Addendum: Found the thread in question. I should used nuclear fission as a search term from the beginning. I used the site's search function, a function which I should not never behaves as badly for me as I read other people claim it behaves for them.
Damn. My technical knowledge isn't enough, is it?
Okay, to be fair, I should've known better seeing as how Orion is ludicrous for reasons Ian pointed out so well in an essay he wrote way back.
What essay are you talking about? Can I see it please?
Thank you.
I usually have good luck with the search function...
... but in this particular case I was using the wrong search terms.
Off the top of my head, my best idea fragment would be some kind of earlier re-opening of large-scale Mediterranean trade, to generate more idea-sharing over a larger area and to introduce Arab and Byzantine preservation and extension of classical knowledge to Europe sooner.
And that's what I'm looking for really. How much has to change to get this to occur, and what does that change about human society in the process.
Let me repeat this because you obviously missed it the first time:
Advances like the one the OP asked about are fundamental ones, they're part of the "weave" of a civilization. This isn't a case of sticking a bigger gun on a certain tank or putting a different engine in a certain fighter. Bringing forward a fundamental advance means bringing forward everything else. Everything changes because the basics have changed.
Because so many, many, many different technologies, theories, techniques, and other fundamental issues are involved in theorizing, developing, and producing nuclear weapons, any advance in that ability essentially advances everything else.
This isn't a case of giving Napoleon Minie ball rifles or the Romans semaphore telegraphs. Both of those advances were already within the technological limits of Napoleon's and the Romans' time. This is a case of bringing forward the vast majority of human knowledge, science, and technology.
You're talking about producing nuclear weapons in 1900 instead of 1945 and want to know what will have changed? Ask yourself this: How many different things changed between 1900 and 1945? Can you even begin to number them?
That's how much change has to occur and that how much human civilization will have to be changed.
My question then is how to set off such a monumental change in human society to begin with?
What essay are you talking about? Can I see it please?
I found a link on the Wayback Machine...
Now it's my turn to thank you for a link! Thank you!![]()
And that's what I'm looking for really. How much has to change to get this to occur, and what does that change about human society in the process.
We really need an aeolipile sticky in Before 1900. This is the second time in as many days that some well-meaning poster has trotted out this pipe dream.
I'm not sure why in an AH forum something as simple as saying, take existing technology and combine it with other existing technology in a revolutionary way, is a pipe dream ...
... it is the stuff of AH.