Has modern science really moved on from what the ancient civilisations already knew and practiced?

Answer 1

Yes. Ancient man theorized about photons, envisioned them from simple observations of nature. Modern man can not only "see" a photon, we may soon be able to create one. Ancient man theorized about the design of life, but modern man can not only "see" DNA, but we have learned how to read the code of life and understand it's intricacies. With stem cell therapies, there will be no more blindness or diabetes or even disfigurements or amputees or paralysis. Cancer, too, is soon to be conquered because of modern science. Ancient man only dreamed of flying, whereas, modern man has taken heartily to the sky . . . and has even ventured out into the solar system, and has seen the earth in its entirety for the first time in our history. We have always theorized about gravity and forces of attraction and now we are at a brink of understanding electromagnetic phenomenon well enough to create anti-matter drive engines and tumor-busting lasers and communication satellites and radio and phones and computers... and more. The Babylonians had a primitive battery made of a gourd and some vinegar, essentially. They understood electricity enough to use it and store it somehow. But, modern man is near the dawn of free and unlimited energy for every man, woman and child on this planet. I would say that modern science has indeed "moved on".

Answer 2

Generally, yes, and yet there are quite a few anomolies which crop up from time to time suggesting that ancient peoples knew far more about our world and science than we've given them credit for. Like, for instance, an aluminium belt found on a mummified body in Western China. The body has been dated to 7000BC. The Chinese authorities won't let you go and see it. Or another from China.....a small box with what are now known to be headphones was found on the body of a warrior found in a grave near Beijing. The warrior's remains are dated at 2500BC. The small box plays music which can be heard through the headphones. The device is powered by purple coloured crystals (not amethysts, BTW) which have retained a charge of around 3 volts since burial and can be recharged by exposure to sunlight. Or this, Flinders Petrie, the father of modern archaeology, who investigated the Great Pyramids at Giza noted that the "sacophagus" in the Great Pyramid had been cut by some boring tool which was calculated to have had a circular cutting action with a downward pressure of more than 2 ton!!!. The Egyptians never had anywhere near that type of technology, and neither did we until the late 19th Century......or so it is assumed for the ancient Egyptians. Modern archaeologist dismiss this by totally ignoring the evidence that's presented to them. Or how did the Inca supposedly make the fortress of Sacsayhuaman in Peru. All the rocks in the structure are multi-ton pieces of granite and volcanic rock, with the keystones and basement stones weighing upwards of 400 tons!!!!. This is in a civilisation that knew nothing of the wheel, levers or anything mechanical, and where the rocks that built the fortress had to be carted over 2 ranges of mountains from 50-80 miles away. One Incan King who tried an experiment to move a 10 ton stone up the side of the hill it came from, failed and resulted in the deaths of 300 men.

So you have to wonder about ancient man......and just how advanced he actually was.

Answer 3

Ancient civilisations (I am thinking here of Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Greek and Roman) undoubtedly achieved much and laid the foundations for modern science. It is also probable that some things they new have been lost but it is very likely that most that they knew has been rediscovered and been added to many times over.

There are so many things we know now that was not understood in ancient times that it is difficult to know where to begin. Perhaps a start is just to look at the categories in Yahoo Answers under Science and Mathematics. Each one of these categories can be subdivided again and there is vast areas of science involved in each subdivision. It is likely that our understanding is many orders of magnitude larger than the ancients.

Answer 4

If you look up a defunct practice used in the Middle Ages called Alchemy, you have to say yes.

Alchemy was around before chemistry before man knew that if you mixed a particular substance with another substance you sometimes get surprising results. For example, it was thought that there was a way to turn lead into gold. But that was mostly because there were still many mixtures yet to be defined and recorded. Did you know that if you mix phenylthaline and sodium chloride in water you get purple water? Both substances are transparent, yet the mixture produces an unexpected reaction.

Long story short, we are a lot more aware scientifically of the world we live in and can count on being correct so much more often. No, we do not have it all right, but we are clearly much further along.

Answer 5

Impressive though ancient technologies appear to us nowadays, How did they build the pyramids with only man power etc.How did primitive societis in the rain forest have powerful medicines from natural plants. Today we can do infinitely more impressive things with our better knowledge of science - space travel, nuclear energy, silicon computer chips, heart transplants, tunnel linking england and france. There will almost certainly be some technologies that may have been forgotten (making certain quality of porcelain etc.) but these seem to be few and not of such importance as to be described as to make the progress made over the last century in the shade.

Answer 6

This is where the fundamental assumptions come in.
We assume that the universe is causal, and consistent.

We can not directly observe "ancient civilizations" so we can not categorically state that they never ever had anything that we do not now fully possess. What we can directly observe in our lifetimes are artifacts, archaeology, and records of history.

Those records and artifacts are remarkably vast, and remarkably consistent with the recorded history. They have reliably told where lost cities are, or the nature of technology, or names, or languages.

We assume, because of their size and consistency that they are very likely accurate. Statistics might tell you what astronomically small chance they have of not being complete and comprehensive indicators of the technology, but I do not have that data.

If they are essentially correct in their indication of the state of the art of technology then modern civilization is radically advanced in many areas. Lifespans were averaging 40 years in the time of Rome, now they average almost twice that. Diseases that ravaged the world are now conquered, though some resistant diseases are being bred. Our metallurgy is radically beyond theirs, as is our mathematics, and medicine.

Kings died from diseases whose cures poor children are freely given today.

Its exciting to think that the ancients had so much more, and I have found that when I assume it, I look through a different paradigm. I think it stems from the idea that what my father can do, I can someday do. When I think that some removed father did something absolutely amazing, I raise the glass cieling that I never knew I imposed on myself, but I go digging in archaelogical sites looking for how to do it.. I try to find my ancient parents.

For me its more profitable to compete against an imagined "government conspiracy", assuming they solved the problem but I cant get their solution, but I know they found it. Knowing they found it, I am willing to look harder into finding it myself.

Answer 7

Who mentioned gravitation is easy to describe? Its a tension that needless to say exists, yet no longer actual defined. At one time scientists felt that one and all illnesses got here from "undesirable air". As technology progressed (definite I mentioned progressed) they found out approximately bacteria and virus. So somebody might have made your suitable comparable arguement a hundred twenty five yrs in the past utilising affliction because of the fact the occasion. basically because of the fact they cant clarify it yet does no longer recommend they wont. And magnetism is brought about by using the alignment of atoms because of the fact the shell of the earth rotates at a diverse speed than its iron center. it truly is been understood for some years.

Answer 8

Yes. The big change is in how we look (Or should look) at science. The ancient civilizations, although somehow science minded, mixed science with religion. Today science stands on it own, and theories need to be provable, and proofs need to be repeatable.

Answer 9

well it wouldnt be modern science in the first place if it hadnt moved on. Everyday there are new discoveries made and new laws written. It is what is supposed to happen.

Answer 10

Yes. We obviously don't dig up cars in ancient Egyptian tombs.