• Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    5 days ago

    Given it has a (good quality) color photo attached to it, it was definitely published when we already understood the theory of electricity really well, so it doesn’t get a pass.

    It’s even worse than that. Electric lighting predates the photo camera by several decades

      • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        The first arclamp is from the 1800-1810s. They weren’t exactly selling them in stores by then, but they had been invented.

    • balsoft@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      I’d argue we didn’t fully understand the theory of electricity until we understood the atomic structures of metals and semiconductors, and that was properly developed in the early 20th century.

      • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        You could place “understanding” at many points in history, and several in the future:

        Building an arclamp powered by a portable generator is damned impressive.

        Sending a message via electromagnetic waves shows very impressive understanding of electricity too.

        Having a small electromagnetic particle accelerator in your house to show moving pictures is pretty damned amazing.

        Using electricity and basically sand to do maths is insanely impressive.

        On the other hand, you might argue we don’t understand electricity because we don’t have a unified field theory.