Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

rootsofprogress.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 515 posts

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#341

Post by Gustomaximus »

entee wrote: post #108
Animats wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. And one point that cannot be stressed enough. Good steel, in quantity, only goes back to 1880. Lots of things that "could have been built in antiquity" foundered on that basic fact. Before Bessemer, steel was as exotic as titanium is now. The alternatives are not good. Cast iron? Too heavy and too brittle. Wrought iron? Maybe, but not that great. Lead? Too soft. Brass? Could work, but expensive. A king's kid m…

I often wonder as I am building/fixing something (often my bicycle as it happens) and I happen to toss an extra screw in the trash how miraculous a simple screw of this type would have been to a middle-ages craftsman. The precision of keeping all those threads perfectly spaced is one thing, but the technology to make them in such volume at these sizes (often quite tiny), and in volumes so as to make them essentially…

Or consider how useless you would be if transported back 400 years.

You would be able to offer great advice about washing hands or the solar system generalisations. But actually create something to show people....even the simplest things would be beyond most of us.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#342

Post by ncmncm »

Someone wrote: post #251
atoav wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think bicycling was really not relevant, because the peasants would probably rather take a mule or a wagon to carry stuff around and the aristocrats would rather take a comfortable carriage. There was basically no rich middle class which had the time and money to fool around with individual transportation, and the other classes had either no real reason to want this or it was pure luxury.

Googling “bicycles in Africa” gives me plenty of examples of peasants who, I guess, would rather use a mule or wagon, but cannot afford one, and are much helped with a bicycle. I also would think such people existed elsewhere in the world centuries ago.

Bicycles in Africa can exist only as output of the massive industrial base elsewhere.

Chinese wheelbarrows are the real endpoint of pre-industrial transportation.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#343

Post by Gibbon1 »

WalterBright wrote: post #237
entee wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I often wonder as I am building/fixing something (often my bicycle as it happens) and I happen to toss an extra screw in the trash how miraculous a simple screw of this type would have been to a middle-ages craftsman. The precision of keeping all those threads perfectly spaced is one thing, but the technology to make them in such volume at these sizes (often quite tiny), and in volumes so as to make them essentially…

It's similar with nails. If you tour Jefferson's home Monticello, there was a "nailery" where the nails needed were forged by hand, one by one. Being handmade, the each nail was valuable. People would burn scrap lumber to recover the nails.

Burn scrap nothing, In Colonial America they'd burn decrepit houses to get the nails. Enough that colonial governments passed laws against it.

Which reminds me when I was a little kid people would carefully pull the nails out of old boards and save them.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#344

Post by lazyjones »

simulate wrote: post #44

In 100 years will we wonder why recumbent bicycles took so long to catch on? MIT's David Gordon Wilson, the writer of the excellent book Bicycling Science, had been advocating for recumbents as a more efficient design to replace traditional modern bicycles for decades. http://news.mit.edu/2017/mit-designer-inventor-author-bike-b... and https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/bicycling-science-third-editi...

> In 100 years will we wonder why recumbent bicycles took so long to catch on?

In 100 years, most likely only crazy hipsters will know what a bicycle is because everything will be electrified. E-Scooters will eradicate bicycles for most uses in the next 10 years or so.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#345

Post by WalterBright »

bookofjoe wrote: post #302
WalterBright wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article also didn't mention weight. The lighter a bike is, the more effective it is. One made out of wood and iron would be simply too heavy. Imagine a cast iron wheel. Lots of people dismiss the Wright Bros as "bicycle mechanics". They kinda miss that lightweight bicycle technology, like chain drives and steel wire, were essential for their working airplane.

If ever you're in Washington, D.C., visit the Air & Space Museum, which has a room containing the ORIGINAL Wright Flyer. It is absolutely spectacular. To give context, the room contains one of their bicycles along with much context and background. Worth the trip every time I visit D.C.

You're right, and I've been there. That room gives me the chills! To me, 1903 was the beginning of the modern era. To go from that to landing on the moon in less than a single lifetime!

Who could ever believe such a thing could happen?

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#346

Post by TeMPOraL »

vageli wrote: post #248
Animats wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The precision of keeping all those threads perfectly spaced is one thing " Making the first precision screw requires a "screw originating machine".[1][2] This is a special-purpose device which can make a better screw than the ones used in building it. Then you can install the first precision screw in a lathe and make more screws in harder metals. This is how precision is bootstrapped. [1] https://chestofbooks.com/ho…

> "The precision of keeping all those threads perfectly spaced is one thing" > Making the first precision screw requires a "screw originating machine".[1][2] This is a special-purpose device which can make a better screw than the ones used in building it. I hadn't realized screws would be needed to create a screw-making machine. I love that we have machines that make better versions of their own components, something…

Which is incidentally yet another reason why it's very important to ensure stability of our technological civilization. We've pulled ourselves by the straps of our boots a couple hundred meters into air now; it's not safe to stop pulling. Given big enough shock to economies and populations, we'll regress not a decade or three, but all the way to the beginning of industrial revolution - you can't build the technology we have now from scratch, as it's full of cyclical dependencies. It would need to be rebooted from scratch.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#347

Post by WalterBright »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #343
WalterBright wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's similar with nails. If you tour Jefferson's home Monticello, there was a "nailery" where the nails needed were forged by hand, one by one. Being handmade, the each nail was valuable. People would burn scrap lumber to recover the nails.

Burn scrap nothing, In Colonial America they'd burn decrepit houses to get the nails. Enough that colonial governments passed laws against it. Which reminds me when I was a little kid people would carefully pull the nails out of old boards and save them.

I did too. These days, I save nuts and bolts. Not because they are expensive to buy, but I don't want to spend a couple hours going to the hardware store to get one.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#348

Post by Gibbon1 »

jsharf wrote: post #223
Animats wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. And one point that cannot be stressed enough. Good steel, in quantity, only goes back to 1880. Lots of things that "could have been built in antiquity" foundered on that basic fact. Before Bessemer, steel was as exotic as titanium is now. The alternatives are not good. Cast iron? Too heavy and too brittle. Wrought iron? Maybe, but not that great. Lead? Too soft. Brass? Could work, but expensive. A king's kid m…

What about making a bike out of wood? It would have a lot of friction, sure, but it might be better than walking?

If you poke around there were a number of bicycles made of wood. Wood is an excellent material from a weight to strength standpoint.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#349

Post by vba »

Animats wrote: post #66
Excel_Wizard wrote: post #29

>Yet it was a simple mechanical invention As a mechanical engineer, this statement baffled me. All manufactured technology exists in the context of the manufacturing capabilities available to the designer. The manufacturing tech had to be tremendously complicated before a decent bike could be made. Hollow steel tubes aren't simple. Ball bearings aren't simple. There is a reductionist viewpoint among "theory" people t…

Right. And one point that cannot be stressed enough. Good steel, in quantity, only goes back to 1880. Lots of things that "could have been built in antiquity" foundered on that basic fact. Before Bessemer, steel was as exotic as titanium is now. The alternatives are not good. Cast iron? Too heavy and too brittle. Wrought iron? Maybe, but not that great. Lead? Too soft. Brass? Could work, but expensive. A king's kid m…

Can you, or anyone else, recommend any good books/resources that chronicle the history of ‘manufacturing’, if that even is the right term to use. I.e. the various ‘discoveries’, such as steel manufacturing, railroads etc.

Re: Why did we wait so long for the bicycle?

#350

Post by WalterBright »

Excel_Wizard wrote: post #29

>Yet it was a simple mechanical invention As a mechanical engineer, this statement baffled me. All manufactured technology exists in the context of the manufacturing capabilities available to the designer. The manufacturing tech had to be tremendously complicated before a decent bike could be made. Hollow steel tubes aren't simple. Ball bearings aren't simple. There is a reductionist viewpoint among "theory" people t…

> a reductionist viewpoint

I once tried to figure out how to make iron from nothing. There are several "from scratch" guides on the internet, but all of them include "buy these needed chemicals from a supply house".

Post reply on HN