Slashdot Mirror
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.'"
Once they finish working this out, I would really be interested if someone manages to reproduce a working version.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
You're right, but not the way you think. Modern science was started by the Catholic church. The dark ages were brought about by the fall of the Roman Empire. Had it not been for the church we might well still be in the dark ages.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
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.'"
The Greek calendar only had 10 months. The Roman's bastardized the calendar to have 12 month (adding August and then July) centuries after the was created.
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.
Have you considered the invention of the Gutenberg press at all? Before that many books were hand-transcribed and cost a small fortune. the Cambridge library in 1424 only contained about 125 books, the total value of which was probably around the size of a king's entire estate. A single book could cost as much as a farm.
Wasn't it a mob of rabid Christians that finally succeeded in destroying the great library of Alexandria? It might have been the single greatest loss of knowledge/history/culture in the entire existence of mankind. Just think of one of tens of thousands of losses, the complete works of Imnhotep, the man who invented modern architecture, medicine, mathematics and who knows what else, thousands of years before anybody else.
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
Points of order:
* "exclusive use", while not perfect, is far preferable to "left to rot", which is pretty much what would've happened if there wasn't at least some entity willing to preserve what would otherwise be disposed of by various invading armies, hordes, etc).
* Throughout Europe (save for Spain during the Islamic occupations), Latin was the common metric of literacy and fluency among anyone who had even the most rudimentary of noble titles. For most of the early portions of the Dark Ages, IIRC it was pretty much the only language of inter-kingdom commerce (which meant that import-export type merchants either knew it, or they got ripped off a lot).
* Err, The Bible wasn't printed in any non-Latin language until the 1450's CE, during the Italian Renaissance, which began quite a bit earlier (13th century), with the arrival of Islamic mathematics and philosophies that came back with returning crusaders... and not by Latin-to-Vulgar biblical translations. You were close, though - in that one invention during the same time period made knowledge easier to access... though not for the reasons you state.
Don't think "Bible", think "Printing Press". Scribe-time before the press was invented was hella expensive for anyone not in the Church wanting copies of something (said church was otherwise busy trying to keep copies of not only internal liturgical and dogmatic script, but to maintain legible copies of everything they could scrounge from the by-now-dead Roman and Greek empires).
HTH a little,
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Modern science was a direct result of Aristotelian empiricism. Just because Aquinas stumbled upon Aristotle and "rediscovered" AKA plagiarized his work doesn't mean the Catholics deserve any credit. If the Church hadn't spent centuries burning "heretics" and "pagan writings" maybe it wouldn't have needed to "rediscover" the wisdom of the previous era.
I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
This assumes that fragmentation is intrinsically negative. Nevermind that the 'fragmented' Greek and Anatolian states were practically the definition of civilization prior to Rome. What about the 'fragmentation' of China before the Qin dynasty? Christianity effectively neutered both Rome and eventually the Vikings. Rather than implement the constructive synthesis/syncresis of Rome, Christianity by nature employed a destructive imposition of socio-cultural concepts that would pave all of Europe into something of a bland monoculture. It wouldn't be a stretch to say that the Christianization of Europe was the first step on the road to today's modern Westernized monoculture. Anyway, the whole point is that there was and can be very valuable and successful 'fragmented' civilizations.
I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
You forgot about us insensitive clods
That's just silly. Where then did Jesus's brothers ands sisters come from?
I agree, but for fairness' sake I'll add that some people think that "brothers and sisters" referred to his cousins (linguistically it's perhaps possible, but again, I agree with you: they were biological children of Mary and Joseph). Better evidence, IMO, is Matthew 1:25a: "But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son." If that doesn't say they "did it", I don't know what would...
Anyway, the whole "virgin Mary" business is silly: Jesus was born of a virgin. Nothing says she had to remain a virgin after that. The idea of a "sinless Mary" is silly, too: "My soul doth magnify the Lord. / And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour." Savior from what, if she was sinless? And if she was sinless, Jesus wouldn't have had to die for sin: she could have done it.
Of course Joseph "knew" his wife. I think that was the mangu's point.
I know... I was responding to the quoted "Pillar of Faith". It was just too good to pass up... can't you picture Joseph? - "You mean we can't ever WHAT?!"
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Only in Europe, and only because anyone who wrote a book without the Church approval would be burned at the stake. But what about the rest of the world? While the monks in Europe were copying their religious texts, the rest of the world was inventing Damascus steel and the number zero, among many other things.
The monks in Europe were so blinded by their faith they couldn't see the brightest supernova in historic times. Not a single mention to one of the most remarkable natural events ever seen on Earth. No wonder they call it the DARK Age!
Well, I'm an atheist (ok, more agnostic) and swift to blame religion myself. Butm to be entirely fair, I'm not sure why you blame the church there.
1. The early Franks were pretty proud that they're warriors, not scribes. They're not the only ones.
Charlemagne was the first monarch there who even tried to learn to write. Very late in life and, while he must be commended for his real efforts and time dedicated, it seems to have gone nowhere.
2. Antiquity itself wasn't that much more literate. Yes, in the middle ages only the rich learned to read and write. Guess what? The Hellots of Sparta and the poor of Rome, but especially _outside_ Rome weren't much richer and nobody taught them to read and write. And even in Egypt, while for the rich it was a thing of _pride_ to be literate (and addressing a letter "to your scribe" was a form of flattery, meaning, "I know you're your own scribe"), don't think that the poor working the fields had time to go to school.
We have a somewhat distorted view of Greece and Rome, in that basically we have a distorted tunnel view of it. We see the greatness of Athens at its peak, or Sparta... which were populated only with rich slave owners, whose only job was to be soldiers and philosophers. Athens additionally had managed to cheat the other Greek states, who had joined as _allies_ against Persia, with Athens as merely heading and organizing the army and funds, but found themselves actually turned into vassals of Athens and paying tribute as... well, more like a form of paying for protection. And not against the Persians, if you know what I mean.
So, yeah, the Athenians of Pericle could build great statues and temples, and sit around debating politics and philosophy, on the money of the whole rest of Greece and on the work of countless slaves. They _were_ the rich guys, and yeah, they could read and write. Big improvement over the Dark Ages, where also the rich guys could read and write, eh?
Ditto in Rome. We look mainly at what happened inside Rome itself, and the great democracy they had, but forget about the whole regions where they reduced the peasants to utter poverty by confiscating the lands and distributing the lands of a whole bloody province to half a dozen rich families. Again, we see the rich and maybe also middle classes this time, getting an education and living in nice cities. And a few slaves used as personal clerks. But forget about the 80% of the population, who was working the fields outside the cities, and who lived a heck of a lot worse and nobody educated those. Don't think that anyone educated the slaves in Sicily, which are documented to have been borderline starved and sometimes outright starved, so their masters could sell more grain to Rome. Or don't think that the slaves in the mines, which was little more than a slow death sentence, got educated first.
Ancient times were a lot shittier than some people assume. Maybe a little better than the darkest of the Dark Ages, but for most of the poor people, not by much or not at all.
3. Romans insisted on your learning Roman or Greek too, so...
4. What we inherited as the idea of the Dark Ages is, well, partially (though not totally) just the eternal circle of nihilism. Each time people go disillusioned, it seems to be a common reaction to go basically "OMG, our contemporary culture is nothing, we're living in the (new) Dark Ages" and "somewhere else / somewhere in the past, now that was Teh Golden Age, and the land of milk and honey!"
So back then, someone thought Rome was all that. Funnily enough, Rome at various points had thought Greece had been all that. And Greece had thought that their Mycaenean ancestors had been all that. And if you go forward in time instead, you find a disillusioned 19'th century England thinking that the middle ages had been such a golden age of chivalry. Some still do.
Others look with nostalgia at the peak of the age of disease, social injustice, broken social contracts, nobles _and_ cities plundering the former common lands
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
I can't speak to the Mayan stuff, but Galileo was an ass. He happened to be a correct ass, but his discipline was as much political as anything else.
To put a point on it, suppose that someone showed up with solid evidence that disproved anthropogenic climate change and instead pointed conclusively to sunspots or cattle by-products. See the comparison? Two competing theories, one carrying the day (for good or ill) in contemporary considerations. So this guy shows up with evidence, but is a pompous ass and tells the UNCC, et al to get bent and mocks them in the academic papers it publishes with the perfectly good data.
I'm not saying that it justifies ignoring his conclusions or anything, but to sit here 450 years later and pretend that he didn't have something to do with his situation is just plain special pleading.