Who would you blame for the no progress / no science since the greeks until Renaissance, 1500 years ? I think we could have our modern society much earlier and be much more advanced today. I blame the church.

 

I would blame your teachers for giving a very poor education.

I know it was something in arab world but not very important.

Actually, that was a bit unfair. I didn't learn anything about history of science at school (I think it should be a core part of the science curriculum). But there has been no period when there have not been advances in science and mathematics.

 

How do you define "important"?

Importnat is not the best word, but it didn't sparked a revolution. I've read a book Philipp Lenard "Great Men of Science".

Edited April 15, 201510 yr by Chriss

Who would you blame for the no progress / no science since the greeks until Renaissance, 1500 years ?

 

A few points from the Wikipedia summary:

 

Muslim scientists placed far greater emphasis on experiment than had the Greeks.[53] This led to an early scientific method being developed in the Muslim world, where significant progress in methodology was made ...

In mathematics, the Persian mathematician Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi gave his name to the concept of the algorithm, while the term algebra is derived from al-jabr, the beginning of the title of one of his publications. What is now known as Arabic numerals originally came from India, but Muslim mathematicians did make several refinements to the number system, such as the introduction of decimal point notation. ...

In astronomy, Al-Battani improved the measurements of Hipparchus ... The corrections made to the geocentric model by al-Battani, Ibn al-Haytham,[56] Averroes and the Maragha astronomers such as Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, Mo'ayyeduddin Urdi and Ibn al-Shatir are similar to Copernican heliocentric model.[57][58] Heliocentric theories may have also been discussed by several other Muslim astronomers such as Ja'far ibn Muhammad Abu Ma'shar al-Balkhi,[59] Abu-Rayhan Biruni, Abu Said al-Sijzi,[60] Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi, and Najm al-Dīn al-Qazwīnī al-Kātibī.

Muslim chemists and alchemists played an important role in the foundation of modern chemistry. Scholars such as Will Durant[62] and Fielding H. Garrison[63] considered Muslim chemists to be the founders of chemistry. ...

Ibn Sina (Avicenna) is regarded as the most influential philosopher of Islam.[68] He pioneered the science of experimental medicine[69] and was the first physician to conduct clinical trials. ...

An intellectual revitalization of Europe started with the birth of medieval universities in the 12th century. ...

Technological advances were also made, such as the early flight of Eilmer of Malmesbury (who had studied Mathematics in 11th century England),[83] and the metallurgical achievements of the Cistercian blast furnace at Laskill. ...

... the natural philosophy contained in these texts began to be extended by notable scholastics such as Robert Grosseteste, Roger Bacon, Albertus Magnus and Duns Scotus. Precursors of the modern scientific method, influenced by earlier contributions of the Islamic world, can be seen already in Grosseteste's emphasis on mathematics as a way to understand nature, and in the empirical approach admired by Bacon ...

The first half of the 14th century saw much important scientific work being done ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science#Science_in_the_Middle_Ages

 

So clearly no shortage of advances in science and mathematics, even if you just pick a few points from a summary.

But still was war in those periods which was not healty for science.

Who are the most promising scientists today ?

Who are the most promising scientists today ?

 

That's rather open-ended.

Ițve read about the first quantum machine developed by O'Connell. Interesting. What possibilities gives that ?

Ițve read about the first quantum machine developed by O'Connell. Interesting. What possibilities gives that ?

 

O'Connell's famous experiment at the beginning of last year showed that quatum superposition can be demonstrated in a macro-object; but this was more an interesting proof of concept than the beginning of a new revolution. The experiment was also dogged by some shameless hyping and exageration. A decent sized quatum computer (which is not outside bounds of possibility) will be a huge technological break-thru with profound societal implications; I think we are up to 8 or 16 qubits and one operation - so we are now talking about scaling rather than "is it possible"?

 

[my supposition is that a decent working quantum computer will be able to implement shor's algorithm and factorisation will become of polynomial order of complexity - new codes all around please.]

I see. So when the quantum computer will be made ?

I see. So when the quantum computer will be made ?

 

 

There is already an 8 qubit machine which has been demonstrated with superposition of 2 states I think; but it is very hard to see past the hype

 

http://www.wired.com/2014/05/quantum-computing

I've read about graphene mass production methods. Are them possible and real ?

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a14651/this-scientist-invented-a-simply-way-to-mass-produce-graphene/

http://delta.tudelft.nl/article/making-graphene-affordable/29377