How did the romans find out about it? Did they know about compressive/tensile strength or was it dumb luck?
>>13748075Have you ever played with wet sand?
>>13748075everything is fine until the support starts rotating or moving upwards from the rotation/"pivot" from the one/s next to it also the romans were just really smart :)
>>13748075>>13748103Brick arches were invented in Babylon 4000 years ago
>>13748075>force move downwards bad>direct some force sideways good
>>13748144>iraqfound the guy seething about the roman empire and the ruler who lead that one crusade against (and wiped out most of) jews
>>13748157What do you spread lies? Arches are from ancient babylon 2000 years before Rome.
>>13748075You never stack rocks as a kid?
>>13748166sorry, i got my history mixed up thanks for pointing that out though otherwise i wouldnt have ever known
>build lots of building >figure out intuitively what good structures work and how to manipulate the forcesThat's all you need to do. Same thing for lots of things. Imagine you are a gun smith with no scientific or engineering background. You build a bunch of different guns change the structure and see which ones can shot better. You can continue to fiddle around with the design until you figure out better and better designs and get an intuitive feel for how to improve it and what makes a good gun.
>>13748302Dumbfucks today will claim it proves the "old ways" are best, despite them not having had a fucking clue how anything actually worked.
>>13748157who cares? modern Iraq got nothing to do with ancient babylon sans the genetic lineage and geography anywas
>>13748398>nothing in common>except the people and geographic locationwhat did he mean by this
>>13748075>Gruggus pile rock this way, rock fall down>Gruggus pile rock that way, rock not fall down>Gruggus pile that way from now on
>>13748409The stuff that matters, mainly culture and identity. The chinese and indian oness go back long before Christ while Mena was reseted during the arab conquest
>>13748418Its not about that, retard. Rocks break if you place them over a large gap due to tensile strain. They found a way to overcome this by creating a structure that only applied compressive force to the other nearby elements of the structure.
>>13748425amd europe was reset by christianization and romanization. i dont know what your point is, but the babylonians (i.e., the ancient people of now-iraq) know about the arch in architecture
>>13748468when europeans become christians they stopped venerating their ancestors. Everyone loved rome, nords larped as vikings, the bongs even larped as a celtic warrior queen.Meanwhile in the middle east everything pre islamic was al -Jahiliya, dirty, unclean. None even bothered to translate their ancient script before westerners did.So none should feel an inferority complex to modern iraqis because people there did something 4000 years ago
>>13748488>So none should feel an inferority complex to modern iraqis because people there did something 4000 years agoagreed. feeling superior would be strange, too.ancestor cults are cringe, btw
>>13748431>Gruggus pile rock like this, rock not break
>>13748506yes, maybe if it motivates you to do something to make them feel proud of you.but their actions arent yours
>>13748488This is not true. All middle easterns of wherever are always going around their ancestral roots, this is much more pronounced among secular arabs. You are thinking of Isis-taliban types that demolish ancient ruins.
God showed how to do itthere's no record of their inventionPeople just know
>>13748075>>13749748>arch>How did the romans find out about it?They noticed birb shell is breddy round and strong so they copied God's design.
>>13749560They started doing that about 70 years ago when the brits told them toIt’s like Boudicca, the brits got no ties to her other than geography or genetics but at some point they started leaping as her
>>13748075Hold a string from two different points on the endsObserve the drooping shapeThis shape when turned upside down is the most stable self-supporting curve
>>13748075It's intuitively obvious.
You have to admit the arch was a hell of an invention
>>13748311The "old ways" always pave the way forward and dominate the cutting edge of technology. Formal engineering operates with the benefit of hindsight.
>>13748103If the Romans were so smart, how come they're all dead?
>>13750108if your mom is not a whore, how come she got fucked?
>>13750135Because she's a manipulative asshole who convinced a man that was abused as a child that her gaslighting and emotional abuse was love, and he should in return work his ass off for her and she'd stay in home not working and living the life off his moneyI have mommy issues :(
>>13748075>everyone who lived before the industrial revolution was retardedI hate this meme.
>>13748157>>13748185>sperg out about jews because history doesn't support your narrativeNever change /pol/
>>13748311Modern is over generalized with computers doing basic formats and churning out unthought trash. We have enough food an shelter, abolish mcdonalds and have them all work in crafts each creating something special
>>13750474If they were so smart why didn’t they think germs were a thing dumbass?
>>13750474how can they be considered smart if they didn't even have youtube videos or smartphones?
>>13748488You shouldn't feel an inferiority or superiority complex against anyone just based on their race, unless you're a racist mental midget, that somehow wants to define himself based off of people he's extremely distantly related to, and achievements he was never a part of.I'll consider you my superior when you're actually much much smarter than me, and with more work-ethic and accomplishments, not because you're from another race that just happened to have it's shit together at the right time X-00 years ago.We wuzzers are fucking pathetic.
>>13750872Whatever just defending the integrity of the British museum from thieves
Arch is an intuitively strong formation that a literal child can figure out by playing with rocks. You don't need to understand why the physics of rocks make them strong in an arch to understand why it works. At some point they also must have tried to span a gap with one stone and then have it be broken which teach them the opposite lesson as well. That's all that's needed to figure out arcs.
>>13750961>Arch is an intuitively strong formationNo it isn't>the physics of rocks makes them strongExhibit A. There is no energy involved so it's not a concept dealing with physics. It's a static analysis of forces.
>>13750029Romans didn't use that kind of arches though, only semicircular arches.
>>13750554>sperg out about /pol/ because someone mentioned modern voldemortdilate
>>13750022This is actually very believable. Its almost impossible to break an egg applying longitudinal force on both ends.
>>13748075>How did the romans find out about it?Maybe from messing around with bent wood.
>>13751270If it isn't to you then you I guess get mentally mogged by 5 year old playing with blocks. I guess that's pretty sad.
>>13751845a kid accidentally discovering an arch is stable while playing with blocks like all of us did is not intuitively realizing that design is stronger than a simply supported beam you midwit. You can't even identify the correct school of thought to explain why it's stronger which is pretty direct proof you don't know what the word "intuitive" means
>>13752777>noooo something even a 5 year old finds intuitive is impossible for me, this can't be happening everyone else must be wrong noooooooooo
>>13752856>proves he doesn't know what the word "intuitive" meansso many pajeets here. Anyway, the entire thread is about how Romans discovered this because it's not something intuitive. You have verbatim said children figure it out while playing establishing it's not intuitive it's discovered by chance just like with the Romans. You are saying I'm right despite your denial. Pretend you are smarter than white people all you want I don't care
>>13748075>Did they know about compressive/tensile strength or was it dumb luck?They knew it intuitively. You don't need to formalize everything into an abstract framework to have some knowledge of the world.
>>13752777>You can't even identify the correct school of thought to explain why it's stronger which is pretty direct proof you don't know what the word "intuitive" meansThat's not just wrong, it's precisely wrong. If he COULD tell you what school of thought is in question, that would imply that he had studied the matter and thus his idea of what's intuitive would be influenced by that. The less he knows of the fields and modes of thought the closer he is to intuition.
>>13748075>>13750034REAL QUESTION: How did the Romans and other ancient civilizations manage to cut rocks into the shape they wanted for the arches, like trapezoids or parallelepipeds? Or even cylinders for the pillars, it seems quite hard to make these shapes without modern tools and electricity
>>13748185>>13750554I'm actually israeli. It is true that Rome is codeword for Nazi Germany.
>>13754464Hammer and chisel can be used to fracture a rock in two halves. You do many small holes in a line and hammer in nails at the same depth, hoping for the rock to fracture in a plane. Theres videos on youtube from the 1930s in Germany of masons breaking rocks in semi-precise lines.Also the Babylonians used more brick than stone.
>>13754464>it seems quite hard to make these shapes without modern tools and electricityYes it is quite hard but they did it anyway, cuz they weren't pussies like we are nowadays.
>>13748431>tensile strainThe issue with rocks is that they separate from eachother unless a sufficient amount of the cross-section of adjacent rocks is compressed.Tensile strain is an entirely different matter, and it was not the issue that ancient bridge builders had.
>>13754464Chisels work pretty well, hell even Bronze ones were decent enough for the Egyptians to cut everything from limestone blocks to making hieroglyphic inscriptions.
>>13754443>If he COULD tell you what school of thought is in question, that would imply that he had studied the matter Wrong. You can intuitively know which branch of thought a matter deals with. He knows arches are stronger only because of observation and pattern recognition that bridges often have arches. He implied children intuitively know but paradoxically also said a "child can figure out by playing with rocks", fulfilling your point that study influences and apparently invalidates intuition... Hence he clearly doesn't know what the word means. He's consistently phrased all his posts as if intuition is synonymous with observation and genuinely has no understanding or intuition of why an arch "works" ... he just sees that they do just like children. His very first, hilariously broken English, post should have said "Arch[sic] is an *observedly* strong formation that a literal child can figure out by playing with rocks"Don't waste a post if you're just going to misunderstand something so trivial
>>13748075>grug need bridge>grug look around>grug copy that>grug have arch bridge
>grug so smart>grug genius
>grug visionary inventor>grug no copy just coincidence
>>13755295>>13755309>>13755315wtf?, roman-greeks bros i dont feel good
>>13751339>your imagedoesn't include the sort of arch this anon is talking about >>13750029(which is a catenary, not a parabola.)
>>13754464>it seems quite hard to make these shapes without modern tools and electricityOh noooo, it's haard guys. Tell the Romans to stop working their MASSIVE SLAVE LABOR FORCE so hard :(
>>13748075They could have learnt this from Etruschians (whose traces they wiped out - almost)
trial and error and getting slaves to build for you was more cost effective than theoretical researchmodern engineers only know about it because of ancient bridge builders
>>13751339the other ones make sensehow do draped arches not just fall under their own weight
>>13756624You're right. I couldn't find any picture of arches that included it.
>>13754757from what I remember the egyptians only had copper chisels maybe with some arsenic bronzing. I think acrual bronze was later I could be wrong.
>>13750029>>13751339So which is the most load bearing? Catenary?
>>13757274Catenary is strongest at just supporting itself; a free standing arch. However I believe parabolic arches are stronger if you're putting some other load on the arch (like a bridge)
>>13757306That's a big rock.
Make your own catenary templates.http://makingmathvisible.com/catenary/catenary.html
Arch's are not that hard:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlL6ZHChhQE
>>13750034How did they build these arches?
>>13757306God I hate Los Angeles sometimes, that Museum actully has some really good and famous and important renaissance art but everyone wanks off to he stupid rock. That shit is not artistically interesting at all
>>13748075think about 2 people leaning forward with their hands touching above their head. It's just an intuitive notion; thats how they figured it out.