|
|
Post by Lokifan on Mar 30, 2016 2:35:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 30, 2016 3:49:00 GMT
cosmic snowball fight...
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Mar 30, 2016 7:49:27 GMT
I notice from the bottom of the page there.... [cue dramatic music] Either that was another close miss, or, has "someone" taken a pot-shot from earth?...  |
|
|
|
Post by Lokifan on Mar 30, 2016 8:01:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Mar 30, 2016 9:05:36 GMT
More likely something got loose from the asteroid belt.?...
|
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Mar 30, 2016 10:47:20 GMT
More likely something got loose from the asteroid belt.?... Or coming inwards from the Kuiper belt or Oort Cloud. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 30, 2016 14:50:21 GMT
or space debris, or somebody forgot to carry a one, or convert to or from French measurements.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Mar 30, 2016 18:27:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 30, 2016 18:53:04 GMT
And by "we," of course, you mean people who think there was no way they could build the things they did without help from Aliens. |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Mar 30, 2016 19:06:27 GMT
And by "we," of course, you mean people who think there was no way they could build the things they did without help from Aliens. Well, yes and no. There is of course the "we" you speak of, but there's also the more collective "we" of the entire human race not knowing until now exactly how they did those things, because we've always assumed they didn't know some of the things we know now. We've accepted that they've built those things, but how they've done it has been (and to some extent still is) a mystery to us. Most of us are just willing to accept that maybe they knew things we had no idea they knew and don't need to invoke religion, fairy tales or science fiction to explain it. We just accept that we don't know. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 30, 2016 19:14:09 GMT
And by "we," of course, you mean people who think there was no way they could build the things they did without help from Aliens. Well, yes and no. There is of course the "we" you speak of, but there's also the more collective "we" of the entire human race not knowing until now exactly how they did those things, because we've always assumed they didn't know some of the things we know now. We've accepted that they've built those things, but how they've done it has been (and to some extent still is) a mystery to us. Most of us are just willing to accept that maybe they knew things we had no idea they knew and don't need to invoke religion, fairy tales or science fiction to explain it. We just accept that we don't know. yes, we don't know the full extent of what they knew. we know their technical knowledge wasn't a match for ours, and those more enlightened among us understand there is stuff they knew which we have forgotten due to finding different machines that did the same task with less engineering and/or manual labor. in a closer to home example, a modern driver most likely could not adjust ignition timing, but a model T driver not only did it - he did it WHILE DRIVING. |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Mar 30, 2016 19:41:25 GMT
Well, yes and no. There is of course the "we" you speak of, but there's also the more collective "we" of the entire human race not knowing until now exactly how they did those things, because we've always assumed they didn't know some of the things we know now. We've accepted that they've built those things, but how they've done it has been (and to some extent still is) a mystery to us. Most of us are just willing to accept that maybe they knew things we had no idea they knew and don't need to invoke religion, fairy tales or science fiction to explain it. We just accept that we don't know. yes, we don't know the full extent of what they knew. we know their technical knowledge wasn't a match for ours, and those more enlightened among us understand there is stuff they knew which we have forgotten due to finding different machines that did the same task with less engineering and/or manual labor. in a closer to home example, a modern driver most likely could not adjust ignition timing, but a model T driver not only did it - he did it WHILE DRIVING. You don't even have to go that far back. As shown in one of the "Kids react" videos that Loki put up in another thread, present a 6-year old with a rotary phone and they won't know what to do with it. Some of them won't even be able to identify it as a phone at all. No one can look at that and not feel like we as a species may have forgotten more knowledge than we collectively posses today. |
|
|
|
Post by Lokifan on Mar 30, 2016 19:53:07 GMT
Cyber made a good point about history some time ago--I couldn't find the post, but the gist of it was that history is written about what was really important at the time. As a result, "common knowledge" that "everybody knew" dies out, because it's so common, no one bothered to write it down when time caused it to become obsolete.
That's one reason why I love those "Kids React" videos--it drives home the point.
I remember a science fiction story I read once in which a couple in a museum in the future were stuck in an exhibit, because they simply didn't recognize what a doorknob did. Clarke's Third Law may be "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic", but it often applies equally in reverse--any sufficiently primitive technology is indistinguishable from magic, as well (in some cases).
Watching an expert make an obsidian arrowhead is darn near magical, in my opinion...
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 30, 2016 20:02:00 GMT
Cyber made a good point about history some time ago--I couldn't find the post, but the gist of it was that history is written about what was really important at the time. As a result, "common knowledge" that "everybody knew" dies out, because it's so common, no one bothered to write it down when time caused it to become obsolete. That's one reason why I love those "Kids React" videos--it drives home the point. I remember a science fiction story I read once in which a couple in a museum in the future were stuck in an exhibit, because they simply didn't recognize what a doorknob did. Clarke's Third Law may be "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic", but it often applies equally in reverse--any sufficiently primitive technology is indistinguishable from magic, as well (in some cases). Watching an expert make an obsidian arrowhead is darn near magical, in my opinion... I forget now how old it is, but there is an old joke about the "Toot-n-C'mon Hotel" that was published back in the 70s and illustrated how little actual information we get in archaeological digs. for that matter, the current mystery tool in our tool thread illustrates how rapidly we lose knowledge. |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Mar 30, 2016 20:10:43 GMT
for that matter, the current mystery tool in our tool thread illustrates how rapidly we lose knowledge. Or, for that matter, how much knowledge there is to keep track of. If that tool is as specialized as it seems, relatively few people will ever have come across it. When the tehcnology that tool goes with gets replaced and the last person to use it has died, no one in the remaining history of human kind may ever figure out what it did. Now imagine how many of those tools have been and will be invented over the entire course of human history, from the first stick ever used to prod a piece of fruit off a branch to the very last piece of technology used by the very last human being to ever live in our universe. There's absolutely no hope of preserving each and every last bit of knowledge conjured up by human minds. There's simply too much of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Lokifan on Mar 30, 2016 20:10:48 GMT
Indeed.
I remember a story I heard about a bunch of aircraft enthusiasts who were trying to rebuild a P-51 Mustang. The plane had a particular air scoop on the bottom of the fuselage, and try as they might, they just could not figure out how to properly build the scoop without deforming the sheet metal. They had the blueprints and tools to make it, but getting it to release from the form was just not happening.
Eventually, they tracked down a machinist who had actually built these planes back in WW2. When asked about helping to rebuild the plane, he immediately said "You're having problems with the air scoop, right?" Sure enough, he outlined a procedure that told how to use the form (and appropriate lubricant mold release and tools) that worked the first time, quickly and easily. It seems the scoop had always been a big problem during the original manufacture, yet no body had ever bothered to write the procedure down.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Mar 30, 2016 20:13:52 GMT
Cyber made a good point about history some time ago--I couldn't find the post, but the gist of it was that history is written about what was really important at the time. As a result, "common knowledge" that "everybody knew" dies out, because it's so common, no one bothered to write it down when time caused it to become obsolete. That's one reason why I love those "Kids React" videos--it drives home the point. I remember a science fiction story I read once in which a couple in a museum in the future were stuck in an exhibit, because they simply didn't recognize what a doorknob did. Clarke's Third Law may be "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic", but it often applies equally in reverse--any sufficiently primitive technology is indistinguishable from magic, as well (in some cases). Watching an expert make an obsidian arrowhead is darn near magical, in my opinion... Introduce a child who's grown up with cell phones to the comparatively very primitive concept of two metal cans with a hole in the bottom and a piece of string tied between them and you'll see a person who thinks they've just witnessed magic  |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 30, 2016 20:14:20 GMT
for that matter, the current mystery tool in our tool thread illustrates how rapidly we lose knowledge. Or, for that matter, how much knowledge there is to keep track of. If that tools is as specialized as it seems, relatively few people will ever have come across it. When the tehcnology that tool goes with gets replaced and the last person to use it has died, no one in the remaining history of human kind may ever figure out what it did. Now imagine how many of those tools have been and will be invented over the entire course of human history, from the first stick ever used to prod a piece of fruit off a branch to the very last piece of technology used by the very last human being to ever live in our universe. There's absolutely no hope of preserving each and every last bit of knowledge conjured up by human minds. There's simply too much of it. not that there's anything inherently wrong with that. unless you count how it frustrates the curious. |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Mar 30, 2016 20:17:45 GMT
Or, for that matter, how much knowledge there is to keep track of. If that tools is as specialized as it seems, relatively few people will ever have come across it. When the tehcnology that tool goes with gets replaced and the last person to use it has died, no one in the remaining history of human kind may ever figure out what it did. Now imagine how many of those tools have been and will be invented over the entire course of human history, from the first stick ever used to prod a piece of fruit off a branch to the very last piece of technology used by the very last human being to ever live in our universe. There's absolutely no hope of preserving each and every last bit of knowledge conjured up by human minds. There's simply too much of it. not that there's anything inherently wrong with that. unless you count how it frustrates the curious. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. If the human species had to actively catalogue each and every item we invent and how it works, however specialized and "one use only" it is, we'd never advance. We'd spend all our time writing up documentation on things that will be obsolete as soon as one particular job is done. |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Mar 30, 2016 20:22:46 GMT
Indeed. I remember a story I heard about a bunch of aircraft enthusiasts who were trying to rebuild a P-51 Mustang. The plane had a particular air scoop on the bottom of the fuselage, and try as they might, they just could not figure out how to properly build the scoop without deforming the sheet metal. They had the blueprints and tools to make it, but getting it to release from the form was just not happening. Eventually, they tracked down a machinist who had actually built these planes back in WW2. When asked about helping to rebuild the plane, he immediately said "You're having problems with the air scoop, right?" Sure enough, he outlined a procedure that told how to use the form (and appropriate lubricant mold release and tools) that worked the first time, quickly and easily. It seems the scoop had always been a big problem during the original manufacture, yet no body had ever bothered to write the procedure down. I've witnessed colleagues first hand having to "invent a tool" on the spot just to refurbish an old house because whatever tools and techniques the original builders used to install whatever we were looking at, that knowledge no longer existed when we got there. |
|
