Stagnating technology...

[NHBL]

How can we get technology to essentially stagnate at a level somewhere between 1900 and 1914 level. It doesn't have to be exactly at that level, but everyday life should be a lot like that era as to what technology the average person has. (It's OK if it's more widespread than in OTL.)
Most people use streetcars or horses, some (or all is OK) homes have electricity, but, other than lights, there are few appliances--no computer, no radio, vacuum cleaners are only in the relatively wealthy homes, etc.
Automobiles can be either very rare, as per 1900, or available to the middle class, as by 1914 with the Model T everywhere--but not the way a lot of people get around.
Telephones--in wealthier homes, some middle class--but long distance is expensive, and sometimes just plain not possible.
Aeroplanes are, if they exist, flimsy noveltys, of little use.
It's OK if some things are higher tech, so long as they are behind the scenes. For example, it doesn't matter to the streetcar if its electricity comes from coal, oil, or even nuclear power.

(I put it in this forum since the POD would likely have to be well before 1900.)

[DuQuense]

?Have you ever looked at a 1910 Sears Robuck Catolog? The range of Electic Applinances avalible shames a mordern Sears Catolog.From Curing irons and hairdyers, thru Vacuum cleaners, iceboxes and washing machines, to electic cars.

What you are looking for is a way to stop Basic Research, in Science, and Inventions.

My Idea would be a Great War in the 1895~1905 timeframe, like WW1 horror the use of Gas, and other products of Science, gets Attached to all new Sceince Research, and a world wide revoltion takes place, by 1910, There are very few new Students going in the the Science Fields. and even established Scienctist like the Curies, are having trouble raising Funds.

[NapoleonXIV]

The Great Anarchist Gas Disaster of 1896.

Anarchists get into the gas pipelines and generation plants, of several cities through a fiendisly well worked out combinaton of turning the gas off (to shut off the pilot lights) and then back on, ( to fill builidings with gas) they turn much of the targeted metropolises into gas chambers and/or giant bombs. Over several days, they kill thousands and destroy millions of dollars in property.

The world left is not that hurt, but the injury was hi-profile. Society feels chastened and obsessed with safety and the terrorist threat. Technology is slowed to snail's pace. Airplanes cannot develop, they might be rigged with bombs and flown into buildings. The same applies to large cars, trucks etc. Home appliances are seen as a source of possible injury far exceeding any convenience. Even telephones are limited, for they might make people too dependent on a wire which could then be cut. Any technology must be rigorously tested for safety and all possible contingencies vis-a-vis terrorism and any possible accident. Strict laws are passed against experimentation and invention, as these are seen as a main source of terrorist weaponry.

Conversely, the world becomes far more classist and restrictive, since the anarchist sentiment is seen as being brought about by people wanting to rise above their station in life. Restrictive laws are passed which limit social mobility and guarantee that many more servants will be available.

Helpful??

[Tyr]

I doubt that'd happen even if such a terrorist attack could occur.
More likely the government would offer a huge sum of money to someone who comes up with a safer alternative- electric lights appear not long after.

For this I'd imagine you'd really need a very early POD that gives us a tech level about what we had in the relevant time period. The concept of progress had been well and truly established for some time prior to 1900 IOTL.

[David S Poepoe]

Originally Posted by DuQuense

My Idea would be a Great War in the 1895~1905 timeframe, like WW1 horror the use of Gas, and other products of Science, gets Attached to all new Sceince Research, and a world wide revoltion takes place, by 1910, There are very few new Students going in the the Science Fields. and even established Scienctist like the Curies, are having trouble raising Funds.

A bit far fetched. Alot of advances, at the turn of the 10th century, were not from the 'Sciences' but just everyday people. A 'world wide revolution' sounds impractical since not all countries of the world were involved in either World War.

[Rick Robinson]

Originally Posted by NHBL

How can we get technology to essentially stagnate at a level somewhere between 1900 and 1914 level.

This might be one of the hardest eras to "freeze," because it was an era of exceptionally rapid and broad technical progress - arguably more than either before or since.

In about 1875, most people even in advanced countries lived day-to-day life much as they had in the Middle Ages - getting around on foot, living by the sun or by candlelight. Apart from reading, there was no "home entertainment" except what you produced yourself by playing the piano, etc. A train trip was something you might take every few years. Electrical anything was a novelty.

By 1925, millions of people are living recognizably modern lives - traveling by car, going to movies, keeping in touch by telephone, listening to the radio and record player. Much of what we have now are simply refinements of these things - the Internet is a sort of combined telephone/radio/phonograph, with a few extra bells and whistles.

So trying to jolt things to a halt in 1900 is exceptionally tough, because everything is so transitional, and so many technologies are already in existence but still in an early development stage.

It might be easier to freeze technology around 1970, if you can find a way to prevent the microcomputer revolution. Then you're left with a whole bunch of technologies, such as the car and the jet plane, that were already pretty mature in 1970, and where most subsequent progress has been through computerization.

-- Rick

[NHBL]

Originally Posted by DuQuense

?Have you ever looked at a 1910 Sears Robuck Catolog? The range of Electic Applinances avalible shames a mordern Sears Catolog.From Curing irons and hairdyers, thru Vacuum cleaners, iceboxes and washing machines, to electic cars.

My Sears catalog is from 1908, and has not a bit of electrical appliances, although I know there were some available.

What I'm aiming for is a steady-state or SLOWLY evolving society where streetcars and railroads are the main transportation, home entertanment is what you make, or a phonograph--no radio entertainment, for example.

Travel is for the rich, automobiles are not ubitquitous, and airplanes are stick and cloth toys at best.

That general pre-great war flavor, regardless of the abundance of electrical appliances...

(I have a very silly fondness for that era.)

[Nicksplace27]

earlier than that. Much earlier in fact, the indusrialization and scientific research was rooted in the renissance in the 1500's and was combined with the reformation. The Church would be the best damper on scientific research (remember Galileo?). If there is stronger chrch, the Middle Ages, with very little scientific progess at all, would be extended indefinitly further.

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by NapoleonXIV

The world left is not that hurt, but the injury was hi-profile. Society feels chastened and obsessed with safety and the terrorist threat. Technology is slowed to snail's pace. Airplanes cannot develop, they might be rigged with bombs and flown into buildings. The same applies to large cars, trucks etc. Home appliances are seen as a source of possible injury far exceeding any convenience. Even telephones are limited, for they might make people too dependent on a wire which could then be cut. Any technology must be rigorously tested for safety and all possible contingencies vis-a-vis terrorism and any possible accident. Strict laws are passed against experimentation and invention, as these are seen as a main source of terrorist weaponry.

Cars may be banned, but large road vehicle had been around for at least fifty years so you are still going to get traction engines and road trains.

The biggest problem is a worldwide stagnation of technology is that you have atleast two centres of development. For sake of argument, I am going to call it three, the USA, the British Empire and continental Europe. Inventors who can not prosper in one can always move to another and sign up a local financier to back their idea. OK so they will probably get stiffed, but the development would still take place.

The model for this is Renaissance Europe where there was a similar movement of brains plus the fact that kingdoms that tried to stagnate technology lost out to those who let new idas thrive. For a worldwide stagnation, we are looking for a global Ming Empire where ideas can be suppressed on an of course global scale.

Originally Posted by Nicksplace27

earlier than that. Much earlier in fact, the indusrialization and scientific research was rooted in the renissance in the 1500's and was combined with the reformation. The Church would be the best damper on scientific research (remember Galileo?). If there is stronger chrch, the Middle Ages, with very little scientific progess at all, would be extended indefinitly further.

Unless the Church could suppress individual kings and emperors, it is difficult to see how it could be much stronger. At various times, the Holy Roman Empire. England and Scotland were all out of the durisdiction of Rome although they were still Catholic.

I see your point though. The sort of AH you might be looking at is if the Holy Roman Empire instead of France kidnapped the Papalcy then took over all of France and Italy (occupation of Rome deals with the antipope problem). With the temporal authority to back up the spiritual, it could bring the periphery of Christendom into line too.

[DuQuense]

A bit far fetched. Alot of advances, at the turn of the 19th century, were not from the 'Sciences' but just everyday people. A 'world wide revolution' sounds impractical since not all countries of the world were involved in either World War.

There was a world wide feeling pre WW1 that the world was Progressing,* And Science was leading the way. With the Gas attacks and other Science related weapons of WW1, there was a felling that Sceince had lead us astray, and let us down.

I said revoltion, not revolution, If this Felling of letdown had been greater and longer lasting......

*Subject to debate

[Rick Robinson]

Originally Posted by NHBL

What I'm aiming for is a steady-state or SLOWLY evolving society where streetcars and railroads are the main transportation, home entertanment is what you make, or a phonograph--no radio entertainment, for example.

Travel is for the rich, automobiles are not ubitquitous, and airplanes are stick and cloth toys at best.

That general pre-great war flavor, regardless of the abundance of electrical appliances...

(I have a very silly fondness for that era.)

It's an elegant era - the Belle Epoque, after all.

An easier stalling point might be around 1875 - if you can find a plausible way to slow down the development of electrical technology. Bear in mind that electricity is NOT an inherent follow-on tech from steam - it depends on a whole different branch of physics, and one that was still pretty poorly understood in the 19th century, even as the first generation of electrical gadgets was being developed. If the generator is not developed, the applications for electricity are very limited.

But this runs into problems, too. Without the telegraph, train speeds are very limited, or else you'd need to install a very expensive pneumatic signalling system. And, of course, without electricity there are no trolley cars, only cable cars and steam "dummies."

However, if your main goal is to have trolleys rather than (very many) automobiles, all you may need to do is delay the "good roads" movement around the turn of the last century. Cars are useless for intercity transportation without good roads, and perhaps the railroad industry successfully pushes the idea that intercity motor roads should be toll roads, instead of paying taxpayer money for roads that only wealthy car owners can use.

This change - and you maybe only need a 20-year slowdown in auto technology, perhaps even less - to push the automobile into a corner from which it is hard to escape. So long as automobiles are rare, there's little incentive to build expensive toll roads for them - and without roads, cars are useful only in town, where congestion is heaviest and trolley and rapid transit networks are faster.

You might want to slow down bicycle tech by a couple of decades as well - cyclists were the original force behind the "good roads" movement.

-- Rick