# Are we the perfect size for technology? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 31, 2015, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469 "2015-01-31T22:41:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/21 "2015-02-02T14:22:39Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > It would have been a lot more difficult for people who were only one foot tall to operate an iron mine, for example. I dunno, they’d bump their heads a lot less… Or, more seriously, why? There’s no minimum height you’d have to be to crack rocks or operate crushing hammers. Never mind that most early mining wasn’t hard rock mining (except the mining of rocks themselves, of course). ---
**Author:** ![Mogle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mogle/32/12021_2.png) [@Mogle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mogle)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/22 "2015-02-02T14:44:43Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Or, more seriously, why? There’s no minimum height you’d have to be to crack rocks or operate crushing hammers. Never mind that most early mining wasn’t hard rock mining (except the mining of rocks themselves, of course). It’s not just about swinging a pickaxe, I doubt a mining technique like [fire-setting](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire-setting) would scale down very well. Then there’s the issue with smelting the ore, would that process scale down? ---
**Author:** ![kferr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/71e660/32.png) [@kferr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kferr)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/23 "2015-02-02T14:47:27Z")
How much force is required to create a stone axe or flint arrowhead? Would a tiny human have the strength needed? They’d have to get past this stage before thinking about space ships. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/24 "2015-02-02T14:48:53Z")
I wonder if weaker metals (tin, for example) would suffice for the one-foot-tall people. ---
**Author:** ![Si\_Amigo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/si_amigo/32/2877_2.png) [@Si\_Amigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Si_Amigo)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/25 "2015-02-02T15:19:38Z")
> [@kferr](#): > > How much force is required to create a stone axe or flint arrowhead? Would a tiny human have the strength needed? They’d have to get past this stage before thinking about space ships. Or to successfully hunt with a [atlatl](http://www.atlatl.com/atlatl-renaissance.php). Could we have even made to the top of the food chain with tiny weapons? ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/26 "2015-02-02T15:41:46Z")
> [@Mogle](#): > > It’s not just about swinging a pickaxe, I doubt a mining technique like [fire-setting](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire-setting) would scale down very well. Why does it have to scale down? Are 1ft tall people incapable of building big fires? Or running a bucket chain? > [@](#): > > Then there’s the issue with smelting the ore, would that process scale down? Of course - you can smelt ore in small units very easily. That’s basically how ore assaying used to work. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/27 "2015-02-02T15:44:28Z")
> [@kferr](#): > > How much force is required to create a stone axe or flint arrowhead? Would a tiny human have the strength needed? I’ve seen a 7yo knapping stone. Not quite 1ft tall, but not an adult human. The hammerstone does all the work. Knapping’s about precision, not brute force. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/28 "2015-02-02T15:47:11Z")
> [@Si\_Amigo](#): > > Could we have even made to the top of the food chain with tiny weapons? Would we still have fire? ---
**Author:** ![Si\_Amigo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/si_amigo/32/2877_2.png) [@Si\_Amigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Si_Amigo)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/29 "2015-02-02T16:25:35Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Would we still have fire? Pretty sure yes since all you really need to do for fire is pull some off of naturally burning brush from say a lightening strike and keep it going. But could tiny people take down a Mastodon and hunt them to extinction? Would they need to if they didn’t need that much meat? ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/30 "2015-02-02T16:58:58Z")
Apples would be frikkin’ huge! ---
**Author:** ![Mogle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mogle/32/12021_2.png) [@Mogle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mogle)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/31 "2015-02-02T17:08:58Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Why does it have to scale down? Are 1ft tall people incapable of building big fires? Incapable? No, but it is more _difficult_ and would require more manpower if\* you have to build fires that are five times the size of what was done historically, relatively speaking. Granted the relative yield would would also be larger, but the mines wouldn’t just be scaled down versions of our Big Folk mines. \*If it’s actually needed, I don’t know how hot and how long a fire would need to burn for it to be effective. > [@](#): > > Of course - you can smelt ore in small units very easily. That’s basically how ore assaying used to work. In the interest of fighting ignorance(my own!), do you have a cite? It’s not that I don’t believe you, I would just like to know more on the subject. ---
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/32 "2015-02-02T17:56:14Z")
Assuming six inch humans that are just as smart as six-foot humans. I can think of two issues: Intrinsic scaling of technology. Some things are easier and some things are harder at 1/12th scale. It’s easier to build ten 8-inch stories than to build ten 8-foot stories (generally, things get weaker as they get bigger). But, it’s harder to heat the smaller building. Easier to float small ships, but harder to make them move (and of course much harder to make them survive storms). Off the top of my head, I agree that maybe fire is the biggest obstacle to developing 1/12th technology. Smaller fires are just intrinsically harder, because they lose heat much faster compared to how much heat they make, so it’s harder to keep them going. No fire, not much of any other technology. Size relative to ecological surroundings. Six inch humans, even with steel tools, would be hard-pressed to harvest mature oak trees. On the other hand, lots of tiny seeds become reasonable food sources. One issue is the size of predators. Real humans are just big enough that, with spears and in a group, they can fight off the biggest predators around right now. One man alone should be scared of a lion or bear, but a village doesn’t have to worry about a lion coming along and tearing all their houses open. Six inch humans might not be able to build permanent structures, as something hungry would soon come along and open them up. And it’s hard to imagine technology getting even to iron age without reasonably permanent structures. ---
**Author:** ![eburacum45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eburacum45/32/8690_2.png) [@eburacum45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eburacum45)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/33 "2015-02-02T18:06:09Z")
Six-inch human ancestors would probably resemble marmosets rather than chimpanzees, so you might find them building homes in trees to avoid predators. This would make any path to high technology significantly different. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/34 "2015-02-02T18:41:27Z")
> [@cmyk](#): > > Perhaps we’d learn to ride beavers and fly on eagles. I’m pretty sure I’ve been called a12-inch beaver rider before. Or something like that. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/35 "2015-02-02T20:04:24Z")
Mandatory reading for this would include [On being the right size](http://irl.cs.ucla.edu/papers/right-size.html) by J. B. S. Haldane. ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/36 "2015-02-02T20:56:23Z")
> [@The Great Sun Jester](#): > > I’m pretty sure I’ve been called a12-inch beaver rider before. Or something like that. I knew there was a joke in there somewhere. ---
**Author:** ![Arrogance\_Ex\_Machina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/arrogance_ex_machina/32/192_2.png) [@Arrogance\_Ex\_Machina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arrogance_Ex_Machina)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/37 "2015-02-02T20:59:55Z")
> [@Shalmanese](#): > > Mandatory reading for this would include [On being the right size](http://irl.cs.ucla.edu/papers/right-size.html) by J. B. S. Haldane. Ohh, is that the origin of “A rat is killed, a man is broken, a horse splashes.”? Live and learn! ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/38 "2015-02-03T08:04:52Z")
> [@Mogle](#): > > Incapable? No, but it is more _difficult_ and would require more manpower if\* you have to build fires that are five times the size of what was done historically, relatively speaking. We build fires orders of magnitude bigger than our “normal” fires all the time - Nov 5, for instance. > [@](#): > > Granted the relative yield would would also be larger, but the mines wouldn’t just be scaled down versions of our Big Folk mines. A hole in the ground is a hole in the ground - and like I said, in any case most ancient mining was _not_ hard rock mining. The first coppper, tin, iron and gold were all native, placer or open deposits. I think a 1ft person can sift through riversand or dig ochre as well as a 6ft person. > [@](#): > > In the interest of fighting ignorance(my own!), do you have a cite? It’s not that I don’t believe you, I would just like to know more on the subject. Sure - for precious metals, the process is called [cupellation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cupellation) and is fairly well-documented. For an idea about smelting base metals, you can check out the slideshow at the bottom of[this page](http://www.cavemanchemistry.com/oldcave/projects/smelt/) (click the image) ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 9:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/39 "2015-02-03T09:00:21Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > It would have been a lot more difficult for people who were only one foot tall to operate an iron mine, for example. But they’d be fantastic at whistling. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 10:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469/40 "2015-02-03T10:39:15Z")
In many trees branches only start at about 4-5 feet off the ground so I imagine climbing a tree, let alone cutting down a tree, would be pretty hard. The great redwoods of California went unmolested until the 19th century when they made massive saws. But then one would need less wood. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-we-the-perfect-size-for-technology/711469.md?page=3)