Workings of Ancient Calculating Device Deciphered

palegray.net writes "Scientists have discovered new meaning behind the functions of the Antikythera Mechanism, which has been referred to as the oldest known analog computing device. In addition to providing a means to calculate the dates for solar eclipses, the device apparently tracked the four-year cycles of the Olympiad. From the New York Times article: 'Only now, applying high-resolution imaging systems and three-dimensional X-ray tomography, have experts been able to decipher inscriptions and reconstruct functions of the bronze gears on the mechanism. The latest research has revealed details of dials on the instrument's back side, including the names of all 12 months of an ancient calendar.'"

Comments

Where would we be today?

[BobTheConvict]

I've always marveled at the "how did they do that" nature of such discoveries and honestly makes me realize an incredible loss of knowledge and skill occurred somewhere in the past (Dark Ages perhaps) that set us back thousands of years.

Re:Where would we be today?

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe a big "thank you" is in order for organized religion.

Re:Where would we be today?

[Abreu]

I believe a big "thank you" is in order for organized religion.

Actually, the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire had more to do with it.

The Church, if anything, managed to save some of the knowledge that would otherwise would have been lost.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_ages

Re:Where would we be today?

[Apathist]

The Church, if anything, managed to save some of the knowledge that would otherwise would have been lost.

Sure, if by "save" you mean "appropriate for exclusive use".

Yes, the fall of the Roman Empire immediately preceded the Dark Ages. However, problem of the Dark Ages was not so much that there was no central empire to act as a beacon of light, but more that education and knowledge was available only to the clergy (and the wealthy, via the clergy). It is very telling that the Renaissance only began with the translation of the Bible into a common tongue, instead of being exclusively in Latin - that only priests could read.

Re:Where would we be today?

[mdmkolbe]

Good, bad or ugly, it's still a fact that more knowledge was preserved with the Church than would have been without. The monks may have shown bias in which texts they copied, but it's not like anyone else was copying or distributing other works on as large a scale.

Re:Where would we be today?

[DerekLyons]

Actually, the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire had more to do with it.

The cause of that fall is still under debate, but the least that can be said is that it was closely correlated to the rise of the Roman Church.

You can say it, sure. You can also say "the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog".

OK, correlation is not causation, but there is no causation without correlation, causation hasn't been disproved either.

Translation: "I want to make it sound like I'm educated and unbiased without actually being either, especially the latter. Learning is hard."

Re:Where would we be today?

[ktappe]

It sounds like you are accusing the Church of suppressing education and civilization.

He may not be, but I am. If you do not think the Church has suppressed education, then you need to go have a long look at texts describing the Inquisition. One single example is how the Church dictated the wholesale burning of every scrap of paper documenting the Mayan civilization because it was declared heresy. (Ref: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/maya). Another very famous example is the Church excommunication of Galileo for daring to suggest the earth orbits the sun. And of course there's the modern-day refusal to accept natural selection as a concept they'll tolerate being taught in schools. Many, many other examples are out there for the learning if you care to look.

Are you saying the collaspe of education and civilization had nothing to do with that whole burning and pillaging thing from the pagan barbarian hordes such as the Goths and Vandals?

They were largely disorganized. The Church is far and away the longest lasting, best-funded, globally-organized suppressor of education that has ever existed. No other example even comes close.

Re:Where would we be today?

[mdmkolbe]

I stand by the point that the church certainly did not go to pains to educate the people.

Anyone who could afford the time to be educated, was educated. Cathedral and monastery schools dotted the landscape and you didn't have to become a monk or priest to join these schools.

Unfortunately most peasants couldn't afford the time to get educated. They were too busy growing crops and living like peasants. That isn't the Church's fault. That's the result of the inefficient food production system at the time. It would be dishonest to ascribe sinister motives to this simple fact of life.

On the other hand, those that could afford the time, would usually prefer to become doctors, lawyers or priests after they were educated instead of going back to their peasant lives. In other words, there were no educated peasants because once a peasant was educated, he was no longer a peasant.

Re:Yeah but...

[Abreu]

I'm imagining Beowulf imagining a Beowulf cluster of these things.

Nah, if anything, I can imagine Beowulf ripping out one of its clock hands and throwing it to the sea

Re:Why calculate timing of the Olympiad?

[Tofino]

The wikipedia article indicates that people think the device was designed with compactness in mind. So why would you add the feature of calculating when 4 years had passed? It's already keeping track of the months, so couldn't you just count them as they went past? Did I miss something?

You've clearly never developed software for salespeople.

Re:Computer Model Proves GeoCentrism

[Red Flayer]

Emphasis mine:

So my point here is that "scientific" computer models should be greeted with skepticism, even when they accurately predict. They should be absolutely scorned when they fail to accurately predict. There are a whole bunch of "scientists" out there running computer similations that are far less predictive than this device that is likey based on a geocentric theory of the universe.

ALL models should be greeted with skepticism. Hell, all THEORIES and all HYPOTHESES should be greeted with skepticism.

That is the very foundation of successful application of the scientific method.

There's a big problem with what you're saying, however... you say that a model that does not accurately predict should be scorned. That is false. Models are often revised to account for inaccurate predictions. As one famous scientist explained, it is not the Eureka! moments that drive true discovery, it is the "That's funny..." moments. In other words, the failure of a model to accuately predict will often lead to greater understanding of what is being modeled. Do you think that the General Theory of Relativity should be scorned, even though, as a modeal, it fails to accurately predict the existence of dark energy and dark matter?

So, to sum up -- yes, skepticism is important in all science. But a model that does not predict accurately may still have value to the scientific community... at the very least, it can be the starting point for a revised model that does accurately predict.