# What is the single most greatest machine mankind has ever built?



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

I'm keen to put my answer out there, but not yet. I could be wrong.

But what do you think?


----------



## EZO (May 6, 2013)

The wheel.


----------



## Megatrowned (May 6, 2013)

The Coffee machine.

:huh: Coffee coffee coffee...


----------



## Steve K (May 6, 2013)

The engineer in me has to ask "how are we defining "great"?"....

In terms of influence on mankind's development, I might offer "the cutting edge", whether it's a knife, knapped flint, axe, etc. 

In terms of high tech, I'll offer the transistor, since it has allowed compact, low cost communications to nearly the whole world, in addition to being an enabling technolgy that touches so much of our lives.


----------



## markr6 (May 6, 2013)

Megatrowned said:


> The Coffee machine.
> 
> :huh: Coffee coffee coffee...



LOL YES!!!

This can go so many ways and I already see people questing how you define "machine". But I'm going to throw out the space shuttle or maybe all those involved in landing on the moon in some of the Apollo missions. Not the most "improtant" machine, but when you consider how complex they were with no margin of error allowed it's pretty amazing.


----------



## Colonel Sanders (May 6, 2013)

Megatrowned said:


> The Coffee machine.
> 
> :huh: Coffee coffee coffee...



+1 Heck yeah! Game over, cased close!


----------



## Flying Turtle (May 6, 2013)

For the greatest effect on mankind, maybe the lowly telephone.

Geoff


----------



## orbital (May 6, 2013)

+

The AC Power Grid






..to then power my coffee maker


----------



## sidecross (May 6, 2013)

Steve K said:


> The engineer in me has to ask "how are we defining "great"?"....
> 
> In terms of influence on mankind's development, I might offer "the cutting edge", whether it's a knife, knapped flint, axe, etc.
> 
> In terms of high tech, I'll offer the transistor, since it has allowed compact, low cost communications to nearly the whole world, in addition to being an enabling technolgy that touches so much of our lives.



This is an excellent answer and I would concur. :thumbsup:


----------



## PhotonBoy (May 6, 2013)

The automobile.


----------



## stanmog (May 6, 2013)

The thermos. It keeps hot things hot and cold things cold. How do it know?


----------



## EZO (May 6, 2013)

Steve K said:


> The engineer in me has to ask "how are we defining "great"?".... In terms of influence on mankind's development, I might offer "the cutting edge", whether it's a knife, knapped flint, axe, etc. In terms of high tech, I'll offer the transistor, since it has allowed compact, low cost communications to nearly the whole world, in addition to being an enabling technolgy that touches so much of our lives.


 I believe we were thinking along the same lines by suggesting the key inventions that lifted mankind above the other species. I would suggest though, that a "cutting edge" is a tool, not a machine, whereas the wheel was the first machine invented by man that could do actual work. Interestingly, cutting tools would have been required to build the first true wheel. (Some consider the lever to be the first machine, but others consider the lever to be a tool.) I'm not sure about the transistor. I mean, yes, of course; it seems obvious from our perspective here in the 21st century. But every era had its "key" high tech invention that advanced mankind. One could argue that the steam engine was the "greatest" because it provided power and helped launched the industrial revolution....and before that, the water wheel. There are many other examples. Each great leap in technology required the previous great leap. In my view, it started with the wheel as the first machine which was preceded by the invention of tools.


----------



## write2dgray (May 6, 2013)

LHC FTW


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 6, 2013)

Gentlemen, surely we can all agree, the greatest invention has to be ~ *The Toilet *

When one pauses to consider the job it does, and the incredible amount of pipe, valves, pumps, etc. ect. that are required to ''finish the job" well, one just has to marvel. 

Don't just think about your personal plumbing, think about the size of the machine servicing New York. 

The second is our Keurig.

~ Chance


----------



## Johnbaz (May 6, 2013)

The Flux Capacitor - we just need 21.1 Gigawatt batteries now!!


John


----------



## jtr1962 (May 6, 2013)

I'm using five criteria here:

1) Has to be inexpensive enough for the masses to own.
2) Must not require extensive training to use.
3) Must enable a person to either perform a function they can't without it, or must extend an inherent human capability.
4) The function performed in #3 must significantly empower the person in some way.
5) Must not have any serious downsides from ubiquitous use.

Here's my rationale for these criteria:

1) An invention which only a fraction of the world's population can afford isn't going to make the average person's life significantly better, even if such an invention might be a marvel of technology.
2) Inventions which require extensive training to use do not benefit the majority of the population. Case in point-computers before GUI operating systems. Yes, they could perform useful functions, but only a handful of people had the knowledge to use them to perform these functions.
3) History has shown that inventions which perform a novel function or extend human capabilities are the real game changers.
4) An invention should improve a person's life by allowing them to do useful things they can't otherwise do. For example, an invention which lets a person count ants quicker might be ingenious, but in the scheme of things nobody's life will be better if they can count more ants.
5) If an invention catches on to the point a lot of people use it, the benefits should greatly outweigh the negatives. Ideally, there shouldn't be negatives. Case in point-automobile use. In my opinion, mainstreaming automobile use has resulted in more downsides than benefits, especially for those who can't afford automobiles but must still nonetheless be subject to their downsides (pollution, congestion, accidental deaths, etc.). Naturally, we can't always foresee the negative effects of inventions down the road, but I can't call an invention great if it harms a significant number of people.

And my nomination is _the lowly bicycle_. I can't think of any other invention which is more useful as far as empowering the masses. Bicycles let you travel 3 to 5 times as far and as fast as you could on foot. We may even extend that to ten times or more with aerodynamic velomobiles. Moreover, bicycles are affordable by nearly everyone, easy to use, have health benefits on the side, and really don't have any serious downsides if used by everyone. You can also move much more cargo by bike than you could carry, and at greater speed.

In second place I would nominate railways. To this day we haven't found a way to move cargo or people faster and with less energy than by rail. Railways are actually what enabled the industrial revolution.


----------



## jtr1962 (May 6, 2013)

Steve K said:


> In terms of high tech, I'll offer the transistor, since it has allowed compact, low cost communications to nearly the whole world, in addition to being an enabling technolgy that touches so much of our lives.


This certainly meets my five criteria. In fact, what else is so cheap that an average person can own millions, even billions, of other than transistors? I could argue the transistor was the greatest invention of the second half of the 20th century, while the modern bicycle was the greatest invention of the first half (yes, bicycles existed before then, but the modern "safety" bicycle is really what made the bicycle accessible to the masses, and it didn't become inexpensive enough for that to happen until the turn of the 20th century).


----------



## StarHalo (May 6, 2013)

It'll come down to the printing press vs the steam engine vs the transistor. The first allowed man to share information beyond his physical limitations, the second allowed man to manipulate objects beyond his physical limitations, and the third pushed the physical limits of information itself. I don't agree with Jtr's cheap-enough-to-own hypothesis, as the first two devices on this list changed human culture without hardly anyone being able to obtain them.


----------



## Littlelantern (May 6, 2013)

the plough ,the agroculture marvel.


----------



## 880arm (May 6, 2013)

All good choices and rationale shared so far.

I'm somewhat surprised no one has mentioned the computer. Broadly speaking they are everywhere today - on our desks, in our pockets (phones), in our cars, running our infrastructure, etc. I suppose it could be argued that they are as prevalent as many of the things already mentioned.

However, I have never really come to terms with the amount of "work" they perform. While I agree they can enhance productivity it seems that the more reliant we become on computers, the more time we spend "feeding" them inputs. Case in point, I'm on here while I should be working . . . maybe they are the greatest distraction mankind has ever built!


----------



## jtr1962 (May 6, 2013)

StarHalo said:


> I don't agree with Jtr's cheap-enough-to-own hypothesis, as the first two devices on this list changed human culture without hardly anyone being able to obtain them.


Here's why I used that criteria-when somebody else owns and controls an invention, there's no guarantee it'll be used for the general benefit of everyone. In fact, generally when inventions are too expensive for the average person to own they only benefit the average person if somebody can make money using them. There is also a history of great inventions never seeing the light of day because those profiting off the status quo would lose (it could be argued this is why Tesla's idea of global wireless power transmission was never pursued). In the end, the true inventions which are game changers are those average people can own and use as they see fit.


----------



## jtr1962 (May 6, 2013)

880arm said:


> However, I have never really come to terms with the amount of "work" they perform. While I agree they can enhance productivity it seems that the more reliant we become on computers, the more time we spend "feeding" them inputs. Case in point, I'm on here while I should be working . . . maybe they are the greatest distraction mankind has ever built!


What seems to happen when we invent ways to increase productivity is that instead of reaping the benefits of more free time, we instead opt for a higher standard of living. Look at the average work week. If anything it's gotten a little longer over the last decade despite great productivity increases. We could instead all be working 15 hours a week and living to the standards of 1960 (i.e. a lot fewer material things). In many ways, I think that would be better, but apparently society thinks otherwise. My question is how far will we carry this? I think in time people will see the futility of acquiring ever more possessions, and then start translating their greater productivity into more free time instead of more material things.


----------



## davidwestonh (May 6, 2013)

Chauncey Gardiner said:


> Gentlemen, surely we can all agree, the greatest invention has to be ~ *The Toilet *
> 
> When one pauses to consider the job it does, and the incredible amount of pipe, valves, pumps, etc. ect. that are required to ''finish the job" well, one just has to marvel.
> 
> ...


I second that. The toilet has saved many lives from typhoid and other diseases and made cities livable..
riding a bicycle and trying to avoid turds would not be a fun way of traveling the large cities.

All hail the great Fergason.


----------



## cland72 (May 6, 2013)

The automobile. 

Can't even begin to state it's importance, from necessary to putting food on the table, to how it has integrated into pop culture, to it being an extension of our personalities and how we identify with them so strongly. Not to mention it revolutionized travel!


----------



## Steve K (May 6, 2013)

davidwestonh said:


> I second that. The toilet has saved many lives from typhoid and other diseases and made cities livable..
> riding a bicycle and trying to avoid turds would not be a fun way of traveling the large cities.
> 
> All hail the great Fergason.



well, having ridden a bike in areas where the Amish use horses on public roads, I'd say that the auto certainly prevented a lot of manure from ending up on the roads. To anyone contemplating cycling in the Amish areas, I'd recommend the use of a good set of fenders/mudguards! 

The toilet certainly made urban living more tolerable. I think that the development of the outhouse and the understanding that it need to be kept the proper distance from the house is also an important innovation in furthering people's health. 

Honestly, I think a good case could be made for any of the utilities as "great machines", both in terms of their impact on our daily lives and in terms of their complexity.


----------



## davidwestonh (May 6, 2013)

Any votes for the printing press.


----------



## bietjiedof (May 6, 2013)

Bicycle, coffee machine and flush toilet. That's the sequence in my life anyway


----------



## sidecross (May 6, 2013)

I am surprised no mention of the human species to create fire at will.
Even though this goes back further than Homo sapiens no other species has ever done this.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

I'm thinking of something a bit more "epic" in scale...

C'mon. Think  A machine so colossal, it's what dreams are made of...


----------



## davidwestonh (May 6, 2013)

Anyone think about a lever for the brain?
the slide rule .
technology put the man on the moon.


----------



## Imon (May 6, 2013)

Megatrowned said:


> The Coffee machine.
> 
> :huh: Coffee coffee coffee...



First thing that came to my mind... :laughing:


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

All kidding aside 

Here's my nomination. Turn up the sound. 480p is better.



2:41 - 8:12 is especially poignant.

Keep in mind the cone trail is over a mile long at about 6:22.


----------



## Imon (May 6, 2013)

The Saturn V is great but I wouldn't call it the greatest machine ever...
Although more than half a century later I think it's still the most powerful vehicle ever. When I was young I was a big space nut - It helped that I had family in Houston so I could visit the LBJ Space Center every year. 

The first stage nozzles are massive and I believe the Rocketdyne F-1 engine is still the most powerful ever. Crazy how NASA was able to get that huge tower of fuel and oxygen flying...
The Soviets had a secret Moon program too but all of their N-1 rockets exploded.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

The Sat V makes the Space Shuttle look like a bottle rocket. 

For anyone who has no idea what these things sound like:



Wait for it. (the sound)


----------



## aginthelaw (May 6, 2013)

his children.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

:laughing:


----------



## sidecross (May 6, 2013)

I would still contend that the ability to create fire not only for food and protection, but no other item listed could have come into existence without the ability to crate fire. :thumbsup:


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

Fire is not a machine.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

This shuttle launch has better bass. I imagine being there it feels like a small earth quake.

Too bad I can't find a Saturn V launch video with sound. There's one somewhere with a reporter inside a view tower and talking about the windows shattering even when miles away.


----------



## piglet (May 6, 2013)

Does a stone tool count? 

A useful hand axe takes skill and planning to knap. You need to provide for your group or family (and yourself ) before you can move on to greater things. 

I still find it amazing that the steam train was invented before the bicycle...


----------



## NonSenCe (May 6, 2013)

yes.. maybe theres the answer.. steam! greatest machine ever, steam power turbine.. mankind has not really invented anything better in past 100 years or two than steam turbine. power to the masses.. simple: all those fancy and complicated nuclear plants still need the good ol turbine to get the power into electricity. the nukeplant is just a big water boiler, its the turbine that makes them roll.


----------



## Sparky's Magic (May 6, 2013)

Megatrowned said:


> The Coffee machine.
> 
> :huh: Coffee coffee coffee...



+1 The Coffee Machine, more specifically Vev's Expresso 4 cup Stove Top model. A possible dead heat for 1st. place would surely be The Whisky Still (in the right hands, of course) - Now, that's keeping things in perspective!

Slainte.


----------



## Monocrom (May 6, 2013)

I'd say the Knife, with the Paper match a very close 2nd.

But machine implies moving parts, so . . . The repeating rifle.


----------



## sidecross (May 6, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> Fire is not a machine.



Without fire pottery for cooking and making things of bronze and iron would not be possible. :thumbsup:


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

sidecross said:


> Without fire pottery for cooking and making things of bronze and iron would not be possible. :thumbsup:



Yeah but fire is a - discovery.  Machines have moving components, they are mechanical. So fire, as a discovery has enabled our ability to build machines. It's a given.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

I would also say, irrevocably, mathematics is mankind's single, greatest invention.


----------



## 880arm (May 6, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> I would also say, irrevocably, mathematics is mankind's single, greatest invention.



So does that mean the abacus is the greatest machine? :nana:


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

880arm said:


> So does that mean the abacus is the greatest machine? :nana:



No because a machine like the Saturn V rocket is the sum of many machines, parts, theories, and inventions.


----------



## sidecross (May 6, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> Yeah but fire is a - discovery.  Machines have moving components, they are mechanical. So fire, as a discovery has enabled our ability to build machines. It's a given.



The next time you are in the wilderness far from any civilization let me know when you discover a fire.


----------



## AZPops (May 6, 2013)

Toilets noth'in without the plumbing, and where it's going too, were it's plumb to, or ..... awh heck you know what I mean!


----------



## orbital (May 6, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> I would also say, irrevocably, mathematics is mankind's single, greatest invention.



+

Math & physic are properties, not inventions. What's made with those two,, are 

I'm still going with the *Electrical Grid*.
Just one big machine


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

sidecross said:


> The next time you are in the wilderness far from any civilization let me know when you discover a fire.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

orbital said:


> +
> 
> Math & physic are properties, not inventions. What's made with those two,, are
> 
> ...



This might explain why math is an invention better than I possibly could:

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/420161

Excerpt:

Mathematics is an invention according to the Formalists and Intuitionists, who believed that mathematics is an invention of the mind because (1) there is no place in this world for mathematical concepts such as negative and complex numbers, thus they must be a construction of the human mind; and (2) they want to fully explain the absolute certainty of mathematics, and since mathematics is an invention of the human mind, then its certainty is inevitable. Mathematics does not inform us anything about the world that we live it; they were constructed for purely practical purposes. However it must be noted that the reasons for their stand on mathematics as an invention can be disregarded because an inseparable part of modern science requires the applications of mathematics and if mathematics was purely constructed for practical purposes, why then does science not construct its own rules instead of using mathematics? Also, it is insufficient reason to discount of infinity just because it cannot be experienced empirically (Intuitionists) or have its logical inferences “surveyed” based on objects in its parts (Formalists). If that is the case, then much of modern science will there be left?


----------



## orbital (May 6, 2013)

____^

that quote is utter nonsense..


There's not a day that goes by that I'm not thankful for *not* being easily told what to think.


----------



## jabe1 (May 6, 2013)

Compound Bow.

Changed our ability to hunt and warfare.

Second would be the wheel, although I see it more as a machine part.


----------



## Stress_Test (May 6, 2013)

If by "great" you don't necessarily mean "great"="good/beneficial", but instead merely a degree (for example, "the greatest tyrant in history was etc. etc."


Then my vote is for nuclear weapons. 

First used in war in 1945, and to this day nearly 70 years later, they still heavily influence the geopolitical system (Iran and N. Korea!)

Nukes weigh heavily on our collective consciousness and culture; think about the entire genre of "apocalypse" themed movies, books, and songs, that still persist today (sometimes in spinoff form, such as the zombie craze). 

I'd say few machines have altered the course of humanity as much as nuclear weapons, and that's without even having ever used them on a wide scale!


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

orbital said:


> ____^
> 
> that quote is utter nonsense..
> 
> ...



The link where the excerpt comes from provides context. It makes sense. It's a philosophical debate, really.


----------



## Poppy (May 6, 2013)

The compass.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> All kidding aside
> 
> Here's my nomination. Turn up the sound. 480p is better.
> 
> ...




Was that a maximum sonic pressure wave at 3:21 and then a "throttle up" at 3:25


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 6, 2013)

AZPops said:


> Toilets noth'in without *the plumbing*, and where it's going too, were it's plumb to, or ..... awh heck you know what I mean!



Reading my post in its entirety, one should have come-away with an understanding that that was what I meant. 

Why you messing with me Pops? :nana: 

~ Chance


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

This one is good


----------



## ShineOnYouCrazyDiamond (May 6, 2013)

Okay, seriously, we are on a flashlight forum geeking it up over glowy objects and 62 posts in and I am the first to say, obviously:

*A FLASHLIGHT*

And then, yeah, a wheel, car, bicycle, and coffee.......


----------



## Poppy (May 6, 2013)

Poppy said:


> The compass.



Actually I was thinking of a geopolitical/social machine and perhaps trade is important, and therefore a compass as a machine.

But with a little more thought... perhaps Religion can be considered a "machine".

Aparrantly there are some who have already made that comparison.



> The religion machine is made up of committees, boards,
> councils, administrators, directors and a host of professionals with various
> titles. It moves on wheels – big wheels who run in big circles by plane to speak
> at banquets and conventions, and little wheels who run in smaller circles by car
> ...


http://www.theexaminer.org/volume8/number2/machine.htm


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 6, 2013)

davidwestonh said:


> Any votes for the printing press.



Any list without the printing press would be woefully incomplete. It's impossible to comprehend its full impact on Mankind. 

~ Chance


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

Yes. Physical, mechanical constructions. Not ideas. The summit of our achievements.

My second nomination would be:


----------



## jamesmtl514 (May 6, 2013)

I'm adding the pump, it allows for fresh drinking water and irrigation to make our food grow.


----------



## ShineOnYouCrazyDiamond (May 6, 2013)

jamesmtl514 said:


> I'm adding the pump, it allows for fresh drinking water and irrigation to make our food grow.



Everyone has their right to an opinion so I have no problem with your choice. But, I am apt to disagree. The Romans had aqueducts, fresh water, working plumbing and irrigation without pumps thousand of years ago.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 6, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> The Sat V makes the Space Shuttle look like a bottle rocket.








Mind boggling. Sat V had 5X the payload of the Space Shuttle.

Sigh. When America was great. Look where we are now.


----------



## Monocrom (May 6, 2013)

AZPops said:


> Toilets noth'in without the plumbing, and where it's going too, were it's plumb to, or ..... awh heck you know what I mean!



Screw plumbing.

With these ridiculous low-flow toilets that obviously were never meant to handle the waste that a normal hungry man produces, I'd prefer an outhouse. I could also happily live with a bathtub in the backyard. Plumbing is great until the pipes get stuck or the low-flow toilet backs up. 

Oh yes, there's a special place in Hell for the idiot who invented the low-flow toilet, and the even bigger idiots with way too much political power who thought that idiotic idea was worth implementing across the nation.


----------



## Random Dan (May 6, 2013)

Apollo 11.


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 6, 2013)

^ Yep! + 1 Monocrom. The lovely Mrs. Gardiner and I purchased our house in 1985. We've made a lot of changes since then......but not the toilet. 

Hey genius's, it's not low-flow when you have to flush it twice!  

That place in Hell, the idiots will have to spend eternity unclogging them. :devil:

~ Chance


----------



## thedoc007 (May 6, 2013)

I cannot believe that no one has mentioned anything to do with agriculture. In terms of the impact it has on society, NOTHING else even comes close. Whatever specific farming machine you choose, you cannot deny that agriculture is the basis for our modern society. If humans can only survive by hunting and gathering, no great specialization is possible. Without specialization, none of the modern inventions you all mentioned would be conceivable, much less practical. It allowed a (relatively) small percentage of the population to feed everyone...there is no more valuable resource than time. 

Put another way...I could easily survive without a coffeemaker (though some avid coffee lovers might not). Others could survive without computers of any sort (hell, a few people I know would prefer it). But EVERYONE benefits massively from agriculture, and our population would literally be impossible to maintain without it.


----------



## Flying Turtle (May 6, 2013)

I think Al Gore invented the low-flow. 

Geoff


----------



## Imon (May 6, 2013)

Don't want to get too much off-topic here but I just want to point out that toilets accept both solid *and* liquid waste. 

I don't understand why people get so bent out of shape over something like a low-flow toilet. I mean really? It's bad to conserve fresh water? :shakehead
Low flow toilets use half the water versus traditional toilets so if it takes two flushes for solid waste then it uses the same volume of water that a old toilet did.
As for liquid waste, unless you urinate one liter every time you go I don't see the point in wasting a lot of water.


----------



## StarHalo (May 6, 2013)

To those replying coffeemaker: If we're going with "addictive" convenience items, why did you choose coffeemaker over air conditioner? And since the question is about a specific machine, what type of coffeemaker are you nominating?


----------



## Sparky's Magic (May 7, 2013)

As for post#42...

+1 The Coffee Machine, more specifically Vev's 'Vigano' Expresso 4 cup Stove Top model. A possible dead heat for 1st. place would surely be The Whisky Still (in the right hands, of course) - Now, that's keeping things in perspective!

Slainte.


----------



## brandonblue (May 7, 2013)

Computer 
Do not have a computer you're still here？
Computer human how to calculate the length of the galaxy
No computer how to conduct highly complex calculations
No computer how to entertain
Well, I is said and done


----------



## AZPops (May 7, 2013)

Chauncey Gardiner said:


> Reading my post in its entirety, one should have come-away with an understanding that that was what I meant.
> 
> Why you messing with me Pops? :nana:
> 
> ~ Chance




:laughing: 


If we get nuked, I hope i'm at dead center when she explodes overhead! Btw, don't ask if you can have my flashlights, cause they'll all be melted!


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 7, 2013)

markr6 said:


> LOL YES!!!
> 
> This can go so many ways and I already see people questing how you define "machine". But I'm going to throw out the space shuttle or maybe all those involved in landing on the moon in some of the Apollo missions. Not the most "improtant" machine, but when you consider how complex they were with no margin of error allowed it's pretty amazing.



I just caught this :thumbsup:

BTW: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 7, 2013)

3rd nomination. Something a wee bit smaller in scale...






Can't think of anything else. That's my top 3.


----------



## ganymede (May 7, 2013)

The Fast Forward button, of course! :thumbsup:


----------



## yifu (May 7, 2013)

While 'machine' may refer to any tool that uses energy to complete an objective, i think a fully mechanical device best suits that moniker. I'll vote for the generator/motor (essentially the same thing and invented at the same time), for a simpler machine i choose the propeller, used in everything from fans, exhaust systems, aircons, planes, ships and the machine you're typing on probably has a fan in it. It has far expanded man's horizons and knowledge of the world.


----------



## orbital (May 7, 2013)

+

Don't laugh, this little puppy changed alot of things.. the combine harvester


----------



## mattheww50 (May 7, 2013)

I'd rate the engine. First external combustion ( steam) powers the Industrial revolution, then the Internal Combustion engine, which gave power to the common man, and then the electric motor, which made the power to do things ubiquitous).


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 7, 2013)

Standby......This just in, the 3D Printer. oo:

~ Chance


----------



## jtr1962 (May 7, 2013)

Chauncey Gardiner said:


> Standby......This just in, the 3D Printer. oo:


Probably the greatest invention of the first half of the 21st century. The idea that you'll be able to download and make anything you want in your home is revolutionary on many levels. I could also see this concept being extended to organic items where people can "print" their favorite foods from basic ingredients. And then there's the medical implications-3D organs to replace failing or injured organs. The prospect of that could be virtually unlimited lifespan.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 7, 2013)

^^ Possibly, in the distant future. It would have to print cells or molecules for any of that to happen.

Anyone want to guess *What the single most greatest machine mankind will build in the next 50 years or your lifetime will be?*


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 7, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> Anyone want to guess *What the single most greatest machine mankind will build in the next 50 years or your lifetime will be?*



Virtual reality/robot "companion*". Think of a programmable, life-like in every way, Barbie, or Ken doll. It/they will probably be the final turning point toward the destruction of Mankind.

* Companion
Noun
A person, animal, or machine with which one spends *a lot of time*. 

~ Chance


----------



## jtr1962 (May 7, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> Anyone want to guess *What the single most greatest machine mankind will build in the next 50 years or your lifetime will be?*


Do you already know the answer? If so, then it will be the _time machine_!

On a more serious note, I'm still going with 3D printing because that will make just about everything accessible to the masses. And I've little doubt very human-like robots will be around in my lifetime, both to perform the necessary functions of society, and to serve as companions. I don't think robot companionship will ever be desirable over human companionship. The usual reasons one might give, perhaps to get a "mate" far hotter than they could get on their own, might be moot. Why? I've little doubt we'll put a lot of our technology to work to mitigate the effects of aging and/or just changing our looks to what we want. I'm just hoping we don't carry the latter too far. The great thing about people is there are many types-tall, short, different eyes/skin/hair, different body types, etc. Basically there's a type for all tastes. What a boring world it would be if we used technology to "normalize" our appearance to whatever the ideal of beauty was at the time (assuming such an ideal even exists). I might instead hope that "improvement" might consist only of getting rid of rough edges and/or any facets of your appearance that _you_ find undesirable. We don't need a world where every woman is 5'9" with blond hair and huge breasts, for example. Anyway, the larger point of my argument is I feel we'll use technology to make the average person much more attractive than now. And in the process attractive robot "companions" might not be as necessary. In a world where most or all people are at least "attractive", we might finally end up having people judged by the content of their character instead of their appearance. There's a bit of irony in that of course having to make everyone attractive so that nobody really stands out, but I think that's where things are headed. I'm also sure some will choose to remain exactly as they were born, and there's nothing wrong with that, either.


----------



## EZO (May 7, 2013)

jtr1962 said:


> Probably the greatest invention of the first half of the 21st century. The idea that you'll be able to download and make anything you want in your home is revolutionary on many levels. I could also see this concept being extended to organic items where people can "print" their favorite foods from basic ingredients. And then there's the medical implications-3D organs to replace failing or injured organs. The prospect of that could be virtually unlimited lifespan.



3D printed body parts are already a reality.....and organs. This will be a game changer in modern medicine when it is perfected. Even more astonishing is that a company named Modern Meadow is already perfecting the concept of 3D printed meat and leather! This too has the potential to be revolutionary. Andras Forgacs the CEO of Modern Meadow states, _"it is as much about minimizing animal suffering as it is about mitigating the environmental impacts."_ As the company states on their web site, _"We develop cultured leather and meat products which require no animal slaughter and much lower inputs of land, water, energy and chemicals." _His previous company was Organovo, which was developing 3D printed human organs for transplant. He says: _"We figured, if we can make medical grade tissues then we can also make muscle for meat and hide for leather."_ Peter Theil, one of the co-founders of PayPal is a major investor in Modern Meadow.

Another potential game changing use of 3D printing is also in development. Large scale, (and some not so large scale) 3D printers are being used by architects and MIT students to print houses.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 7, 2013)

I'm going to say the space elevator...


----------



## jtr1962 (May 7, 2013)

EZO said:


> 3D printed body parts are already a reality.....and organs. This will be a game changer in modern medicine when it is perfected. Even more astonishing is that a company named Modern Meadow is already perfecting the concept of 3D printed meat and leather! This too has the potential to be revolutionary. Andras Forgacs the CEO of Modern Meadow states, _"it is as much about minimizing animal suffering as it is about mitigating the environmental impacts."_ As the company states on their web site, _"We develop cultured leather and meat products which require no animal slaughter and much lower inputs of land, water, energy and chemicals." _His previous company was Organovo, which was developing 3D printed human organs for transplant. He says: _"We figured, if we can make medical grade tissues then we can also make muscle for meat and hide for leather."_ Peter Theil, one of the co-founders of PayPal is a major investor in Modern Meadow.
> 
> Another potential game changing use of 3D printing is also in development. Large scale, (and some not so large scale) 3D printers are being used by architects and MIT students to print houses.


I especially like the idea of printed meat. It's always bothered me on some level that we raise animals only to kill them to eat. If we can instead culture meat, I'll feel a lot less guilty. I also think the meat will be healthier, more sanitary, and won't be tainted by growth hormones or antibiotics.


----------



## bietjiedof (May 7, 2013)




----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 7, 2013)

jtr1962 said:


> .....I also think the meat will be healthier, more sanitary, and won't be tainted by growth hormones or antibiotics.


 
Meat without poop in it. Saaay, that is, a great idea! 

~ Chance


----------



## steveg270 (May 7, 2013)

As far as the computer goes I would have to say that is certainly one of the greatest inventions ever made. However the difference is at least to me that the computer for all the good things it brings to our lives has also brought a lot of bad baggage with it. What I mean is the inappropriate stuff that out there for anyone to access. Not just XXX stuff that kids can get but terrorist crap that these morons can easily obtain. Things like that make it a two edged sword as far as Im concerned where as the wheel or coffee maker or other things suggested don't have any negative aspects . just my opinion... I could be wrong


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 7, 2013)

Imon said:


> Don't want to get too much off-topic here but I just want to point out that toilets accept both solid *and* liquid waste.
> 
> I don't understand why people get so bent out of shape over something like a low-flow toilet. I mean really? It's bad to conserve fresh water? :shakehead
> Low flow toilets use half the water versus traditional toilets so if it takes two flushes for solid waste then it uses the same volume of water that a old toilet did.
> As for liquid waste, unless you urinate one liter every time you go I don't see the point in wasting a lot of water.



Of course low-flow toilets that work (for both solids & liquid) are a great idea. Monocrom and I are ranting against the ones mandated by government, that weren't yet perfected, but were nevertheless forced upon the public. I don't know about you, but I don't want to spend my time waiting/watching......*do-do do-do do do do, do-do do-do do, da-do-da-do....to see if all the solids are flushed the first time, then, if not, waiting for the tank to refill so I can flush again. Hoping this time everything disappears..........instead of having to deal with a clogged pipe.

*Theme music from Jeopardy. Clever, no? 

~ Chance


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (May 7, 2013)

..
....................The Nuclear Bomb......................

It has, and will continue, to prevent World War III


----------



## EZO (May 7, 2013)

jtr1962 said:


> I especially like the idea of printed meat. It's always bothered me on some level that we raise animals only to kill them to eat. If we can instead culture meat, I'll feel a lot less guilty. I also think the meat will be healthier, more sanitary, and won't be tainted by growth hormones or antibiotics.



Aside from 3D printed meat, there is another concept in active development.....In vitro meat. This is meat grown in a lab in sheet form, hence it is called SHMEAT! .........*"Shmeat: It's What's for Dinner"
*


----------



## davidwestonh (May 7, 2013)

Smeat

To serve man, the next chapter.


----------



## melty (May 7, 2013)

steveg270 said:


> As far as the computer goes I would have to say that is certainly one of the greatest inventions ever made. However the difference is at least to me that the computer for all the good things it brings to our lives has also brought a lot of bad baggage with it. What I mean is the inappropriate stuff that out there for anyone to access. Not just XXX stuff that kids can get but terrorist crap that these morons can easily obtain. Things like that make it a two edged sword as far as Im concerned where as the wheel or coffee maker or other things suggested don't have any negative aspects . just my opinion... I could be wrong



You're thinking of the Internet which is a global network allowing instant global communication. What you speak of is inevitable when it is possible for any data anywhere to be communicated to/by anyone anywhere. Most computers have nothing to do with the Internet. Computers are everywhere: phones, appliances, cameras, vehicles, key fobs, medical devices, flashlights, batteries, satellites, guidance systems, space shuttles, scientific equipment, televisions, remote controls, toys, tools, etc. The list goes on and on. Blaming the computer for the Internet is similar to blaming coffee machines for caffeine addiction or blaming the wheel for vehicular manslaughter and war machines.


----------



## EZO (May 7, 2013)

davidwestonh said:


> Smeat
> 
> To serve man, the next chapter.



Funny you should mention........

One of the articles I read about 3D printed meat suggested the strange possibility that in the future you might be able to order a steak printed with cells harvested from your favorite celebrity.

This gives new meaning to the phrase, "Eat Me!"


----------



## thedoc007 (May 7, 2013)

jtr1962 said:


> I especially like the idea of printed meat. It's always bothered me on some level that we raise animals only to kill them to eat. If we can instead culture meat, I'll feel a lot less guilty. I also think the meat will be healthier, more sanitary, and won't be tainted by growth hormones or antibiotics.



To a large extent, I agree with you. But I think there might be a couple pretty substantial drawbacks. 

First, if guilt is a motivator to eat less meat, then it has some value. Do we really want to encourage MORE eating of meat, whether printed or not? (Personally I don't feel guilty when eating meat, I would like animals to be treated humanely, but I have no inherent problem with them being raised purely for meat.)

Second, although it may not contain some of the harmful substances, it may also lack the taste and the micronutrients that comes with real meat. Nothing natural is a simple as many processed foods, and I can't imagine that we would replace all the variety that exists in nature with printed meat, mostly because we don't know how, or even what is really beneficial or not. For examples, see margarine v. butter, carbs v. fats, etc. There is still SO much we don't know about food that we currently have no hope of reproducing what nature creates, for better or worse.


----------



## jtr1962 (May 7, 2013)

thedoc007 said:


> First, if guilt is a motivator to eat less meat, then it has some value. Do we really want to encourage MORE eating of meat, whether printed or not? (Personally I don't feel guilty when eating meat, I would like animals to be treated humanely, but I have no inherent problem with them being raised purely for meat.)


That depends upon a lot of things. I think "manufactured" meat will probably cost a lot more than the real thing, at least in the beginning. It may eventually cost less. Even if it doesn't, I suspect PETA and other similar organizations will get legislation through banning the production, sale, and distribution of real meat once fake meat gets close in price to real meat. I also feel manufactured meat won't be as bad for you to consume in large quantities as real meat, so eating more of it might not necessarily be a drawback. The fact is Americans already eat way too much meat. I'm not seeing how manufactured meat can make things much worse.



> Second, although it may not contain some of the harmful substances, it may also lack the taste and the micronutrients that comes with real meat. Nothing natural is a simple as many processed foods, and I can't imagine that we would replace all the variety that exists in nature with printed meat, mostly because we don't know how, or even what is really beneficial or not. For examples, see margarine v. butter, carbs v. fats, etc. There is still SO much we don't know about food that we currently have no hope of reproducing what nature creates, for better or worse.


You may have a point, but I'm sure down the road, as these processes become more sophisticated, we'll be able to come pretty close to the real thing in terms of taste, texture, and nutritional value. We may even be able to strip out the bad things without affecting anything else. The fact is regardless of how one feels about raising animals to eat, it's an enormously wasteful way to make food compared to eating non-meats. That alone will probably eventually mean the end to animal husbandry. For various reasons, I'm dubious we can get most people on a diet that doesn't include at least some meat. I personally don't feel such a diet would be healthy, at least based on my own personal attempts to eliminate meat from my diet. Therefore, a way to include meat which has a smaller ecological footprint is welcome. If we can make manufactured meat both safer, and better for you nutritionally than the real thing, so much the better. We will also be able to make many types of meat which most people can't currently consume.

By the way, the way I feel regarding the animals raised for meat depends upon the animal. Obviously, the closer they are in intelligence to us, the worse I feel. I could never eat whale meat, for example. It would be nice down the road if what's on my plate never had a connection to anything with a brain or a consciousness.


----------



## JCD (May 7, 2013)

wheel > ball bearing > bicycle


----------



## Monocrom (May 7, 2013)

Chauncey Gardiner said:


> ^ Yep! + 1 Monocrom. The lovely Mrs. Gardiner and I purchased our house in 1985. We've made a lot of changes since then......but not the toilet.
> 
> Hey genius's, it's not low-flow when you have to flush it twice!
> 
> ...



CPF really needs a "Like" button. :twothumbs


----------



## Monocrom (May 7, 2013)

Imon said:


> Don't want to get too much off-topic here but I just want to point out that toilets accept both solid *and* liquid waste.
> 
> I don't understand why people get so bent out of shape over something like a low-flow toilet. I mean really? It's bad to conserve fresh water? :shakehead



When your body produces solid waste, and you have to flush the toilet 3, 4, even 5 times; then you're using up far more water than you would with a proper toilet that only requires one flush. So an idea to conserve water actually ends up wasting more of it. 

Here's a more intelligent solution which currently exists in France and other parts of Europe . . . Dual-flush toilets. 

Low-flow for urine. Stronger-flow for solid waste. That way, you don't have to flush several times to get rid of solid wastes. And, you don't have to worry about your toilet backing up after just the first, weak, pathetic, flush when you're done with your solid waste. Hopefully someday that intelligent solution to water conservation will come to America, and we can get rid of the idiotic low-flow only toilets that half the time aren't up to the job; and never were.


----------



## Monocrom (May 7, 2013)

jtr1962 said:


> . . . The prospect of that could be virtually unlimited lifespan.



What a horrifying thought.

No offense but you can have that curse if you want it.


----------



## EZO (May 8, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> Here's a more intelligent solution which currently exists in France and other parts of Europe . . . Dual-flush toilets.
> 
> Low-flow for urine. Stronger-flow for solid waste. That way, you don't have to flush several times to get rid of solid wastes. And, you don't have to worry about your toilet backing up after just the first, weak, pathetic, flush when you're done with your solid waste. Hopefully someday that intelligent solution to water conservation will come to America, and we can get rid of the idiotic low-flow only toilets that half the time aren't up to the job; and never were.



Dual flush toilets have been fairly common here in Vermont for many years and I've always assumed it was the same elsewhere in the US. Perhaps they are just not often seen in NYC.


----------



## Slazmo (May 8, 2013)

Orffyreus Perpetual Motion machine - a machine that could have done so much good... Other than that - pretty much everything that's made life better - not easier just better...


----------



## Flying Turtle (May 8, 2013)

My low-flows are easy to defeat. Need a real flush? Just hold the handle down for a slow three count before releasing. Takes care of those big jobs. 

Geoff


----------



## davidwestonh (May 8, 2013)

EZO said:


> Dual flush toilets have been fairly common here in Vermont for many years and I've always assumed it was the same elsewhere in the US. Perhaps they are just not often seen in NYC.


The school bully uses low flow if he dislikes you a little.
the school bully uses full if he dislikes you a lot.
how about low flow bidet if you only smell a little and soaker if you reak.
anyone old enough to remember the joke about the automatic Kotex remover?


----------



## orbital (May 8, 2013)

Flying Turtle said:


> My low-flows are easy to defeat. Need a real flush? Just hold the handle down for a slow three count before releasing. Takes care of those big jobs.
> 
> Geoff



+

Yep, hold the handle down.

I hate low-flow toilets too, *there are so many other way to reduce water usage.*
I'd name off several, but it'd sound like preachin'


----------



## jtr1962 (May 8, 2013)

If buildings were designed to collect rainwater solely for the purpose of flushing toilets then low-flow toilets would be a lot less common. In fact, you could even use "gray water" (i.e. water from showers or washing clothes) to flush toilets. It's a shame more buildings aren't retrofitted to do that (and also to recapture some of the heat from waste water).


----------



## sidecross (May 8, 2013)

jtr1962 said:


> If buildings were designed to collect rainwater solely for the purpose of flushing toilets then low-flow toilets would be a lot less common. In fact, you could even use "gray water" (i.e. water from showers or washing clothes) to flush toilets. It's a shame more buildings aren't retrofitted to do that (and also to recapture some of the heat from waste water).



I totally agree and soon water will become more valuable as draught and shortage become more common.


----------



## Steve K (May 8, 2013)

JCD said:


> wheel > ball bearing > bicycle



if you believe Wikipedia, the sequence was actually wheel > bicycle > ball bearing:

"Although roller bearings had been developed since ancient times, the first recorded patent on ball bearings was awarded to Jules Suriray, a Parisian bicycle mechanic, on 3 August 1869. "

My interpretation is that Mr. Suriray was a bicycle mechanic at the time he patented the ball bearing. Of course, it may depend on what you consider qualifies as a bicycle too.....
The use of pedals and cranks on the front wheel dates to the early 1860's, per Wiki:
"In the early 1860s, Frenchmen Pierre Michaux and Pierre Lallement took bicycle design in a new direction by adding a mechanical crank drive with pedals on an enlarged front wheel (the velocipede)."


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 8, 2013)

jtr1962 said:


> If buildings were designed to collect rainwater solely for the purpose of flushing toilets...



The problem of course: Cost verses return. 

Probably sometime in the future one of the more "progressive" states will mandate that all new residential construction will have to incorporate a holding tank somewhere on the property, perhaps underground, that will be connected to the homes downspouts. The cost to operate would be much less if the rainwater was to be used only for watering the lawn. Once you start trying to incorporate dirty rainwater into your indoor plumbing system the costs are going to rise dramatically. 

~ Chance


----------



## jtr1962 (May 8, 2013)

Steve K said:


> if you believe Wikipedia, the sequence was actually wheel > bicycle > ball bearing:
> 
> "Although roller bearings had been developed since ancient times, the first recorded patent on ball bearings was awarded to Jules Suriray, a Parisian bicycle mechanic, on 3 August 1869. "
> 
> ...


And the ball bearings were fitted by Mr. Suriray to the winning bicycle in the world's first bicycle road race (Paris-Rouen) in November 1869.

Of note when we're discussing bearings is that railways used solid or journal bearings well into the 1950s. These were simply steel axles inserted into a brass journel lubricated by grease or oil soaked rags. These bearings surprisingly didn't have much more running friction than roller bearings, although they had up to ten times as much starting friction. As they were prone to failure if someone forgot to keep them lubricated, all new cars made after 1966 had to have roller bearings. Journal bearings were banned in interchange service starting in 1980.


----------



## Steve K (May 8, 2013)

St. Louis has a Museum of Transportation that has a wonderful train collection... things like the Big Boy locomotive, 






Silver Charger streamliner locomotive,





While these are incredible bits of engineering, I also recall being interested in a plaque that described the lube and bearing system that JTR describes. Amazing that they could rely on such a primitive bearing, but this was technology of the mid 1800's. 
It would be interesting to hear how they made some of the components of the trains.... were the wheels just cast, or were they forged, or?? 

Heck, I'm just amazed looking at all of the linkages in the drive mechanisms... what do they all do? (this is another shot of the Big Boy..)





oh.. I found some neat animations of how the drive linkages work... pretty remarkable!
http://www.steamlocomotive.com/appliances/valvegear.php


----------



## orbital (May 8, 2013)

+

One of the highest power to weight ratios in racing & sophisticated electronics

*Honda RC213V*


----------



## steveg270 (May 8, 2013)

melty said:


> You're thinking of the Internet which is a global network allowing instant global communication. What you speak of is inevitable when it is possible for any data anywhere to be communicated to/by anyone anywhere. Most computers have nothing to do with the Internet. Computers are everywhere: phones, appliances, cameras, vehicles, key fobs, medical devices, flashlights, batteries, satellites, guidance systems, space shuttles, scientific equipment, televisions, remote controls, toys, tools, etc. The list goes on and on. Blaming the computer for the Internet is similar to blaming coffee machines for caffeine addiction or blaming the wheel for vehicular manslaughter and war machines.


I stand corrected about the computer I suppose you are correct that it is the internet per se and not the machine itself that I'm having these feelings about. Thanks


----------



## GLOCK18 (May 8, 2013)

orbital said:


> +
> 
> One of the highest power to weight ratios in racing & sophisticated electronics
> 
> *Honda RC213V*




That reminds me the Rc30 I bought back in 1991


----------



## idleprocess (May 8, 2013)

Big picture machines that changed humanity? I would say the plow and associated accoutrements (such as the harness and the yoke) were one of the first major game-changing inventions (in parallel across multiple isolated peoples). Before agriculture, it took square _miles_ to support each hunter-gatherer. With the ability to turn the soil and cultivate nutritious plants, it suddenly took an order of magnitude less land to sustain each human, settlements became permanent, we were granted the luxury of spare time, and we developed truly large-scale *societies*.

Significantly more modern ... the ability to produce mass quantities of copper wire (ala the wire mill) - eventually leading to the electrical grid and telecommunications. The electrical grid allows _work_ to be performed without the need for local energy generation. Telecommunications made for instant transmission of information - be it telegraph, phone, or internet - making for the fast-paced connected world of today. While telecommunications is gradually moving to fiber optic, we still need absolutely need copper for the electrical grid.


----------



## BIGLOU (May 8, 2013)

I'm on the late train but I know it's been mentioned and it was the first thing I thought when I first read the title and I have to also say the Printing Press (movable type). Thanks Mr. Gutenberg.


----------



## Monocrom (May 8, 2013)

Flying Turtle said:


> My low-flows are easy to defeat. Need a real flush? Just hold the handle down for a slow three count before releasing. Takes care of those big jobs.
> 
> Geoff



Unfortunately, that technique doesn't work with mine.


----------



## Vinniec5 (May 8, 2013)

The Block and Tackle, the rope and pulley moved mountains and helped lift men to the moon. The Saturn-5, SR-71 and the XB-70 bomber , works of pure engineering genius built by hand and no computers. To this day they are still ahead of their time and special to see in person


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 8, 2013)

Most of the suggestions here are discoveries, apparatus', tools, and utilities. Like the wheel, the computer, even the farmers combine. Each one represents a technological stepping stone that ultimately helped achieve something that exists, and that _something _is much greater than their individual selves. 

So what was the ultimate machine mankind has created to date? I'd reiterate the suggestion I made previously. In terms of scale, which has spanned multiple sciences and resources needed to finalize its achievement, the Saturn V rocket is indisputable.


----------



## davidwestonh (May 8, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> Most of the suggestions here are discoveries, apparatus', tools, and utilities. Like the wheel, the computer, even the farmers combine. Each one represents a technological stepping stone that ultimately helped achieve something that exists, and that _something _is much greater than their individual selves.
> 
> So what was the ultimate machine mankind has created to date? I'd reiterate the suggestion I made previously. In terms of scale, which has spanned multiple sciences and resources needed to finalize its achievement, the Saturn V rocket is indisputable.


The Saturn V has not shown a financial or social gain.
it may be the greatest toy.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 8, 2013)

Space exploration. New technologies.

Semantics.


----------



## davidwestonh (May 8, 2013)

Wheel
plough
aquaduct
toilet -------
bicycle
steam engine
printing press
slide rule
thermos
telephone
coffe machine
ac grid
transistor
auto
saturn V
soylent green
anything invented by al gore


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 8, 2013)

anything invented by al gore

:laughing:

Comedy genius. 

~ C.G.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 8, 2013)

Full size: http://imageshack.us/a/img441/371/saturnvi.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img199/371/saturnvi.jpg

Full size: http://imageshack.us/a/img441/371/saturnvi.jpg

(Thanks StarHalo)



Your image is five times the allowable size, a new record, when you post an image please remember Rule #3 

Rule #3 If you post an image in your post, please downsize the image to no larger than 800 x 800 pixels.

*Please resize and repost.* - Thanks Norm


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 8, 2013)

The BoSS


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 8, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> :laughing:




Read this in one of the comments:

Ferrorschini 4 years ago
"Typical women. They think a Space Shuttle works like a washing machine.﻿ Ladies, this has a little more power..."

:laughing:


----------



## orbital (May 9, 2013)

___________^ 

triple posting *including *quoting yourself is another blooper record.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 9, 2013)

oops 

OK anyway, so now that we established the Saturn V rocket as mankinds greatest machine ever built (and that I'm right 99.98% of the time)

w0t the 2nd greatest? (Hint: USS Ronald Reagan nimitz class nuclear powered aircraft carrier)


----------



## melty (May 9, 2013)

Since no-one has mentioned it, I'll go with the Large Hadron Collider. 20 countries cooperating to build a 17 mile long scientific instrument (300ft underground) that smashes protons together at 3 meters per second shy of the speed of light. The 17 mile tubes are kept at a vacuum comparable to outer space. One of it's detectors (ALICE) weighs 20 000 _tons_ and could house the nave of the Notre Dam cathedral. It is powered by 1232 super-conducting magnets each weighing 35 tons. The LHC created 600 million collisions _per second_ for _years_ and the it data created will be studied indefinitely.

0.00000000047 grams of matter with the same kinetic energy as a compact car being driven at 1000mph!

I think it's incredible that scientific theories have progressed to the point that such an instrument is required (not to mention possible) to weed out competing theories.

Some more fun facts:

http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080905/full/news.2008.1085.html

http://lhc-machine-outreach.web.cern.ch/lhc-machine-outreach/lhc-interesting-facts.htm



Edit: Oops! It was mentioned on the first page.  It definitely deserves more than 6 letters though! :thumbsup:



write2dgray said:


> LHC FTW


----------



## sidecross (May 9, 2013)

melty said:


> Since no-one has mentioned it, I'll go with the Large Hadron Collider. 20 countries cooperating to build a 17 mile long scientific instrument (300ft underground) that smashes protons together at 3 meters per second shy of the speed of light. The 17 mile tubes are kept at a vacuum comparable to outer space. One of it's detectors (ALICE) weighs 20 000 _tons_ and could house the nave of the Notre Dam cathedral. It is powered by 1232 super-conducting magnets each weighing 35 tons. The LHC created 600 million collisions _per second_ for _years_ and the it data created will be studied indefinitely.
> 
> 0.00000000047 grams of matter with the same kinetic energy as a compact car being driven at 1000mph!
> 
> ...



The size of the ‘Large Hadron Collider’ is relatively very small; I have read it would need to be the size of our ‘Solar System’ to come near to be creating sub-particles that were present near the ‘Big Bang’.


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 9, 2013)

*Huggies TweetPee – A Device That Sends You A Tweet When Your Baby Pees*

 

....Not the greatest machine..... 

~ Chance


----------



## TEEJ (May 9, 2013)

Its whatever makes bacon.


----------



## melty (May 9, 2013)

sidecross said:


> The size of the ‘Large Hadron Collider’ is relatively very small; I have read it would need to be the size of our ‘Solar System’ to come near to be creating sub-particles that were present near the ‘Big Bang’.



The Saturn V rocket is relatively very small compared to a rocket that would be needed to transport a city into orbit. :nana:

The LHC is the largest collider in the world. I'd say the moniker holds. After all, it's not called the Solar-System-Sized Hadron Collider. 

Future colliders may be larger, but they will also use different technology to accelerate particles more quickly and efficiently. The LHC could conceivably be used as an injector for yet another particle accelerator. Perhaps the new collider would accelerate the particles _created _by the LHC. Who knows?


I also want to present to this thread the Patek Philippe Calibre 89; the most complicated timepiece ever made. Including research and development, it took 9 years to create.


----------



## NonSenCe (May 10, 2013)

Steve K said:


> if you believe Wikipedia, the sequence was actually wheel > bicycle > ball bearing:
> 
> "Although roller bearings had been developed since ancient times, the first recorded patent on ball bearings was awarded to Jules Suriray, a Parisian bicycle mechanic, on 3 August 1869. "
> 
> ...




hmm.. and i thought it was Josef Ressel whom had patented the ball bearing first. (the guy whom "invented" the ship propeller and added it into a steamship.. propeller is one of the "big" inventions too)


----------



## bietjiedof (May 10, 2013)

I think that if the "greatest machine" means big and complex, with lots of spin-off technologies, we've got that nailed down. However, I'm intrigued at small inventions that have fundamentally reshaped our history. Quite a few already mentioned (plough, toilet, wheel etc). What about the lens (telescope, microscope, eye-glasses) - does that qualify as a machine? The cauldron (to melt glass, metals)? How about the simple valve, without which the steam engine (and countless other inventions involving fluids and gasses) wouldn't exist? In terms of "aha" moments that changed the world, Isaac Newton takes some beating - but Bill Bryson (in his wonderful Short History of Nearly Everything) makes much of the genius of the Wright brothers, who did much more than make a contraption that flew. Finally - unless I missed it - nobody has mentioned musical instruments. What an extraordinary accomplishment to produce a violin, a piano, a saxophone - all the work of countless generations, bringing together science, art and craft. Maybe the only thing we can all agree is that there is no shortage of worthy nominees for this title?


----------



## orbital (May 10, 2013)

+

Tools, parts & components are all important~~
but the brilliant combination of those things make a _machine_.

Hubble Telescope needs to be on this list






____^ Hubble en route


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 10, 2013)

(sound barrier broken 1:37)

So can anyone explain why the sound from giant rockets seem to crackle, and isn't a constant
swoooooosh?


----------



## Norm (May 11, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> So can anyone explain why the sound from giant rockets seem to crackle, and isn't a constant
> swoooooosh?



I bet you're listening to recorded sound, the extreme volume is overloading the input circuit of the recording device pushing it into clipping and you hear the resultant distorted playback

Norm


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 11, 2013)

No. I've seen a shuttle launch. That's what it sounds like. It's like a constant staccato of explosions intermingled into each other.

And the floor rumbles.

It's insanely loud. You'll feel your organs shake.


----------



## melty (May 11, 2013)

ledmitter_nli said:


> No. I've seen a shuttle launch. That's what it sounds like. It's like a constant staccato of explosions intermingled into each other.
> 
> And the floor rumbles.
> 
> It's insanely loud. You'll feel your organs shake.



That from the interaction of the hypersonic exhaust with the atmosphere. The exhaust is travelling faster than the speed of sound which causes a constant sonic boom. The reason it crackles is because the interaction is random instead of smooth. It's the sonic boom equivalent of peeing in a toilet.


----------



## tygger (May 11, 2013)

The Lever

Magnifying lens

Refigeration, Air conditioning (Air Conditioning drastically changed the US, particularly the south east)


----------



## Norm (May 11, 2013)

melty said:


> It's the sonic boom equivalent of peeing in a toilet.



:twothumbs


Norm


----------



## ledmitter_nli (May 11, 2013)

melty said:


> That from the interaction of the hypersonic exhaust with the atmosphere. The exhaust is travelling faster than the speed of sound which causes a constant sonic boom. The reason it crackles is because the interaction is random instead of smooth. It's the sonic boom equivalent of peeing in a toilet.



Yup. That sums it up pretty nicely 

And kudos for the best analogy evaR. :laughing:


----------



## thinker (May 11, 2013)

jtr1962 said:


> What seems to happen when we invent ways to increase productivity is that instead of reaping the benefits of more free time, we instead opt for a higher standard of living. Look at the average work week. If anything it's gotten a little longer over the last decade despite great productivity increases. We could instead all be working 15 hours a week and living to the standards of 1960 (i.e. a lot fewer material things). In many ways, I think that would be better, but apparently society thinks otherwise. My question is how far will we carry this? I think in time people will see the futility of acquiring ever more possessions, and then start translating their greater productivity into more free time instead of more material things.



In the words of that great philosopher Bruce Springsteen, "Poor man want to be rich; rich man want to be king. And the king ain't satisfied 'til he rules everything." Human nature makes people want to keep up with the Jones' and die with the most toys. I don't agree with that philosophy, but most people do. I haven't read the rest of the thread yet. Maybe someone else already said something profound on this.


----------



## thinker (May 11, 2013)

steveg270 said:


> As far as the computer goes I would have to say that is certainly one of the greatest inventions ever made. However the difference is at least to me that the computer for all the good things it brings to our lives has also brought a lot of bad baggage with it. What I mean is the inappropriate stuff that out there for anyone to access. Not just XXX stuff that kids can get but terrorist crap that these morons can easily obtain. Things like that make it a two edged sword as far as Im concerned where as the wheel or coffee maker or other things suggested don't have any negative aspects . just my opinion... I could be wrong



I beg to differ about the wheel not having negative aspects. Have you ever heard about a war chariot or an army tank? The WW II blitzkrieg would not have been possible without wheels. The autobahn was built to supply the army (using wheeled vehicles). Dwight Eisenhower said the most important weapon of WW II was the 2-1/2 ton truck.


----------



## thinker (May 11, 2013)

orbital said:


> +
> 
> Tools, parts & components are all important~~
> but the brilliant combination of those things make a _machine_.
> ...



This is an interesting picture from the standpoint that you can just barely see the exhaust from the shuttle's liquid-fueled engines (the reason for the large fuel tank between the shuttle and the solid rocket boosters). Almost all of the fire and smoke is from the boosters, and it generally obscures the liquid-fueled exhaust. Based on the geometry of the shuttle, it seems that the main purpose of the solid boosters is just to lift the fuel tank, while the shuttle's internal engines use that fuel to lift the shuttle proper.


----------



## kaichu dento (May 11, 2013)

Imon said:


> Don't want to get too much off-topic here but... Low flow toilets use half the water versus traditional toilets so if it takes two flushes for solid waste then it uses the same volume of water that a old toilet did.
> As for liquid waste, unless you urinate one liter every time you go I don't see the point in wasting a lot of water.


+1 on the not going too far off topic, but since it's been discussed so much already, I'd like to at least add some more perspective. But first, this...


Monocrom said:


> Here's a more intelligent solution which currently exists in France and other parts of Europe . . . Dual-flush toilets.
> 
> Low-flow for urine. Stronger-flow for solid waste. That way, you don't have to flush several times to get rid of solid wastes. And, you don't have to worry about your toilet backing up after just the first, weak, pathetic, flush when you're done with your solid waste. Hopefully someday that intelligent solution to water conservation will come to America, and we can get rid of the idiotic low-flow only toilets that half the time aren't up to the job; and never were.


Also available in the U.S. for the past several years, although sadly not widely available yet.

There are flush systems of this type in Japan that are already decades old and having always been frustrated at the lack of urinals in homes (even from the time I was less than two digits old - I mean, they had them at school, why not home) thought they should have already been here. Back to urinals for just a moment, many Japanese homes have a separate tiny closet for that too, allowing the 'sitter' to be used by someone else.



jtr1962 said:


> If buildings were designed to collect rainwater solely for the purpose of flushing toilets then low-flow toilets would be a lot less common. In fact, you could even use "gray water" (i.e. water from showers or washing clothes) to flush toilets. It's a shame more buildings aren't retrofitted to do that (and also to recapture some of the heat from waste water).


Another concept long used in Japan, the use of grey water, at least for running the washing machine, but rainwater collection is a discontinued foregone conclusion in this country, where many used to gather theirs in a barrel beside the house. Too much hassle once piped in plumbing came along, although still in use rurally.

Okay, that's all I've got to add on this particular 'not really appropriate to the thread title' discussion, I think. 



thinker said:


> In the words of that great philosopher Bruce Springsteen, "Poor man want to be rich; rich man want to be king. And the king ain't satisfied 'til he rules everything."


Very ironic that his words describe himself so well, with his recent outbursts labeled as art. Great songwriter - philosopher not so much. OT.



ledmitter_nli said:


> No. I've seen a shuttle launch. That's what it sounds like. It's like a constant staccato of explosions intermingled into each other.
> 
> And the floor rumbles.
> 
> It's insanely loud. You'll feel your organs shake.


I hear rockets go off on a semi-regular basis in the winter and as you say, there is no question what is going on. Even the tiny (by comparison) rockets here rumble the house and are loud from miles away.


Monocrom said:


> CPF really needs a "Like" button. :twothumbs


Yeah - *Liked*


----------



## TobyZiegler (May 11, 2013)

Rockets seem like a good choice for overall great machine, or better: spacecraft.

I personally prefer aircraft, since they have the greatest influence in my life.


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (May 13, 2013)

http://www.wired.com/underwire/2013/05/chris-hadfield-space-david-bowie/

The International Space Station should be in the running. 

~ Chance


----------



## JCD (May 15, 2013)

Steve K said:


> JCD said:
> 
> 
> > _wheel > ball bearing > bicycle_
> ...



I listed them in order of importance, not chronologically.


----------



## gadget_lover (May 15, 2013)

The thread title seems to imply a single instance of a machine as opposed to a class of machine.

My vote for most significant type of machine is the lathe. 

The lathe is the machine that allowed the creation of precision shafts, axles, wheels, hubs and bearings. Lathes allow perfectly concentric parts even with relatively low technology.

There are special lathes built for special purposes; 

There are little bitty lathes to make parts for watches and fit in a lunch box. 
100 foot long lathes for creating straight ship's masts.
10 ton lathes for truing up locomotive wheels so they are perfectly circular.

A lathe was used to create just about every flashlight. If not the flashlight itself, then the tools that made the flashlight.  

Early lathes used two tree trunks and and used a sapling as a spring and apprentices as the power source. Modern lathes are often computer controlled and have 10s or 100s of horsepower. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lathe )

It's often said that a lathe is one of the few machines that can be used to totally replicate itself.

Danielhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lathe


----------



## Kestrel (May 15, 2013)

Everyone that hasn't answered "the flashlight" is hereby banned. :banned:
The *LED* gets honorable mention and would also suffice, lol.


----------



## Atakdog (May 15, 2013)

CERN particle accelerator; also the largest single machine ever built.


----------



## gadget_lover (May 15, 2013)

Atakdog said:


> CERN particle accelerator; also the largest single machine ever built.



Not to be contrary, but are we talking cubic feet, or are we talking about square miles? The CERN installation is big, but a 15 story, 600 foot long cruise ship is a lot of cubic feet. So are constructions like the Hoover Dam. 


How much concrete is in the Hoover dam?

Three and one-quarter million cubic yards. There are 4,360,000 cubic yards of concrete in the dam, powerplant and appurtenant works. This much concrete would build a monument 100 feet square and 2-1/2 miles high; would rise higher than the 1,250-foot-tall Empire State Building if placed on an ordinary city block; or would pave a standard highway 16 feet wide, from San Francisco to New York City.​
Daniel


----------



## bbb74 (May 22, 2013)

thinker said:


> This is an interesting picture from the standpoint that you can just barely see the exhaust from the shuttle's liquid-fueled engines (the reason for the large fuel tank between the shuttle and the solid rocket boosters). Almost all of the fire and smoke is from the boosters, and it generally obscures the liquid-fueled exhaust. Based on the geometry of the shuttle, it seems that the main purpose of the solid boosters is just to lift the fuel tank, while the shuttle's internal engines use that fuel to lift the shuttle proper.



Not quite the right way of looking at it. Yes, the shuttle definitely could not get off the pad without the SRB's. But after booster separation not that long into the flight, the shuttle & tank continue on together for the rest of the launch, which is a relatively longer period of time. Initially after SRB separation, the SSME's do not have enough thrust to continue accelerating the shuttle, and it is actually decelerating for a period, until more fuel is burnt off and SSME thrust becomes larger than the vehicle weight again.


----------



## StarHalo (May 22, 2013)

It's still not in my top three, but I must say, when you're standing under it, from some angles it's like artwork..


----------



## Shooter21 (May 23, 2013)

Of course the airplane.


----------



## mesa232323 (May 23, 2013)

EZO said:


> The wheel.



Agreed. The wheel


----------



## Steve K (May 23, 2013)

I would have sworn the answer was this:

*Link removed as per the banner at the top of the page - Norm*


----------



## orbital (May 23, 2013)

+

How is the wheel a machine? 

the airplane is a great vote though.


_________


----------



## melty (May 23, 2013)

mesa232323 said:


> Agreed. The wheel



The wheel itself can't be considered a machine since a wheel is useless without an axle. The wheel-and-axle would certainly be a good contender though.

Then we have to get into the definition of "greatest". We use basic machines to build more complex machines. Are the tools and building blocks considered "greater" than the machine they build/are a part of? Is the wheel greater than the automobile? Is the transistor greater than the computer?


----------



## EZO (May 23, 2013)

orbital said:


> +
> 
> How is the wheel a machine?
> 
> _________



melty's answer is technically correct; a wheel isn't really considered a machine unless it has an axle. On the other hand the concept of a wheel as a machine predates the axle....and the wheel! Before the first true wheel and axle came into general use logs were used as "wheels and axles" to move large heavy objects. Several logs were placed under an object and the one in the rear would be moved to the front as the object rolled forward. For example, it is believed that the stones that were used to create Stonehenge were moved in this manner. The wheel and axle were really just a logical extension of the rolling log as the first primitive machine, defined as a mechanical device that can do work.


----------



## orbital (May 23, 2013)

EZO said:


> melty's answer is technically correct; a wheel isn't really considered a machine unless it has an axle. On the other hand the concept of a wheel as a machine predates the axle....and the wheel! Before the first true wheel and axle came into general use logs were used as "wheels and axles" to move large heavy objects. Several logs were placed under an object and the one in the rear would be moved to the front as the object rolled forward. For example, it is believed that the stones that were used to create Stonehenge were moved in this manner. The wheel and axle were really just a logical extension of the rolling log as the first primitive machine, defined as a mechanical device that can do work.



+

I'll consider this setup a machine, just barely..


----------



## EZO (May 23, 2013)

orbital said:


> +
> 
> I'll consider this setup a machine, just barely..



Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion but you are leaving out a huge swath of human technological development. The first wheel vehicles date back to the 4th millennium BC (which also marked the beginning of the Bronze Age and of writing.) There are actually six basic *machines* that precede all other machines that came after. They are the lever, the wheel and axle, the pulley, the incline plane, the wedge and the screw. The wheel dates back to the late Neolithic era.


----------



## mesa232323 (May 23, 2013)

I was aiming towards how Egyptian would have used logs to move very large blocks


----------



## orbital (May 23, 2013)

EZO said:


> ... the lever, the wheel and axle, the pulley, the incline plane, the wedge and the screw. The wheel dates back to the late Neolithic era.



__________^

when any of these *parts* are used in a system to complete a task, then you have a machine.


________________________


----------



## EZO (May 23, 2013)

orbital said:


> __________^
> 
> when any of these *parts* are used in a system to complete a task, then you have a machine.
> 
> ...



Not so. These ARE basic machines.


----------



## EZO (May 23, 2013)

mesa232323 said:


> I was aiming towards how Egyptian would have used logs to move very large blocks



Yes, of course. Whether Stonehenge or building the pyramids the concept would have been the same.


----------



## orbital (May 23, 2013)

+

gears alone, are not machines either.

Really, if I have three gears sitting alone on my garage floor, that's not a machine.


----------



## EZO (May 23, 2013)

orbital, I believe you are failing to make a distinction between a simple machine and a complex machine. You seem to be saying that if a machine is not complex. (ie: has many parts) that it is not a machine. This just isn't so. The machines I listed, the lever, the wheel and axle, the pulley, the incline plane, the wedge and the screw are considered simple machines and these were the first machines devised by man. 

I would respectfully suggest that you do some research into the actual definition of a "machine". In fact, I will provide it. *"A Machine is apparatus using or applying mechanical power to perform a particular task."* You do not need multiple "parts" to have a machine. Thus, it can be as simple as a lever to be considered a "machine". Umm....this is really the stuff of elementary and middle school science class. (see also)


----------



## orbital (May 23, 2013)

EZO said:


> .. *"A Machine is apparatus using or applying mechanical power to perform a particular task."*



+

my definition in post #173, which I did not copy/paste, is basically saying the same thing.

I believe you'll have a hard time convincing people that a screw in you hand is a machine.
Now if you take that screw and combine it with mechanical power to then move/lift something,, I'll recognize that as a machine.

It's all the other factors applied to that part, that complete the machine


----------



## EZO (May 23, 2013)

orbital said:


> +
> 
> my definition in post #173, which I did not copy/paste, is basically saying the same thing.
> 
> ...



Orbital, to quote your definition in post #173, "when any of these *parts* are used in a *system* to complete a task, then you have a machine." 
So once again, you are stating that you must have a *complex* device in order to define a machine and to repeat myself once again, this is not so. 

Orbital, as I said several posts ago, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. I have no desire to get into some sort of snit with you over a subject like this and I've made my case as clear as I am able. I'll have nothing further to say on this subject and everyone reading this thread should reach their own conclusions and definitions of what constitutes a "machine", whether the greatest, the simplest and the most significant.

edit: try clicking on those links in post #177.


----------



## orbital (May 23, 2013)

+

I never used the word 'complex'
The _system_ aspect would be the use of the part/parts


btw, you see I edited my post #178 before you quoted me

______________________


----------



## mesa232323 (May 23, 2013)

The Chevrolet Corvair


----------



## StarHalo (May 24, 2013)

mesa232323 said:


> The Chevrolet Corvair



You didn't even specify the turbocharged Monza Spyder convertible edition.. (The bad news: this highest-performing model is slower than a Toyota Prius)


----------



## orbital (May 24, 2013)

+

_Fun,, Fun,, Fun!_


----------



## mesa232323 (May 24, 2013)

The Prius is actually quicker than people think. Haha


----------



## JCD (May 24, 2013)

Wow! I never thought I would ever hear anyone try to argue that simple machines aren't really machines. :shakehead


----------



## idleprocess (May 24, 2013)

mesa232323 said:


> The Prius is actually quicker than people think. Haha



The definition of "fast" or "quick" car is a moving target.


----------



## orbital (May 24, 2013)

JCD said:


> Wow! I never thought I would ever hear anyone try to argue that simple machines aren't really machines. :shakehead



+

That was aimed directly at me, ok then

Once forces are included into the equation to complete a task, then you have a machine.
Those forces can be from just about anything.

A stick just laying on the ground is just a stick,,
once you pick up that stick and put it to work, that's different.


----------



## Monocrom (May 24, 2013)

I have to be honest . . . When I think of a "machine," I think of something that has moving parts inside. Either moving on their own or when properly manipulated by someone.

I'd have to put the mechanical watch as a very close 2nd to my original answer.


----------



## JCD (May 24, 2013)

orbital said:


> +
> 
> That was aimed directly at me, ok then
> 
> ...



By that logic, a car sitting in a driveway is not a machine, and a clothes washer is not a machine if it isn't running.


----------



## orbital (May 24, 2013)

+

...and if a computer isn't turned On, it's a box of silicone & metal, since no energy is being applied and not completing tasks.

________


----------



## JCD (May 25, 2013)

Cars, bicycles, clothes washers, wedges, and screws are all machines, even when not in use.


----------



## gadget_lover (May 25, 2013)

StarHalo said:


> You didn't even specify the turbocharged Monza Spyder convertible edition.. (The bad news: this highest-performing model is slower than a Toyota Prius)



But... You didn't even specify the ORIGINAL Toyota Prius! While it's not the greatest machine made, it did show that you can build a usable, reliable and affordable car that used electricity as well as gas. My belief is that it's success has helped the public accept other innovations such as the Tesla.

Just as a side note, the humble ORIGINAL Prius has a faster 0-60 time than the Ford F150 pickup and the base model of the Ford Mustang. Yeah... I was surprised by that too. It has so much torque that it will accelerate cleanly and quickly to max speed (105 MPH) on a 5% grade after having to slow down for a truck that pulled out to pass another at 25 MPH. 

Daniel


----------



## Norm (May 25, 2013)

Two off topic posts and one reply pointing out why the the posts were Off Topic have been deleted. - Norm


----------



## gadget_lover (May 26, 2013)

Might the DNA sequencer be the greatest machine? It will enable us to conquer many diseases that plague mankind and limit our lifespan.

Daniel


----------



## idleprocess (May 26, 2013)

gadget_lover said:


> Might the DNA sequencer be the greatest machine? It will enable us to conquer many diseases that plague mankind and limit our lifespan.
> 
> Daniel



In that vein mitochondria may well be the greatest machines created given their key role as the cell's powerplant, generating the overwhelming majority of ATP (Adenosine triphosphate) - the "unit of currency" in cellular metabolism.


----------



## StarHalo (Jun 1, 2013)

StarHalo said:


> You didn't even specify the turbocharged Monza Spyder convertible edition..



True story: Heading back across town this afternoon after a visit to the grocery store, turning into the intersection and heading the other way was ...a red Chevrolet Corvair Spyder. What a coinkydink..


----------



## HighlanderNorth (Jun 4, 2013)

It's hard to say whats the overall greatest invention, but I'd say the atlatl because it was the worlds first force multiplier and the first true weapon "system", that allowed hunting large game at greater distance. Unlike many early invention which are only found in one or two regions, and not across oceans or completely separate regions, the atlatl has been found on every continent, used by almost every civilization through history, even though many of those civilizations had no way to communicate with each other. Atlatls were supposedly used as far back as 40,000 years ago, and maybe earlier. From that time forward they were used as recently as a few hundred years ago by Latin American civilizations, who never developed the bow and arrow to replace the atlatl as most other civilizations began to do at least 15,000 years ago. 

Although not a machine, I'd have to say that bread could be one of the most significant inventions, because it can be stored and eaten later without spoiling like most fruits, veggies and meat. But it baffles me how early humans actually figured out the idea of turning grains into bread to begin with. Think about it, it's easy to figure out the concept of killing and eating an animal, or picking and eating berries or whatever other plant based food conveniently growing nearby, but imagine coming across some overgrown grassy weed, which contains dry, fairly lousy tasting seeds which would seem useless to most people, but somehow somebody thought to grind up the seeds after drying them, adding water, kneading out some dough, then cooking it. All with a bunch of useless looking seeds that taste horrible and dry on their own! That's quite an impressive feat for very early humans IMO.....


----------



## PCC (Jun 5, 2013)

Air conditioner and a related product, the refrigerator.


----------



## Hooked on Fenix (Jun 9, 2013)

I'm going to go with the satelite. It can see into the far reaches of space. It can warn us of an incoming CME so we know when our electronics are in danger. It can run a G.P.S. tracking system to keep you from getting lost, coordinate with our military's aircraft and ships, and guide nuclear and conventional missles accurately to their destination. It can help you receive a call in the farthest reaches of the planet. And most importantly, it can bounce a signal to and from earth and send a coded signal to your television which then decodes it and turns it into moving pictures on the screen giving you hundreds to thousands of channels to watch sent from space.


----------



## EZO (Jun 9, 2013)

Sort of in line with Hooked on Fenix's post, but in a different vein I would nominate The Voyager spacecraft(s). They could well end up being the _only_ machines that an extraterrestrial civilization ever sees from Earth.


----------



## bietjiedof (Jun 10, 2013)

I'm with PCC - seems to me the refrigerator was a massive paradigm-shift in the transport and storage of food, which transformed the global economy. And not only food - I was reading about the super-cooling of natural gas, to ship it around the world, changing the shape of energy-supply for decades to come. And would blood transfusions be practical without refrigeration? How many drugs and vaccines need to be kept cool? And, dammit, there's cold beer and ice-cream...


----------



## Steve K (Jun 10, 2013)

Refrigeration is great, but there used to be a business of harvesting ice from lakes (in places where winter got cold enough), and stockpiling the ice in caves and insulated warehouses. The ice was sold for use in ice-boxes (the forerunner of the refrigerator), in refrigerated railroad cars (for the shipping of perishable goods), and even used in caves by Anheuser-Busch around St. Louis for storing beer. 
It's a lot easier to just use modern refrigeration systems, though.


----------



## Julian Holtz (Jun 10, 2013)

I heard that the lack of refrigeration techniques was responsible for the downfall of the Roman Empire.
Rome became so big, that the food had to be transported for longer and longer times, as the hinterland became bigger and bigger. By the time it arrived in the inner city, it was half-rotten. So one could either eat this, or dried meat, which is not known for containing many vitamines.
Because of this, half of the inhabitants of Rome died each year. Try to keep an administration running in these conditions.

The Germans, at least, had sauerkraut. It is both rich of vitamin C and can be stored for a long time. Barrels of sauerkraut enabled James Cook to circumnavigate the world without losing his crew to scurvy.


----------



## P_A_S_1 (Jun 10, 2013)

I love sauerkraut, it's a very underrated side-dish/condiment.


----------



## bietjiedof (Jun 11, 2013)

P_A_S_1 said:


> I love sauerkraut, it's a very underrated side-dish/condiment.



Yes, but is it a MACHINE? :shakehead


----------



## EZO (Jun 11, 2013)

How about sauerkraut powered robots! Does that count?


----------



## orbital (Jun 11, 2013)

^

_*It's Alive!!*_

wonder how it would go on pickled habaneros?


----------



## bietjiedof (Jun 12, 2013)

EZO said:


> How about sauerkraut powered robots! Does that count?


Definitely! Gets my vote :thumbsup:


----------



## HighlanderNorth (Jun 20, 2013)

orbital said:


> ^
> 
> _*It's Alive!!*_
> 
> wonder how it would go on pickled habaneros?




Looks like ill never find out because due to the 12 inches of rain weve gotten in the last 3 weeks my habaneros aren't even growing after 3 weeks of being in the ground. At least they aren't flat out dying like some of my other plants though. 

As far as top machines, the microprocessor, the internal combustion engine, the steam engine back in the day, the liquid fueled rocket. The centrifuge(?)


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (Jun 21, 2013)

......The still.....:drunk: 

~ Chance


----------



## Lynx_Arc (Jun 27, 2013)

If it hadn't been said already I would add in the electric motor/generator. This allowed conversion of mechanical force into electricity and electricity into mechanical force. Without generators most electrical power wouldn't exist we would have to use batteries and solar panels.


----------



## Chauncey Gardiner (Jun 27, 2013)

It's the still, hic, the still.

~ Chance


----------



## RedLED (Jun 28, 2013)

The epic and prolific journey of Apollo 11, and subsequent missions. They paved the way to all the technology we have today. Or, the 40 acre complex under Ft. Mead, MD...you decide!

Edit: Add: I guess I was ahead the curve...


----------



## Norm (Jun 28, 2013)

Several unsuitable posts and quote of said posts have been deleted, the usual suspects know who they are. - Norm


----------



## Federal LG (Jun 29, 2013)

To the OP:

The greatest machine ever ir the air conditioner! I live in Brazil, and here it´s very HOT. Without them we all would be screwed!


----------



## ash9nine (Jun 29, 2013)

I think the Microwave is the greatest machine ever made.


----------



## jamie.91 (Jun 30, 2013)

Maybe something like the ISS, space shuttle or the mars rover etc ?


----------



## StarHalo (Jul 7, 2013)

jamie.91 said:


> the mars rover etc ?



About that; today is day 3,652 of Opportunity's 90-day mission, happy tenth to Earth's most reliable wheeled vehicle that just happens to not be on Earth..


----------



## jamie.91 (Jul 7, 2013)

StarHalo said:


> About that; today is day 3,652 of Opportunity's 90-day mission, happy tenth to Earth's most reliable wheeled vehicle that just happens to not be on Earth..



AWESOME! That's what I call engineering!


----------



## xv-750 (Jul 7, 2013)

The Motorcycle

Specifically, The Yamaha XV-750 of course.


----------



## EZO (Jul 7, 2013)

StarHalo said:


> About that; today is day 3,652 of Opportunity's 90-day mission, happy tenth to Earth's most reliable wheeled vehicle that just happens to not be on Earth..



I wonder what criteria they used when they came up with the idea for a 90 day mission? :thinking:


----------



## jtr1962 (Jul 7, 2013)

StarHalo said:


> About that; today is day 3,652 of Opportunity's 90-day mission, happy tenth to Earth's most reliable wheeled vehicle that just happens to not be on Earth..


That thing is more reliable than a lot of cars. This is all the more amazing because you can't exactly send a team of mechanics out to Mars to make repairs.

Semi off-topic but would anyone here want to live on Mars if we had a decent-sized colony there? I'm talking something like a domed city with at least a few hundred thousand inhabitants? I would seriously consider it. Not being a hot weather person, Mars would be somewhat nicer than Earth. Even the summers there at the equator aren't hotter than fall in most places on Earth. And then low gravity, plus thinner air in the domes with a higher oxygen content, would make for some speedy cycling (see this and scroll down to the bottom).


----------



## jamie.91 (Jul 8, 2013)

Whenever people talk about living on mars the first thing I think of it total recall lol 😜, people cutting off your oxygen and stuff, not for me I'm afraid.


----------



## esldude (Jul 8, 2013)

Atlatl is my choice. 

You had spears which were evolved pointy sticks. Edged weapons might be worth considering. It was the atlatl which required something akin to invention to looking deeper, to create something not otherwise existing in nature for purely human purposes. Once man got over that hump other ideas that weren't fully natural came more quickly and more often. The wheel, the bow and arrow, etc. etc.


----------



## Solid Lifters (Jul 9, 2013)

Has anybody said 'TV remote controllers' yet?


----------



## Monocrom (Jul 9, 2013)

Solid Lifters said:


> Has anybody said 'TV remote controllers' yet?



Not really that great. Parents back in the day had children to get up and change the channel. Plus, there were only about 7 or 8 channels back then anyway.


----------



## PhotonBoy (Jul 10, 2013)

I remember it well: clunk, clunk, cluck: *"It's Howdy Doody Time!"*


----------



## orbital (Jul 23, 2013)

+

When you hear the Ford Cosworth 3Liter V8 Grand Prix motor, it gets ingrained in your soul
..it's a sound you cannot _*unhear*_ ~~~


----------



## Steve K (Jul 23, 2013)

I was going to say the same thing about a good afterburning jet engine...


----------



## Mark620 (Jul 24, 2013)

EZO said:


> They are the lever, the wheel and axle, the pulley, the incline plane, the wedge and the screw.



The screw is an inclined plane wrapped around a cylinder....


----------



## EZO (Jul 24, 2013)

Mark620 said:


> The screw is an inclined plane wrapped around a cylinder....



This is quite true. Nevertheless, the screw and the inclined plane are considered separately as simple machines since they perform different functions.


----------



## 1nterceptor (Jul 24, 2013)

*What is the greatest machine ever built? The bicycle.*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNuuT-nRer4


----------



## Steve K (Jul 25, 2013)

*Re: What is the greatest machine ever built? The bicycle.*

Brompton, Dahon, or other brand? Folding bikes are an intriguing subculture of the bike world. It's almost a shame that I don't have a use for one... they look like fun.


----------



## 1nterceptor (Jul 25, 2013)

*Re: What is the greatest machine ever built? The bicycle.*



Steve K said:


> Brompton, Dahon, or other brand? Folding bikes are an intriguing subculture of the bike world. It's almost a shame that I don't have a use for one... they look like fun.



The one in the previous video is a Brompton S6L. I also have a Tobukaeru folding bike; a bit bigger than the B.
But with some disassembly; was able to fit it in a standard Samsonite luggage for my trip to China. And yes,
they are fun! 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi0156wPqe0


----------



## StarHalo (Mar 25, 2015)

StarHalo said:


> About that; today is day 3,652 of Opportunity's 90-day mission, happy tenth to Earth's most reliable wheeled vehicle that just happens to not be on Earth..



And as of today, the Mars Opportunity rover has traveled 26.219 miles, making it the first Earth interplanetary explorer to complete a marathon.


----------

