# Science versus technology

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by timojin, Aug 31, 2016.

1. ### danshawenValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,950
That's not "self-referential", that's INCONSISTENT, because if x is a number, then x/0 <> x.

3. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
19,457
If you will notice the same answer is achieved. If 1 is divided by 0 it remains neither greater nor lesser than 1
IMO, if this function can be proven to be consistent, it confirms that to divide one by nothing, it remains whole.

Last edited: Oct 4, 2016
danshawen likes this.

5. ### danshawenValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,950
One (or any number) divided by zero is infinity, which is NOT a number.

7. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
19,457
Right, it's a false comparison. One yields a consistent function , the other a "what"? A timeless permittive condition?

This why an answer of infinity is a disqualifying property of an equation or function in theoretical science. It is mathematically not allowed to perform functions which are mathematically flawed, even as they may be influenced, as in *wave-interference, etc.

Infinity has no practical application. It is purely theoretical mathematics, also expressed in Pi (transcendental numbers)

8. ### danshawenValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,950
Correct. Proportional relationships (equations) speak only to whatever can be determined by proportional relationships, and this by a far shot is not anything like a comprehensive, complete or consistent view of anything.

A knowledge of the quantity of apples you have, its color, relative size, weight on Earth, etc. tells you exactly nothing about whether it is fresh or got worms in it, or how it will taste or how it compares to other kinds of fruit when you or a worm bite into it.

9. ### exchemistValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,063
Is that so? Do you have a reference for it?

While it seems not unreasonable, I see no mention of it in the Wiki article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel which instead claims the first wheel for which we have evidence was a potter's wheel (with a bearing), not a wheel used for transport.

10. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
19,457
[/quote]

http://www.speedace.info/wheels/wheel_images/wheel_development_log_roller_to_wagon.jpg.
The evolution of rolling transport vehicles.
Note that the last two *wheeled" carts used wooden pegs to keep the wheels aligned.

You are right that the wheel may have been used for other applications before it was used for transport. Of course this involved a vertical axle which had to be restrained from falling down.
http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/wheel.htm

https://www.bing.com/images/search?...iest potters wheelsuse of the wheel&FORM=IGRE

Note that the earliest potter wheel bearings were a stone with a dimple, into which the shaft was turned.

Last edited: Oct 6, 2016
11. ### Fraggle RockerStaff Member

Messages:
24,690
Indeed. With the thousands of potter's wheels in existence in the Paleolithic Era (the early Stone Age: before agriculture), it's commonly assumed that every now and then one of them was accidentally dropped--or thrown in anger--and began rolling down an incline. The speed at which it could roll must surely have caused the more curious members of the tribe to wonder if the phenomenon couldn't somehow be put to work.

A roller is nothing more than an extremely thick wheel, which doesn't need balancing in order to continue turning. Of course, resting a load on top of a roller isn't especially useful, because the load will roll right off the top rather quickly. But there were surely Paleolithic craftsmen who imagined cutting a hole very carefully in the middle of the wheel, and putting an axle into it that would support a modest load. As soon as they realized that they could put an axle through two wheels, they could put a platform on the axle, and they had invented a primitive wheelbarrow.

The Neolithic Era was the dawn of agriculture, but who knows whether farming or animal husbandry was the first kind of agriculture--and for that matter, some tribes thought of one first, while others thought of the other. Once large animals were trained for riding (goats may have been the first), it was much easier for hitherto distant tribes to visit each other and swap ideas.

The Neolithic people were able to make much more precise tools than their Paleolithic ancestors. Instead of cutting wood with axes and knives, they could use saws, which could cut wood precisely enough to build a modern wheel with spokes and a rolling axle. At this point, there was a quantum increase in transportation technology, which, in turn, resulted in more trade between tribes, and the widespread sharing of ideas.

12. ### exchemistValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,063
This has become a rather informative thread. Thank you.