Why did we wait so long for the bicycle? • Hacker News Board

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

#351

Post by zrobotics » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:35 AM UTC

entee wrote: post #327

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.

That's wild! I thought nails were way easier because you could maybe just cast them. I guess forging would make them substantially stronger.

Casting parts like that is actually incredibly difficult. The iron will want to freeze before filling the mold cavity, since the cross section of a nail is so small. While tedious & time consuming, hand forging a nail is significantly easier than attempting to cast one. Plus, cast iron is much more difficult than forging simply due to the much higher temperatures required. A simple charcoal fire is adequate for forging, the higher temperatures required for casting necessitate specialized equipment. Hence why many village blacksmiths didn't have the capacity to produce cast iron parts.

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

#352

Post by TeMPOraL » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:38 AM UTC

SilasX wrote: post #69

jandrese wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to make the machine to make the machine that allows you to make your final product. You would still have the advantage of being able to beeline past technological dead ends, but you still have to build up the industrial base. Even then you run into problems with chemicals simply not being available on an industrial scale because previously there was no need for them. The world is a massively complex intercon…

Related quote from the computer game Alpha Centauri: "Technological advance is an inherently iterative process. One does not simply take sand from the beach and produce a [computer chip]. We use crude tools to fashion better tools, and then our better tools to fashion more precise tools, and so on. Each minor refinement is a step in the process, and all of the steps must be taken." https://www.quotes.net/mquote/2325

The people who authored quotes for Alpha Centauri deserve some sort of award. It's probably the most quoted game I've seen, and those quotes are all pretty insightful.

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

#353

Post by quickthrower2 » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:40 AM UTC

thedogeye wrote: post #121

I think the post downplays the value of a horse. Horses are incredible. Not only do they provide transport that is even better than bicycle (you don't have to pedal, and they can go over almost any terrain) but they also provide labor. Indeed, horses actually generate a net surplus of labor above the labor required to grow food to feed them. That is, a farmer with a horse can grow far more food than a farmer without…

Then I hope you would clean up it's poo.

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

#354

Post by hdfbdtbcdg » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:41 AM UTC

Gustomaximus wrote: post #341

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…

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.

You could draw/paint modern devices which would then eventually inspire others.

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

#355

Post by monktastic1 » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:43 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #346

vageli wrote: post #248

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. 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…

This is one of the most fascinating things I've read on this site. Do you know of any resources that go into this in more detail?

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

#356

Post by WalterBright » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:45 AM UTC

Gustomaximus wrote: post #341

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…

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.

If you could figure out how to make wire, you could make a working electric motor.

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

#357

Post by garyclarke27 » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:48 AM UTC

Great article. Yes is amazing how humans are often blind to obvious (with hindsight) and relatively simple innovative ideas. Another good example of this is the - wheeled suitcase - not invented till 1970!! http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/10/04/wheeled.luggage.ann...

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

#358

Post by rienbdj » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:49 AM UTC

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…

Bamboo can work well enough.

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

#359

Post by zrobotics » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:54 AM UTC

im3w1l wrote: post #297

hinkley wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assembling a bike from parts would be a challenge for many people here. Assembling a wheel from parts is beyond most people, including many bike mechanics. In fact most wheels are assembled by machines, else labor costs would be too high. Used to be it was mostly serious amateurs and professionals that had them hand built. They’re more reliable, but I think it’s more to do with the combinatorial explosion of parts. M…

> Assembling a wheel from parts is beyond most people, Just how shitty wheel would be admissible here? A wooden octagon?

Speaking as someone who has laced motorcycle wheels (same construction as bycicle wheels, just with larger parts) it is very much a non-trivial task. Even given a premanufactured hub, rim, and a bag of spokes assembling a wheel is time consuming and easy to get wrong. Spokes have to be laced following the correct pattern, and it may not be obvious there is a mistake until ~80% of the spokes are installed. There are (at least on motorcycles with a drop-center rim) 4 different types of spokes that aren't that dissimilar from each other & are easily confused.

Having rewound electric motors w/ no repair manuals avaliable & laced rims w/ repair manuals & directions from the spoke manufacturer, rewinding an electric motor is far easier to successfully accomplish.

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

#360

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jul 16, 2019, 5:54 AM UTC

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…

[deleted]