Who invented the steam engine and when was it invented?
366900
Thomas Savery\nThomas Savery was an English military engineer and inventor who in 1698, patented the first crude steam engine.\n\nfor more info \nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_engine
388220
It wasn't really invented by Benjamin Franklyn but it was discovered by him. He was the first to realise that lightning was a power that somehow could be harnessed for the good of mankind. It was other scientists in Europe who actually did harness the power. But before all that, there were parlor toys people used to catch static electricity and show sparks but that type is not powerful.Edison had nothing to do with the creation of electricity but his genius invented a ton of stuff for us to use it in.
438870
The very first self-powered road vehicles were powered by steam engines and by that definition Nicolas Joseph Cugnot of France built the first automobile in 1769 - recognized by the British Royal Automobile Club and the Automobile Club de France as being the first. So why do so many history books say that the automobile was invented by either Gottlieb Daimler or Karl Benz? It is because both Daimler and Benz invented highly successful and practical gasoline-powered vehicles that ushered in the age of modern automobiles. Daimler and Benz invented cars that looked and worked like the cars we use today. However, it is unfair to say that either man invented "the" automobile.
120307
The first match was made by Robert Boyle around 1680, and scientists and inventors have been improving them ever since.\n\nCheck out the website I've attached.  I hope this helps.
473381
Designer, inventor and innovator Nikola Tesla.
50878
Nobody discovered a computer. It was invented. As far as who acctually invented the computer is still being debated to this day.
163552
James Prescott Joule (December 24, 1818 – October 11, 1889) was an English physicist, born in Salford, near Manchester.\n\n \nJames JouleJoule studied the nature of heat, and discovered its relationship to mechanical work (see energy). This led to the theory of conservation of energy (the First Law of Thermodynamics). The SI unit of work, the joule, is named after him, and is pronounced to rhyme with "tool." He worked with Lord Kelvin to develop the absolute scale of temperature, made observations on magnetostriction, and found the relationship between the flow of current through a resistance and the heat dissipated, now called Joule's law.\n\nThe son of Benjamin Joule (1784–1858), a wealthy brewer, Joule was tutored at home until 1834 when he was sent, with his elder brother Benjamin, to study with John Dalton at the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society. The pair only received two years' education in arithmetic and geometry when Dalton was forced to retire owing to a stroke. However, Dalton's influence made a lasting impressions as did that of his associates chemist William Henry and Manchester engineers Peter Ewart and Eaton Hodgkinson. Joule was subsequently tutored by John Davis. Joule was fascinated by electricity, he and his brother experimenting by giving electric shocks to each other and to the family's servants.\n\nJoule became a manager of the brewery and took an active role until the sale of the business in 1854. Science was a hobby but he soon started to investigate the feasibility of replacing the brewery's steam engines with the newly-invented electric motor. In 1838, his first scientific papers on electricity were contributed to Annals of Electricity, the scientific journal founded and operated by Davis's colleague William Sturgeon. He discovered Joule's law in 1840[1] and hoped to impress the Royal Society but found, not for the first time, that he was perceived as a mere provincial dilettante. When Sturgeon moved to Manchester in 1840, Joule and he became the nucleus of a circle of the city's intellectuals. The pair shared similar sympathies that science and theology could and should be integrated. Joule went on to lecture at Sturgeon's Royal Victoria Gallery of Practical Science.\n\nIn his Manchester lecture, motivated in part by a business man's desire to quantify the economics of the decision, and in part by his scientific inquisitiveness, he set out to determine which prime mover had the greater 'economical duty'[2]. He went on to realise that burning a pound of coal in a steam engine produced five times as much duty as a pound of zinc consumed in an electric battery. Joule's common standard of 'economical duty' was the ability to raise one pound, a height of one foot, the foot-pound[3].\n\nJoule was influenced by the thinking of Franz Aepinus and tried to explain the phenomena of electricity and magnetism in terms of atoms surrounded by a "calorific ether in a state of vibration".\n\nHowever, Joule's interest diverted from the narrow financial question to that of how much work could be extracted from a given source, leading him to speculate about the convertibility of energy. In 1843 he published results of experiments showing that the heating effect he had quantified in 1841 was due to generation of heat in the conductor and not its transfer from another part of the equipment[4]. This was a direct challenge to the caloric theory which held that heat could neither be created or destroyed. Caloric theory had dominated thinking in the science of heat since introduced by Antoine Lavoisier in 1783. Lavoisier's prestige and the practical success of Sadi Carnot's caloric theory of the heat engine since 1824 ensured that the young Joule, working outside either academia or the engineering profession, had a difficult road ahead. Supporters of the caloric theory readily pointed to the symmetry of the Peltier-See
40961
Benefits:\nThe invention of the steam engine was one of the most important innovations of the industrial revolution. This was made possible by earlier improvements in iron smelting and metal working based on the use of coke rather than charcoal. Earlier in the 18th century the textile industry had harnessed water power to drive improved spinning machines (see spinning jenny) and looms (see flying shuttle). These textile mills became the model for the organisation of human labour in factories\n\nIndustrialisation also led to the creation of the factory. \n\nThe Industrial Revolution could not have developed without machine tools, for they enabled manufacturing machines to be made. \n\ntextile Manufacturing\n\nMining Industry and Metallurgy Industry\n________________________________________________\n\nHarmful Effects:\n1. Child Labor\nChild labour existed before the Industrial Revolution, and in fact dates back to prehistoric times, but during the Industrial Revolution it grew far more abusive than ever before.[1] Politicians tried to limit child labour by law. Factory owners resisted -- they felt that they were aiding the poor by giving their children work from the age of five years onward. In 1833 the first law against child labour, the Factory Act of 1833, was passed in England: Children younger than nine were not allowed to work, children were not permitted to work at night and the work day of youth under the age of 18 was limited to twelve hours. Factory inspectors supervised the execution of this law. About ten years later, the employment of children and women in mining was forbidden. These laws improved the situation; however child labour remained a problem in Europe up to the 20th century.\n\n2 Housing Situation\n\n3 Luddities\nThe rapid industrialization of the English economy cost many craft workers their jobs. The textile industry in particular industrialized early, and many weavers found themselves suddenly unemployed since they could no longer compete with machines which only required relatively limited (and unskilled) labour to produce more cloth than a single weaver. Many such unemployed workers, weavers and others, turned their animousity towards the machines that had taken their jobs and began destroying factories and machinery. These attackers became known as Luddites, supposedly followers of Ned Ludd, a folklore figure. The first attacks of the Luddite movement began in 1811. The Luddites rapidly gained popularity, and the British government had to take drastic measures to protect industry.
629702
A steam engine.  Please, the  1800s are over.  Have you heard of solar power and/or wind power?
321206
Ford was the first company to use an assembly line.\n\nA Catholic priest named Father Ferdinand Verbiest has been said to have built a steam powered vehicle for the Chinese Emporer Chien Lung in about 1678.
13772
Featured Article - The History of Time Keeping\nLearn about the history of ancient timekeeping, sun and water clocks, mechanical and quartz clocks, time standards and time zones with this indepth five page article.\n\nMinute Hand\nIn 1577, Jost Burgi invented the minute hand. Burgi's invention was part of a clock made for Tycho Brahe, an astronomer who needed an accurate clock for his stargazing.\n\nPendulum\nIn 1656, the pendulum was invented by Christian Huygens, making clocks more accurate\nCheck out the link!
650841
If you don't count the abacus, which is ancient, then Blaise Pascal invented the first mechanical computation machine in France in 1642. Check it yo!\n\nhttp://www.thocp.net/hardware/pascaline.htm
236372
william gilbert\n\nWilliam Gilbert first coined the term "electricity" from the Greek word for amber. Gilbert wrote about the electrification of many substances in his "De magnete, magneticisique corporibus". He was also the first person to use the terms electric force, magnetic pole, and electric attraction.
157019
Typical Steamboat Engine\n\n\n    Have you ever seen a steamboat, either in the movies or real life? Did you notice the large puffs of white steam shooting into the air from pipes near the back of the boat. Those graceful white puffs are the exhaust steam from each stroke of the engines. Those clouds of white are really condensed steam.\n\n    Both early steamboat designs and steam railroad locomotives, are examples of "non-condensing" steam engines. A technical term meaning they do not re-use the steam. Once it has done it's work, the spent steam was vented directly into the atmosphere. A tremendous waste of both water and fuel for more water had to be pumped into the boilers and heated. Water which came from a rather muddy and cold river to boot.\n\n    So what is the difference between a non-condensing and condensing engine? A "condensing" steam engine does not exhaust its spent steam. Instead the spent steam is piped into a devise which, like a car radiator, cools the steam turning it back in to liquid water (cooling and condensing the steam). That still very hot water is pumped back into the boilers where it is reheated and reused. Since the returning water is still very hot it requires less heat to bring it back up to boiling temperature. A big savings in fuel and boiler maintenance, for this reused water is free of mud and dirt like normal river water.\n\n    The term "fixed cut-off" refers to the method of opening and closing the steam valves. In a fixed cut-off engine the rate at which the steam valves open and close is "fixed." Not adjustable, just open or closed at a given rate. Later designs included an additional device which allowed the valves to be controlled. That in turn allowed the engineers more control over the rate steam was used by the engines.\n\n    Like the vessels they propelled, river boat steam engines came in a variety of sizes. The side-wheeler PAUL JONES had engines with 21 inch diameter pistons and a stroke of 7 feet. The engines of the CITY OF NATCHEZ had pistons 26 inches in diameter with a stroke of 10 feet. Many were smaller, much smaller, however, a few may have been even larger.\n\n    If we take a minute to do the math, we can determine just how much steam those massive engines used. For those who don't know, or who have forgotten, the formula for determining the volume of a cylinder is (Volume = 3.1416 x (R x R) x H). For the CITY OF NATCHEZ engine's the answer is, 63,711 cubic inches.\n\n    Sixty-three thousand seven hundred and eleven cubic inches of steam were used with each ten foot stroke of the engine. Doing a little more math we can figure out the amount of water it took to make that much steam.\n\n    Water as we know, boils at 212 degrees (F). In a pot on the stove that is. When we confine the same water in a boiler under 200 pounds of pressure, it boils at 387 degrees (F). When water is converted to steam it expands 1,700 times its normal volume. Basically that means that one cubic inch of water when converted to steam will occupy 1,700 cubic inches of space. If we divide the amount of steam used in the engine by 1,700 we get 37.5 cubic inches of water. Or put another way, slightly more than 2 1/2 cups of water.\n\n    Two and a half cups of water isn't very much to be sure. But that was just for one stroke of the engine. One full revolution of the paddle-wheel requires two strokes of the piston or 75 cubic inches (five cups) of water per revolution. And of course there were two engines on each steamboat so we really used 150 cubic inches or roughly 10.3 cups (2 1/2 quarts) of fresh water for each complete revolution of the paddle-wheel.\n\n    Still not a tremendous amount of water is it? Okay, so now we multiply 2 1/2 quarts by the number of revolutions a paddle-wheel makes in one minute. Generally in fair weather and deep water most steamboats went as fast as they could. Getting the passengers and cargo to their destin
174226
Michael Farday invented electricity as we know it.\nAs a sidenote If Benny Franklin was  a creator of anything it was the lightning rod and the grounding priciple.\nFor centuries electricity has been a challenge to scientists. They have long known that it exists, and have discovered how to generate it on a large scale, but find it difficult to explain exactly what electricity is.\n\nWhere did it all begin?\n\nAround 600 BC Greeks found that by rubbing an 'electron' (a hard Fossilised resin that today is known as Amber) against a fur cloth, it would attract particles of straw. This strange effect remained a mystery for over 2000 years, until, around AD 1600, Dr William Gilbert investigated the reactions of amber and magnets and first recorded the word 'Electric' in a report on the theory of magnetism.\n\nGilbert's experiments led to a number of investigations by many pioneers in the development of electricity technology over the next 350 years.\n\nBenjamin Franklin(in his own words)\n Franklin was an American writer, publisher, scientist and diplomat, who helped to draw up the famous Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. In 1752 Franklin proved that lightning and the spark from amber were one and the same thing. The story of this famous milestone is a familiar one, in which Franklin fastened an iron spike to a silken kite, which he flew during a thunderstorm, while holding the end of the kite string by an iron key. When lightening flashed, a tiny spark jumped from the key to his wrist. The experiment proved Franklin's theory, but was extremely dangerous - He could easily have been killed.\n\nGalvani and Volta\n In 1786, Luigi Galvani, an Italian professor of medicine, found that when the leg of a dead frog was touched by a metal knife, the leg twitched violently. Galvani thought that the muscles of the frog must contain electricity. By 1792 another Italian scientist, Alessandro Volta, disagreed: he realised that the main factors in Galvani's discovery were the two different metals - the steel knife and the tin plate - apon which the frog was lying. Volta showed that when moisture comes between two different metals, electricity is created. This led him to invent the first electric battery, the voltaic pile, which he made from thin sheets of copper and zinc separated by moist pasteboard.\n\nIn this way, a new kind of electricity was discovered, electricity that flowed steadily like a current of water instead of discharging itself in a single spark or shock. Volta showed that electricity could be made to travel from one place to another by wire, thereby making an important contribution to the science of electricity. The unit of electrical potential, the Volt, is named after Volta.\n\nMichael Faraday\n The credit for generating electric current on a practical scale goes to the famous English scientist, Michael Faraday. Faraday was greatly interested in the invention of the electromagnet, but his brilliant mind took earlier experiments still further. If electricity could produce magnetism, why couldn't magnetism produce electricity.\n\nIn 1831, Faraday found the solution. Electricity could be produced through magnetism by motion. He discovered that when a magnet was moved inside a coil of copper wire, a tiny electric current flows through the wire. Of course, by today's standards, Faraday's electric dynamo or electric generator was crude, and provided only a small electric current be he discovered the first method of generating electricity by means of motion in a magnetic field.\nThomas Edison and Joseph Swan\n Nearly 40 years went by before a really practical DC (Direct Current) generator was built by Thomas Edison in America. Edison's many inventions included the phonograph and an improved printing telegraph. In 1878 Joseph Swan, a British scientist, invented the incandescent filament lamp and within twelve months Edison made a similar discovery in America.\n\nSwan and Edi
880309
An early pressure cooker, called a steam digester, was invented by Denis Papin, a French physicist, in 1679.\n\nWile E. Coyote cartoons had pressure cookers.
478828
In my opinion best thing invented by man is electric power.Its help to develope indusry ato a greate extent