Talk:Wheel
From Academic Kids
I'm going to make some changes again based on my view that the page should be about the wheel as an aid to transport, and that other (different) things called wheels should be kept separate to avoid confusion.
Also I will change (my own) explanation of how the wheel works.
The wheel is often viewed as the quintessential invention, and was most likely invented in all ancient civilizations, although not always used.
How true is this? From what I know, wheels as means of transportation were invented around the middle east around 4000 BC and spread outward from there. The concept is neither as obvious as one might think, nor as useful (eg without roads slider bars do a better job moving heavy things around).
Where is the evidence of South American wheels?
- There are wheeled things we suppose to be TOYS - wheeled dogs in Mexican contexts, wheeled Llamas in Incan. The usual reason given for the failure ot use them on carts is that usable roads would have been too hard to build or too uncommon, which I for one buy for the Andes but not for Central Mexico. --MichaelTinkler
Also - I've added a bit about how wheels transform forces, and I think that when one talks about a wheel as a simple machine it is that that one is referring to, not the transformation between linear and rotary motion (which is really a special case of a friction gear when you think about it). Should this maybe be changed?
Yes it should! Apart from being gobbledygook it should be on a page called Wheel and Axle. I'm about to try and make this change. hope it works.
Aw, come ON people! Someone must have something to say of the history of the wheel! I had an exceedingly short go, but that was deemed inappropriate even though i framed it rather diffusely. A more fact filled history must be out there somewhere. Or are we inventing the wheel again? :-) --Anders Törlind
- I'm all for history and don't object to the circa 4000 BC part at all for 'earliest commonly recognized,' and then let other cultures invent it for themselves in a dependent clause. --MichaelTinkler
I got rid of the "third-most-important invention after language and fire clause," because language was never "invented" by humans. --Alex S 04:27, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
- Language not an invention? Are theories inventions? Are World Views inventions? Is a metaphor an invention? An analogy? What would you call them then? So far as I am concerned a metaphor or analogy is clearly an invention. Aren't they clearly based on the invention of language? -- Geo Swan 02:24, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Am I the only one that finds is strange that the only external links are to bacteria pages? (valid though that may be) Seems very unbalanced. The whole notion is a bit dodgy, the wheel in question is more like a cog which I suppose is type of wheel but... Also, did bacteria really invent the wheel, that's like saying an animal invented the brain, bacteria may have evolved the cog wheel but not invented it. I'd really like to take the whole reference out, it's cute but not appropriate --Bob Palin 02:39, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
"Recent" (april 2002) excavations in the Ljubljana (which lies in Slovenia) marsh have brought up a wheel with an axle that is dated somewhere around 3250-3150 a.Chr.n (=BC). --Matija Šuklje, 16 Oct 2004
Notice of intention to overhaul
I find this description of the wheel to be very lacking. The writer seems to think that dry equations actually impart a real knowledge of what is happening mechanically. Far from it. Also, the history section was much better about a year ago. I'm planning a total rewrite. If anyone has much to say for this version, please speak up in the next few days. JDG 05:02, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
- JDG, I agree with you that the article could use a good overhaul. One thing which comes to mind for inclusion, is a counter to the view commonly expressed or implied that societies which lacked significant use of technology associated with the wheel are thereby deficient in some regard, and that the possession of wheel-based technologies necessarily confers some crucial advantage over those without it. Many (primarily non-academic) references overplay this distinction.
- As an efficient transport technology, the wheel requires not only the axle and vehicle chassis, but a suitable domesticated draught animal for propulsion, not to mention suitable terrain. Such animals were completely lacking in the pre-Columbian Americas, pre-colonised Australia, etc., and failure to explore this technology further should hardly be surprising. Even so, many impressive civilisations and edifaces were constructed without its substantive aid, such as the Egyptian pyramids, Mayan, Aztec, Zapotec and Inca cities, Great Zimbabwe, the Easter Island statues, etc etc.
- A case could be made that applications of the technology, such as for chariots in warfare, provided an advantage to the possessors (eg, Hittites v. Egyptians). However, whilst undeniably a substantial and largely beneficial technology, the extent to which it has aided the development of those who employed it will need to be mapped out with some care. --cjllw | TALK 02:22, 2005 May 26 (UTC)
