258
submitted 3 months ago by PugJesus@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.world
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 11 points 3 months ago

I have a hard time believing the concept of a bridge is so new.

A log across a stream is a bridge, of sorts.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

Lasting bridges - anything bigger than a log across a stream, if you will.

[-] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 9 points 3 months ago

Probably when we first started using stone, which would actually last long enough to make it into history.

The very nature of a bridge over a river also means the river is likely to change course and wipe out the bridge and foundations, so it's possible a number of crossings have been destroyed that are older.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

We actually have evidence of some of the earliest bridges using wood. It's just that bridge-building, even with just wood, is a massive undertaking. Pile bridges took a while to come about, and even then, it was the use of the arch and corbeled arch which made bridges to pass large rivers practical. Otherwise you're effectively limited to one span from bank-to-bank - ie you can only cross a river as wide as the shortest log used in the construction.

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

preserved wood in stone would be a great source as well, but cut stones of any kind - which may make up foundations - would be long lasting.

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

bridges that survived in some form in the archeological record. there were almost certainly bridges - logs, rope bridges, etc., that predated these - but these survived in some preserved form - whether the wood was preserved or the cut stone foundations were preserved - there's evidence.

[-] Atlas_@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Why would they need a tossing after they had bridges 😳

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

BC counts down - 4001 BC is 4001 years BEFORE 1 AD. So 4001 BC is 1 year before 4000 BC.

[-] Atlas_@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Wait, so they had time travel back then? Why don't we have time travel anymore?

[-] CallMeMrFlipper@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago
[-] Manzas@lemdro.id 1 points 3 months ago

Or average Facebook user

this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
258 points (100.0% liked)

memes

10649 readers
2239 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS