@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote: And in the 'duh' moment: once you go black you never go back! I mean, who would have thought that black absorbs light...

We all know black absorbs light. But absorbing != converting to electricity, so it's not like you can simply paint the solar cell to make it more efficient. That would instead add to the heat, lowering the efficiency. What is needed is a way to CONVERT more light into electricity. These guys claim to have found a way to make the cell surface matte by making tiny pits without using bad chemicals. All in all good, I don't see any "duh" moment here.

Quote:

Perhaps eventually they will figure out how to absorb non-visible light...

How was that even relevant? Again, do you mean absorbing or converting? Long wavelength IR is essentially RF, so you can absorb them with a simple radio antenna. But you would need to get it up past the threshold of a rectifier to be able to use the energy in it.

Short wavelength IR can be converted to electricity by using PV cells that aren't Si based. This site has a few technologies listed that absorb well into the shorter IR spectrum. Unfortunately they seem to convert less visible light.

UV light outside the range of absorption in a solar cell can be converted to visible light. Turbo Solar claim they can increase the efficiency of solar cells by 10% this way. Not a whole lot, but an interesting start.

I still don't see any "duh" moments here.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@olegil

Quote:

olegil wrote: @Lou Quote: Lou wrote: And in the 'duh' moment: once you go black you never go back! I mean, who would have thought that black absorbs light... We all know black absorbs light. But absorbing != converting to electricity, so it's not like you can simply paint the solar cell to make it more efficient. That would instead add to the heat, lowering the efficiency. What is needed is a way to CONVERT more light into electricity. These guys claim to have found a way to make the cell surface matte by making tiny pits without using bad chemicals. All in all good, I don't see any "duh" moment here.

...but but but...
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-06/new-alloy-can-convert-heat-directly-electricity

Quote:

Quote: Perhaps eventually they will figure out how to absorb non-visible light... How was that even relevant? Again, do you mean absorbing or converting? Long wavelength IR is essentially RF, so you can absorb them with a simple radio antenna. But you would need to get it up past the threshold of a rectifier to be able to use the energy in it. Short wavelength IR can be converted to electricity by using PV cells that aren't Si based. This site has a few technologies listed that absorb well into the shorter IR spectrum. Unfortunately they seem to convert less visible light. UV light outside the range of absorption in a solar cell can be converted to visible light. Turbo Solar claim they can increase the efficiency of solar cells by 10% this way. Not a whole lot, but an interesting start. I still don't see any "duh" moments here.

Again, I blame the language barrier.

The 'duh' moment was only for the realization that "solar" panels can absorb and create more light to energy if they don't actually reflect some of it away.

The rest was to show that visible light is not the only 'light' that can be converted to energy but if you noticed in the article these new black solar panels also generate electricity on cloudy days.

@Lou

Quote:

You mean you actually believe the eye witness testimony of the people who say humans did it?

No.


I do not believe anything. I look at all of the evidence that is available, then draw conclusions based on the greatest balance of probabilities arising from the study of all of the evidence. I then hold this to be the most acceptable answer based on the evidence. If new evidence becomes available it is added to the sum total of all of the evidence and a new balance of probabilities arises. sometimes this simply reinforces , but sometimes it changes the currently held answer. Since in my case, belief does not get in the way of learning, there is less resistance to new ideas.
This method is in stark contrast to your own "method" of first deciding what you want the answer to be, then accepting unsupported assertions in your favour as cast iron evidence while ignoring any evidence that contradicts your idealised and prejudiced view of the universe. If the evidence cannot be ignored your next tactic is to claim that it has been faked, again without having any evidence to back your assertion.

An example of this methodology is the case of LLoyd Pye's "Starchild" A skull showing all of the typical deformities associated with untreated infantile hydrocephalus is claimed to be of alien origin. There is at first no evidence to support the claim other than the deformity, and the only evidence against the claim is that the deformity is of a recognised nature. As new technology is developed DNA is extracted and studied. This quickly determines that the mother of the child was definitely human, and the human female interred with the child was not its mother. This does not placate the lunatic fringe who simply concoct even wilder claims about the child being some kind of hybrid. A panel of believers label themselves experts and release a report claiming that there has been nothing like it on earth before, while the reply of independent doctors and surgeons is shouted down because the answer does not meet with the approval of the faithful. despite tha claims made by LLoyd Pye on his sponsored lecture tours, on LLoyd Pyes website, and in LLoyd Pyes books, medical science does recognise the deformities, and geneticists do recognise the genetic material as human. The only reason that there was any undetermined material was that after 900 years, much of the DNA had denatured due to normal decay. In the meantime a lot of people have been separated from their money by a smooth salesman.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou Quote: You mean you actually believe the eye witness testimony of the people who say humans did it? No. I do not believe anything. I look at all of the evidence that is available, then draw conclusions based on the greatest balance of probabilities arising from the study of all of the evidence. I then hold this to be the most acceptable answer based on the evidence. If new evidence becomes available it is added to the sum total of all of the evidence and a new balance of probabilities arises. sometimes this simply reinforces , but sometimes it changes the currently held answer. Since in my case, belief does not get in the way of learning, there is less resistance to new ideas. This method is in stark contrast to your own "method" of first deciding what you want the answer to be, then accepting unsupported assertions in your favour as cast iron evidence while ignoring any evidence that contradicts your idealised and prejudiced view of the universe. If the evidence cannot be ignored your next tactic is to claim that it has been faked, again without having any evidence to back your assertion.

Ok, so other than word of mouth, what is your evidence?

@Lou

Quote:

Ok, so other than word of mouth, what is your evidence?

For a start there is clear evidence of the development of pyramids and the building methods used to produce them. Starting with the basic mastaba, the later step pyramid at the same site as many mastabas, then the bent pyramid. This shows a clear evolution through basic trial and error that finally led to the final design of the Great Pyramid. For the entire history of ancient Egypt there were bureaucrats keeping records. These contemporaneous records ist wages, materials, food etc for the workforce, and even mention imported labour. The labour recorded includes Jews and Hittites, but not ET's. Records from Jewish sources, and Hittite archaeology substantiate the Egyptian record, but still do not mention ET's
In the middens and rubbish dumps of the time old and broken tools have been found that could certainly be used to produce structures like the pyramids, and the Ancient Egyptians certainly knew how to use water to produce a clear flat surface for building, how to cut and shape limestone, and they had the infrastructure necessary to support an effort of this magnitude. As I said you start with an open mind, look at what information there is and look to the balance of probability.
In the Roman structures, castles, and cathedrals of Europe we have clear evidence that large dressed stones can be moved and stacked without using motorised methods, or steel cranes.
This chain of evidence directly contradicts the frequent dishonest assertion that the Great pyramid stands in glorious tecnical isolation as though it were the former Sears tower surrounded by yurts.

While it is true that absence of proof is not proof of absence, the fact that the population of Egypt was approximately 1.5 million at the start of the Old Kingdom, rising to about 5 million by the time of the Roman conquest, and not one of them saw fit to break the code of silence and mention the presence of ET's gives a strong probability that there were never any ET's there for them to talk about.
Against this there is Lou's statement that "It was aliens, because there is no absolute proof that I will accept, that there were no aliens, so therefore it absolutely must be aliens, because if it wasn't aliens then how come... (Insert lie * here).

* Insert the deformed human remains, misinterpreted text, misrepresented carving, or faked artifact of your choice

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou Quote: Ok, so other than word of mouth, what is your evidence? For a start

For starters, you are answering the wrong question.

Quote:

...there is clear evidence of the development of pyramids and the building methods used to produce them. Starting with the basic mastaba, the later step pyramid at the same site as many mastabas, then the bent pyramid. This shows a clear evolution through basic trial and error that finally led to the final design of the Great Pyramid. For the entire history of ancient Egypt there were bureaucrats keeping records. These contemporaneous records ist wages, materials, food etc for the workforce, and even mention imported labour. The labour recorded includes Jews and Hittites, but not ET's. Records from Jewish sources, and Hittite archaeology substantiate the Egyptian record,

Ok, I'm from Missouri, show me the records!!!

Quote:

but still do not mention ET's

No, just plenty about their gods...which come down from the heavens on flying shields, chariots of fire, etc...

Quote:

In the middens and ....

and who cares...

Quote:

While it is true that absence of proof is not proof of absence, the fact that the population of Egypt was approximately 1.5 million at the start of the Old Kingdom, rising to about 5 million by the time of the Roman conquest, and not one of them saw fit to break the code of silence and mention the presence of ET's gives a strong probability that there were never any ET's there for them to talk about.

Actually that's just plain wrong. They specifically mention all the things that describe an 'ET' and said they came from 'the heavens'.
It's amusing how you pick and chose what words of men to believe.

Quote:

Against this there is Lou's statement that "It was aliens, because there is no absolute proof that I will accept, that there were no aliens, so therefore it absolutely must be aliens, because if it wasn't aliens then how come... (Insert lie * here). * Insert the deformed human remains, misinterpreted text, misrepresented carving, or faked artifact of your choice

It was aliens because I believe what is written by the 'people who kept records' vs. what is a theory made thousands of years later. Records of people who were there describing advanced technology > a theory from someone who wasn't there many millenia later. I mean how illogical of me!

An excerise for you: made a cylinder seal to the level of detail the Sumerians did using the technology of the time.

@Lou

Quote:

Quote: but still do not mention ET's No, just plenty about their gods...which come down from the heavens on flying shields, chariots of fire, etc...

So the reason you believe in ET's is....Religion. I might have known.
I require the same actual evidence to support assertions from ancient priests as I do from nutjobs posting on youtube, as there is little difference between the two groups.
In the early 1820s Joseph Smith(December 23, 1805 – June 27, 1844) claimed he was given a book of golden plates by an angel, which only he could translate, and as a result he became a powerful and influential figure prior to his death while in custody. There is a reason that people make up stories about Gods, it gives them power without having to explain beyond "God told me to do it." and of course their god is more powerful than the other gods and any deed claimed by the followers of one god is quickly copied by the supportes of another god. Give it enough time and the Mormons will be claiming that J. Smith was born of a virgin, murdered, then rose again on the third day... etc.
Bureaucrats may pad the accounts and skim a bit off the top, but they do not invent stories that can be so easily disproved when the auditors ask awkward questions like "what flying citadel?"

Quote:

Quote: In the middens and .... and who cares...

apart from somebody who is looking for all of the evidence, but of course you don't care about trivial details like evidence when it contradicts your chosen predetermined conclusion.

Quote:

It was aliens because I believe what is written by the 'people who kept records'

The bureaucrats who kept records make no mention of ET's or Gods, flying saucers or people riding pillars of fire. Only the religions tell such stories in order to pacify the downtrodden masses. When Karl Marx wrote of religion as the "opiate of the people" he was not expounding a new idea, merely making an observation about an ancient and long standing practice. The final analysis of your collected statements throughout this thread boils down to the following statement.

"It was aliens because I believe."

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@Lou

Quote:

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/355265/group/Opinion/ Interesting new book...

http://www.michaelshermer.com/the-believing-brain/
Interestinger new book. Why and how do people make conclusions then evidence?
"The brain is a belief engine. From sensory data flowing in through the senses the brain naturally begins to look for and find patterns, and then infuses those patterns with meaning. "
-- eg large earthquakes are due to planet Nibiru closing in on us, this was the belief pushed here. Turned out no it wasn't and earthquakes were on the high side last year they weren't statisically out of the norm. Which means there was no evidence for the belief.

Looking forward to chapter 3 on Unseen Beliefs. What makes Gods, aliens, and conspiracies the same, or different. IMO there's fairly little difference there. Once one accepts there's an unseen and unproveable truth then one can ascribe any thing they want as a property and accept it as true too.
Quote:

just plenty about their gods...which come down from the heavens on flying shields, chariots of fire

Or even simply reject that a culture had religion and claim it was all aliens posing as gods. What I see here is your less than 100% means 0% rule. If it can be unseen unknown gods then simply claim unseen unknown aliens or unseen unknown fairies or unseen unknown ....

Quote:

The 'duh' moment was only for the realization that "solar" panels can absorb and create more light to energy if they don't actually reflect some of it away.

Not sure what you're seeing as a duh moment here? Scientists certainly knew this that's why they have been working on approaches to reduce reflection and thereby increase absorption. So it's not a duh for science. Perhaps a duh for Lou? You hadn't thought of this before? Explain more please what you see is 'duh'.

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou So the reason you believe in ET's is....Religion. I might have known. I require the same actual evidence to support assertions from ancient priests as I do from nutjobs posting on youtube, as there is little difference between the two groups.

Are you still trying to spin this scratched record?
Is it not obvious that technology in ancient times would be confused for "magic"?
Of course, pushing the religion card is a good way to discredit the source as per the debunking rules...

Quote:

In the early 1820s Joseph Smith(December 23, 1805 – June 27, 1844) claimed he was given a book of golden plates by an angel, which only he could translate, and as a result he became a powerful and influential figure prior to his death while in custody. There is a reason that people make up stories about Gods, it gives them power without having to explain beyond "God told me to do it." and of course their god is more powerful than the other gods and any deed claimed by the followers of one god is quickly copied by the supportes of another god. Give it enough time and the Mormons will be claiming that J. Smith was born of a virgin, murdered, then rose again on the third day... etc. Bureaucrats may pad the accounts and skim a bit off the top, but they do not invent stories that can be so easily disproved when the auditors ask awkward questions like "what flying citadel?" ...blah blah blah blah... Quote: It was aliens because I believe what is written by the 'people who kept records' The bureaucrats who kept records make no mention of ET's or Gods, flying saucers or people riding pillars of fire. Only the religions tell such stories in order to pacify the downtrodden masses. When Karl Marx wrote of religion as the "opiate of the people" he was not expounding a new idea, merely making an observation about an ancient and long standing practice. The final analysis of your collected statements throughout this thread boils down to the following statement. "It was aliens because I believe."

You have shown me ZERO bueraucratic records.
Keep on typing though, if you believe typing like a broken record equals facts, that is...

@BrianK
Quote:

Quote: The 'duh' moment was only for the realization that "solar" panels can absorb and create more light to energy if they don't actually reflect some of it away. Not sure what you're seeing as a duh moment here? Scientists certainly knew this that's why they have been working on approaches to reduce reflection and thereby increase absorption. So it's not a duh for science. Perhaps a duh for Lou? You hadn't thought of this before? Explain more please what you see is 'duh'.

Solar panels have been around for decades. It was obvious they were inefficient when I'd get a reflection of the sun from them. Duh!

You are reading too much into this.

I then went on to link how even non-visible light can produce energy...

Last edited by Lou on 02-Apr-2012 at 02:56 PM.

@Lou

Quote:

Solar panels have been around for decades. It was obvious they were inefficient when I'd get a reflection of the sun from them. Duh!

Pretty much everything has some reflectivity. So unless they can make the panels out of blackholes..

Quote:

I then went on to link how even non-visible light can produce energy...

You mean like Microwaves which have done so in your kitchen for decades?

@BrianK
Quote:

Quote: I then went on to link how even non-visible light can produce energy... You mean like Microwaves which have done so in your kitchen for decades?

Yeah but opposite direction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectenna

http://www.coolcadelectronics.com/DARPA_Energy_Harvesting.html
http://www.coolcadelectronics.com/Partners_aff.html oh look, it's DARPA!

But again, I'm talking about a larger spectrum...as AlienScientist proposed.

Last edited by Lou on 02-Apr-2012 at 04:33 PM.
Last edited by Lou on 02-Apr-2012 at 04:30 PM.

@Lou

Quote:

But again, I'm talking about a larger spectrum...as AlienScientist proposed

I don't see anything new here? This stuff has been demonstrated for decades. This stuff has existed longer, nearly a century, on paper.

As for AlienScientist - he was simply born to late. These sorts of physical principles were found prior to his birth.

Last edited by BrianK on 02-Apr-2012 at 08:06 PM.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unAR5UE8sjc

Great J. Allen Hynek and attorney Peter Gersten interview.
But of course, let's not believe anybody as is par for the course...and of course completely disregard it...

@Lou

Quote:

You have shown me ZERO bueraucratic records. Keep on typing though, if you believe typing like a broken record equals facts, that is...

This is one hell of a statement from somebody who thinks the words "I believe" are cast iron, irrefutable evidence of his moronic fantasy.
Exactly how much evidence have you provided for your statement tht the only possoble conclusion is alien intervention. The sum total of all of your argument comes down to the two words that are less than nothing in a fact based world. Even when you are shown facts you close your eyes, block your ears, and scream "FAKE" simply because you are incapable of accepting ideas outside of your pathetic fantasy world that causes you to accept the ramblings of people who find their "science" in history books because it is easier than accepting the world as it really is.
I cannot shove the original papyrus into your hands, but I will quote from an account by a minor official called Weni reporting to his superiors, on a task set for him during the construction of a pyramid for king Menerere, of the sixth dynasty.
Quote:

His Majesty sent me to Hatnub in order to bring a great altar of travertine of Hatnub. I brought this altar down for him in 17 days. After it had been quarried at Hatnub, I had it transported downstream in the barge that I had made for it, a barge of acacia wood of 60 cubits in length and 30 cubits in width. It was built in 17 days and in the third month of summer, when there was no water on sandbanks, it was safely moored at the pyramid of King Merenre.

The Hatnub quarries are in Middle Egypt, some 186 miles, south of Saqqara, where King Merenre's pyramid was built. The barge was over 98ft long and over 49ft wide. You will also note that there is no mention of it flying, or being crewed by LGM, hardly surprising since it was made of wood.
Now that I have produced a contemporary record showing HUMAN involvement in the construction, perhaps you will return the compliment and produce a contemporary document that clearly and unequivocally identifies an ET as the labourer involved in the construction effort. BTW the words "I believe" are a creed, and as such do not qualify as clear and unequivocal evidence.

Quote:

http://www.coolcadelectronics.com/DARPA_Energy_Harvesting.html

A very interesting read, especially the summary of objectives.
Step 1. design new CAD tools. If they don't even have a drawing package capable of doing the drawings, I don't suppose that they are on the verge of a major breakthrough any moment now.
Step 2. Design a new type of antenna that is broadband, low loss, high gain, optimised for micro fabrication. I suppose that should take about five minutes then... I mean, it's not as though we haven't been trying to do exactly that since Marconi was a boy.
Step 3. Design a new diode to use as a rectifier. The new diode must have an increased surface area to speed up the response time and reduce the junction voltage, while having a reduced surface area to keep the capacitance to a minimum. Bigger and smaller at the same time. Simple.
What we have here is a wish list, why not add winning $640M in the lottery while you are at it.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@Nimrod

You don't increase area to reduce time and voltage, you decrease thickness of depletion layer. This has the same effect (increasing capacitance) but that is why they need reduced area (to mitigate the problem of increased capacitance).

Basically we're talking a diode for very small currents (it's for a small antenna after all) but they've done something interesting in their drawing. It's not placed in series, it's placed in parallell, shorting out the pulses they don't want instead of conducting the pulses they want. This fixes an inherent problem of rectifiers, that they only conduct in the short time where the (usually sinusoidal) input signal has a larger amplitude than the output signal. This leads to noise in powersupplies that leaks out to the utility lines, so therefore it's discouraged to have a PSU with a rectifier feeding a large capacitor directly.

The recommended solution for 50/60Hz is to rectify into a small capacitor, then chop this voltage up (preferably with duty cycle (and therefore also input current) proportional with the input voltage) and feed it to an isolated boost converter, increasing the voltage to a larger capacitor. From there you use buck converters to get down to working voltages.

Funnily enough, this is basically what a MPPT regulator for PV systems also does. But it can't use the input voltage directly to feed the duty cycle, it must keep searching up and down in duty cycle to maximize both voltage and current out of the PV. The reason this is useful is (like I expect you know) that the curve of voltage vs current in a PV cell at constant insolation has a knee pointing upwards to the right, where you can get more power the further towards the knee you creep. Possibly some of the same ideas can be used with a "rectenna" as they call it.

Now, having looked at the radiaten spectrum of the sun, I can't really see the point of trying to make that fit with RF instead of PV. Seems it mostly ends around 4000nm (75GHz) and the useful energy levels are from about 200 to 2000nm. This is well within the usefulness of PV cells, just maybe not made from Si (which is very good at visible light and sucks at IR). The sun simply is too hot to emit useful levels of RF.

Ironically the greenhouse effect helps to convert some of that into the RF domain (through reflecting the much longer IR/RF emitted by the much colder planet Earth, which is why this works equally well in the night), but for instance if you want to harvest solar energy in space this won't help at all.

There's an even easier way of utilizing the IR. A heat pump cooling the PV cells to keep them at the optimum temperature would provide a lot of waste heat. So in essence, you get a solar water heater (or boiler, if you need it) from the remaining 80-70% of the sunlight that isn't converted into electrical energy. The heat pump takes power to operate, but that should fit nicely with the increased output of the PV array due to the lowered temperature. I think. Not sure of the manufacturing cost of the absorber and the insulation for the PV cell. IBM is doing research into efficient energy transfer between PV and cooling system, according to this article. This means it's possible to make very small, inexpensive solar cells with very large, inexpensive fresnell lenses feeding the sunlight into them. This requires tracking, though. A bit of give and take there.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@Lou

Yeah Astronomers manipulate color. How much? So much that special lenses have been and are being made to facilitate the task. Canon InfraRed filter is one example.

Where your thought goes wrong is that this proves they also photoshop in greater details than possible OR they hide the alien bases. Whomever is claiming that CAN show proof of such an event by zooming in on the pixels and seeing the differences in the images. (Okay perhaps they're not personally capable but they could farm it out to someone who can. Afterall it's not rocket science. )

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou Quote: You have shown me ZERO bueraucratic records. Keep on typing though, if you believe typing like a broken record equals facts, that is... This is one hell of a statement from somebody who thinks the words "I believe" are cast iron, irrefutable evidence of his moronic fantasy. Exactly how much evidence have you provided for your statement tht the only possoble conclusion is alien intervention. The sum total of all of your argument comes down to the two words that are less than nothing in a fact based world. Even when you are shown facts you close your eyes, block your ears, and scream "FAKE" simply because you are incapable of accepting ideas outside of your pathetic fantasy world that causes you to accept the ramblings of people who find their "science" in history books because it is easier than accepting the world as it really is. I cannot shove the original papyrus into your hands, but I will quote from an account by a minor official called Weni reporting to his superiors, on a task set for him during the construction of a pyramid for king Menerere, of the sixth dynasty. Quote: His Majesty sent me to Hatnub in order to bring a great altar of travertine of Hatnub. I brought this altar down for him in 17 days. After it had been quarried at Hatnub, I had it transported downstream in the barge that I had made for it, a barge of acacia wood of 60 cubits in length and 30 cubits in width. It was built in 17 days and in the third month of summer, when there was no water on sandbanks, it was safely moored at the pyramid of King Merenre. The Hatnub quarries are in Middle Egypt, some 186 miles, south of Saqqara, where King Merenre's pyramid was built. The barge was over 98ft long and over 49ft wide. You will also note that there is no mention of it flying, or being crewed by LGM, hardly surprising since it was made of wood. Now that I have produced a contemporary record showing HUMAN involvement in the construction, perhaps you will return the compliment and produce a contemporary document that clearly and unequivocally identifies an ET as the labourer involved in the construction effort. BTW the words "I believe" are a creed, and as such do not qualify as clear and unequivocal evidence.

Great job moving the goal posts!
The slabs used on the GREAT pyramids came from 500 miles away.
No explanation how they managed to lay the diagonal ones at the top so perfectly...
The only time there was water near the pyramids in Giza was about 12000 years ago. So either the GREAT pyramids were built prior to when your nimrodic beliefs say it was, or aliens did it or both. In any case, your beliefs are wrong.

Another difference between your moving goal posts and the great pyramids, other than the obvious size and scale is quality. The great pyramids were better built despite being built 8000+ years prior.

Yes this is truly amazing: Over time, as authority became less centralized, the ability and willingness to harness the resources required for construction on a massive scale decreased, and later pyramids were smaller, less well-built and often hastily constructed. The materials and methods of construction used in the earliest pyramids have ensured their survival in a generally much better state of preservation than for the pyramid monuments of later pharaohs. I bolded monuments because as you know, no mummies were ever found in the great pyramids. My guess is that the 'newer' pyramids were built for the egos of pharohs attempting to replicate the great ones...but obviously never exceeding them...

Yes, its totally amusing how technology simply got WORSE. Obviously those beuraucrats of 2000BC weren't as good as the ones from 10,000BC...

@Lou

Quote:

Yes, its totally amusing how technology simply got WORSE. Obviously those beuraucrats of 2000BC weren't as good as the ones from 10,000BC

Technology can be lost. The Dark Ages was a great example of this. Europe backslid their technology. For example, concrete was known to the ancient Romans. Along came Christianity which brought the Dark Ages. There appears to be no concrete structure during this time. Later on builders rediscovered the receipe and began making concrete. Though while Europeans lost some of their knowledge and capabilities others, such as the Arabs, were increasing theirs. We see things happening such as medicine advancing in the middle-east while it backslid in Europe.

Though probably the real reason for a backslide in technology is the lack of discovery of tin foil to protect us from the Alien Mind Control Laser (tm).

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @Lou Quote: Yes, its totally amusing how technology simply got WORSE. Obviously those beuraucrats of 2000BC weren't as good as the ones from 10,000BC Technology can be lost.

Another 'duh' moment. ;)

Quote:

Though probably the real reason for a backslide in technology is the lack of discovery of tin foil to protect us from the Alien Mind Control Laser (tm).

Clearly!