Science Channel's Top Discoveries

[RJGabriele]

This Wednesday The Science Channel is starting a special on the top discoveries of all time.

 

 

What do you think the number one scientific discovery is and why?

[Tormod]

Well, that's a hard one. Maybe agriculture? Or doesn't that count as a discovery? Cooking? Toolmaking?

[gpdone]

Heliocentricity is my #1. Followed close by Mathematics (Pythagorus) which is necessary for modern science. The idea of Heliocentrism was proposed as early as the 4th century BC (Aristotle) but was demonstrated scientifically by Galileo, Copernicus and Kepler using instruments and math in the 16th and 17th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism, My reference source.

 

You bring up a good question Tormod. My mentioning the idea of as opposed to the scientific demonstration of Heliocentricity was based on some concern as to this question.

When the results are posted we should get some idea as to what criterion were used.

Agriculture: irrigation and toolmaking: mechanical advantage are certainly biggies.

 

Cool topic RJGabriele.. Thanks.

 

Lee

[Tormod]

Heliocentricity is my #1.

 

That's an interesting one. I recently read Michael White's biography of Giordano Bruno (who was burned on the stake by the inquisition for his outlandish ideas involving a heliocentric universe and beings living on other planets [although the real reason for killing him was probably more political]). Not a very good book, though.

 

I also think the discovery of electricity is fundamental - as well as the understanding of electromagnetism. And of course the discovery that Earth had to be very, very old...

[RJGabriele]

Heliocentricity is my #1. Followed close by Mathematics (Pythagorus) which is necessary for modern science. The idea of Heliocentrism was proposed as early as the 4th century BC (Aristotle) but was demonstrated scientifically by Galileo, Copernicus and Kepler using instruments and math in the 16th and 17th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism, My reference source.

 

You bring up a good question Tormod. My mentioning the idea of as opposed to the scientific demonstration of Heliocentricity was based on some concern as to this question.

When the results are posted we should get some idea as to what criterion were used.

Agriculture: irrigation and toolmaking: mechanical advantage are certainly biggies.

 

Cool topic RJGabriele.. Thanks.

 

Lee

 

 

I will shortly be googling "Heliocentricity" cause I have no idea what that is. Dumb? Yeah. ;) ;) Sorry. But I'll have learned something today, that's what matters.

 

Toolmaking is probably my biggest thought right now. Seems to me this may have possibly been a reason humans outlasted other species. Better tools equaled a better chance at survival. Which led to many other wonderful events. Without the first tools, we may not have made it at all. Maybe? Who knows...I'll be watching to see what they come up with.

 

 

EDIT: Boy do I feel silly. ;) I am sure it won't be the last time. :wink:

 

Heliocentricity - Of or relating to a reference system based at the center of the sun.

- Having the sun as a center.

[Tormod]

But I'll have learned something today, that's what matters.

 

I love hearing stuff like this! :wink:

[Bo]

i will put my money on 'advanced language/communication' or something like that. It allowed mankind to continue where your parents have stopped, to evolve further and further.

 

Bo

[Stargazer]

Difficult to say. I mean, fire was obvisouly extremely important and has always been. I'm not sure when it was invented or discovered, but one source say it could have been 790,000 years ago. It was a long time ago anyway. It's been important all the time, for warming, for keeping animals away, cooking, metallurgy, etc. We even use it to fly into space :)

Agriculture is a good choice as well. It made it possible for technology to develop much faster. Or what about the wheel or the written language, perhaps? Maybe I'm more in inventions now rather than scientific findings... hmm, heliocentrism was suggested, and I agree with that. Very important step to realise we're not the centre of things (except from our perspective of course, hehe).

[alexander]

This is a hard one, Fire is a big one, and so is electiciry, and electomagnetism, and so is heliocentricity, and so is linguistics, I dont know, all the good ones are taken, so just to be different, i'd say gravity...

[alexander]

hey, check this out:

http://encarta.msn.com/column_scientificdiscoveries_tamimhome/10_Great_Scientific_Discoveries.html

[Bo]

nice list, however somewhat arbitrarely i think. Why the 4 laws of thermodynamics, and not maxwell's laws of electromagnetism?

 

Bo

[GAHD]

#1 writing

#2 the lever

#3 fire

 

Just my humble opinion.

[Bo]

i like the idea that the lever is crucial :wink:

It is indeed the beginning of many mechanical systems.

 

Bo

[alexander]

Second that, i kinda like the idea too... pretty much covers all the funtementals

[Freethinker]

It would seem that the number one "Discovery" of Science is the "Scientific Method". All other results come from the ability to recognize factual results. What value is fire if it does not perform in a predictable consistant manner? Or a lever if the ratio of work/ effort was not predictably consistant. If humans had not recognized patterns and learned to turn observations into reliable predictions, we would not have anything.

[pgrmdave]

How about the number zero? We all take it for granted, but the idea of a representation for nothing had to be discovered/invented at some point.

[TINNY]

It would seem that the number one "Discovery" of Science is the "Scientific Method". All other results come from the ability to recognize factual results. What value is fire if it does not perform in a predictable consistant manner? Or a lever if the ratio of work/ effort was not predictably consistant. If humans had not recognized patterns and learned to turn observations into reliable predictions, we would not have anything.

so what was science before the discovery of the scientific method?