The invention of the wheel, its effects on humanity and why zebras don't have wheels

The wheel made it possible for armies to move quickly, but also for merchants to carry heavy loads on carts, for urbanization and even for the expansion of empires. On the history of the ancient invention and reference to the question why nature did not produce wheels for any animal?

introduction

The invention of the wheel is considered one of the most important pillars in human development. The wheel improved military capabilities and fast chariots allowed armies to be more destructive than ever before. The wheel made it possible to carry heavy loads on carts drawn by horses, oxen and other beasts of burden instead of using the limited human power, thus paving the way for the construction of large and complex buildings. In addition, the wheel brought about a revolution in agriculture because it was possible to plow the fields with the help of more sophisticated agricultural tools and even sell the agricultural produce in distant places. The by-product of the ability to purchase agricultural produce that was grown in distant places was the establishment of large urban settlements that did not have to live on their own produce, and their residents could free themselves to develop other occupations and specialize in various professions. And from here until today's high-tech era, the road was already paved.

Another historical process that was a consequence of the development of the wheel was the expansion of empires, and through the faster, safer and more convenient transmission of information in new ways that were paved, extensive trade relations were created between distant places. The speed of movement and the transfer of information also contributed to the spread of other technologies.

In this article I will briefly bring you the story of the wheel and its effect on humanity and at the same time I will address the question "why there are no wheels in nature" and explain the evolutionary context of the wheel and its place in the living world. To conclude, I will provide a description of one of the confrontations from the front of the war between religion and science.

history

Many tend to think of the wheel as a particularly ancient invention, something like the discovery of the way to start and control fire, but this is not the case. While there is evidence that even the ancient Homo Eractus who lived about two million years ago knew how to use fire for his needs even before he became the modern man, the wheel was invented "only" a few thousand years ago. Although some researchers claim that the invention of the wheel took place already in the sixth millennium BC (about 8,000 years ago), most researchers believe that the wheel was invented in the fourth millennium BC, that is, about 6,000 years ago in the area of ​​Mesopotamia by the ancient Sumerians - between today's Iraq and the coasts the black sea The agricultural revolution was then in full swing and already several thousand years before the invention of the wheel, humans cultivated the land, planted and domesticated plants and made them tastier, more fertile and more convenient to grow through a process of man-made evolution. The wheel spread relatively quickly throughout the Old World along with some basic agricultural crops such as wheat and barley. It reached ancient India and the Caucasus region and from there it spread to Europe, North Africa and China (although some claim that the wheel developed at the same time independently in China).

The earliest evidence of wheels found so far was from around the middle of the third millennium BC, that is, about 5,000 years ago. The oldest wheel found so far was discovered in archaeological excavations in a swamp in Slovenia, about twenty kilometers south of Ljubljana. Many evidences of settlements from several thousand years ago were found there. Since the first wheels were made of wood, and wood is known to decay over time, real wheels are very hard to find. This is why this find is so rare and important. The conditions prevailing in the swamp preserve organic materials such as wood in an excellent way, which is why the wooden wheel was preserved so well. Along with it is even the hinge that was apparently attached to it.

Other ancient evidence includes a painting of chariots with wheels created by the Assyrian culture about 5,200 years ago, tombs with chariot remains from about 5,700 years ago from the Caucasus region and chariot paintings on urns from about 5,500 years ago discovered in Poland.

How was the wheel invented?

The invention of the wheel is more complex than one might think. It is not just about creating a circle out of stone or wood, because there is no real benefit in doing so. The wheel receives its advantages only when a pivot is attached to it exactly in its center that allows the wheel to rotate, and for this a relatively complex technology is required. It is not possible to know for sure what led to the creation of the first wheel, but it can be assumed that it is an interesting development of 2 different technologies for carrying loads that were used thousands of years before - the sledge and the logs. These two technologies have been used for ages to carry loads by humans, but their combination could have led to the production of the wheel in the following way:

First, a log is used and loads are rolled on it. When the load moves forward, add another log in front of it and thus move the load to a distance. Using a sled without boards is efficient and convenient on a relatively smooth surface such as sand, grass, snow, etc. By combining the sled on top of a log, minimal friction is created which facilitates the transfer of the load. Over time, the logs wear down and create "rails" in them that make it even easier to move the load. Here the central part of the log can easily be dispensed with completely and from here to a system of two wheels and an axle, the distance is very small. The following chart taken from this site, Explains the process in a relatively simple way (look at the drawings in the illustration next to this paragraph from left to right)

Technological improvements

Beyond the initial difficulty in creating the wheel, there were other technological problems that had to be solved: when you cut wood horizontally, you get rings, and this basic structure of wood is not strong enough to carry heavy loads. This is why a much more complicated longitudinal section was needed to make wheels. Later, metal reinforcements were also added to the wheels. In addition, termites, ants and general decay would destroy the wheels relatively quickly, so in the past they used to burn the wood with fire to prevent pests from destroying it. This is a fairly ancient practice and even the wheel found in Slovenia was probably already charred as a protection against pests.

The spokes were added in the second millennium BC. A wheel with spokes is stronger, lighter and more flexible and therefore allows the driving of faster vehicles. Surprisingly enough, from the second millennium BC to the nineteenth century, almost no changes or improvements were made to wheels.

Why is the wheel not opened in America, Australia, Polynesia and the rest of the "New World"?

A question that is very interesting to me personally is why the wheel was not developed by the Aztecs, the aborigines, the Maori, the tribes in South Africa, the Polynesians and other peoples and cultures in other parts of the world? If this invention is so good and useful and relatively uncomplicated, why hasn't it been invented in other places?

At the time, I published an article about domesticating pets following the excellent and highly recommended Pulitzer Prize winning book - Germs and Steel Guns written by Jared Diamond. Diamond dedicated his book to the question of how it happened that the Europeans conquered the world and not any of the other nations and cultures. Diamond provides detailed and fascinating explanations and, among other things, deals with the topic of the wheel. He claims that the reason that the wheel was developed only in the Eurasian region is divided into several different reasons. First, it should be noted that wheels actually developed in at least one other place - among the tribes that lived in Mexico about two thousand years ago. But the ancient Mexicans did not have the ability to use the wheel since they did not have beasts of burden. In fact, at the stage when agriculture and technology were developed in America, there were no longer any large animals that could be domesticated, in contrast to the situation in the Eurasian region. All the big animals were slaughtered years before, when man arrived. By the way, this process of destroying the big animals with the arrival of man is typical all over the world, in New Zealand, Mauritius, Australia, America, Europe and more.

Diamond continues and claims that a chain of coincidences led to the invention of the wheel in Eurasia, and that the same chain of circumstances led to the industrial revolution, technological superiority and the fact that the Europeans conquered the rest of the world. The same chain of circumstances begins with the fact that Eurasia is the largest land mass and that it stands from east to west in contrast to Africa and America which stand from north to south. The direction of the continents is important because on a continent that stands east-west it will be possible to find similar weather over a very large area, in contrast to the continents that extend from south to north, where the weather changes to extremes over a relatively small geographical distance. Since Eurasia is the largest land mass, more species of animals have evolved there, among them the vast majority of large animals that can be domesticated including cows, sheep, horses, pigs and more. Agriculture, which was developed in many parts of the world more or less at the same time, received a significant boost from the domesticated animals, which led to the construction of permanent settlements and the evacuation of man from the constant pursuit of food. In the free time created, the people developed specialties and hobbies - sewing, leather processing, blacksmithing, iron works and significant technological improvements. The use of domesticated animals such as horses, oxen and donkeys led to the development and massive use of the wheel. All of these led, as mentioned, to military technologies and extensive occupations.

Diamond goes on to explain the European technological superiority that eventually led to the conquest of the world and claims that the domesticated animals had another important but cruel role - through a cruel and deadly process they led to the vaccination of the surviving population against many diseases of animal origin. The ancient inhabitants of Eurasia were exposed to the same diseases because they lived in the same house with pigs, chickens and other animals, and apparently the hygiene conditions in those days were not particularly improved. The thing, the black plague and other terrible diseases and epidemics that plagued the population from time to time originate from those farm animals. Those who survived became immune to these diseases by a simple evolutionary process. Those who were not vaccinated simply did not survive. But when the Europeans arrived in America, Australia, Alaska, Tahiti, Hawaii and other distant places, the locals who were not vaccinated against those diseases began to die in huge numbers as a result of the exposure to the diseases brought by the Europeans. About 95% of the Native Americans died within a few decades after the arrival of the Spanish conquistadors, most of them even before they were in contact with each other due to epidemics that spread across the continent. Many cases are recorded in which the Spaniards arrived in villages that were almost abandoned and found only the bodies of people who had died shortly before from diseases. The combination of the superior technology that included the guns and steel together with the deadly bacteria led to easy and simple conquests for the Europeans, and a terrible holocaust that befell the conquered peoples everywhere the Europeans went. It was this deadly combination of military capabilities (guns), immunity to disease (germs) and superior technology (steel) that allowed them to eventually conquer the world. This concise explanation may sound simplistic, but the book "Guns, Bacteria and Steel" is one of the most important, comprehensive and interesting books I have read and it includes detailed explanations of the process.

Why does a zebra have no wheels - on the development of the wheel in the animal world

The diversity of the animal world is tremendous and surprising. Evolution has proven itself in finding amazing, original and very sophisticated solutions to a variety of problems, and first and foremost - on the subject of movement. Prof. Richard Dawkins in his excellent book "The Ancestors Tale" gives as an example the kangaroo in Australia and the deer in Africa. Both are common herbivores that had to deal with ferocious predators. Evolution has developed very fast movement skills for both of them as part of the "evolutionary arms race", but the deer runs on all fours while the kangaroo jumps on 2 (with the help of the tail). These two forms of movement are very different from each other, but the end result is very similar. A kangaroo fleeing from danger moves with an amazing and surprising speed, which is similar to the speed developed by the deer.

Almost all vehicles created by man throughout history (including boat engines and airplanes) are based in one way or another on wheels. Moreover - almost every machine above a certain complexity contains wheels. How did evolution bypass the invention of the wheel?

This lack of wheels in the natural world has fascinated humanity for many years. The famous painter M. si. Asher, (who is also my personal favorite painter), and who became famous for his impossible and ingenious paintings, was also disappointed by the lack of wheels in nature and created in 1951 the Pedalternorotandomovens - an imaginary creature with six human legs, a beak and two protruding eyes that can roll from place to place to the place

Asher's creature is of course imaginary. Why are there no animals and plants that use the wheel? Some examples of the use of balls in nature may come to your mind, such as the Tumbleweed bush, which is called in Hebrew "tumbling grass". This is the same bush that always appears in westerns in abandoned areas and is rolled from place to place by the wind. Similarly, the coconut is spherical and rolls (and floats) from place to place. But here we are talking about balls, not wheels. Richard Dawkins provides an interesting explanation of this subject in the same wonderful book I mentioned earlier - "The Ancestors Tale". He begins by claiming that the wheel is considered to us to be such an important tool only in comparison to the relatively poor legs we have. Almost all large animals can move faster than us using their legs. Until the invention of the engine, the wheel was used by man to move at a speed that was limited to the legs of the person who pulled the wheel. For the horse, for example, the wheel is not a fast means of transportation, but on the contrary - something that slows it down.

Another point that Dawkins raises (and also raised in many references to the subject in other books I've read), is that we tend to attach too much importance to the wheel because it is very dependent on another important invention - the road. Any racing car will stay far behind in a race with a goat when the track goes over a mountainside or even a rough field.

If so, continues Dawkins, perhaps the question should be changed - instead of asking how evolution bypassed the wheel, perhaps we should ask how evolution did not create the occupied road? From a technical point of view, creating a convenient way to pass is a trivial matter compared to marvelous creations of evolution, such as the artificial lake created by the beaver through a dam. In fact, there are animals that create occupied roads, such as a certain species of wasps (digger-wasps), which occupy soil using stones. Theoretically, larger animals could use a similar technology to create occupied roads, but an unexpected evolutionary problem arises here - even if creating roads is technically possible, it is an altruistic act in a dangerous way for the animal. In other words, if I invest energy and build a convenient road to get from point A to B, then you too, who didn't bother to help at all, will benefit just as much from the road I built.

This is the place to mention that Prof. Richard Dawkins became famous in 1976 when he published the groundbreaking book called "The Selfish Garden". The book brought an original and revolutionary approach to evolution from the perspective of the gene itself. And the gene, as it is expressed in the process of evolution - is selfish. An altruistic approach to a gene would be less favored by evolution, and therefore unlikely to evolve. If my opponent benefits from the path I worked hard to build, but he doesn't have to pay for it by investing time and energy, then he will benefit more than me from the path. As a result his genes will spread further in the population because while I work hard to build roads, he will get from place to place using the roads I have built. Since he will have more time and energy he will be able to fertilize more females and spread his sperm better. Therefore, the genes of those who invest in road construction will eventually disappear from the population and the lazy and selfish genes will spread more efficiently, to the point where roads simply won't be created anymore.

As a result, roads are not paved by animals, and in the bottom line everyone loses from this, but evolution does not work towards a particular direction or goal, and this is one of its results. This evolutionary difficulty could be solved by making roads exclusively within the territory of a particular animal or group of animals. After all, many animals demarcate territories for themselves and fiercely defend them, until they become their exclusive property. Why aren't roads paved within these territories for self-use only? The reason for this is apparently that the benefit generated from such a road in a relatively small territory that is in local use, does not justify the investment in "paving" roads, and certainly not in creating wheels for movement on these roads.

And there is another important and significant problem that Dawkins raises and which prevents the formation of wheels in nature - creating a wheel that rotates on an axis freely and at the same time be part of the animal's physical body is a complicated thing. The wheel is supposed to grow out of the body and therefore blood vessels and nervous systems are supposed to be connected to it in some way, just as blood vessels and nervous systems are connected to every other organ in the body. One can imagine what happens to such linked systems when they rotate and become entangled with each other, or alternatively rotate until they break.

Another problem arises from the common muscle structure in the natural world. Most animals are equipped with muscles that generate energy by contraction alone. In order to use the wheel, a completely different source of energy is needed in its essence, which will require a significant structural change in the animals. It may be possible to find a biological-evolutionary solution to these problems, but the bottom line is that we shouldn't be surprised that we don't find wheels among large animals in the wild.

And yet nature has developed wheels, except they are very tiny. The propulsion mechanism of a large part of the bacteria is called "shuton". The whip, as its name suggests, is a kind of tiny tail or whip that rotates quickly and allows the bacteria to move and rotate. The bat's engine is based on a molecular wheel that spins at high speed and even has a "gear box" that allows the wheel to change the direction of rotation. This is a very complex mechanism and for many years it was considered a real miracle. This fact, together with the fact that it is such a tiny engine consisting of a relatively small number of molecules, put the tiny bat at the center of the war between religion and science.

For years the Shotton and its engine were used by converts and creationists. They argued that the tremendous complexity of the Shotton is indivisible. In other words, the religious claimed that it is a complex unit that the removal of any part of it will lead to a collapse and a collection of useless or useless molecules. If it has no use, how did it develop in an evolutionary mechanism? The idea is absolutely true - evolution creates complexity as a result of the development of less complex things. The example that preceded Shoton was the eye. The religious claimed in the past that the eye is indivisible. They tried to claim that the amazing complexity of the eye could not be created as a result of evolution because, as they defined, there is nothing to do with "half an eye".

But the scientists proved that the eye was created as a result of the development of a simple nerve that showed a basic sensitivity to light. Light sensitivity, or the ability to know where there is light and where there is darkness, can be an advantage for any animal in that the animal will be able to identify whether it is swimming up or down in the sea, or alternatively it will allow you to know if it is already dark and it is relatively safe to get out of the cave without the predators jumping on you from every direction. Those whose nerves were more sensitive to light managed to survive better. Over time, the creatures developed more and more sensitive nerves, to the point where the optic nerves began to be sensitive enough to detect the predators or the prey, allowing objects to be identified to enable a quick escape. From here to the compound eye of man, the way is clear. By the way, it turned out that the eye development mechanism is one of the most common in nature and evidence was found that the eye developed at least 40 times in nature independently.

After it was unequivocally proven that the eye is absolutely suitable for an evolutionary development process, the clergy realized that they could not continue to use the eye as an example. They turned to less familiar things to try and substantiate their claims against evolution, and that's how they came to the conclusion of the bacteria. They again claimed that the baton is too complex a mechanism and that it cannot be disassembled because none of the parts will have any use. According to them, the shoton is a complex unit that cannot be divided. It is difficult to understand how such a complexity was created, and if it is difficult to understand, then according to them only God himself could have created it. This is classic religious logic and according to that logic, every appearance of a magician or juggler should be treated as a divine miracle. But don't worry - many scientific studies conducted in recent years have once again unequivocally proven that not only have more primitive whips and engines been found in nature, which can be seen as intermediate stages to the familiar whip, but it has also been proven that even if we disassemble the whip, it is found that its various parts have effective uses the most for the bacteria, and from these divisions the shoton evolved. In other words, the scientific evidence shows that the rod, like any biological mechanism, gradually developed from different and available parts, each of which had a different use. As in all similar cases, here too the unequivocal proof is that evolution is a proven and established fact.