, which is still the largest of its kind, some 2000 years later. I think if we were still using roman numerals, we would still be fine. We seem to be able to manage the calendar and all its weird and wonderful attributes. Speaking of which, Julius Caesar was able to reform the calendar in 46 BC, to within 99.99% of the tropical year. That's pretty good calculations for a number system without a zero, I'd say.
Keep Calm and Carry On
-
Well, I think I've a response for this, but the situation in the Roman Empire was not too different from the 18 century in Europe, but curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution, a knowledge explosion an so on. The reason, for me, was a tiny actor they lacked, one of the two main characters in computing. What do you thing could be the reason?
Too busy waging war to have much time for "pure" R&D. Mass "publishing" (Gutenberg) set the ball rolling. Information sharing. Today, it's called "the internet". Leveling the playing field (if you choose to use it).
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it. ― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
-
altomaltes wrote:
curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution
An industrial revolution? In Roman times?? Didn't even happen during the enlightment, ages later, wich had much better foundations to do so. Makes me doubt wether your question is serious. The revolution required education and freedom, and periods mixed of peace and war.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
The question is serious. Let me reformulate: ¿Is it possible an Industrial Revolution without a zero based math?
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Didn't even happen during the enlightment, ages later, wich had much better foundations to do so.
They also lacked zero. This is precisely the point.
-
Romans were pretty good engineers. There are aqueducts that maintain a steady 4 degree angle, even through tunnels. Not to mention things like the 100 foot unreinforced concrete dome over the Pantheon in Rome, which is still the largest of its kind, some 2000 years later. I think if we were still using roman numerals, we would still be fine. We seem to be able to manage the calendar and all its weird and wonderful attributes. Speaking of which, Julius Caesar was able to reform the calendar in 46 BC, to within 99.99% of the tropical year. That's pretty good calculations for a number system without a zero, I'd say.
Keep Calm and Carry On
They pushed its numerical system to its limits, no doubt, and got got incredible things. But if you withdraw the zero of many of out engineering fields things like the Fourier Transform get really complicated. As another example, it is predict the planets position with the middle ages earth centered system. but if you place the sun in the center, things became simpler.
-
Good try, he, he. Well some modern banks like Lloyd's made great part of his wealth from slavery, till late 18 century. Some people could argue their job is slavery nowadays ... Now seriously speaking, I think the actual reason was the lack of "0", half of our binary system. This one came from India, like software stuff nowadays. I can´t image Oliver Heavyside building some foundations of engineering without a good supply of zeros.
-
Romans were pretty good engineers. There are aqueducts that maintain a steady 4 degree angle, even through tunnels. Not to mention things like the 100 foot unreinforced concrete dome over the Pantheon in Rome, which is still the largest of its kind, some 2000 years later. I think if we were still using roman numerals, we would still be fine. We seem to be able to manage the calendar and all its weird and wonderful attributes. Speaking of which, Julius Caesar was able to reform the calendar in 46 BC, to within 99.99% of the tropical year. That's pretty good calculations for a number system without a zero, I'd say.
Keep Calm and Carry On
I'm sure the Romans had the concept of zero or nothing but just didn't have a symbol for it. Centurion: Hand over your taxes. Peasant: You've left me with nothing. Centurion: And you'll like it. Peasant: Yes I will.
-
The question is serious. Let me reformulate: ¿Is it possible an Industrial Revolution without a zero based math?
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Didn't even happen during the enlightment, ages later, wich had much better foundations to do so.
They also lacked zero. This is precisely the point.
altomaltes wrote:
¿Is it possible an Industrial Revolution without a zero based math?
Yes. Doesn't require math.
altomaltes wrote:
They also lacked zero. This is precisely the point.
No, they didn't, and the Romans knew the concept of "nothing"; it just didn't have a char to denote it. --edit I don't take it as a joke. Your statement is incorrect.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
One of the things that seems to have made the industrial revolution so successful was developing machines to create machines. It seems that if you can do this, you can then start to miniaturise and mass produce products with a similar quality. Also the prior invention of the printing press meant that accurate information could be shared fairly easily.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
GuyThiebaut wrote:
Also the prior invention of the printing press meant that accurate information could be shared fairly easily.
This part is seriously underrated I believe. Although I'm not sure how accurate all information was. :rolleyes:
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
I think so. It came from India. Can you imagine the speed of light represented in roman digits? Is is philoshopically interesting that an item devoid of existence, in fact it represents the opposite of existence, has such importance: "Please, add some zeroes to my wage !!!" "No,no the opposite side"
It got to India, but not invented there. What is the origin of zero? How did we indicate nothingness before zero? - Scientific American[^] Also independently created by the Mayans.
-
altomaltes wrote:
¿Is it possible an Industrial Revolution without a zero based math?
Yes. Doesn't require math.
altomaltes wrote:
They also lacked zero. This is precisely the point.
No, they didn't, and the Romans knew the concept of "nothing"; it just didn't have a char to denote it. --edit I don't take it as a joke. Your statement is incorrect.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Quote:
the Romans knew the concept of "nothing"; it just didn't have a char to denote it.
They did not apply the concept "zero" to its numerical system, hence the lack of symbol; so, they could not handle too big or too little numbers and operate with it. It is impossible to develop chemical novelties, radio antenae, iron ships, major metal structcures without strong math. An math-less industrial revolution would have been anchored in the steam engine and the alchemy, and would not have headed to place a man alive on the moon. "The Void" is an indian concept. In fact the have ancient texts about it. Zero was invented by the indians, brought to Europe by the moors via Spain (Al-Andalus)promoted by Fibonacci and widely used in Europe in the 16th century. Shortly after some mathematicians started their work and made technology possible.
-
Well, I think I've a response for this, but the situation in the Roman Empire was not too different from the 18 century in Europe, but curiously this did not lead to a Industrial Revolution, a knowledge explosion an so on. The reason, for me, was a tiny actor they lacked, one of the two main characters in computing. What do you thing could be the reason?
Their aqueducts were made with lead pipes, so the leadership became insane from lead poisoning. Hmmm...I wonder what the pipes in DC are made from. :laugh:
Latest Articles:
Abusing Extension Methods, Null Continuation, and Null Coalescence Operators
