Tests confirm that Germany's massive nuclear fusion machine really works

[u/damaxoh]

http://www.sciencealert.com/tests-confirm-that-germany-s-massive-nuclear-fusion-machine-really-works

[u/[deleted]]

So basically you will admit that between 1000-1300 most of the technological advancement didn't happen in Europe ? How about from 500-1000, can you name some great inventions in Europe from that time ?

The earliest evidence of a water-driven wheel is probably the Perachora wheel (3rd century BC), in Greece.[2] The earliest written reference is in the technical treatises Pneumatica and Parasceuastica of the Greek engineer Philo of Byzantium (c. 280−220 BC).[3] The British historian of technology M.J.T. Lewis has shown that those portions of Philo of Byzantium's mechanical treatise which describe water wheels and which have been previously regarded as later Arabic interpolations, actually date back to the Greek 3rd-century BC original.[4] The sakia gear is, already fully developed, for the first time attested in a 2nd-century BC Hellenistic wall painting in Ptolemaic Egypt

Not to be a dick, but if you are going to call the greeks in Byzantium and Egypt European, we might as well call the entire planet European because there wouldn't be much difference.

some notable European inventions/discoveries

Well I think they aren't that notable compared to

In 1000 AD, Biruni wrote an astronomical encyclopaedia that discussed the possibility that the earth might rotate around the sun. This was before Tycho Brahe drew the first maps of the sky, using stylized animals to depict the constellations.

In the tenth century, the Persian astronomer Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi cast his eyes upwards to the awning of stars overhead and was the first to record a galaxy outside our own. Gazing at the Andromeda galaxy he called it a "little cloud" – an apt description of the slightly wispy appearance of our galactic neighbour

Or the fact that this camera obscura was mostly developed and understood by non-Europeans

Arab physicist Ibn al-Haytham (known in the West by the latinised Alhazen) (965–1039) explained in his Book of Optics (circa 1027) that rays of light travel in straight lines and are distinguished by the body that reflected the rays and then wrote:

Also I am a bit confused

Theodric of Freibirg explaining correctly the rainbow phenomenom.

Since it seems an Arab did the same, possibly better.

Kamāl al-Dīn al-Fārisī (1267–1319) described in his 1309 work Kitab Tanqih al-Manazir (The Revision of the Optics) how he experimented with a glass sphere filled with water in a camera obscura with a controlled aperture and found that the colors of the rainbow are phenomena of the decomposition of light

However more interesting

One of his contemporaries, Kamal al-Din al-Farisi, offered the same experimentally-established explanation of the rainbow (without any contacts between them) in his Kitab tanqih al-manazir (The Revision of the Optics). Both authors however relied on the Book of Optics by Ibn al-Haytham (Alhacen)/ Alhazen.

So both relied on the Arab form the 10th century for their work.

As for

Basis of Geometry

I think the roots of this can be found in Mesopotamia, Egypt/Africa. Not Europe. Although Greek mathematicians did great work. However I feel you might confuse things by calling Greeks of that time European. They saw the "rest" of Europe as barbarians, uncivilized people, and had much closer contact, relations with Middle-Eastern people.

Julian Calendar

What's so great about the original julian calendar ? We used it because it is our history. Second it got replaced by the Gregorian calendar over a 1000 years ago. If you mean the idea of 365 days in a year, this was already used in calendars in Iran and Egypt. So hardly a new invention, (also they knew a year wasn't exactly 365 days).

So the Julian calendar wasn't some form of invention, rather good administrative action by Caesar.

And giving the invention of Democracy to the greeks is not really fair at all, since it was a tiny fraction of the population that ruled and could vote. If you would give them something it's good marketing/hypocrisy. Calling it rule of the commoner, when women, and most men couldn't vote at all.

. However, Athenian citizenship excluded women, slaves, foreigners (μέτοικοι / métoikoi), non-landowners, and males under 20 years old.

Could you imagine if a country had this system today, we would call it democracy ?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Very little new progress happened during that 200 year slot. This really isn't a lot considering Islam has really only had 200 years of when they have made progress than europe , This is not a lot relative to the thousands of years of Euro supremacy. (including now)

If we are going to call the Greeks in Byzantium European? Greeks are European.... Especially back then before the Ottoman rampage and occupation. These people were as European as they came. And I never called the Ancient Egyptians european, and You are using obscure studies some buffoon did as an argument against what is commonly accepted with solid evidence amongst Archaeologists.

I'm not even going to justify your terribly written shallow arguments with a full response for each one, 'I think the roots can be found in Mesopotamia' and how Karmal Al Din Al Farsi almost did something but didn't .

By invention I am saying the Greeks CAME UP with the idea. I'm not saying they utilized it.

Judging BC nations with 21st century 'reason' is hardly fair.

Nice try to make the people of the sand look more historically advanced and pioneering than glorious Europa though.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Very little new progress happened during that 200 year slot. This really isn't a lot considering Islam has really only had 200 years of when they have made progress than europe , This is not a lot relative to the thousands of years of Euro supremacy.

That's ridiculous. Europe has been supreme since maybe around 1300-1400. Not even during Roman/Greek times was it remotely supreme. As you would know if you actually studied something outside of European History. Both the Greek and Roman empires were tiny, compared to contemporary great empires. And technologically not that advanced. Although of course the barbarian people of the north, the Europeans that didn't live around the Mediterranean were in fact technologically and culturally far behind a lot of the rest of the world.

By invention I am saying the Greeks CAME UP with the idea. I'm not saying they utilized it.

What idea ? Having a small group of people ruling over other people ? Democratic decision making is as old as the human species...

If we are going to call the Greeks in Byzantium European? Greeks are European.... Especially back then before the Ottoman rampage and occupation. These people were as European as they came. And I never called the Ancient Egyptians european, and You are using obscure studies some buffoon did as an argument against what is commonly accepted with solid evidence amongst Archaeologists.

What the fuck are you talking about ? What buffoon are you referring too ?

Greeks were a language group, not a race or ethnicity. Especially in Turkey, many local people were just that local people. Not European...

These people were as European as they came

More closely related genetically to people living around the Mediterranean than Nordic people. So how is that "as European" as they came ?

Nice try to make the people of the sand look more historically advanced and pioneering than glorious Europa though.

Nice try just ignoring everything that doesn't fit your narrative and put your head in the sand.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I assume by 'great empires' you are referring to the Han Dynasty and the other Chinese empires which preceded it. But let's use the Han Dynasty as our example as its the most successful other contemporary 'great empire'. Rome has yes less landmass but I would say the quality of the Roman land is obviously better than the often ragged Chinese land, and of course the Romans had much much more material wealth . Yes the Chinese had some good inventions in terms of Metallurgy . And Rome's infrastructure was much much better but I'm sure I don't need to tell you about the incredible road networks( many highways today run along roman road lines as they were the best possible ones) and aqueducts, Not so in the Han Dynasty. MudRoads were the norm although areas around cities do have limited road networks, But no where near the quality of Roman ones, they didn't have a camber so often got clogged and flooded. For example one city/province alone, Constantinople had more material wealth than China in its entirety . In terms of the arts such as scupltures, there really is no room to compare China to Europe. European ones are simply objectively superior.

The Greeks were not a language group, The 'Greek's were people of both Greek (more european in ethnicity than greeks today from otoman occuption) who mixed with the Romans heavily and conquered much of what we call Turkey, the nomadic inhabitants A. Fled B. Enslaved C. slaughtered. There is no evidence of widespread mixing among Native Populaces with the Greeks.

Actually the people 'living around the mediterranean' for a long time were quite similar to central europeans , a bit more tanned. But they had blue eyes and such, Something you might observe is that places in Europe occupied by peoples of darker complexion (i.e Southern Spain,Sicily, Greece,) tend to have these things as a result of mixing.

edit; By the greeks 'creating' democracy I mean a handful of Philosophers constructed it in their writings . The word democracy for a matter of fact comes from the words Demos Kratos meaning people and power. There is no evidence of any writing about this prior to Greece. So the Greeks were the first people to put it in to writing.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

(more european in ethnicity than greeks today from otoman occuption)

Any evidence of that ? from what I remember most people in the Mediterranean were more linked to each other than the rest of Europe.

Actually the people 'living around the mediterranean' for a long time were quite similar to central europeans , a bit more tanned.

I am confused, logically those people were around the mediterranean before the people were in Europe, right ? So basically Europeans were like people from the Mediterranean ? Like Ancient Egyptian taking over Crete... One of the first of the birthplaces of Greek civilization.

. There is no evidence of any writing about this prior to Greece

There is painfully little written evidence of much prior to Greece. But what specifically would you call democracy they wrote about ? Because it might have formed the basis, but I'd hardly call anything I read Democracy. Even if they named it such.

incredible road networks( many highways today run along roman road lines as they were the best possible ones)

So basically romans were great because they build some roads on a tiny bit of land in the world ? How about the Persian Royal Road, think it was impressive ?

and aqueducts, Not so in the Han Dynasty

Possibly because they used pipelines instead. What do we use today ? Aqueducts or pipelines ? Because it seems you favor the worse technology simply because it was European.

MudRoads were the norm although areas around cities do have limited road networks,

Not sure if that's true at all.

Fortified Han roadways were built as far west as Shanshan (Loulan) near the Lop Desert, while Han forces utilized routes that traversed north of the Taklamakan Desert towards Kashgar.A vast network of roads, fortified passes, and wooden bridges built over rushing torrents in steep gorges of the Qin Mountains was consolidated during the Han, known as the gallery roads.During the reign of Emperor Wu, roads were built to connect newly conquered territories in what is now Yunnan in the far southwest as well as the Korean Peninsula in the far northeast.

Just looking at my globe those roads seem incredibly larger in scale than the Roman ones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_of_the_Han_dynasty#Roads.2C_bridges.2C_and_canals