Slashdot Mirror


Feather-based Jacobean Space Chariot

simonmsh writes "The article Cromwell's moonshot: how one Jacobean scientist tried to kick off the space race describes 17th century plans to build a space chariot out of springs, feathers and gunpowder. The design was based on the idea that gravity disappeared at an altitude of 20 miles, which was called into question by Hooke ? and Boyle ? 's work. It sounds like the plot of a Neal Stephenson book." Said book, and its sequels are phenomenal.

50 of 173 comments (clear)

  1. 20 Miles Up by deliciousmonster · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's funny, I could have sworn gravity dissapeared within 3 inches of our receptionist's breasts...

    Although I think getting within 20 miles of them is a longshot...

    --
    I have a plan. Using mainly spoons, we'll tunnel our way out of the city...
    1. Re:20 Miles Up by Theaetetus · · Score: 5, Funny
      That's funny, I could have sworn gravity dissapeared within 3 inches of our receptionist's breasts...

      In the pursuit of scientific inquiry, I think we need pictures...

  2. Favorite Quote by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "In space we wouldn't need to eat because the reason why we need to eat on Earth is that the pull of gravity pulls food through our bodies and constantly empties our stomachs," Professor Chapman explained.

    Quotes like this remind you of a child trying to divine where all the food they eat goes. I remember thinking at 3 or 4 years old that there must be some sort of containers inside us to hold the food forever. Then I considered the volume of food we eat and just couldn't fathom what was happening to it. It didn't quite connect that the food might get processed then *ahem* ejected. :-)

    1. Re:Favorite Quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't mean to insult the poster, but I wonder what's so interesting about that post? Did the mods go "ooh, yes, infinite containers in our bodies, that's an interesting thought"...

      I'm scared.

    2. Re:Favorite Quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Also remember that back then you were called a professor not on your smarts but on how rich you or your family was.

      Money bought fandom. and most of the real scientists were shunned, stoned or hanged for daring to go against the lunatics.... I mean "professors" of the day.

      Hell President Lincoln was not killed by the bullet but by the QUACKs that were the doctors of that day.

      A little knowlege is extremely dangerous, and history shows us a large number of "little knowlege" people that caused lots of pain and suffereing for hundreds of years afterwards.

    3. Re:Favorite Quote by Feanturi · · Score: 3, Funny

      Then I considered the volume of food we eat and just couldn't fathom what was happening to it.

      When I was little, some grownup mentioned me eating like I had a hollow leg. Well that's what I wound up seriously believing for a brief period. :) But like you, I couldn't see how it would keep from filling up. Weird how one can be going to the bathroom on one's own for a couple years and still not get it, heh.. This also reminds me of a more recent bit of idiocy I read only a few years ago. Somebody was saying the reason you get the munchies from smoking pot is because it warms up your liver, which heats your stomach causing it to expand, and thus feel less full.

    4. Re:Favorite Quote by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Funny

      This ofcourse has nothing to do with space travel, however, to keep the thing on topic, I too am from England! So maybe theres a pattern emerging!! :-D

      I say! Did I make some sort of comment that lead you to believe I was from Blighty? A thousand apologies my good sir, but I'm afraid I'm located on the other side of the pond! :-)

      Or was your comment in reference to the Professor in the article?

  3. Remember what Archimedes said: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Give me a big enough spring, and I can move Rubin Studdard into low earth orbit.

    1. Re:Remember what Archimedes said: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, it was "Give me a big enough spring, and I can move Earth into low Robin Studdard orbit."

  4. Hrmm by acehole · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder if macgyver could have done better...

    --
    Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
    1. Re:Hrmm by Ledora · · Score: 2, Funny

      I guess you don't watch SG-1, macgyver is alot better at space travel.

  5. Yet not the first by JUSTONEMORELATTE · · Score: 5, Interesting

    According to legend the Chinese sent a man up around 1500AD.
    He didn't come back, but that's the way with pioneers


    --
    US$10, really

    1. Re:Yet not the first by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah...I knew *something* bothered me about John Carmack's X-Prize vehicle.

    2. Re:Yet not the first by earthforce_1 · · Score: 2

      Just think, the chinese guy might well have earned history's first Darwin award, had they existed at the time.

      I remember seeing a very early movie about a guy who jumped off the Eiffel tower, in order to test a prototype parachute. Unfortunately, the thing failed to open, and the unfortunate man plunged to his death.

      Prof. Picard was nearly killed in his balloon contraption as well. Many considered him a nut when he went up, and figured he would never come back alive. They were very nearly right, as the controls intended to bring him back to earth jammed, and he sailed on and on at incredible altitudes. To make matters worse, his capsule developed a leak which he had to find and seal en-route in order to save his life.

      --
      My rights don't need management.
  6. Someone should try it by contagious_d · · Score: 3, Funny

    "17th century plans to build a space chariot out of springs, feathers and gunpowder. The design was based on the idea that gravity disappeared at an altitude of 20 miles"

    I wonder if the thing could have made it 20 miles up. If someone builds one, I will supply the bound and gagged - erm, I mean "Jacobean Spacesuited" test pilots.

    --
    - /home is where the food is.
  7. Hmmmmmm, curious by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This kind of stuff makes me wonder which current technology will be looked back upon with the same feeling we look back at this "technology"??

    --
    This is the sig that says NI (again)
    1. Re:Hmmmmmm, curious by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The difference, I think, is that our technology does what it's supposed to do. I mean, I look at an abacus or slide rule and I don't think, "Oh, hah hah, those silly pre-computer people, what cute toys they had!" I think, "Wow, that's a really elegant solution to a difficult problem ... but I'm glad I don't have to use that thing." Our cars and trains and ships and planes do move us around; our computers do crunch numbers; our space technology did (and hopefully someday will again) get us to the Moon. There's a difference between doing the best you can with what you've got, and flights of fancy.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Hmmmmmm, curious by dustman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Our technology and science, though it may be primitive to someone in the future, will never be looked back on with the same feelings as this crap.

      By actually using the concepts of the scientific method (experimentation etc), we come up with things that are true (as far as we can measure them) rather than stories we make up that sound good.

      "Gravity is what requires us to eat, it pulls the food out of our bodies"... The fact that this explanation was considered shows that the concept of digestion wasn't understood. There is nothing wrong with that. The problem is that this theory is easily tested, by laying down or standing on your head for a day and seeing if you get hungry.

      Newton's model of physics has been shown to be "wrong", but we don't fault him for that, he drew proper conclusions from the available data.

    3. Re:Hmmmmmm, curious by jd · · Score: 2
      Probably quite a lot. I've a fascinating book that dates to 1752, which describes thunder as the product of evaporating gunpowder. Storms are rather better understood today, but there is still a lot that is uncertain. Strange plasmas are sometimes seen above storm clouds, for example. There is still no universally-accepted theory on ball lightning. Observations on the internal workings of tornados are still extremely limited.


      The problem with the Jacobean notions of space travel was the limited data on natural phenomina that existed at the time. By implication, any technology we have that is ALSO based on very limited data is also likely to be shown to be wide of the mark.


      In defence of the Jacobean hypothesis, though, the idea of there being a point at which you can travel unhindered by gravity is not worlds away from modern descriptions of an escape velocity. Both conjecture that you merely have to reach certain finite, achievable, conditions, in order to escape the Earth's gravitational pull.


      True, the method chosen was rather... impractical. However, not dramatically more so than the Ornithopter or other early attempts at flight. Even the early attempts by the Wright Brothers were wide of the mark - and, again, largely by inadequate science and insufficient data. The biggest difference is that the Wright Brothers put in the extra time to gather the data, correct the science, and determine what really would work.


      The only reason we have flight today is that they did go the extra mile. The only reason we didn't have flight in the 1700s is that they chose not to. They would certainly have been technically capable, had they put in the time.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:Hmmmmmm, curious by painandgreed · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The difference, I think, is that our technology does what it's supposed to do. I mean, I look at an abacus or slide rule and I don't think, "Oh, hah hah, those silly pre-computer people, what cute toys they had!" I think, "Wow, that's a really elegant solution to a difficult problem ... but I'm glad I don't have to use that thing." Our cars and trains and ships and planes do move us around; our computers do crunch numbers; our space technology did (and hopefully someday will again) get us to the Moon. There's a difference between doing the best you can with what you've got, and flights of fancy.

      Not too much difference. it was a hypothesis that would have failed and was revised later as more information was gathered. There are plenty of failed hyothesis' around by notable scientists to discuss. From "wackos" like William Reich to respected scientists such as Tesla, there are plenty of ideas that later turn out to be funny or wrong. Even Einstein is saddled with the Cosmological Constant which was added at a whim and later claimed to be his biggest blunder. People are still debating if it was useless or genius.

  8. The "Mars Direct" of its day by OnanTheBarbarian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Re Stephenson books: Phenomenally large? Phenomenally self-indulgent? Phenomenally didactic?

    At any rate, it's an amusing story.

    All that hand-waving is vaguely reminiscent of "Mars Direct" or whatever they're calling it these days. Once upon a time, we didn't have to eat in space because of the absence of gravity. Now, we just hand-wave away radiation damage to the crew and the logistics of setting up a nuclear reactor on Mars to produce fuel for the return journey.

    1. Re:The "Mars Direct" of its day by roystgnr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All that hand-waving is vaguely reminiscent of "Mars Direct" or whatever they're calling it these days. Once upon a time, we didn't have to eat in space because of the absence of gravity. Now, we just hand-wave away radiation damage to the crew and the logistics of setting up a nuclear reactor on Mars to produce fuel for the return journey.

      Radiation hazards are discussed on pages 10, 13, 81, 83, 95, and 114-120 of _The Case for Mars_. The fuel production processes are detailed starting on page 148, and end on page 156 with a mention of the power requirements (300 watts, which makes the "nuclear reactor" just another RTG) for a sample return mission. The mass requirements of a fission generator are on page 205. This is just the discussion in the popular non-fiction book; don't be too surprised if the actual studies (the first study by JPL claimed the human mission would be doable for $50 billion; more recent studies by NASA claim $33e9 + $7e9 per mission, and the ESA thinks they could do it for under $22e9 + $6e9 per mission.)

      If you have some specific concerns with the proposals, it would be more credible of you to bring them up rather than pretend that these problems haven't been considered at all. Do you really think that a NASA engineer might read your post and exclaim "There's radiation in space! Why didn't I think about that!?"

  9. it didn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Of course his approach did not work because he based it on the premise that the Earth's pull only went up 20 miles and if you crossed that 20 miles, you could float after that," no, i think the main reason it didn't work was because it was a clockwork flapping machine..

  10. Ancient Flying Machines in India by GillBates0 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Ancient Indian Aircraft Technology

    According to ancient Indian texts, the people had flying machines which were called "Vimanas." The ancient Indian epic describes a Vimana as a double-deck, circular aircraft with portholes and a dome, much as we would imagine a flying saucer.

    It flew with the "speed of the wind" and gave forth a "melodious sound." There were at least four different types of Vimanas; some saucer shaped, others like long cylinders ("cigar shaped airships"). The ancient Indian texts on Vimanas are so numerous, it would take volumes to relate what they had to say. The ancient Indians, who manufactured these ships themselves, wrote entire flight manuals on the control of the various types of Vimanas, many of which are still in existence, and some have even been translated into English.

    The Samara Sutradhara is a scientific treatise dealing with every possible angle of air travel in a Vimana. There are 230 stanzas dealing with the construction, take-off, cruising for thousand of miles, normal and forced landings, and even possible collisions with birds. In 1875, the Vaimanika Sastra, a fourth century B.C. text written by Bharadvajy the Wise, using even older texts as his source, was rediscovered in a temple in India. It dealt with the operation of Vimanas and included information on the steering, precautions for long flights, protection of the airships from storms and lightening and how to switch the drive to "solar energy" from a free energy source which sounds like "anti-gravity."

    The Vaimanika Sastra (or Vymaanika-Shaastra) has eight chapters with diagrams, describing three types of aircraft, including apparatuses that could neither catch on fire nor break. It also mentions 31 essential parts of these vehicles and 16 materials from which they are constructed, which absorb light and heat; for which reason they were considered suitable for the construction of Vimanas. This document has been translated into English and is available by writing the publisher: VYMAANIDASHAASTRA AERONAUTICS by Maharishi Bharadwaaja, translated into English and edited, printed and published by Mr. G. R. Josyer, Mysore, India, 1979 (sorry, no street address). Mr. Josyer is the director of the International Academy of Sanskrit Investigation located in Mysore.

    Sources: Ancient flying machines (Contains diagrams/details).
    Wikipedia reference to the term-Vimanas

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
    1. Re:Ancient Flying Machines in India by RandomWordGenerator · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hmm, this sounds great - but as with all these things I would welcome a Vedic scholars perspective. With my massive researching skills I found this quote which sheds a little light.

      "...There is one book entitled Vaimanika-sastra that was dictated in trance during this century (20th - I assume. RWG)and purports to be a transcription of an ancient work preserved in the Akashic record." "The medium in this case was Pandit Subbaraya Sastry, a 'walking lexicon gifted with occult perception', who began to dictate the Vaimanika-sastra to Mr. Venkatachala Sarma on August 1, 1918. The complete work was taken down in 23 exercise books up to August 23, 1923. In 1923, Subbaraya Sastry also had a draftsman prepare some drawings of the vimanas according to his instructions." quote ref

      This sounds a little suspicious to me. A little like John Edward 'dictating' a new chapter of the Old Testament called "Moses had Laser Pistols"

    2. Re:Ancient Flying Machines in India by Feanturi · · Score: 2, Funny

      A slip in the translation is always possible. Maybe these 'manuals' are just player handbooks for a really early RPG. :)

    3. Re:Ancient Flying Machines in India by dfay · · Score: 2, Funny

      A little like John Edward 'dictating' a new chapter of the Old Testament called "Moses had Laser Pistols"

      Actually he did. But Pharoah shot first. Don't let the revisionists tell you otherwise.

    4. Re:Ancient Flying Machines in India by tonywong · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, there has been a new text discovered and translated called the "VYMAANIDASHAASTRA AERONAUTICS NO FLY WATCHLIST".

    5. Re:Ancient Flying Machines in India by TeknoHog · · Score: 3, Funny
      "..The complete work was taken down in 23 exercise books up to August 23, 1923. In 1923, Subbaraya Sastry also had a draftsman prepare some drawings.."

      This sounds a little suspicious to me. A little like John Edward 'dictating' a new chapter of the Old Testament called "Moses had Laser Pistols"

      With that many 23s in it, it's either highly suspicious, or it holds the very key to the secrets of the universe fnord...

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    6. Re:Ancient Flying Machines in India by Noginbump · · Score: 2, Funny

      So...

      Samara Sutradhara + Kama Sutra = History's first Mile High Club?

      --
      He who questions training, only trains himself at asking questions. -- The Sphinx, Mystery Men
  11. just 2 more miles and they'd have made it ! by RandomWordGenerator · · Score: 3, Funny

    Although gravity doesn't disapear after 20 miles, you can acheive geostationary orbit at 22 miles - so they weren't too far off.

    No, wait - I think I'm missing the obvious ... they were 22 miles off

    1. Re:just 2 more miles and they'd have made it ! by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Informative

      ehm... wouldn't that be 22000 miles.

  12. a grave and gathering threat by EugeneK · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's obvious 17th century England is trying to use its stocks of springs, feathers and gunpowder to develop WMDs. I say we invade now. We don't want to wait until the smoking feathers becomes a mushroom cloud.

  13. Always a damn plug for NS by lidocaineus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I love how we turn an interesting bit of history into a plug for Mr. Stephenson's ego.

    1. Re:Always a damn plug for NS by thelexx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not sure what it is with the Stephenson worshipping that goes on here. I suspect he rides a wave of young people just discovering a genre. I recently was given a copy of Snowcrash and have to say I didn't think it was that great. It read like a comic..err, graphic novel, but without the graphics.

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
  14. Interesting man by frankthechicken · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Dr. John Wilkins, the Jacobean scientist in question, was quite an interesting chap really.

    For example, with his book, A Discourse concerning a New Planet, he tried to popularise the view of the universe according to Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo. He attempted to explain in the book that the Moon is not purely a shiny, cut out disc but rather it is a world with a landscape like that of the Earth.

    Fairly radical stuff for the time, though admittedly he did publish the book annonymously.

    For more info, try this or this

    1. Re:Interesting man by mattdm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And he reminds the /. editor of a Neal Stephenson story because Wilkins actually features quite prominently in Cryptonomicon (Stephenson makes Wilkins the author of the fictional tome from which the book takes its title) and in Quicksilver (and therefore in the rest of the Baroque Cycle books). Daniel Waterhouse, one of the chief heros/protagonists, is a protege of Wilkins's.

      You can find a lot more about the real (in addition to Stephenson's historical fiction version) Wilkins at Stephenson's metaweb.

  15. Hooke and Boyle? by Royster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Newton was the first to suggest that the same force which keeps us on the Earth was responsible for the orbits of the plants around the sun. The planets are demonstrably further than 20 miles from the surface of the Earth.

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
  16. Re:Still no Christopher Reeve story? by Chuck+Bucket · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, but it's not like Stephen King died or anything...

    CBA@#$

  17. Stephenson... by kzinti · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It sounds like the plot of a Neal Stephenson book.

    Hmm... Also reminds me of the plot of a Jules Verne book - one that predates Stephenson by a number of years.

  18. Too Bad they did not consider Space Travel Sooner by lcsjk · · Score: 4, Funny

    A few hundred years earlier, it would have been much easier. One only had to board a ship and sail to the edge of the earth. Since it was flat, they would have been able to sail to the edge and merely jump off into space. Unfortunately, space travelers at the time had no way to return, so it was very difficult to sell tickets to rich kings.

  19. Sail On! Sail On! by jenkin+sear · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Stephenson is great and all, but Phillip Jose Farmer had a great short story on a similar topic about twenty years back.

    Sail On, Sail On! posited that Francis Bacon turned his experiments toward electromagnetism, inventing the radio- except, that instead of electrons, they refered to them as Cherubim. So the AM radios of the day were tuned to various CW's - Cherubim wavelengths, which where the slope the cherubim's wings described as they flew through the ether.

    The story takes place on columbus' ships as he travels to discover America- it's terrific. Strongly recommend digging this one up out of your local library.

    --
    What a strange bird is the pelican, his beak can hold more than his belly can.
  20. Re:Too Bad they did not consider Space Travel Soon by youngerpants · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, in the middle ages they never actually believed the earth to be flat; this is backed up by religious and maritime texts of the age.

    The myth was actually started in 18th Century England to prove the cultural and scientific superiority of the time.

  21. Re:Stupid people by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 3, Funny

    I, for one, welcome our timetravelling anonymous coward posting timelords.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  22. Nobel Prize Winner by bayers · · Score: 3, Informative

    I wonder if this 'space chariot' is the basis of Balthazar and Blimunda . The author won a Nobel Prize for the book. In the book, the device works. It's a good read.

  23. The author is so cruel by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Funny

    Unfortunately, Wilkins never had the chance to test his theories, and what Professor Chapman terms the Jacobean Space Programme was grounded. - I don't think the author of this likes this Wilkins guy too much.

  24. Gunpowder Boosters? by curtvdh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if the inventor had any idea how much black powder would have been required to lift even a moderately sized object into orbit? By my calculations, the energy released by the boosters would have atomized said flying machine, plus its unlucky passenger...

    1. Re:Gunpowder Boosters? by kitzilla · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ya figure? ;-)

      --
      This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
  25. from the dept? by Myopic · · Score: 2

    point of order: this story posting does not have a witty "from the...dept." tagline.

  26. His Greatest Invention by Number+110 · · Score: 2, Funny
    Dr Wilkins drew up plans for what he called a flying chariot powered by clockwork and springs, a set of flapping wings coated with feathers and a few gunpowder boosters to help send it on its way...

    ...and though his design never did lead to manned space flight the principles that he envisioned took root in the scientific community of the day leading to the eventual, perhaps even inevitable, creation of the Wile E. Coyote/Road Runner cartoon.