Artificial Acceleration of Technological and Social Change

[SpitfireIX]

I'm currently finishing the preliminary outline for a series of SF/alternate-history novels about a man and a woman in their mid-twenties who are transported, by a probe from an extraterrestrial civilization, to an alternate reality identical to our own, except the year is 1856. Andrew is a mechanical and electrical engineer who designs railroad locomotives and is a Civil War cavalry reenactor; Jenny has just finished medical school and plans to become a neurosurgeon. They are both white, and come from wealthy, though not rich, families. Unsurprisingly, they are both highly intelligent (IQs of 150-160). They have no useful reference books to speak of with them; only the knowledge in their heads (and some flashlight and mobile phone batteries).

So, the question I'd like to bounce off people here is, how much could they accelerate the advancement of technology and the rate of social change in the second half of the 19th Century, compared with the historical reality? One important factor is that they will initially travel to Nevada and strike it rich in the silver rush; by investing the proceeds in oil and railroads, within a few years Andrew will be the wealthiest man in the world many times over. So his engineers and scientists will have effectively unlimited R&D budgets, and they will have vast amounts of money to donate to worthy social causes.

As I see it, limiting factors to the improvement in technology would include a lack of qualified engineers and scientists, reduced demand for certain items (due to a smaller and poorer population base), and social resistance to some technological changes.

I'd like to keep my OP relatively short, so I'll leave it here for now. I'll go into some specifics about goals and strategies later.

 

[dasmiller]

For the engineering side, if Our Hero has picked up a good understanding of systems engineering, that could be a big factor. Particularly if he was funding developments, because he'd be in a position to simply impose it on his staff.

If he'd had a class in basic aerodynamics or aero engineering, he'd probably be able to develop an workable airplane within a few years. The tricky bit, IMO, would be the engine, but he's a mechanical engineer; I'd think he'd be able to make a lot of IC engine progress pretty quickly.

 

[SpitfireIX]

For the engineering side, if Our Hero has picked up a good understanding of systems engineering, that could be a big factor. Particularly if he was funding developments, because he'd be in a position to simply impose it on his staff.

Having worked both as a cooperative education student and after graduation (and during part-time grad school) on designing locomotives, I imagine that he would have such knowledge.

If he'd had a class in basic aerodynamics or aero engineering, he'd probably be able to develop an workable airplane within a few years. The tricky bit, IMO, would be the engine, but he's a mechanical engineer; I'd think he'd be able to make a lot of IC engine progress pretty quickly.

My thought is that airplanes (at least powered ones) would come around 1870-1875. Andrew never took an actual aeronautical engineering class, but I think he would be familiar enough with the theory, especially because he took a few hours of lessons in a Cessna before he decided he wasn't that interested in pursuing a pilot's license. At least that's my current thought.

I had also initially planned for aircraft development to skip the early phases and start with something like the DC-3, as soon as reliable aluminum production and engine technology were developed. However, upon reflection, it might be wiser to start with earlier wood-and-canvas models, both to gain experience in design and construction, and for pilot training.

 

[Loss Leader]

The big limiting factor in the 1850's were lack of steel (which saw important advances in the mid-1800's), the lack of energy (with steel needed to effectively mine coal), and the lack of standardized measures (every engineer had his own tools).

I don't think one person could do much to get around these problems. Improve the steam engine? Try to build an experimental electrical generator? Bring Babbage over from England and fund difference engines?

 

[dasmiller]

My thought is that airplanes (at least powered ones) would come around 1870-1875. Andrew never took an actual aeronautical engineering class, but I think he would be familiar enough with the theory, especially because he took a few hours of lessons in a Cessna before he decided he wasn't that interested in pursuing a pilot's license. At least that's my current thought.

If he'd picked up some of the basic top-level lift & drag equations and understood parasite vs. induced drag, he'd probably get by okay. If he was lugging around that awful Bernoulli* explanation of lift, that might cost him a few years.

If he'd picked up a vague understanding of Reynolds number (which is unlikely, I think), that could help him a lot with the wind tunnel work. But then, if he's sufficiently diligent, he'd probably 'rediscover' Reynolds number effects pretty quickly.

This leads to an interesting sub-plot: would the protagonist be so convinced of his own understanding that he ignored or even undercut contemporary scientists because he didn't remember them? I'm picturing George Stokes trying to explain why wind tunnel experiments might not scale up to full-size wings, and Our Hero shouting him down because he "knew" how "real" airplanes worked.

You know, if that sort of thing happened enough, Our Hero could actually slow progress. After some initial successes which led everyone to believe he was the world's greatest authority on science and technology, his ego and misunderstandings could cause more harm than good.

*There's nothing wrong with Bernoulli's principle, and in fact if you measure the local velocity around a wing, you can use Bernoulli to calculate lift just fine. The problem is when they use explanations like, "the air has to go farther over the top of the wing, so it has to go faster" . . . which makes no sense, and actually underpredicts the lift from a normal wing.

 

[Corsair 115]

However, upon reflection, it might be wiser to start with earlier wood-and-canvas models, both to gain experience in design and construction, and for pilot training.

As well as gaining an understanding as to what was needed for controlled flight. That requires ailerons, elevators, and rudder all working in concert, and later on, flaps to lower landing speeds.

 

[Pope130]

If they have a good understanding of the history of science and technology a great deal of influence could be made by knowing who to hire. Babbage (already mentioned) and Lovelace could have produced a useful programmable computer. George Cayley, for example, had an excellent grasp of what was needed for controlled flight, but lacked a lightweight engine. Edison would make a top notch development program manager.

 

[Loss Leader]

Starting in the mid 1800's, a geologist who knew what an oil reserve looked like would be worth his weight in ambergris.

And, of course, one could at least sketch out the basics of an atomic bomb.

The biggest hurdle to overcome would be skepticism from other scientists, who would basically think you were a crazy person. Pretty much everything a doctor from today says would be lunacy 150 years ago.

 

[SezMe]

To be humble, make Andrew have one of my experiences at Purdue. I did not study aeronautical engineering but I did take several flying lessons in the Purdue Piper Cub. That would give him some flying knowledge.

To your OP, it seems to me the biggest boost could come by pursuing energy technology and, more specifically, electrical generation and transmission. Witness how important cheap electricity is to our culture then imagine it evolving decades faster.

 

[Corsair 115]

Somebody call Kiff!

 

[arthwollipot]

I'm not sure that one or two people could make a significant impact on a society. For a start, there's the social distrust already mentioned. Also, people today tend to be experts in very narrow fields if they are experts in anything at all.

An engineer may be able to turn steel into a bridge, but she wouldn't necessarily know how to smelt iron into steel, or mine iron ore successfully, or even know where under the ground to find it.

I suspect this narrow focus would be the downfall of individuals trying to uplift a more primitive society.

 

[SpitfireIX]

The big limiting factor in the 1850's were lack of steel (which saw important advances in the mid-1800's)

Henry Bessemer and his partners perfected his steel-making process and established a steel mill in 1859; in 1863 he licensed the American rights for £10,000. Andrew will have his first steel mill completed by the end of 1860.

the lack of energy (with steel needed to effectively mine coal)

I disagree that steel would be needed to "effectively" mine coal in the amounts that would be required, at least until steel production was ramped up.

and the lack of standardized measures (every engineer had his own tools).

Andrew will require all of his employees and contractors to use the metric system (he'll provide standard tools); he'll also press for the use of a simplified form of Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) in all technical drawings. Jenny will push the use of the metric system in medicine.

I don't think one person could do much to get around these problems.

I think one person with the proper knowledge and huge amounts of money could do a lot.

Improve the steam engine?

The triple-expansion steam engine was patented in 1861, but wasn't in use commercially until the 1880s. I figure that Andrew could have them in large-scale operation by the early 1870s.

Try to build an experimental electrical generator?

Already done in the 1830s. Practical DC generators (dynamos) were introduced in the late 1860s; AC generators were introduced in the 1880s.

Bring Babbage over from England and fund difference engines?

Absolutely (including "hazardous duty" pay for everyone working with him for having to put up with his temper tantrums ). One thing I'm currently investigating is whether it would have been feasible to have redesigned the Analytic Engine to have used electrical relays.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Duplicate post.

 

[SpitfireIX]

If he'd picked up a vague understanding of Reynolds number (which is unlikely, I think), that could help him a lot with the wind tunnel work. But then, if he's sufficiently diligent, he'd probably 'rediscover' Reynolds number effects pretty quickly.

Why do you think that unlikely, if I may ask? I have a "vague understanding" just from my two mechanical engineering technology classes in fluid power and fluid mechanics. The "light bulb" moment for me was when the professor described a man standing on top of a dirigible moving at full speed, and feeling almost no wind.

This leads to an interesting sub-plot: would the protagonist be so convinced of his own understanding that he ignored or even undercut contemporary scientists because he didn't remember them? I'm picturing George Stokes trying to explain why wind tunnel experiments might not scale up to full-size wings, and Our Hero shouting him down because he "knew" how "real" airplanes worked.

Andrew wouldn't shout (at least not in that circumstance), and he knows who Stokes was (due to the unit of kinematic viscosity's being named for him, and the Navier-Stokes equation. However, you do raise an interesting point that could possibly apply in some other cases. I'll have to give that some thought.

You know, if that sort of thing happened enough, Our Hero could actually slow progress. After some initial successes which led everyone to believe he was the world's greatest authority on science and technology, his ego and misunderstandings could cause more harm than good.

Andrew does not have that kind of an ego, though he sometimes underestimates his own fallibility.

 

[SpitfireIX]

As well as gaining an understanding as to what was needed for controlled flight. That requires ailerons, elevators, and rudder all working in concert, and later on, flaps to lower landing speeds.

I just recently learned that all of those (except flaps) were patented long before the Wright brothers, and that they probably shouldn't have received patent protection for their invention. It's interesting that people were patenting aeronautical engineering concepts decades before experiments with powered flight began.

 

[dasmiller]

Why do you think that unlikely, if I may ask? I have a "vague understanding" just from my two mechanical engineering technology classes in fluid power and fluid mechanics. The "light bulb" moment for me was when the professor described a man standing on top of a dirigible moving at full speed, and feeling almost no wind.

R/C airplanes have been a big hobby of mine for the last few decades, so I've had a lot of discussions about aerodynamics with people who don't have formal training in aerodynamics. In my experience, they could immediate understand lift & drag coefficients, but the moment I said, "Reynolds number," their eyes would glaze over. Throwing in "viscosity" didn't help.

That being said, I'm not sure how many Mech E's I talked to about it; it may well be that the standard Mech E curriculum has enough fluid dynamics to cover it.

Andrew does not have that kind of an ego, though he sometimes underestimates his own fallibility.

Might he have that kind of ego after 20 years of being a captain of industry and the greatest technologist the world has ever known?

 

[SpitfireIX]

If they have a good understanding of the history of science and technology a great deal of influence could be made by knowing who to hire.

Andrew has an extensive knowledge of the history of science and technology; like me, he read many biographies of famous scientists, engineers, and inventors when he was a kid.

Jenny took a class on the history of American medicine when she was an undergrad, but she didn't study it for fun the way Andrew did the history of science and technology.

Babbage (already mentioned) and Lovelace could have produced a useful programmable computer.

I really wish I could have used Ada Lovelace as a character, but, sadly, she died of cancer in 1852. There's also some question among historians as to how much she actually contributed to Babbage's work.

George Cayley, for example, had an excellent grasp of what was needed for controlled flight, but lacked a lightweight engine.

Cayley died in 1857, but Andrew will undoubtedly obtain copies of all his published works.

Edison would make a top notch development program manager.

I'm still trying to decide what Andrew's relationship with Edison will be; I'm not sure that Edison would have been willing to work for anyone else, even for huge piles of money. More research is required. This also applies to some other famous personalities of the age, such as George Pullman, Andrew Carnegie, and John D. Rockefeller.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Starting in the mid 1800's, a geologist who knew what an oil reserve looked like would be worth his weight in ambergris.

Apart from getting in on the very start of the Pennsylvania oil boom, Andrew will mainly rely on his knowledge of the locations of two huge oil and gas fields: Spindletop Hill, south of Beaumont, Texas, and the Trenton gas (and oil) field in central Indiana. Eventually additional deposits will be discovered and exploited.

And, of course, one could at least sketch out the basics of an atomic bomb.

Andrew and Jenny will engage in a tremendous amount of soul-searching over this issue, at the proper time. There are two options. First, try to prevent any development in that direction, and hope that by the time someone finally invents nuclear weapons, the world will be advanced enough that they will never be used. Second, develop them as rapidly as possible, and attempt to create a Pax Americana that would prevent nuclear proliferation. I have no idea what they will eventually decide.

The biggest hurdle to overcome would be skepticism from other scientists, who would basically think you were a crazy person.

Not so much, if you can give convincing demonstrations.

Pretty much everything a doctor from today says would be lunacy 150 years ago.

Yes and no. I recently read a book on medicine during the American Civil War, and other than not understanding the germ theory of disease, and that mosquitoes spread malaria and yellow fever, medical knowledge and treatment for the time were actually fairly accurate and effective.

 

[SpitfireIX]

To be humble, make Andrew have one of my experiences at Purdue. I did not study aeronautical engineering but I did take several flying lessons in the Purdue Piper Cub. That would give him some flying knowledge.

I see him having taken about a dozen hours of flying lessons in high school, before he decided to give it up due to the time commitment involved.

To your OP, it seems to me the biggest boost could come by pursuing energy technology and, more specifically, electrical generation and transmission. Witness how important cheap electricity is to our culture then imagine it evolving decades faster.

Andrew will explain to Jenny early on that they need to develop power sources, materials (first steel, then aluminum, and then plastics), and improved machine tools, as their first priorities for increasing industrialization.

 

[dasmiller]

Andrew will explain to Jenny early on that they need to develop power sources, materials (first steel, then aluminum, and then plastics), and improved machine tools, as their first priorities for increasing industrialization.

Unless Andrew specialized in material science, aluminum might be a problem.
The material itself was well-known; the problem was how to affordably refine it from bauxite, and I wouldn't expect that he'd remember that technique. It certainly didn't come up in any of my classes, and we aero engineers take our aluminum very seriously.

ETA: If he's rich enough, he can probably have a team of experts working the "aluminum problem," so the process might be developed earlier even he he doesn't remember it.