Who told you that?

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by alatar

So, in many mythologies, we're experiencing a knowledge entropy where, if one were to graph it, would be a downward asymptotic curve where we'll always know some things, but nothing like our ancestors or the gods.

To me, however, in the real world, it's the exact opposite.

Well, maybe now, but it was not always like that. If you went to Egypt 1000 years ago and asked anyone to build a pyramid, they would just laugh at you (Even with enough manpower).

In fact, to me it seems that things did go slightly downward in the technological level in the early middle ages.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

I think that my question is more to do with why Vala and Maiar felt that they may have needed certain skills. Aule is defendable; he was asked to make the lamps of the Valar. We may assume the others intuitively knew that he had a creative skill surpassing their own and this was where he, as it were, invented the craft. From there on we may assume he got interested in it and began 'experimenting' or something until he became a smith.

As for Osse, I find fewer answers. Why ships? They plainly didn't 'need' them to cross the sea. Any craft being devised for pleasure has usually been through a long period where it was simply necessary. Did Osse invent the art of ship building just for the elves, there and then? Had he been thinking about it for a while and then got a light bulb above his head?

As for the idea of crafts degrading over time, I suppose it depends on your perspective, really. Needs change over time and so crafts must adapt to them. The more adept a craft is, then the 'higher' it is. If you are talking purely about aesthetic beauty, in this modern age it may be argued that less thought is given to it than of old.
But yes, every good myth needs its Golden Age. It's a great plot devise, something to reminisce about and, often, bring some mystery. Numenor is a fine example. More than a Golden Age for men, really. It's a symbol that runs through the psyche of the descendants and those affected by them. Their craft and skill is but one part of their influence, you may say.

[Alfirin]

Originally Posted by Eönwë

Well, maybe now, but it was not always like that. If you went to Egypt 1000 years ago and asked anyone to build a pyramid, they would just laugh at you (Even with enough manpower).

In fact, to me it seems that things did go slightly downward in the technological level in the early middle ages.

I can think of several "lost formulae" that would be very valuable today but are no longer within our knowedge. How about Damascus steel, generally still regarded as the finest in the world? We've gotten close but as far as I remember we still haven't made any steel in modern times that equals it in quality and toughness. Or "greek fire", we still don't know what went into that and I am sure there is someone who could find use for it in modern times. Lest you think all of the lost tecnology is exculsively military (and hence, some might argue, things which are better left lost) How about a Stradavarius violin. No morder violing make can make one as good and most reasarchers agree that it isn't all in the fact that they are so old. (one program I once saw suggested that the secer could be unusual growth rings in Italian trees caused by the climate condions durng the time preceding and during the so called "Little Ice Age"
For the most part I agree that in genereal as time progresses we tend to gain tecnical knowedge not lose it. but there are anomolies. The "Greek computer" has been discussed in an earlier thread, and most archeologists now concede that the "Bagdad Battery" really is a form of primitive electrical cell. There Hero's steam ball which had it been utilized (say some historians) could have given the ancient greeks the steam engine and the locomotive. Finally there is the famous "Pillar of Dheli" and iron pillar cast of such high grade metal that it has stood outdoors in a humid climate (India) for almost 2000 years as still show little or no signs of rust. that enogh for now

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Alfirin

I can think of several "lost formulae" that would be very valuable today but are no longer within our knowedge. How about Damascus steel, generally still regarded as the finest in the world? We've gotten close but as far as I remember we still haven't made any steel in modern times that equals it in quality and toughness.

Surely we have even better materials today (but, being made in huge batches, aren't as unique as the thousands of individual mixes of steel). I would use the analogy of my wife's cookies. There was that one batch that was the best - all are mostly great - but some contaminant made that one batch stick out (could have been the coffee). And I found this regarding recapturing the tech.

Or "greek fire", we still don't know what went into that and I am sure there is someone who could find use for it in modern times.

A cruise missile or any of its small children isn't as useful? And against wooden sail boats?

Lest you think all of the lost tecnology is exculsively military (and hence, some might argue, things which are better left lost) How about a Stradavarius violin. No morder violing make can make one as good and most reasarchers agree that it isn't all in the fact that they are so old. (one program I once saw suggested that the secer could be unusual growth rings in Italian trees caused by the climate condions durng the time preceding and during the so called "Little Ice Age"

As you can guess, I can disagree here as well. Show me an objective 'double-blinded' study where a Strat is compared to a better quality violin made today. I've seen too many studies where 'designer labels' bias 'professionals' into making subjective judgments, thus securing their jobs.

Then again, with my tin ear, they'd both most likely sound like fiddles.

For the most part I agree that in genereal as time progresses we tend to gain tecnical knowedge not lose it. but there are anomolies. The "Greek computer" has been discussed in an earlier thread, and most archeologists now concede that the "Bagdad Battery" really is a form of primitive electrical cell. There Hero's steam ball which had it been utilized (say some historians) could have given the ancient greeks the steam engine and the locomotive. Finally there is the famous "Pillar of Dheli" and iron pillar cast of such high grade metal that it has stood outdoors in a humid climate (India) for almost 2000 years as still show little or no signs of rust. that enogh for now

Surely there were smart (even smarter) people back then, but they didn't have the information that is at our fingertips today to help. On the other hand, to me most people are the same as they were in the past.

Sorry for being such a wet blanket.

[Hot, crispy nice hobbit]

The ancients were not all inventors. Neither are the moderns...

Both Melkor and Aule were gifted craftsmen among the Valar. It was said that Aule took delight in teaching his little clay miniatures his crafts (Before being chatised by Illuvator) I wondered whether Melkor cradled his orks in his arms, and sank to them the lullaby of cannibalism and murder... I think there was a passage in "HoME: Morgoth's Ring" about Melkor visiting the Edain and teaching them stuff, before demanding interests.

"Loan of Knowledge - 40% interest rate. Lowest rate in all of Arda!" - University of Angband.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by alatar

Surely we have even better materials today (but, being made in huge batches, aren't as unique as the thousands of individual mixes of steel). [...]Surely there were smart (even smarter) people back then, but they didn't have the information that is at our fingertips today to help. On the other hand, to me most people are the same as they were in the past.

What I meant was that it is only in the last century that regaining a lot of lost knowledge. For example, contact lenses.

[alatar]

To get myself back on thread, I think that the Valar did not experiment as we may think of it. There weren't 27 trees, all essays in the craft of making the Two, where all 25 (27-Two) were just complete failures. In science/experimentation, there are usually more failures and dead ends than successes. Think of Osse experimenting with ships. How many elves did he drown until he got it right? Did some of Varda's stars crash into Arda as she just didn't use enough glue to keep them hanging in the sky?

On the other hand, not much is known about the world before the elves showed up, so maybe many of the flubs were hidden back in the depths of time.

And regarding Egyptian contact lenses - anything's possible, but why then do we not have other examples of their knowledge of optics? And sometimes we see the past through our present-day filters, seeing bits of small glass and seeing 'contact lenses,' whereas the Egyptians meant something completely different.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

As you can guess, I can disagree here as well. Show me an objective 'double-blinded' study where a Strat is compared to a better quality violin made today.

There have in fact been many. Not just Stradivari, but in general the entire North Italian School about 1680-1750. Nobody has been able to figure it out. (there is one notable exception now: Brooklyn maker Sam Zygmuntowicz may have cracked it.)

[alatar]

More than you may have ever wanted to know about violins can be found here.

Originally Posted by Colin Gough

In practice it is extremely difficult to distinguish between a particularly fine Stradivarius instrument and an indifferent modern copy on the basis of the measured response alone. The ear is a supreme detection device and the brain is a far more sophisticated analyser of complex sounds than any system yet developed to assess musical quality.

Quality in the hearing?

Top players regularly return their instruments to violin makers, who move the sound post and adjust the bridge in an effort to optimize the sound. This means that there is no unique set of vibrational characteristics for any particular instrument - not even a Stradivarius!

So even a Strad needs to be tuned/maintained, and in my hands, would sound like fingernails across a chalkboard.

Science has not provided any convincing evidence for the existence or otherwise of any measurable property that would set the Cremonese instruments apart from the finest violins made by skilled craftsman today. Indeed, some leading soloists do occasionally play on modern instruments. However, the really top soloists - and, not surprisingly, violin dealers, who have a vested interest in maintaining the Cremonese legend of intrinsic superiority - remain utterly unconvinced.

Though I didn't see the results of their double blind test (if anyone even performed one), sounds like they are making my point regarding subjectivity.

Not saying that I'm right or know what I'm talking about, but I remain a skeptic and cynic regarding this and most other things.