Things TLs 7-9 would be interesting to see WITHOUT

[David Johnston2]

Feudalism is actually a kind of federalism except that the leaders are selected on the basis of inheritance instead of being elected or appointed. The problem of course is that in the era starting with radio, it's too each to consolidate a wide-scale following producing an absolute monarchy/dictatorship or democracy. It would be easier if their TL omitted the advancements in long distance communications that causes people to identify with each other on a wider scale. Then again, it would also work to vastly increase the scale you are dealing with so that communication will once again be outstripped by scale.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Feudalism is actually a kind of federalism except that the leaders are selected on the basis of inheritance instead of being elected or appointed. The problem of course is that in the era starting with radio, it's too each to consolidate a wide-scale following producing an absolute monarchy/dictatorship or democracy. It would be easier if their TL omitted the advancements in long distance communications that causes people to identify with each other on a wider scale. Then again, it would also work to vastly increase the scale you are dealing with so that communication will once again be outstripped by scale.

Nationalism seems to be doing pretty well today, so modern communications aren't enough to ball us all up into one big happy blob. Why couldn't strong, savvy feudal lords keep the consolidation a layer or two further down?

[Lord Carnifex]

Originally Posted by Nymdok

Energy = Weaponry. I cant think of any situation where that is not the case.

Mechanical - Melee
Chemical - Bullet
Atomic/Nuclear - Nuke
Optic - Laser
Thermal - Steamships
Electrical - Taser


Solar could be and exception. I cant think of a single weapon in history that has been solar powered.....

That could be endemic to the human tendency to provide their own competition.

Nymdok

In many cases, it's because the process to release a lot of energy in an uncontrolled fashion is discovered first. It's only after that process is investigated, better understood, and then controlled and harnessed does it move from weapon to energy. It's a lot easier to explode TNT and use that as a weapon than it is to harness exploding gasoline vapours and turn them into an internal combustion engine.

That being said, as I recall, the Manhattan Project had a working reactor (the squash court at Columbia University comes to mind, but I could be incorrect). But, they were looking for a bomb, so a bomb is what they built.

[Lord Carnifex]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Considering that you need pretty highly enriched nuclear material to make the bomb, by my understanding, I'm not sure you could make a bomb without first having reactors capable of generating power. Not necessarily actually used to generate power, but capable of it.

(I am not a nuclear engineer...)

Um... you're right that you'd probably be able to build a small controlled nuclear reaction before you'd build and set off an uncontrolled one, but that has nothing to do with enrichment.

Enrichment of uranium means using gas centrifuges to select U-235 out of a mix of U-235 and U-238. Gas centrifuges are non-nuclear technology and don't require a reactor to build or operate.

[Nymdok]

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex

In many cases, it's because the process to release a lot of energy in an uncontrolled fashion is discovered first.....

I think that is an excellent likelyhood and 'Recklessly enthusiastic curiosity' is a kinder charachterization of humanity than what I had written upthread. :)

Nymdok

[lwcamp]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

Our first real nuclear technology was a weapon, and only later did we apply it to peaceful ends. Isn't it possible to do it the other way around, to create a nuclear technology for power, and only later go "Heeeyyy, I bet we can use this as a weapon."

The world's first working nuclear reactor was built by Enrico Fermi fairly early in the Manhattan Project, well before the Trinity test (the world's first working nuclear bomb). The world's first practical nuclear reactor was the Hanford B reactor, which produced plutonium. Again, this was up and running before Trinity (it had to be, that's where the Trinity bomb got its plutonium).

If we were not so deadly focused on building a nuke to Win The War and Save Us All, it is quite conceivable that nuclear power reactors would have come before nuclear explosives. Axis countries that put some thought into nuclear weaponry tended to end up with designs closer to reactors than to bombs.

Luke

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Nationalism seems to be doing pretty well today, so modern communications aren't enough to ball us all up into one big happy blob. Why couldn't strong, savvy feudal lords keep the consolidation a layer or two further down?

They could. But then they'd be independent monarchs, not feudal lords. The thing you need is to have people be loyal to the remote king to a certain extent, without him being able to exert much in the way of hands-on control. Otherwise, you end up with either balkanization or consolidation.

[Anders]

No freight containers.
They make a huge difference to loading/unloading times when shipping cargo.

[Nymdok]

Originally Posted by Asta Kask

No freight containers.
They make a huge difference to loading/unloading times when shipping cargo.

Wow. I never thoguht of it that way, but your right. Withotu freight containers, ships would just be big floating free market bazaars with people walking onto and off of the boats to transact buisness because loading and unloading the boat would be such a pain.

Neat. I like the idea.

Nymdok

[Ragitsu]

Contraceptives.