Slashdot Mirror
Eureka! Archimedes Revealed
pin_gween writes "The Mercury News has an AP wire that shows science uncovering history. 800 years ago a monk scrubbed the text off a goatskin parchment to write prayers. Nothing unusual there, except the parchment contained writings from a copy of Archimedes' Palimpsest. Now scientists are using x-rays, generated by a particle accelerator, to cause tiny amounts of iron left by the original ink to glow without harming the delicate goatskin parchment. It takes 12 hours to scan one page, then the information is posted online."
So, in other words, you could say that Archimedes had the first post. :) Sorry, could not resist.
Well, that, and the fact that some monk dude scrawled his love letters to god all over the bloody text!
She's built like a steak house, but she handles like a bistro....
4 Carrots
2 Pints of milk
Brithday card for aunt Mavis
I heard an interview with one of the scientists on the CBC. He said that there was possibly some new stuff that we didn't know about. In particular, there seems to be a section which tries to figure out how many different ways there are to solve a problem. So it seems that Archimedes was wondering about combinotorics.
Although this is a cool discovery, it would have been cooler if the lost writings were by a Greek intellectual whom we have less information about, say Heraclitus. Well, there is always the possibility that this technique could be used to recover other "lost" texts.
Philosophy.
Check out the article -
It was probably the only reason we got these writings in our hand.
If it was just the text of archimedes, then it would have been destroyed during the dark ages...
Since it was a prayer book, nobody dared, and now we have the data.
Every action has consequences, and some of them are inconcieveable
rajmohan_h@yahoo.com
I would say to put any Anti-Religious Zealotry aside, and think about it this way. How many files have you deleted from your hard-drive that perhaps in a couple hundred years would allow archeologist to get better insight on your generation, or the previous ones. Parchment was not as cheap as it was today. It took considerable amount of work just to create it, and Rubbing out the Old stuff for the New stuff seems like best situation, for the times. This period was well in the dark ages, saving old stuff wasn't the goal or even seemed that valuable. And besides as far as most were concerned at the time, this is old stuff from a dead civilization, make room for our new more modern method.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
This is a fairly obscure term, so most non-specialists don't know it. A "palimpsest" is a piece of parchment that has been re-used. This particular palimpsest contains stuff by Archimedes; and so it is called "the Archimedes Palimpsest." It is not "a copy of Archimedes' Palimpsest," it is THE Archimedes palimpsest.
Finally I can use my LIS nerdiness on slashdot, bastion of computer, science, and math nerds.
The summary says "Nothing unusual there, except the parchment contained writings from a copy of Archimedes' Palimpsest," using the term palimpsest incorrectly. By calling it "a copy of Archimedes' Palimpsest," the summary implies that Archimedes wrote something--a Palimpsest--which was then copied and found on this random scrap of parchment.
In actuality, a palimpsest is a parchment already inscribed where the original ink was scraped off for reuse. Parchment, being the skin of a calf, sheep or goat, was in the Middle Ages very expensive (there is an argument that the Gutenberg revolution was fuelled more by cheap paper then by the printing press, but I digress). It was not discarded, but often reused by monks in Medieval scriptoria.
Many works from antiquity, once thought lost, are found serendipitously through palimpsest, many of them pagan works overwritten in favour of Christian ones. So, what we have found is a palimpsest of a manuscript copy of Archimedes, not a copy of Archimedes' palimpsest
"Our earth is degenerate in these latter days, bribery and corruption
are common, children no longer obey their parents and the end of the
world is evidently approaching." --Archimedes goatskin, 210 B.C.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
I had a bible on vellum made by some printing company called Gutenberg, but some asshole called Martin Luther scribbeld all these corrections over it, so I used it to light the fireplace.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Dude, the "monk" wrote in Greek, in Constantinople. Whether it actually was a "monk", or just a scribe, or a priest, who scrubbed and copied that thing, is a different story. Anyway, 1229 Constantinople was a pretty rough place, and the Greek clergy wouldn't have been terribly rich; they've never been very interested in pagan Greek literature in the Eastern Church anyway. Now, in Paris, at the same time, there are plenty of priests, monks and friars who would be very eager to see what that text said (at least in translation). And there were active centers of Greek-Latin and Arabic-Latin translation of scientific texts at the time, especially in Spain.
The dark ages were more a result of the collapse of the Roman Empire. The monks were among the few people who kept education going. The monasteries of Ireland were one of the few bastions of learning and knowledge during the Dark Ages.
chmod 711
If there's one thing that drives me nuts about science these days is that there seems to be such an effort to maintain a hard line between the academics and the "public"...
Admittedly, they could be buried deep in the website somewhere were I coudn't find them... or, maybe they are still working on official translations and don't want to put anything that's inaccurate on the site, but I doubt it- Instead, the passages the translated probably sound boring and so they'll publish it in obscure science journals- All the public will hear about (I fear) is "Look! We're so cool for recovering the pampliset!"
True, they are cool for translating this thing, I agree- But why not give the public a better pathway into understanding the meaning of this find by showing us the money? Would it really kill them? Maybe we, the public, can appreciate the inherent value of even some obscure, boring-sounding passages?
I have the same complaint about PBS and the recent special on "String Theory"- These science programs (which are admittedly better than nothing) work so hard to be accessible that they put a subconscious barrier between "average people" and "scientists" that I think becomes self defeating to the advancement of science- A PBS program on String Theory would be far more awesome if there was an attempt made to make the program a gateway into the science, giving a few basic formulas and some feeling for the real science. Sure, the formulas might seem a bit boring and basic and maybe some folks won't take the mental effort to try to follow along... but a small peek "under the hood" (even if you don't understand it) would still be far more interesting than a bunch of bland generalizations that just tells you they don't think people really care about the important details. </rant>
One thing to keep in mind is that just because this palimpset is the only copy that we know about today, doesn't mean that there weren't other copies extant at the time it was reused; and at the time it was probably not such a unique text. Remember that Constantinople (now Istanbul) had just been sacked in 1204 during the Fourth Crusade, and things were still quite chaotic. At that time (1229) the city would still have been controlled by the Crusaders (it was not retaken by the Byzantines until 1261). In addition the city was sacked again in 1453 when it was conquered by the Turks, after which the Church and Byzantine civilization in general underwent systematic persecution and suppression. All of these disruptions have caused the loss of huge numbers of texts.
The Archimedes manuscript is not the only manuscript reused to make the prayer book - there are several other texts that were also used, including some others which are now also our only remaining copies. These include both pagan writers and other Christian texts. Again, we have little reason to think that any of these would have been considered particularly unique at the time.
Events have not been kind to ancient manuscripts generally; what we have left today is only a relatively small sampling of what was originally a vast ancient literature. The Church has often been blamed, and in the case of pagan religious texts there may be some justice in the charge; but what have doubtless been much bigger culprits for the bulk of the destruction have been marauding armies, fires, floods, and simply the ravages of time as old manuscripts decay without having been copied.
What you say is true, for the Catholic church, and (unfortunately) may churches today. However, there are many of us Christans who follow in the footsteps of those who were also burned at the stake, tortured and killed by this "Christianity" you speak of. Just remember, just because someone calls them self a Christian, does not mean they follow the commands and wishes of Jesus Christ.
Man is the lowest-cost, 150-pound, nonlinear, all-purpose computer system which can be mass-produced by unskilled labor.
Mob of Jews kills Christians. Mob of Christians get angry, seek revenge, kill Christians and burn some stuff. That's hardly a matter of being for or against learning and science. It was opposing tribes rioting against each other. Reminds me very much of Northern Ireland, where the problems are really two cultures clashing, rather than two religions.
I'm sure that members of the church did at times have in influence on the decline of the Roman Empire, something I never claimed to ignore, but as the church and state become intermeshed, that brought corruption, so it is more an illustration of the problems of church getting mixed up, rather than a proof of Christianity being anti-knowledge. i think that that the way the church got so involved with the state is a travesty and thoroughly unbiblical. Constantine made a lot of mistakes in that regard.
The church of Rome actually had very little influence on many areas of Christianity e.g. Celtic Christians and Eastern Orthodox during this time, so it's also rather unjust to tar all of Christianity with the same brush, especially given that the Protestant view is that the Roman church became increasingly corrupt during this time, requiring the Reformation. Christians involved with the Reformation had a very high of science and knowledge, seeing it as the Christian's duty to investigate God's creation, just as many monks had previously seen it as their duty to record history, providing us with a great part of the little history we have from the 'Dark Ages.' Incidentally, this view was carried on into latter centuries and well embodied by such scientists as Faraday and Maxwell, who were very passionate about science, but also staunchly evangelical Christians.
I suggest you take a look at the Wikipedia article on the Dark ages to see some of the misconceptions and biases that people have concerning the term and the time.
Yes - read the Scholarship section on the project web page. For example, http://www.archimedespalimpsest.org/scholarship_ne tz2.html which shows that Archimedes knew about Infinity and used it in a proof. The Greeks were fascinated by large numbers - questions like "can you count the number of grains of sand on all the beaches of the world?" - but it was thought they did not have the concept of actual infinity. The palimpsest shows that this was known some 2000 years ago, then forgotten for centuries.
But why should Archimedes give everyone execute rights to his writing?
This is from an assyrian stone tablet, circa 2800 bc... Puts things in perspective, doncha think ?
Non-Linux Penguins ?