Fair enough, I admit I misused the term. I was most certainly wrong to contend those vehicles did not have or use axles, my apologies for the factual error.
However in transportation, ‘axle’ is used to describe one or two tires (possibly even more) on the end of roughly a pole that approximates the width of the vehicle to create bilateral symmetry and disperse weight to the outside edges of the vehicle as we all imagine when we picture a chariot, a cart, a wagon, and a long haul truck.
An individual wheel did not contribute significantly to transportation in any instance I am aware of. When we talk about the ability to move possessions or wares to distant locations, beyond adding more pack animals, we are talking about vehicles with axles that create bilateral symmetry. It is two wheels separated by a wooden or metal pole that makes pulling people or objects (with an animal, or a diesel Kenworth, or anything in between) a reality. The primitive use of branchless logs used as rollers just keeps the front end of a large and heavy object or load from digging in and causing a furrow (and more resistance) while pulling it. I don’t think they would be useful for moving anything over long distances, and that is arguably what makes the wheel such a marvelous invention.
I will stay with my contention (for now) that the wheel really didn’t contribute to advancing mankind in a significant way until it was pared with an axle (in the sense of pairing the wheel with a twin across the width of the vehicle), and a road. Try moving a simple cart across undeveloped land sometime by drawing a line on a map where no road exists then trying to follow that path. It is very likely every five to ten feet you will need to stop and fell a tree, or to clear an obstruction like a rock or bolder, flatten out a grade, and every now and then you will need to stop and build a bridge. But I do thank you for correcting my mistake above, I was most certainly incorrect. Wheelbarrows and bicycles DO have axles- but not as I think of axles (most certainly when the DOT says a truck can carry ‘x’ amount of weight per axle, they are not talking about a single wheel on an axle barely wider than the wheel itself- they are talking about a pair of wheels or two pairs of wheels).
Here is a super neat video that talks about how the earth moves and how we measure time and from 7 min - 16:30 min it talks about why the calendar is how it is and why it gets off by a day every 3,216 years.
Ok, first of all, the DOT means axle, not the number of wheels. It’s the same definition of axle as in a wheelbarrow.
Now, axles are not wheels. The axle is the great invention, wheels were used long before axles as rollers, and not much else because the aren’t that much good without axles. So that part you have right. But that’s what inventing the wheel is about, inventing the combination of a wheel and axle.
Wow! Very cool video! You have my back 24.0000006 hours a day, Drunky! We watched this after mowing the lawn this afternoon and were both blown way. I expected to hear things I was vaguely aware of – but this is more detail than I have ever tried to learn about the movements of our planet and its star. Thank You.
(The kid paid attention throughout the entire video. Unbelievable!)
This need not be a dilemma; you could write about chocolate, while eating chocolate. Seems like that would cover all of your bases, but it still leaves the question of which has benefited humankind the most.
Glad to hear it. I just recently found that video and have been sharing it with everybody. I watched it again after I linked it because he explains everything so plainly on such a complicated topic.
I really don’t understand this post, are you just trying to pick a fight? I am willing to be as pedantic as the next guy- probably more than the next guy. But I am really not sure what you are trying to say here. I admitted I dismissed the single wheel axles in error, but I did clarify that for hauling, an axle means a rod with the same number of wheels on each end. That is absolutely true, there are no examples of anyone moving freight with a single wheeled vehicle in all human history that I am aware of. Do you wish to contend that the wheelbarrow was as fundamental in developing cities or hauling materials as the cart? That the bicycle or wheelbarrow was as significant an invention as the chariot or simple ox carts? Here is a definition of “axle” from a credible source: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/axle
We agree the wheel without an axle is almost useless, I will go farther—for hauling anything heavier than one person could lift using a lever – a single wheeled axle is almost as useless. In fact, I do not consider rollers to be wheels at all; I see them as a very slight advancement of the skid, and best used in modern conveyer belt systems. For moving merchandise for sale, entire households of possessions, or groups of people (larger than two)—the only axle that matters is one that has equal numbers of wheels on each end. I have been advocating the axle over the wheel in every post on this subject in this thread and in fact I was the first to mention them.
Furthermore, the number of wheels on an axle (or pairs of axles) DOES determine how much weight you can load onto that (those) axles. You are used to seeing pairs of axles with dualies, and even single axle dualies, but there are plenty of box trucks used for local deliveries with only single wheels at each end. They can obviously not haul as much weight as the dual wheeled version (if they could why would anyone go to the expense of making axles for dual wheels?). There are special heavy load dollys that have axles with eight wheels on a single axle (I have never climbed under one to see the mechanics- they may be two separate short axles in line with each other, but that seems unlikely). They are basically tire all the way across the width of the vehicle, and there might be four or five axles per dolly. Each tire can carry only so much weight, so for very heavy loads you need more tires which means more gross weight which adds to the load the tractor must pull, but not the payload. It is best to put them on the same axle since you are already pulling that axle.
I continue to contend (until a much better argument is made) that for hauling, the only definition of an axle that matters is a fixed lateral piece under a box or platform with an equal number of wheels on it at each end. What the train people (and skateboarders) call trucks I believe. I also contend without roads, wheels (even on an axle) have very limited usefulness.
(Once again, I do not pull this stuff out of thin air; I do not think I am in any need of an idiot lesson where axles are concerned. If you want to give me an idiot lecture, I suggest you do it when I post in a thread concerning art (especially music) where it would be more appropriate.)
Language, the verbal communication of information. This allowed knowledge gained by one person, to be imparted to another.
This evolved into oral traditions, allowing this knowledge to pass through generations.
This evolved into written language, allowing this knowledge to pass through generations without distortion and without alteration/loss by intermediaries.
.
The other stuff we invented like fire, the wheel, nintendo, starship warp drives, etc… are natural offshoots of this.
Once you enable knowledge to be not only learned, but shared on to others, progress is inevitable.
Temporary Name, I’m another one who has no idea what you mean. A bicycle’s axle is approximately the width of the vehicle, and the front axles on a car are much narrower than the vehicle. And it’s quite possible to make a wide, symmetric, stable wheeled vehicle which has no wide axle, such as anything with tank-style steering.
Several months ago we had a thread about the invention of the wheeled wagon. I remember that a pivoting axle to facilitate steering was cited as an important improvement. The lack of roads made wagons relatively useless in some terrains, but not others. Anthropologists regard the wheeled wagon as key to the sudden expansion of the Yamnaya people of the steppes. Descendants of those steppe people later invented the spoked-wheel war chariot near the Aral Sea to their East … and also spawned cultures like Bell Beaker in the West.
Archaeologists have long been aware of the Bell Beaker Culture which had a profound influence on Western Europe during the Copper Age. It is only recently, however, that genetic evidence has established that most Western Europeans descend from a single clan of migrants from the East. Observe the S116 radiation at the lower right of this clading diagram. This shows a single clan leader whose progeny expanded at a ferocious pace about 2500 BC. What was it specifically that gave this clan huge prestige and power?
These newcomers who developed the Bell Beaker culture probably brought horses to ride; they had metallurgy skills; and had different social, religious, and political customs than the autochthones; but I’m not sure anyone knows exactly why they were able to achieve dominance so quickly. But their wheeled wagons and carts probably played some role.Here’s a webpage about a wagon-driver buried with his wagon. The burial was in Eastern Europe, though about the same time as Western Europe’s Bell Beaker explosion.
.
Thank you for this post, I found it interesting and informative. I have not yet read all the links you provided but hope to when time allows.
(As a complete aside to your post- did any one of these wagons, carts, or chariots that so impacted the settling of these areas have narrow axles? Did the Bell Breaker culture use bicycles, wheelbarrows, skid-steering [as in tanks], or knuckle axles [for steering] to conqueror or settle these areas? Or did they use carts with wide axles and pairs of wheels (if the axles pivoted for steering or not?) And I am sorry for dragging an insignificant distraction into this reply.
Nobody invented language. It’s a natural human capacity, like walking or sneezing. To include it as an “invention” just evades the whole point of this thread, as far as I can tell.
It is obvious to me this is going to devolve into a useless discussion that has little or no bearing on the topic being discussed; I will however try again to explain what you surely must understand. (I do realize you are a moderator and I am not, but I stand ALMOST ready to accuse you of threadshitting.) Honest to god, I feel like a complete fool having to explain this, but I am going to assume your comment was honest and made in good faith. My contention is very simple, an axle with only one wheel on it has never contributed to advancing humanity in a large impact way, and axles as used in carts and the like (a rod with a wheel on each end) has. To say that a bicycle (or wheelbarrow) axle is the same as a cart axle is like saying that predators and prey are the same because they are both animals.
First of all, the point of this thread is what invention made the greatest contribution to mankind. Many posters have suggested the wheel as the most significant invention because it allowed groups of people to move their possessions with them when they relocated, to haul surplus crops to a crossroads where they could be sold which grew into marketplaces and eventually international commerce. The wheel was suggested as the most important invention in human history because of its use for transporting loads (people or freight) long distances. Several posters, including me, suggested the wheel wasn’t much use without axles (ask your pal Cecil Adams about that if you still have questions about it). I went further and suggested roads were a huge contribution to being able to transport materials and groups of people. Septimus has pointed out that is only sometimes true and I accept that, the terrain is what determines the need for roads (I have even stated numerous times the use of drags which I was taught in school were widely used by Native American tribes to move material – and in many Westerns, to move those with broken bones.)
The point here is that the axle was the crux of using the wheel to its full potential. Now I have admitted several times that I had dismissed single wheel axles as I do not think of them as axles at all – although they most certainly are. My point is that they were not ever a contributor to moving freight or people, and were never a significant contributing factor in human development. When I say: “AXLE” I mean (what I guess I should refer to as) a separated axle. An axle with the same number of wheels on each end of it, a rod with either one or two (potentially more) wheels separated by an empty space (and please don’t confuse the term with a split axle which is the term used in modern trucking for two axles on a trailer apart from one another to add extra carrying capacity, as opposed to the more common tandem axles). The kind of axle that makes a cart a cart, has been used since the wheel was invented (roughly) and has helped humankind in several ways i.e.: relocating the tribe/clan, hauling wares to market, trains passenger and freight, automobiles, and all modern highway freight vehicles.
Bicycles are a relatively new invention and they have certainly been a personal transportation boon in parts of Asia. They contribute to the fitness of Americans, but probably stationary exercise bikes as much as the more traditional means of personal transportation the bike is known to be. You may claim that Hell Angels are a significant contribution to human development, and you may even make a claim that all heavier than air aviation is a result of two brothers who built an airplane out of bicycle parts. But please stop trying to claim that the reason that the wheel is a great and significant invention is because of anything accomplished with a single wheeled axle. Tell me one time a civilization spread and conquered because of a bicycle. Tell me of one time a bicycle was used to advance other technologies (other than the one I mentioned above- aircraft). Tell me one time bicycles were used to move freight that affected the course of human discovery or development, or even just history. I am so sorry (so very sorry) I dismissed the single wheel axle as “not really an axle”, but if we are going to talk about transportation contributing to human development – only a separated axle has any significance at all (and they may have a better term that I do not know, I just assigned them that name so I could refer to them and be understood in this thread). I even provided a dictionary definition of axle that refers to exactly what I am referring to and dismisses what you are referring to (although I admit it is not hard to find a dictionary that uses a broader definition that includes the usage you suggest).
Here is how bicycles have contributed to human development. In modern times as a personal transportation device, as an exercise device, there are many companies employing many people in the industry, if you add motors and include motorcycles the numbers go up and the exercise factor goes down. If you want to claim these are great contributions on the level of controlling fire and written language – please make a case for that. The two fictional contributions bicycles have made that I am aware of are this: In my mother’s favorite movie, the Von Trapp family escapes from the Nazi’s on them, and In A CONNETICUT YANKEE IN KING AURTHOR’S COURT the king and Hank Morgan are rescued by Lancelot and the boys (just in the nick of time) by use of bicycles. Now make a case for bicycles effecting the course of human history or leave off pestering me about short axles (your other points will be addressed below — but this applies for them as well). When people speak of the wheel contributing to human development they are talking about pairs of wheels separated by an axle as used in ox carts and chariots and other wagons for battle or to move freight as any human should realize. If you want to have a debate about axles in the abstract, start a thread and invite me, if you want to say I am an idiot who is hard to understand start a Pit thread and invite me there. But please let’s try to keep this thread about the great inventions of human history – of which the separated axle is one and the single wheel axle is not – and we can quibble someplace else.
I think we can agree that while a bicycle does have two axles, it is not ideal for carrying freight, and that is what made the wheel a significant invention. If ancient mankind had a bicycle in the first place, I have a hard time imagining how he loaded it with freight before a journey in the second place (other than stuffing his pockets or backpack with goods). As I stated in a post above, if ancient man did have a bicycle and wanted to convey information over a long distance quickly, the bicycle would be mighty handy. The battle of Marathon comes to mind in this regard, as well as spies and couriers needing to get information to principals before an event – but I know of not one single instance of any mechanical horse device being used to change human history. Apparently they are pretty good at delivering small packages around Manhattan, and that give Kevin Bacon’s carrier a boost (and sold a shit ton of quicksilver merchandise).
The skid-steer style of vehicles that includes tanks, and excavators, Bobcats, and Caterpillar’s aptly names Skid Steer Loader do not use axles, you are correct. But they all derive from previous designs that were based upon a platform on axles (the type I mean- a separated axle with wheels on each end). Besides being a cast iron bitch to drive the first time you jump into one, they are a wonderful drive system that allows you to turn in a VERY small area – essentially inside your own footprint (plus whatever you have hanging outside the tracks or tires like a bucket or backhoe or main gun). They are a relatively recent development, and do make excavating and especially demolition much easier, but I would be reluctant to call them one of the top inventions in all human history. I would contend they are their own invention, but really an improved combination of drive and steering that is really an improvement of existing technology (and based somewhat on axles as I have been using the term).
Likewise, the knuckle axle is a relatively new technology that is derivative of the axle. If you look at pictures of old trucks and school buses, you can see they had full axles in the front and a rod slightly above and behind them to make both wheels point left or right. As height became a concern, and even more so with the advent of front wheel drive vehicles, the middle portion of the axle was eliminated and engine, or cooling, or drive train elements lowered into that space. The end portion of the axle that steers (in a vehicle without front drive wheels) is just bolted onto the frame [actually the suspension which is bolted to the frame] – but they are always used in pairs and are referred to as if they had an axle. In modern long haul trucking they are called “steers” and they are treated as if they were on an axle. In a car with front wheel drive it is the same except more complicated because each front tire also has a driveshaft coming into the back of it. Designing a wheel that both drives and steers is the kind of thing it took thousands of years to develop, and most certainly nothing I would have ever thought of even trying to design myself. But these are all examples of the evolution of the axle (what I have named the separated axle for the purpose of this thread) that helped mankind develop from primitive to modern times. Again used only in pairs and derived from designs that had traditional axles.
If I have not been clear enough, wheels on axles as used in carts, and wagons, and chariots have had a massive impact on humanity and human development. Wheels on axles as used in wheelbarrows, bicycles, and motorcycles – wheels that are not used in pairs (except in tandem) have had almost no impact on human development.
My last word on the use of axles (please nonexistent deity, please let this be the end of it). I read somewhere, and it might have even been in one of Cecil’s books, that the station wagons so many of us went on summer vacations in our youths were the actual descendants of the old Calistoga wagons (or similar) that were stripped of their canvas cover and stored near the rail station to deliver travelers, luggage, and freight around town when the train disgorged any of same. Since the wagon belonged to and was stored at the station—it was called the ‘station wagon’ as was its longer than normal motor vehicular family car descendant complete with fake wood paneling to make it more similar in appearance to its namesake.
My apologies to the other posters for this entire distraction. Additional apologies that I am not able to state myself more succinctly; I am not very good at brevity. If anyone wants to discuss axles, OR my inability to relate information in the most efficient way possible, please start another thread and notify me, I will be happy to contribute as politely as possible. I have however said everything I have to say about axles (and myself) and unless you are eager to hear me restate the views stated above . . . perhaps the matter is best left alone.
I want to be careful how I phrase this because I don’t want to get sucked into a second drawn out debate that is only tangentially related to the topic. That being said, it could be argued that language is inevitable and would occur naturally in humans, but languages are most certainly invented. If language was not invented—they would all be the same. If it was a universal trait you were born with, every culture would develop the same word to mean “mommy”. But you do bring up an interesting point; there has never been a people discovered in all of history (that I am aware of) that did not have spoken language.
The post right above yours mentions complex language, do you consider that an invention or simply a continuation of the naturally occurring capacity. Is it possible to feel belonging without being able to express it verbally? Obviously deaf people feel love and acceptance and belonging, but those things are always communicated (as is everything in their lives) through non aural/nonverbal methods. I think it would be hard to have deep thoughts if you had never heard the deep thoughts of others. The fact that some cultures only have a few words for colors while others have many words for colors informs us that language is an invention and one that significantly contributes to how fully actualized a life can be lived.
There are no important inventions in the sense that when it comes the time to invent something it will get done by someone even if the original person would not have done it.
That’s not true at all. Without Newton it could well have taken centuries for someone to come up with the principle of universal gravitation. The theory had been published for more than a century before it could even be tested in a laboratory.
Are you actually suggesting that different languages exist because somebody just decided to invent them? Seriously? So, for example, people migrated from place A to place B, and when they got there, they thought, “Hey, we’re in a different place now–let’s make a new language to speak”? You’re really suggesting that?
