all 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 42 points 8 months ago (1 child)

Scientists? You mean Civil Engineers?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    To construct it they would have had to build a support structure nearly a thousand feet long, across a river, that could take the weight of a masonry arch bridge nearly a thousand feet long until the keystones could be put in. Not hard to imagine why it got rejected.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    That was basically just the process of creating bridges back then, it's not far off from how it works today...

    I don't think that was an avoidable issue, you need to build temporary support structures while bridge building is in progress. In other words, if an extensive support structure is a deal breaker for you, it turns out you're not building a bridge today.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Sure, but think of the scale of what they would need and the technology they had. 1000 feet long and as tall as a ship, carrying a stone structure that would weigh probably hundreds or thousands of tons, across what I'd imagine was a pretty busy waterway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    “This article is more than 24 years old

    Still an awesome article if you’ve never read it.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Am I missing something here? The article was posted in 2019

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I’m an shit! I was trying to find the actual bridge that has since been built, based on the design. I found an article on The Guardian from 2001 (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/01/engineering.internationaleducationnews) , about the same work that was done. And I conflated the two because it’s a damn old article. Now, this one is from 6 years ago, which is still pretty old… but it’s a cool article

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    A bridge that doesn't get built doesn't work, so.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    "You can't cross 100% of the bridges you don't build."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I donno, pretty sure crossing 0 of 0 bridges is something I can manage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    There are infinite bridges you didn't build, unless you already did build infinity in which case I retract my comment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Why would there be infinite possible bridges for me to build? There are only so many places where I would reasonable want to build a bridge. I also have a finite life, totally possible bridges are further limited.

    Besides, 100% of the bridges I didn't build is 0, infinity doesn't even come into the equation.

    Good try tough. I'm sure 60% of the time it works every time!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago
    [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    3069: " hey look at that! The left leptomagnetic symbophone is just as Einstein said it would be! "

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    I swear sometimes that da Vinci was a time traveler trolling the lot of us.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Ia this part of the 28 days later franxhise ? 500 years ago ? Was the bridge to contain zombies ?

  • source