Science Vs. Technology

[Faeelin]

Okay, there's a bit of a discussion always going on about whether or not science leads to technologicla advancement.

In other words, just because we give the Early roman empire the scientific method doesn't mean we'll see railroads across Britannia in a few hundred years.

However, it seems to me that technological advancement can be spurred along by a rationalist, scientific world view. And science can certainly lead to advances in engineering and navigation; perhaps the Romans, in this hypothetical scenario, don't get steam engines but can circumnavigate the globe.

Thoughts?

[Johnestauffer]

This may be simplistic, but we could consider science to be theory and technology to be application. It is very possible to develop theories that remain only that because the resources (technology) need to demonstrate it is not available.
We could determine the speed of sound, but until technology caught up with theory, we could not demonstrate what happened (or didn't happen) when you execeed the speed of sound for example.
Both theory and practice need to work hand in hand.