Pedestrian crossings at traffic lights seem to be either of the type where the "walk" sign aligns with the green signal for car traffic in the same direction, or the type where all crossings go "walk" at the same time with the car traffic completely stopped (which also enables crossing the intersection through the middle). Which style of these came first? It seems the "walk at the same time with traffic stopped" would be safer, preventing cars turning into pedestrians, but the "walk with traffic" is a lot more common, was there a debate on this when deciding what to standardize on?

it's very easy in today's world/technology to see people get fit in such different ways. What did the ancient greeks do specifically that caused them to be so muscular?

Google gives the definition of a world war as one that "... [involves] many large nations in all different parts of the world." However, by that definition we should surely include wars such as the Napoleonic War or the 7 Years' War. I understand that the two world wars that we all know and love (learning about) are the most obvious, but if we want to be completely pedantic and technical, how many world wars have there actually been?

or is it just that iron armour is hard to preserve, and therefore we have difficulty finding any intact pieces?

At first, I must say I definitely do not know enough about Asia's history. This questions is purely based on observation and I am only a curious 18 year old.

With that being said, we all know that Asians found the formula of gunpowder, knew how to make paper or print before anyone else. I am curious about the period in-between that and the 20th century digital revolution(we all can agree Japan had a great contribution).

The question struck my mind while thinking mainly about Maths, Physics, etc. We know about Lagrange, Fermat, Euler, Riemann, Newton, Faraday, Tesla, Einstein, Darwin, Watt, Planck and many other European mathemathicians, chemists, physicists, biologists, but I don't believe I've heard of any other major Asian "scientist" in 12 years of school(I strictly mean school curriculum).

Why wasn't there any?(or maybe, if they existed, why aren't we taught about them?)

As a P.S.: I don't try by any means to sound racist or to claim that europeans were superior or similar stuff. I am just genuinely curious, and again sorry if it is a simple answer. If it is, I must improve my "googling".

Is someone from say 1700 more "intelligent" than someone from 1500? Are people today more intelligent than those from 1500 or 1700? Has our IQ and critical/analytical thinking skills increased over the years at all? Or do we just have more access to information? If we all had the same info presented to us would someone today pick up in it better?

Can be books or articles (I can access most scholarly databases in my current position.) Fascinated by the topic, for starters, and the Jeopardy! test is coming up, as well - one of their favorites!

I've been searching for information about the invention of the arquebus, but there are far too many contradicting statements about it: one says that the Chinese were already using it in the 12th century, another says that the Spanish invented it in the 15th century and yet another one says that it came to be when a "serpentine" lever was added into an hand cannon in 1411.

As for the matchlock, the only information I could find about its invention is that they were already being used in 1475.

I ask this question because I was researching the Maya, and it seems like they created a civilization in some of the most hostile terrain possible.

I've heard the standard, "Central Africa's soil was too poor" or "There was no need for civilization" or "There were no easily-domesticated animals." Those same reasons apply to southern Mexico and Guatemala, the Mayan heartland. Why, then, did the Maya develop civilization but not central Africans? There doesn't seem to be anything in equatorial Africa rivaling Chichen Itza or Tikal.

Ok so this was a showerthought and I don't have any in-depth knowledge on this topic but at least according to popular culture, different immigrant groups seemed to have brought along their own versions of organizied crime: the Italian mob, or mafia, the irish mob, the russian mob, triads, yakuza (although I'm not sure if they operate outside of Japan) to name a few. So, in general, my question is if these syndicates were "imported" or formed among the respective immigrant groups long after immigration and, in particular, if there was some sort of German organzied crime?

Edit: wording

Edit 2:grammar

I've always thought about this, the Aztecs, Mayans, Incas etc. were even more isolated but they manage to develop astronomy, complex record keeping, pseudo writing and large urban dwellings and temples etc. whereas, Kingdoms in sub-Saharan Africa did not with a few exceptions like great Zimbabwe. why didn't knowledge of agriculture, animal husbandry and permanent cities flow down the Nile and into lower African kingdoms on the continent or by trade routes on the Swahili coast

[deleted]

Could the gun m1941 LMG have a scope on it?

So after yet another viewing of The Third Man, I want to know more about the place and the time, specifically what life was like there on a day to day basis. Google hasn't helped much, are there any books about the period generally, maybe something featuring a lot of diaries or letters, that sort of thing? I want to understand the place culturally, like what the different social groups were.

Thanks reddit!

When did efforts begin to professionalize the police in the West so they were more interested in solving crime, and what steps were taken say between 1850-1980?

I wanna know if there are actual witness reports describing these wars?

There is an awful lot of utter trash being circulated online and off about Göbekli Tepe, as every historical conspiracist under the sun races to claim it proves their particular point. However, it is an ancient site with very unusual features. What do actual historians make of it?

He had the allies covered in all directions and he could've easily gotten them all. Why didn't he?

I'm a bit hard pressed to find information beyond uniforms and the small arms in use. My question is largely focused on the general state of the Army such as its strength, equipment in use (such as certain field guns), and the leadership of the Army.

I know the phalanx was replaced by a better system (Legion), but what beat or replaced the roman legion?

How did it fall out of military war method/tactics?

Same goes for Socrates and Plato. Many people treat it as axiomatic that these three were some of the greatest philosophers who ever lived, and that's why they are famous. But it seems to me like association with (and adoration from) Alexander would be enough to elevate any decent philosopher of the time into the stratosphere. That fame would explain why there were so many copies of their books survived so they were not lost to history, etc. I wonder whether they were really just pretty good philosophers whose historical reputations got a huge lucky break.