Linguistic Clue Pushes Back Origin of "World's Oldest Computer"

Calopteryx points out a piece at New Scientist which suggests that the Antikythera mechanism may be even older than previously thought; an ancient Greek word on of the device's dials suggests the device may date to the early second century BC. The article is accompanied by a great animation of its (deduced) workings, too.

Comments

Well that concludes many things

[tengeta]

Watch, next thing you know that dial is how they got their ancient IP addresses.

Re:Well that concludes many things

[pushing-robot]

Oh, you and your wild anachronisms. Next you'll be telling us they played D&D in ancient Rome!

Re:Well that concludes many things

[dkf]

Oh, you and your wild anachronisms. Next you'll be telling us they played D&D in ancient Rome!

No, but they did have dungeons and live-action runs of Gladiators.

Re:Well that concludes many things

[camperdave]

Oh, you and your wild anachronisms. Next you'll be telling us they played D&D in ancient Rome!

I don't know about Rome, but I hear the Egyptians were famous for their games of Dungeon Draggin'.

Re:Well that concludes many things

[peragrin]

The original LAG was a game killer just like it is today.
Only back then you really did die.

Re:Well that concludes many things

[EdZ]

You could at least post the obligatory XKCD link.

Re:Computer?

[pushing-robot]

Please read this before posting.

Oh shucks, too late.

Re:Computer?

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree with you.
This not a free form stick and sand device.
It's a mechanical device that deterministically computes planetary data based on user input.
It's a highly specialized computer in my book.

But Does It End In 2012 (tm)

[RuBLed]

My gut says someone is already thinking of adding this device as part of a movie plot. sigh...

Re:But Does It End In 2012 (tm)

[timothy]

Two syllables, one color-word? And the color word might remind you of the content of (what I hear) is a vital plot device in another movie which is apparently a bit better than (say) The Da Vinci Code called Two Girls One Cup?

Because I suspect he's just floating in a pool of his own drool trying to work this device into an awful novel.

timothy

Re:But Does It End In 2012 (tm)

[jandersen]

My gut says someone is already thinking of adding this device as part of a movie plot. sigh...

Really? Mine generally just growls.

Re:But Does It End In 2012 (tm)

[kv9]

+5, Scatological

Re:Computer?

[The_mad_linguist]

A computer? That's the hot chick who crunches numbers for me.

It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[AftanGustur]

I sometimes wonder what the world would look like today if the Catholic church hadn't held back scientific research in the middle ages and killed the best and brightest minds..

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Anonymous Coward]

I sometimes wonder what the world would look like today if the Catholic church hadn't held back scientific research in the middle ages and killed the best and brightest minds..

They didn't actually do that, but don't let that get in the way of your prejudice. About the worst they can reasonably be accused of is encouraging bright people to remain celibate.

Either way, though, it wouldn't have changed much. The Catholics did not control the entire world, and there was plenty going on outside their reach -- particularly in the Islamic world, where massive progress was made in mathematics, chemistry, and astronomy.

Nice troll though.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[gknoy]

Wouldn't threatening leading scientists with heresy or witchcraft charges, crusades against a technologically advanced (and supportive of science!) civilization, and a general discouragement of literacy outside the clergy count as "holding back scientific research"? I think it does.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

Nothing would have been changed, in the byzantine empire and the arabic world and china knowledge thrived, so basically

nothing was held back. I think technological jumps follow a cycle and currently we are at the height of such a development cycle which might slow down again for several decades.
The main root for modern science were some factors, call it the lazy well fed european together with the connection between mathematics and physics layed out by people like Decardes Leibnitz and Newton.
It could have been developed earlier in the arabic or byzantine world or in china, the foundations always were there and also the minds and some already did, but the theories did not stay long enough to have an impact.
For instance the first steam engine was designed in Alexandria, but it never had any impact due to inherent slavery being present, same goes for the connection of mathematics and physics and generally calculus which is the foundation of the connection, all done in greece to some degree but it had not any impact because mathematics were seen by the general public as being from a to esoteric angle and the people doing the connection did not make enough impact on society.
Same in the arabic world, they took the decade system with zero from india and developed it further again no impact.
Sometimes an apple is all you need to change the world.

And I dont think it would have happend earlier with or without the catholic churchs stance on things in the middle ages.
(Which were not that bad they preserved knowledge as well, but europe was piss poor and most people had survival in mind, things became bad later when the printing press was invented)

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Anonymous Coward]

Please don't let the facts get in the way of GP's prejudice!

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

Happened all the way later, the funny thing is the so called dark ages the middle ages were not that dark, the witch burning happened way after the middle ages with their height about 300 years ago, but when that started to happen the genie in form of the printing press was already out of the bottle.

And even worse the catholics were not even the worst witch burners in fact in the later stages during the 30 years war in europe the offical roman view was even against it (the triggering books although were clearly catholic), but it was a mass phenomenon infesting the minds of the europeans at that time, and the protestants often being worse.

Also the stance of the catholic church towards science and the trial of galileo did not change anything and it would not have happened probably in the middle ages.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

Ah to add an example the so called dark middle ages, were the foundation of the first universities in paris and there was a huge exchange between the scholars of france and granada (which was the science capital of that time)

The situation was simply that the roman empire was crushed and so in the european world science was lost what was saved mostly could be found in cloisters which also opened the first schools, the other roman world the byzantime empire still had it thriving but was constantly under war so they had higher priorities, but nevertheless all the science also went into the arabic world and from then again into europe!

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[bundaegi]

Read Bachelard Formation of the scientific mind and weep. If only it were so easy and blame everything on the catholic church. For a very long period of time, it looks as if entertainment value was put way above scientific rigor... that and scientific thinking is quite a recent thing. From the book, experiment held around 1700 (from vague recollection): Electricity from a battery cell passes through a liquid and the experimenter's tongue. Experimenter then "tastes" the electricity. Taste through milk? "Soft and sweet" as opposed to electricity flowing through vinegar "strong acid taste". Anyway, interesting read.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Anonymous Coward]

If anything, the catholic church promoted the brightest minds and protected them. You know, when the roman empire fell, most europeans favourite hobby was still smashing their neighbours heads with axes. It wasn't even just the northern europeans, since the german tribes spread to all parts of the old western rome.

Luckily, the catholic church eventually converted these peoples and with that came a culture where even a quiet man who spent most of his life in a room doing experiments could be regarded a great man. That would not have happened without the catholic church.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Potor]

+5 interesting for a blatant troll?

If anything held back technology, it was the slavery of the ancient world (by this, I mean slaves controlled by punishment rather than reward).

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[AliasMarlowe]

For a very long period of time, it looks as if entertainment value was put way above scientific rigor

And we have recently returned to that dark age.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Anonymous Coward]

but never let facts interfere with hate.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Opportunist]

I'm not really a friend of the Catholic church and its dogmatic position, but claiming they're the fiend of research and development is a bit misplaced. As usual progress was the enemy of those in power, and they in turn used the Church for their means. It's a bit like saying that today, governments are enemies of progress because they issue laws that hamper it.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[SlashWombat]

I had always read that the Arabs were the repository of ancient knowledge, keeping good quality copies in libraries, not some cloister in some hick medieval village. (In fact, religion is often quoted as being the cause of the destruction of the library at Alexandria ...) Thus our numeric scheme (0..9, 10 ...). As much as many seem to deny (in the threads above) Religion has been accused of holding back scientific progress. If some halfwit religous nut calculates that the world is only 6231.1215926 years old, that is the age of the world! Thus evolution is a load of crap, since the world is demonstrably less than 7000 years old.

Better get of my soapbox now, before some deluded religious maniac threatens me with bodily harm.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[RaymondKurzweil]

Jeez, AC.

Yes, maybe the GGP exageratted some things, but it still doesn't change the fact that the Catholic Church sucks.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[netpixie]

One day in the far future:

"I've finished! The last peice of source recovered. We now know how this ancient artifact called Linux worked"

"Linux, what's linux?"

"Its a very old but staggeringly advanced computing system devised *before* the dark age of Microsoft. Its amazing to think that hundreds of years ago people had the ability to listen to music and watch videos whenever and whereever they wanted without being bound by the draconian licencing schemes, blue screens, poor driver quality and cost we have had to put up with for so many many years"

"Interesting, just think how advanced our technology would be now had Microsoft not had all heretics burned"

"Yes, it's a terrible terrible shame. What were they thinking?"

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Anonymous Coward]

I sometimes wonder what the world would look like today if the Catholic church hadn't held back scientific research in the middle ages and killed the best and brightest minds..

I often wonder what the world would look like if the roman empire never fell and the Christians and Muslims never came into power.

The reason some say the dark ages were not that dark, is that there is not a lot of history from that period because of the prevailing ignorance that was lead by the church in an effort to spread their word under pain of death.

Sure a few religious people over the centuries protected a little bit of knowledge, but for every document saved, thousands were lost. The Muslims did a better job of maintaining that knowledge and now they take credit for all those Greek and roman inventions. Of course they only kept the non-heretical stuff as well.

I am sure a computer, even and analogue one, would have been seen as evil magical technology by the church. I mean they even forgot the formula for concrete. Not exactly a mind trust IMO.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[jonwil]

Just look at Galileo Galilei or Jean Francois Champollion for examples of what the Catholics did against science.
Galileo was pushing the sun-centered universe and was persecuted by the Church for it. And the Church went after Champollion because of a fear that he would discover something in Egypt proving that the Great Flood of the bible couldn't have happened when the Church said it did.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Anonymous Coward]

+5 interesting for a blatant troll?

If anything held back technology, it was the slavery of the ancient world (by this, I mean slaves controlled by punishment rather than reward).

Sure, slavery eliminated the economic need for mechanical technology in many regions, but it did not hold back technology in any way. Where slaves were not practical there was plenty of mechanical technology that rivaled that of the modern industrial revolutions.
The history channel had a good show on it a while back called Roman Tech.

If you take out the social issues, slavery has usually provided enough wealth to create the good tech. Then when the tech is at a high enough level it replaces the slaves unless it is still cheaper to have slaves. both the roman and modern examples follow this example. The Romans just never totally gave up slavery.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Heed00]

Galileo begs to differ that, "the worst they can reasonably be accused of is encouraging bright people to remain celibate."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Church_controversy

With the loss of many of his defenders in Rome because of Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, Galileo was ordered to stand trial on suspicion of heresy in 1633. The sentence of the Inquisition was in three essential parts:

1) Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy," namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions.

2) He was ordered imprisoned; the sentence was later commuted to house arrest.

3) His offending Dialogue was banned; and in an action not announced at the trial, publication of any of his works was forbidden, including any he might write in the future.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Opportunist]

Funny enough, it wasn't the RCC. As much as they're dogmatic about religious things, they were (and to some degree still are) pretty lenient and progressive towards research and science. The RCC are hardly Luddites, and quite a bit of progress that was possible in medieval times was helped by Popes who wanted better artillery and more sculptures.

The RCC was a good scapegoat for emperors, though, if they wanted a cheap and easy way to get rid of gripers. Much like a lot of "terrorist" laws are today. Heretic, witch, communist, terrorist... why do you think the times change? The terms change, their use stays the same. It's a tool for those in power to intimidate their subjects and gain support for their quest to weed out the malcontents that dare to raise their voice.

The RCC wasn't keen on keeping literacy down. In fact, they taught it. Most charges of heresy and witchcraft against scientists were not raised by the RCC itself but rather by powerful individuals that were threatened by them. The Roman Inquisition was one of the most advanced judical systems in those times, and many people accused of heresy hoped to be subjected to the RI instead of a "worldly" court because your chance for a fair trial (as far as fairness went in those times) was heaps higher. You had the right to a defender who was educated in Roman Law, you had the right to be sheltered, in such a way that it is possible to you to prepare for your trial, the judges were not under the direct control of the Pope (actually quite often they acted against the Pope's interests) and your chance to go out free was not too bad, compared to other trials of that times. Maybe the best example on how much these Inquisition trials were aiming at finding the truth rather than a 'desired' result was the trial of Martin Luther, who, after all, challenged the RCC itself.

The Spanish Inquisition is the one we usually think of when we think of the term "Inquisition", with fake trials and torture and predetermined verdicts. This was by no means sanctioned by the RCC and actually just a tool of the local authorities, not one of the Holy See.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

Not more than many other churches, as soon as extremists have a certain percentage every religion starts to suck.
There are churches on the protestant side and on the orthodox side which are so extreme that the catholic church looks like a bunch of liberal hippies compared to them.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

I would not even say the arabs are the safekeepers, probably almost the entire middle age society with western europe being the dark spot only. The biggest gate was Constantinople with their book copy shops from there the books went into the arabic world and also to some degree into europe.
For those countries western europe must have looked like Afghanistan looks now for us.

This is one of the biggest mistakes tought in schools that the middle ages were some kind of age where knowledge was lost everywhere while only a small subset of the world lost its knowledge (which it never had in the first degree since france never went into this stage after the roman empire collapse neither did italy really nor spain)

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Dunbal]

As usual progress was the enemy of those in power,

      No, progress is always the ally of those in power. However those in power are always trying to stomp on the masses and hold them back - that's how they STAY in power - because if you're not one step ahead of the masses, you are nobody.

      Thus today we have corporate lobbying and purchasing of politi - er campaign contributions, copyright laws and extensions far beyond YOUR lifetime, patents on YOUR gene sequences, etc. Government, which ideally is a big stick to prevent the strong from destroying the weak - is now a tool used by the strong to keep the weak in line.

      Back then the biggest "international" government was the church. Europe was divided into many squabbling kingdoms, but the church had the power to keep kings in line by threatening ex-communication or getting several neighbors to put pressure on an "sinful" nation. It's just the same shit, over and over again. We call ourselves civilized yet the structure of our society is similar to watching a pack of wild street dogs, only on a different scale.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

The church was fighting a loosing battle there, the main issue was the invention of the printing press, the church tried to supress things and development, and did not manage. You can draw a shitload of parallels to the MP/RI AA mess we have today.
That does not mean they hampered or stopped any development, and that did not happen in the middle ages!

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

That applied only to western europe and was one of the causes for the reformation to even have a ground to thrive on.
The church was never in the power to stop any progress because most of the time since the collaps of the roman empire the development simply did not happen in western europe at all!
The role of the church in all this is greatly exaggerated due to the Galileo trials, which btw. happened at a time when science already was happening in europe in full force.
The church never hampered any development in science before especially not the lectures by Pleton which triggered the Rennesaince in italy!

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

Actually in case of a catastrophy on a worlwide scale, it is more likely that Linux would survive in case of computer technology can be safed than Windows, due to windows inherent closed source nature!

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Heed00]

I was responding to the assertion that, "About the worst they can reasonably be accused of is encouraging bright people to remain celibate." I pointed out a counter-example to that assertion which clearly shows the church doing a lot more than encouraging Galileo to "keep it in his pants".

And yes, you're correct -- that happened about 100 years after the period in time known as "the middle ages". But that doesn't change the inaccuracy of the original assertion that all the church really did was encourage bright people to be celibate. The church clearly used its power to stifle thought that conflicted with its world view.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Dunbal]

Luckily, the catholic church eventually converted these peoples

      You make it sound wonderful. Yes, just like the Catholic church "converted" the natives living in the Americas. Oh, where are they today, anyway? That's right, most of them chose to die rather than be "converted". Now why would that be?

      No, it's not burning people at the stake that brought about the renaissance. Progress and science continued East of Constantinople which less than 300 years after the fall of Rome, converted to Islam. During the golden age of the Islamic Caliphate, great progress was achieved in mathematics and natural science while Europe was embroiled in petty squabbles and eternally warring fiefdoms and baronies. The catholic church actively persecuted scientists as heretics, whereas the Islamic world embraced them (with certain limitations in the field of medicine, like not allowing dissections of the human body).

      Then the Mongols invaded and destroyed the Islamic caliphate, and again a lot of progress and knowledge was lost in the world. Fortunately for Western Europe the big fish had eaten most of the little fish, and the squabbling local bosses had been forced to accept the rule of kings by then. This allowed for the organization of navies, the re-establishment of international trade and the establishment of universities - like Salamanca in Spain and Oxford and Cambridge in England. Finally Western Europe could afford to maintain scholars again. However what mostly happened is that they copied the knowledge that was coming from the East. It would be another 200 years before the Renaissance happened, and invention took off in the West.

      No, please don't give me that line about how the church promoted scholarship. The ONLY thing the church did was force monks to copy old texts, and that's how SOME of the ancient knowledge was preserved. However monks weren't allowed to pass that knowledge on to the general public, and didn't communicate much among themselves lest they be called heretics.

      It's no coincidence that the only "religious" scientist, Mendel, only had his work on genetics "discovered" 200 years AFTER HE WAS DEAD.

      I suggest you read a few history books, and you'll see what a nasty political tool the Catholic church (or any church, for that matter) is. But remember, God needs your money.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Dunbal]

Pleton was expelled from Florence by the church in 1409 for his teachings, and ended up back in Byzantine territory. Don't give me that crap, and learn your history.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Cyberax]

Yes, the church built several universities.

But scholars at these universities only engaged in intellectual masturbation (i.e. religion). They produced ZERO useful results. Literally zero. Oh, and they even failed to preserve antic texts, overwriting old parchments with stupid prayers.

And what about the Library of Alexandria? It was destroyed by Christians.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Carewolf]

No, please don't give me that line about how the church promoted scholarship. The ONLY thing the church did was force monks to copy old texts, and that's how SOME of the ancient knowledge was preserved.

And build universities and schools and fund scientists. Funny how Europe can have so many old universities isn't it? And funny how they were all founded by a pope?

However monks weren't allowed to pass that knowledge on to the general public, and didn't communicate much among themselves lest they be called heretics.

You are making that up. It has absolutely no basis in reality.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[orzetto]

It's no coincidence that the only "religious" scientist, Mendel, only had his work on genetics "discovered" 200 years AFTER HE WAS DEAD.

That's 20 I suppose. Mendel died in 1884.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Dunbal]

And build universities and schools and fund scientists. Funny how Europe can have so many old universities isn't it?

[citation needed]

University of Bologna, founded in 1088 and received a charter from Frederick I, King of Germany and Italy in 1158.
Salamanca - founded by Alfonso IX, King of Spain in 1218
University of Paris - founded between 1160 and 1170 and later recognized by Pope Innocent III (who was a graduate in 1182).
University of Oxford - founded in the 11th century, not by any pope.
University of Cambridge - founded by students fleeing the University of Oxford...
University of Padua, founded 1122 by students of the University of Bologna

in fact, here's a link for you, where you can see that really not that many universities were founded by popes - especially outside of the Italian peninsula, and most of those were founded 200+ years after the first universities because Italy was starting to lag far behind the rest of the world. The renaissance may have begun in Italy, but if you look at the names of the great scientists, most of them are German, French or English.

I will argue that the pope's main interests in the universities was to assure that the "fourth" doctrine, theology, was taught properly, and that none of the other fields of study (law, medicine and philosophy) strayed from permitted doctrine.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[moonbender]

Scientific progress didn't stop simply because it largely stopped in Western Europe. The best and brightest minds weren't killed by the church because they didn't live within its reach.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[moonbender]

Those in power very much included the church for most of Europe's history.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[mcoca]

You make it sound wonderful. Yes, just like the Catholic church "converted" the natives living in the Americas. Oh, where are they today, anyway? That's right, most of them chose to die rather than be "converted". Now why would that be?

Take a look south of the US border sometime. Most of the Central and South American population is of native descent. Of the ones that died, most didn't "chose" to, but died of imported diseases no one really had control over. The only large area of the Americas where natives were completely eradicated was North America, which happens to be the only area colonized largely by non-Catholic nations...

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[smoker2]

Galileo was pushing the sun-centered universe and was persecuted by the Church for it.

That's not true. The Church were quite happy with the heliocentric version of the way the solar system worked - it meant that by using those calculations, they could determine the exact date of Easter much more precisely. Previously their system had Easter moving throughout the year unpredictably, whereas under a heliocentric system it could be pinned down to within a month.

They persecuted Galileo because he had some un-politically correct things to say about the church and the Pope. That didn't stop them using the calculations though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Church_controversy

By 1616 the attacks on Galileo had reached a head, and he went to Rome to try to persuade the Church authorities not to ban his ideas. In the end, Cardinal Bellarmine, acting on directives from the Inquisition, delivered him an order not to "hold or defend" the idea that the Earth moves and the Sun stands still at the centre. The decree did not prevent Galileo from discussing heliocentrism hypothesis (thus maintaining a facade of separation between science and the church). For the next several years Galileo stayed well away from the controversy. He revived his project of writing a book on the subject, encouraged by the election of Cardinal Barberini as Pope Urban VIII in 1623. Barberini was a friend and admirer of Galileo, and had opposed the condemnation of Galileo in 1616. The book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, was published in 1632, with formal authorization from the Inquisition and papal permission.

Pope Urban VIII personally asked Galileo to give arguments for and against heliocentrism in the book, and to be careful not to advocate heliocentrism. He made another request, that his own views on the matter be included in Galileo's book. Only the latter of those requests was fulfilled by Galileo. Whether unknowingly or deliberately, Simplicio, the defender of the Aristotelian Geocentric view in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, was often caught in his own errors and sometimes came across as a fool. This fact made Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems appear as an advocacy book; an attack on Aristotelian geocentrism and defense of the Copernican theory. To add insult to injury[neutrality disputed], Galileo put the words of Pope Urban VIII into the mouth of Simplicio. Most historians agree Galileo did not act out of malice and felt blindsided by the reaction to his book.[90] However, the Pope did not take the suspected public ridicule lightly, nor the blatant bias. Galileo had alienated one of his biggest and most powerful supporters, the Pope, and was called to Rome to defend his writings.

So this tell us that by using a character called Simplicio as the geocentric supporter in the book, and making him appear an idiot, having Simplicio repeat the words of the Pope made the Pope look like an idiot. This is what damned Galileo, not heliocentrism.

The Vatican Supported Astronomy
Did the Church Study Astronomy ?

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[the_womble]

Of course its + interesting. This is Slashdot, the home of such fanatical atheists that they make Dawkins look reasonable.

Facts like the preservation of knowledge in monasteries after the collapse of the Roman Empire are inconvenient truths that are best forgotten.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[hcpxvi]

Perhaps the RCC could sponsor the development of a "moderate" button that doesn't select "Redundant" when I meant "Interesting". Posting to undo same.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[alexhard]

The RCC most definitely did not help improve literacy. Contrast Moorish Spain which had virtually universal literacy with the rest of Europe at the time, and their stance toward learning becomes obvious.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[alexhard]

That's an insane view. Slavery allowed the elite to devote themselves to intellectual concerns. If Plato had to spend half his day in the fields, would he have written what he did? Of course not.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[crrkrieger]

No, please don't give me that line about how the church promoted scholarship. The ONLY thing the church did was force monks to copy old texts, and that's how SOME of the ancient knowledge was preserved. However monks weren't allowed to pass that knowledge on to the general public, and didn't communicate much among themselves lest they be called heretics.

Excsue me? Weren't allowed to pass knowledge on tot he general public? I think, perhaps, you have forgotten that the general public DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO READ! It's not that they weren't allowed to pass it on, it is that they were unable to do so. Yes, perhaps there were some rules about keeping the riff raff out of the libraries, but lets be fair, when they can't read, why would they need to be there?

It's no coincidence that the only "religious" scientist, Mendel, only had his work on genetics "discovered" 200 years AFTER HE WAS DEAD.

Actually, you are right, it is not a a coincidence, it was the fault of a "scientist". Mendel took his results to the leading scientist in the area who told him he was an idiot. So, Mendel abandoned his research and went onto become a fine abbot.

As for him being the only "religious" scientist, I guess you have never heard of Copernicus? Look him up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[maxume]

Oh boo hoo, science hasn't slowed down any, and it isn't as if current researchers are working on easier problems.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Anonymous Coward]

> It's no coincidence that the only "religious" scientist, Mendel, only had his work on genetics "discovered" 200 years AFTER HE WAS DEAD.

Mendel died in 1884. If it's 2084 already, I've been reading Slashdot _way_ too long this morning.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[zehaeva]

But why would you build a backhoe when you already have a gang of 40 slaves that you can work to the death and replace quickly and cheaply? Why would you build a steam engine to move goods around long distances when slaves would do the same! There is a good deal of ancient literature that refers to slaves as tools and gangs of slaves as machines. dan carlin does a good job of distilling this down in his hardcore history episode addicted to bondage. Maybe give it a listen?

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Big Hairy Ian]

Tell that to Geordano Bruno http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno and all the others who were burnt at the stake for heresy. Of course the stupid thing is that the real heretics were those at the conclave of nicea who decided to amend the bible to fit around the classical Aristotelian view of the world. Had they not gone down that path we may well have had the renaissance 500 years earlier.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Mr. Slippery]

Slavery allowed the elite to devote themselves to intellectual concerns. If Plato had to spend half his day in the fields, would he have written what he did? Of course not.

If Plato had had to get up off his ass and do some productive work once in a while, he might have had some more sensible ideas. Instead his anti-democratic notion of "philosopher-kings", and his metaphysical elevation of ideas over observations, have been toxic streams in Western thought for millennia.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Attila Dimedici]

Yes, because the parts of the world where the Catholic Church had no influence whatsoever (China, India, Africa, the Middle East) are (and were) so much more advanced scientifically than Western Europe. I mean imagine what the world would be like if only Europe had had the open and free attitude toward science that the rest of the world had had. /s
Think about it a little bit, where did the philosophy of science develop? Why did Europeans develop this concept of experimental science?
The Chinese were technologically more advanced than Europe in the Middle Ages, but how much of that is a result of political stability not a superior attitude toward technology? The Arabs had several advances that they gave to Europe, but there is evidence that those things either came from elsewhere (Arab numerals actually came from India) or was leftover from before the rise of Islam (this latter is controversial, but there is good reason to give this theory some credence pending further consideration).

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Anonymous Coward]

The real beginning of science is when natural philosophers started talking to people who worked with materials.

For a glass maker, or rope maker or metal forge owner, speculation about the world was not enough.
If they were not correct in their calculations, glass was cloudy, metal brittle and ropes weak.
If that happened, they did not get paid.

So for these people, science had to be accurate, process had to be repeatable.

So when the first real scientist, Robert Hook , started investigations, those were the people he consulted.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[AshtangiMan]

This shouldn't be modded flamebait, just left unmodded is better, after all it's just an opinion and fairly topical. Churches suck, as the goal of the institution is to control its members behavior. The Catholic church (disclaimer, I was raised catholic) seemed ok to me as a kid because it preached free will. That part seems to be missing these days, at least in the bumper sticker and sound bite world (eg you cant be catholic and pro-choice). But it falls into the same trap that most religions I have seen do, which is in its daily doctrine the church teaches that god is some being that exists externally to all of us and who all of us are beneath, like a child is beneath its parents. So in order to make it to "heaven" you have to follow the rules. Utter bullshit, but apparently effective bullshit. Any true religion rather than giving you answers will simply help you answer your own questions about what god is to you, what "right" is for you, and how to find your own spiritual sense. Any one here belong to a religion/ church like that?

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Anonymous Coward]

STFU

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

Interesting, but seems unlikely can you give me references, i have yet to see one of this fact.
All references I found were that pleton came to florence in conjunction with the emperor, and had time on his hands and started teaching and after he left his scholars tought, but not a single reference on the net is speaking about being expelled, it seems more likely he left after the council was over.

Also unlikely because Pleton visited Florcence in conjunction with the byzantine emperor around 1407 and was therefore under the protection of his emperor, besides that he has been living in Mistra since 1393.

Truth however is he was a neo pagan and hence hat lots of enemies but he constantly was under protection of the byzantine emperor hence was sort of untouchable in Mistra.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

Sorry I mixed up the years, in 1409 Pleton was in Mistra he was expelled from Constantinople in 1393 and started to settle there, the famous council was in 1438-39, so how could the catholic church hamper the lectures which happend around 30 years later? Pleton was not even in Florence in 1409 but was sitting in Mistra studying Plato. Forget about my last posting regarding this I mixed up years a quick googling about the facts set me right.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Bemopolis]

Given that the Catholic Church accepts evolution, a concept religiously offensive to a powerful religious faction of a major political party which until recently held significant political power in America, and still holds sway within the corridors of power, I would suggest a good analog would be to watch how the United States fares in the next decade.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Yes, the church built several universities.

But scholars at these universities only engaged in intellectual masturbation (i.e. religion). They produced ZERO useful results. Literally zero. Oh, and they even failed to preserve antic texts, overwriting old parchments with stupid prayers.

And what about the Library of Alexandria? It was destroyed by Christians.

Incorrect : "Ancient and modern sources identify four possible occasions for the destruction of the Library of Alexandria: Julius Caesar's Fire in The Alexandrian War, in 48 BC The attack of Aurelian in the third century AD; The decree of Theophilus in AD 391; The Muslim conquest in AD 642 or thereafter."

Also remember that while the arabs kept copies of the classical greek and roman texts they did not incorporate them in there body of knowledge (especially the philosophical works) like the medieval scholars of europe did when they were rediscovered. From the same wikipedia page : "Several historians told varying accounts of an Arab army led by Amr ibn al 'Aas sacking the city in 642 after the Byzantine army was defeated at the Battle of Heliopolis. Some historians, including Alfred J. Butler, argue that, when the commander Amr ibn al-Aas asked the Caliph Umar on what to do with the library he gave the famous answer: "They will either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, in which case they are superfluous." It is said that the Arabs subsequently burned the books to heat bathwater for the soldiers"

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Cyberax]

Have you read what you've quoted?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria#Decree_of_Theodosius.2C_destruction_by_Theophilus_in_391

"In 391, Christian Emperor Theodosius I ordered the destruction of all "pagan" (non-Christian) temples, and the Christian Patriarch Theophilus of Alexandria complied with this request."

As far as I know, this is the most plausible version. Because Theodosius' decree is corroborated by other sources.

And the story of Caliph Umar is most probably a hoax.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[CharlyFoxtrot]

A roman emperor decree is hardly "christians", it was probably more about solidifying his hold on a crumbling empire than about religious dogmatism. And it's equally unclear how destructive that decree was for the library ("The Serapeum once housed part of the Great Library, but it is not known how many, if any, books were contained in it at the time of destruction".)

I had always been taught the final destruction probably took places under the muslim rule, who had their fair share of "intellectual masturbation" periods (which was what I tried to illustrate with the quote). But at the very least the article shows that there is debate concerning the who and why of the destruction and if it was a single event. Definitely more nuanced than "christians did it."

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[jonaskoelker]

The Spanish Inquisition is the one we usually think of when we think of the term "Inquisition"

I call BS.

If everybody thought of the Spanish Inquisition whenever they thought of the term "Inquisition", they wouldn't go around talking about how nobody expects them!

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Cyberax]

Have you read what I quoted? He issued this decree to kill the remnants of 'paganism' - a religious reason. The use of Christianity to solidify personal power is even more telling of the nature of religion.

And of course, if Muslims really had burnt the library, then it changes little enough. Religion was still a force stifling science throughout the ages. It still is.

In fact, the Arab world is another great example. They got a huge head-start early in the history and then just squandered it. Right now, the Arabic world is divided into two groups:
1) Poor uneducated countries.
2) Rich countries, hating science (there are ten _times_ less science papers per capita in the Arab world then in the East).

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Have you read what I quoted? He issued this decree to kill the remnants of 'paganism' - a religious reason. The use of Christianity to solidify personal power is even more telling of the nature of religion.

I read it. It's just naive to accept the stated objective of those in power as fact (see "Operation Iraqi Freedom".) There's always a convenient excuse (values to be promoted, wrongs to be righted, etc) and religion has played that part often in history. Personally I believe this illustrates the mechanics of power more than those of religion. But I have to say I otherwise agree with with you saying religion has held science back.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[klossner]

Yes, just like the Catholic church "converted" the natives living in the Americas. Oh, where are they today, anyway? That's right, most of them chose to die rather than be "converted".

That's true only if dying from smallpox is "by choice." The natives that survived the new diseases chose to convert and intermingle.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[MemoryDragon]

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

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Weedlekin]

"Tell that to Geordano Bruno http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno [wikipedia.org] and all the others who were burnt at the stake for heresy."

Only one of the charges against Bruno concerned any his scientific views (specifically, the one about there being a plurality of worlds). All the others were about various non-standard theological ideas he'd been espousing, and his investigations into, and writings on several types of prohibited magical practices.

It should be noted that (a) Bruno's trial lasted for seven years, so this wasn't a case of him being railroaded to the stake on a set of trumped up charges and invented evidence; and (b) although the Catholic inquisition found him guilty of heresy, it wasn't them who burned him, or even asked for him to be burned (they actually petitioned for him not to be executed because he'd partially recanted), but Rome's secular authorities, who had legal jurisdiction over him once the trial had concluded.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Opportunist]

Again, that was not the (direct) action of the RCC. It was the Spanish Reconquista which was essentially the Spanish Emperor trying to "reclaim" his lands. In other words, yet another war waged in the name of religion when the actual interest was conquest.

The RCC itself had more to do with the struggles in middle Europe, namely Italy and Germany.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Opportunist]

Yes and no. Most of the popes in medieval times came from Italy (actually, IIRC almost all of them except a handful), from various important families that ruled the local city states, with the notable exception of the French popes during the schism. The RCC was in a constant struggle with the German Empire (which included large parts of south Italy at that time), also due to a very different social system in the areas, feudal Germany vs. Renaissance Italy.

Essentially, the Church did have a lot of power but often could not really employ it, lacking the support of the rulers it was generally in a state of war with.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[Opportunist]

Thanks for proving my point. Because "gee, I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition" is the line that leads to them coming in. That's what we generally think of when the term Inquisition is used: People in power accusing you of something, determined to prove you're guilty, no matter what the cost, be it torture, be it forged confessions or bribed witnesses. That's NOT what the "official" style Inquisition was about.

I don't really enjoy being the advocate for the RCC, but their inquisition system was incredibly modern and fair for its time. The main difference between them and today is that accuser and judge was the same person, which might seem odd and unfair to our understanding of a fair trail and due procedure, but this person's clear order was to find the truth. Not a guilty verdict. You could actually refuse the accuser/judge if you had proof that he has a personal ("worldly") interest in swaying the verdict one way or the other. People are people, of course, and thus prone to personal preferences, the theory back then (and in their mindset that was quite logic and reasonable) was that he would be guided by the holy spirit to find a fair (or rather "agreeable to God") verdict.

Of course that wasn't always "fair" in our more modern definition. Your chance to go free if you weren't a "true faithed catholic" were slim to nil, often not being one was the accusation altogether. Still, it was certainly a step ahead of the "judgement of God" often used before those trials, or other forms of "judgement", completely unfair and only deserving the label "show trial", held before.

Re:It it hadn't been for the Catholic Church ..

[moonbender]

Agreed, but you could make a similar argument about, for instance, the (Holy Roman/German) Emperor, who had a lot of power but problems employing it due to being in a constant struggle with the Church and, perhaps more significantly, his peers within the HRE, not to mention the rest of Europe. ;)

Also -- the HRE for some time included parts of Northern Italy, not Southern Italy, right?

Full res video and more info.

[yogibaer]

This device is awesome and gives you a glimpse what the "Ancients" ("Stargate" pun intended) already knew and how much of our history is lost. Imagine for a moment if there had been an uninterrupted development from the knowledge that went into this little box for 2000 years. Makes Steling/Gibbons tale of "The Difference Engine" pale by comparison. I read a fascinating book about the discovery and science of this mechanism ("Decoding the Heavens": http://www.decodingtheheavens.com/) and it ist is truly mind boggling how much skill went into this box, 1500 years before we "modern" people build anything remotely as sophisticated. While reading the book I had some trouble to imagine all the wheels and gears described and the full res video is very helpful (can be found here: http://www.mogi-vice.com/Antikythera/Antikythera-it.html (italian)). Very well done, indeed, Signore!.

Re:Full res video and more info.

[Hammer]

I am actually very curious as to what made this knowledge go lost? And why there was no further development of such fantastic devices.
Where would we be now hadn't historic society stopped this?

Re:Full res video and more info.

[Anonymous Coward]

Politics.
Religion.
No child left behind.

You know, the same forces that always cause loss of knowledge.

Re:Full res video and more info.

[WeirdJohn]

Most likely the destruction of the great Library of Alexandria ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria_library ) in the late 4th century. Consider the things that were there - Heron's plans for the first car, complete works of Aristotle and Archimedes - and in order to show how pron is not new, the works of Sappho.

Re:Full res video and more info.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody needed it. We are speaking of an age where antibiotics, advanced agriculture, relative safety from genocidal invasions, etc. didn't exist.

Some admittedly very intelligent snake oil vendor would invent this kind of mechanism to predict solar eclipses position of stars, etc. to impress the populace.

However, as soon as sharp townsfolk noticed that accurately predicted eclipses had nothing to do with food, war or illnesses, they burnt the useless Shaman and the machine(which nobody but the shaman, the original proprietary vendor, knew how to use).

If they had developed the technology, they could have entered the industrial treadmill, improved their agriculture, engineering, and even health care, but it is not something they could possibly have known.

Re:Full res video and more info.

[American Expat]

Even more amazing stuff for the mechanically inclined, from Massimo's web site: http://www.mogi-vice.com/Antikythera/Antikythera-en.html

As an amateur clockmaker, I have to say that his model is awe-inspiring. This is by no means a simple mechanism to build, but seeing what he did I am off to try!

Re:Full res video and more info.

[pz]

Here's the thing. This is a beautiful machine, yes. It embodies tremendous amounts of skill and knowledge, yes. But then, so did creating the beautiful structures that remain in Ancient Greece that were well-documented and we know are about 2500 years old (somewhat older than this device). The flutes on columns of buildings like the Parthenon, for example, were cut by hand, and yet are demonstrably as perfect as those cut by machine in modern times. The skill to do such precision work -- by many workers, so there was a means to ensure uniformity across tradesmen -- and the skill to produce buildings with lines that are just-so not quite straight, making them appear to be straight ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenon ), makes it not surprising at all that the same populace could have produced something like the Antikythera Mechanism a few hundred years before the current date on the device.

Re:Full res video and more info.

[MaskedSlacker]

War, death, and pestilence.

Re:Full res video and more info.

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing about this ability of people to do some degree of precision machining this far back makes me wonder if there were actually useful steam engines from the bronze age. Not just amusing novelties like Hero's spinning ball, or perhaps a piston with some pulleys that opens a temple door, but practical steam engines that could run winches or do useful things like stone cutting. If you can forge bronze, do fairly consistent machining (such as is needed to make the gear ratios needed for these ancient mechanical computers), and know a thing or two about managing running water... Just how big a leap would it be to have an enclosed bronze vessel over a fire blast a jet via some piping at a free-spinning paddle wheel with some reduction gears? Use that to pull ropes... Or adhere something abrasive on one side of that freespinning wheel and do some nice stone cutting work or tool sharpening. And if the ancients were clever enough to do a cloth weave around a spike, soak in latex, heat over a fire, move finished portion, repeat... They could have flexible pressure lines. And wood handles or heavy cloth would provide reasonable protection for working with primitive steam powertools and engines.

Why should steam power be only relegated to that which we know at the end of the iron age and the birth of the age of steel and the industrial revolution?

Unfortunately, we don't have much evidence. If there were any records, they probably burnt in Alexandria. And the other problem in regards to evidence is that the metals were too valuable as salvage. Any machine that's far enough in disrepair or beyond usefulness could easily melted down to make other goods. Not to mention they would be destroyed in instances of war, lest the secrets behind them fall into the wrong hands. (Impressing the other empires would involve not letting them know how you actually did it. Lying about how many slaves or tradesmen were involved in monument creation was probably more awe inspiring in those days than saying somebody had some clever machines on hand that could each do the work of 100 oxen.)

Well done

[Anonymous Coward]

Everything is better when cunning linguists are involved.

Deja vue.....

[rts008]

Didn't I just see this on 'Warehouse 13'?
*Spoiler Warning!!!*

Hint:
He loved puzzles, look for secret compartments!

Re:Computer?

[Joce640k]

It's as much of a "computer" as my Casio G-Shock is. The Casio is microprocessor controlled so you shouldn't have a problem with accepting that.

Baghdad Battery, Homopolar Motor & Antikythera

[j-stroy]

The prior devices and knowledge also come to mind. The crafts, arts, maths and sciences leading up to this must have included similar devices, possibly going back much farther. As well, other fine geared devices are likely.. I wonder what other similar mechanisms would be useful in the ancient world?

Wow, cool thought!! You heard it here first:
The Baghdad Battery, another ancient mystery device which dates to almost exactly the same time as the Antikythera Mechanism, performs well enough to drive a Homopolar Motor (very cool video link). I believe that there is no actual evidence of a handle with the Antikythera Mechanism, but simply an input shaft with a coupling. If I remember correctly, one turn of the shaft advanced it one day. I'll bet that a homopolar motor could accumulate enough power over a day to drive the Antikthera device.

Now the homopolar motor in its simplicity could easily be missed as a ancient device, or its 2 useful components (wire and magnet) scavenged for another use, leaving no artifact to find. Finally, here is a variable speed homopolar motor video I know I'm synthesizing the electric motor invention.. its just so simple that its invention at that time is possible, let alone any other type of motor. And an voltage/amperage controlled speed regulator seems likewise possible.

Is it a 'computer' ?

[Richard Kirk]

If you read the comments, there is a hot but pointless discussion on whether this device is actually a 'computer'.

My father worked in RAE Farnbrough in the '40s and '50's. The first early 'Pilot-ACE' prototypes were developed by Manchester University and the National Physical Laboratory. Another less well known one was made for the Ministry of Defence and sent to Farnbrough for calculating things like air flow over wing profiles. The NPL director at the time seems to have had a deep distrust of computers, and the early versions were explicitly forbidden to execute conditional jumps ( IF..THEN..ELSE ). The computer would solve flow equations by shooting from the boundary conditions, and then stop. A human operator then had to press a key to instruct it to execute the jump back to the beginning of the loop to take the next iteration. I can only imagine how irritating Alan Turing must have found that - to go right to the edge of computational completeness, and then stop just short. Aaaaugh!

Arguments about who made the first computer tend to get rabid, fast, so people often define a computer as something that can make a conditions jump based on it's previous calculations, and not just like a player piano, rewinding its roll when it has detected the end. This is a nice, clear rule - either the machine can do conditional jumps or it can't - so it tends to get invoked when things get heated. The Antikythera mechanism had no need of a conditional jump. I have no doubt that the people who made it could have designed it to do so if they had wanted to, just as Charles Babbage could have done for the Difference Engine. However, in both cases, they did not, so in both cases, according to the narrow definition that requires a computer to do a conditional jump, this is a 'calculator' and not a 'computer'.

I suspect the Antikythera mechanism may have had immense value for calculating the tides and the safe dates for shipping. As such, you can imagine the ship's captain chucking it over the side in an emergency, like a U-Boat commander disposing of an Enigma machine, rather than let it be captured, and copied. Maybe this is why these devices have vanished so completely from known history.

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[tsjaikdus]

I agree. It's an orrery. It's not something we would call a computer today, however amazing it is. Babbage's Difference Engine wasn't a computer in that sense too. The Difference Engine is more like an ALU. Today, two Difference Engines are in existance, one is in the science museum in London, the other one will be shipped to some MicroSoft billionaire anytime soon. The machine is about GBP 1 million. Babbage's Analytical Engine, however, that's what we would call a computer today. A real nice box of tricks. The Analytical Engine was somewhat bigger and somewhat more complex. For example, the difference engine is an adding machine. This in itself is enough to make a computer out of, but the AE also had dedicated mechanisms to multiply and divide 50 digit decimal numbers in about 3 minutes upon request of a punched card. Babbage also got rid of the ripple carry we all learn about in elementary school and created something that could add the same 50 digit numbers in 2 steps (adding all numbers, then adding all carries at once by linking 9's next to each other mechanically). I've no idea what it would cost to make it today. It was also never finished, but part of the ALU has been built by Babbage (and later his son did some work too). Babbage called the ALU the mill and the memory the store, concepts that were taken from the weaving industry. He also used somthing similar to the Jacquard loom to read the punched cards.

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[tsjaikdus]

I forgot to say that a jump was referred to as backing or advancing the punched cards. This could be either unconditional as conditional. Conditional jumping is a way for the machine to "change its program".

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a model, or at best an analog calculator. Computers are defined by their universality, their ability to perform different algorithms according to a program. Whether that program must be allowed to include conditional jumps is debatable, but a hardware implementation of a single algorithm satisfies no reasonable definition of a computer.

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[smoker2]

So it's not a computer because it doesn't conform to the narrowest of definitions ? By any normal definition, a computer is a device (or person) that takes in data and uses that data to produce different data according to a fixed set of rules. Under this definition, the Antikythera mechanism is most definitely a computer. It handles IF / THEN rules mechanically. IF a certain marker is aligned with another distinct point, THEN a certain result is produced. IF that marker is aligned with a different point, it produces a different result(ELSIF). If it doesn't align with a marker at all you get your ELSE. The only limitation is that the inputs are restricted to those available on the mechanism.

if(pointerA=marker1){
$result=x;
}elsif(pointerA=marker2){
$result=y;
}else {
$result=0;
}

I can think of simpler devices that can be called computers. Ever heard of a "go- no go" test ? By making a template or a mould that is exactly the dimensions you require, by applying a manufactured item to the "go - no go" test you can determine whether the item passes the dimensional requirements without further calculation. That is computing. The fixed rules are the template, the data is the manufactured item. What's more, it can be parallel computing by measuring more than one dimension at once.

If you define computing by what an electronic computer can do, you are missing the bigger picture.

Define compute

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[tsjaikdus]

IF a certain marker is aligned with another distinct point, THEN a certain result is produced. IF that marker is aligned with a different point, it produces a different result(ELSIF). If it doesn't align with a marker at all you get your ELSE. The only limitation is that the inputs are restricted to those available on the mechanism.

There's no value added. It's like saying it's true because it's true and it's true because it's not false.

The computer should be able to change its program based on a previous result. That's what "if then else" is all about. The antikythera can not do that.

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is it that in that set of comments, there is a pointless discussion about computers, while in /., the discussion is about old cultures and other details.
I felt that /. discussion is much more mature than the comments on the article.
Why is it so? Is it that the age group of /. is higher?

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[itsdapead]

If you read the comments, there is a hot but pointless discussion on whether this device is actually a 'computer'.

Only because some people have unilaterally declared that "computer" always means "universal Turing machine" rather than "something or someone that computes".

Humptey-dumptey syndrome ("words mean precisely what I intend them to mean") and the pathological inability to accept that words can have multiple similar but different meanings seems to be an industrial disease amongst nerds.

Guys: if you want a new word to always mean something highly specific and techical then iether make one up or use something from Latin/Greek/Klingon/Elvish, don't overload an existing English word!

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[radtea]

Maybe this is why these devices have vanished so completely from known history.

What is more likely is that devices like this were never widely known because there was very little that resembled a scientific community, so there was no way to make such knowledge public. By "no way" I mean there was neither the technical means of dissemination nor the social means of rewarding the creators of such knowledge.

Science is a public, communal activity. Until the founding of the Royal Society in the 1600's there was no way for the nascent scientific community to actualize itself in archival journals and shared results. Such "science" as there was was carried on by practitioners who swore oaths of secrecy (much of the actual text of the vaunted Hipocratic Oath is actually about not teaching anyone but the sons of physicians any trade secrets, and not stepping on the toes of any of the other medical services unions.)

It is therefore likely that similar techniques and ideas were rediscovered and lost many times during the past few thousand years, in a wide variety of fields. And extreme example of this is knowledge of the diameter of the Earth, which the Greeks knew pretty well, but which was sufficiently debatable 1500 years later that a nutjob like Columbus could convince people that it was about half the actual figure.

The lack of comprehensive, authoritative publications embedded in a living community of empirical investigators meant that knowledge tended to wither and die with time, resulting in relatively slow accumulation over the long term.

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[drinkypoo]

When we say "computer" we aren't talking about abaci or slide rules. We're talking about nearly-turing-complete digital computers, which if they had unlimited store would all be theoretically capable of emulating anything any of the others can do (over time.)

So, NO, the Antikythera device does NOT have ANY bearing on the argument as we typically think of it. If it did, then we never would have had to discuss colossus et al, because again, the slide rule precedes them (As do other similar calculators.)

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[gardyloo]

So a combination lock is a computer? Perhaps so.
So, indeed, a keyed lock is a computer?

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[epine]

The value of if/then for this mechanism is completely obvious. If the sun doesn't come up tomorrow, without fully taking this into account, the phase of the moon calculation will come out horribly wrong.

Computing was hard back in the day. Moses climbed Mount Sinai for some peace and quiet while he chiseled out his astrolabe's stack dump as part of a warranty claim, ate some strange mushrooms on the way up to relieve the tedium, and the rest is history. (One wrong chisel stroke and your claim is rejected completely, but that's another story.)

By the anally-uptight bifurcating decision path definition of computing, op amps aren't computers either, but it's truly amazing what a wizard can build with the little buggers.

From another perspective, the ancient Greeks deserve a major KISS bonus for making a mechanism even a fool could use. Instead, we complicate the definition of computer and take marks off.

I have a copy of Calendrical Calculations at hand. Opening to a random page, I transcribe this formula:

mean-moon = degrees
  (218.3164591 + 481267.88134236 * c - .0013268 * c^2 + c^3 / 538841 - c^4 / 65194000)

Or something like that. No conditionals in sight. I've used a computer to write complicated little programs with no conditionals or flow control and been tremendously happy when the answer came out as expected.

On the other hand, the equation for Easter involves a conditional expression, which looks like this:

if shifted-epact = 0 or (shifted-epact = 1 and 10 (g-year mod 19)}

In defence of the ancient Greeks, Easter hadn't been invented yet. But there were omens. While the Greeks were perfecting their teeth, the Romans were hard at it sharpening the nail. Tooth against nail, the nail prevailed.

To further complicate matters, it's known that one-dimensional cellular automata can function as a general purpose computer. However, the mechanism that executes a one-dimensional cellular automata can be built with no use of conditional mechanisms more complex than trivial boolean equations.

So we have it that evaluating (218.3164591 + 481267.88134236 * c - .0013268 * c^2 + c^3 / 538841 - c^4 / 65194000) makes you a calculator, whereas evaluating the boolean expression (a && b || b && ~c) makes you a general purpose computer (or at least capable of executing one). Perhaps this debate is silly.

In 100 BC, I suspect the idea of making something before you decided its purpose was not in wide currency. "General purpose" hadn't been invented yet. If it was being done, it wasn't been done under a creed. The ancients made a lot of pottery, sometimes (I once read) in volumes where it was easier to throw it away than wash it, but I'm sure they didn't consider mass production the founding credo of new-age industrialism.

Is solving a Sudoku a calculation or a computation? I could set up a machine to enumerate the solution space with no conditional logic aside from a stop condition when the displayed digits match the givens and the other Sudoku constraints are also satisfied. The mechanism would hardly be more complicated than an Enigma machine, which had no in-built conditional logic.

If you claim that it's the mechanism not the problem which distinguishes calculation from computation, who is to say the Greeks didn't have a general purpose understanding of how to implement single purpose mechanisms? Part of the deal is miniaturization. The general purpose implementation is a lot less attractive if it's the size of an aircraft hanger. Which would you build?

Some days I hope our civilization soon collapses, and the only device found 2000 years from now to commemorate our technology is an iPod.

"It's cool, but it doesn't really do much. Not even a two qubit superposition."

"Wait just a furry nanosecond there, this sand-baking thing is a lot more sophisticated than it first appears. However crude, I think the ancients were on to something with broader applications."

Re:Is it a 'computer' ?

[Richard Kirk]

What is more likely is that devices like this were never widely known because there was very little that resembled a scientific community, so there was no way to make such knowledge public.

In Greece at the time, quite a lot of what Aristotle and his friends wrote survived. An influential teacher would attract followers, and there was usually the feeling that the 'right answer' could be reached by dialogue, so this is not Science as we know it, Jim, but it does have many of the general properties.

I am not a historian, but I would argue that the Greeks of Athens and Pergamon were a rich society with a leisured class that allowed people to indulge in abstract thought. Philip Ball in "Bright Earth" suggests that Aristotle and the cultured Greeks of his time would have been pretty ignorant of how paints and pigments were made, because that would have been a job for a working man. In Egypt, at the same time, the skilled artisan would have been respected. As a result, the Egyptians documented their pigment recipes, and are known to have made blues, and slivers, and imitation gold.

Ptolomey's Almagest, dated about 150AD, so about the time of this machine, predicted the movements of the planets on an earth-based system using a series of 55 epicycles. You can draw any mad shape with enough epicycles (see www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVuU2YCwHjw where a system of epicycles draws Homer Simpson). While it is possible that the Almagest was all based on manual calculations, it strongly suggests that there must have been a machine with 55 wheels somewhere to test the calculations.

This leaves me with the guess that a rich Greek shipping merchant employed an Egyptian gear-maker to make a robust and portable version of a machine he may have worked on in Alexandria, suitable for taking on boats. This rich guy and his pals may have looked at the spinning wheels, and said "Hey! Let's get this to predict the date of the Games, too!', and all sorts of almost useless features were stuffed in, because the guy who was paying wanted it. It was the airman's watch of the day.

This is all guesswork. I have no evidence for any of this. But it does seem to fit with the people that were about at the time.

And my dad did say they worked with electronic calculators in 1948, and the history books tell us Pilot-ACE was not demonstrated until 1950.

Whopdedo, 100 years older

[Anonymous Coward]

big whoop

RMS 2000 BC

[ciderVisor]

This not a free form stick and sand device.

"GNU/Stick and Sand" has the Four Freedoms.

Re:Baghdad Battery, Homopolar Motor & Antikyth

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, cool thought!! You heard it here first:
The Baghdad Battery, another ancient mystery device which dates to almost exactly the same time as the Antikythera Mechanism, performs well enough to drive a Homopolar Motor

Firstly its not clear at all whether the Baghdad Battery was meant to produce electricity, or whether it was a simple storage jar that happened to be from two metals. Secondly, the article you quote on building one says things like "charge at 1.1 to 1.5 V and a few milliamps of current", so good luck bootstrapping your Baghdad Battery charger bank when your only source of electricity is the occasional thunderstorm. Thirdly, good luck building your hompolar motor from naturally-occuring magnetic lodestones when you don't have fancy neodymium magnets around. So yeah, I heard it here first, and now I will go forget it again, wake me up when you have these little issues sorted out.

I doubt it'll run Crysis...

[Anonymous Coward]

... but can it handle Nethack?

So who is selling replicas?

[John Hasler]

n/t

Re:Mendel's work ..

[Anonymous Coward]

Mendel also appeared to fudge his figures in a big way.
The main reason his work was given short shrift at the time was that his reported experimental results clustered too closely around his 3:1 ratio.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendel

fiction plot

[Anne Honime]

As far as I know, Clive Cussler already plotted a Dirk Pitt novel around this device. Can't remember which one though, he's quite a prolific writer.

Re:fiction plot

[AshtangiMan]

If by prolific you mean terrible then I agree :)

Re:fiction plot

[Anne Honime]

Hum. My english level is not good enough for me to take such a stance. Let's say I was happy to read his novels because they were easy enough for my poor understanding the moment I needed it. Now that I've improved a bit, I tend to read more mature books. Before you criticize me, just think for a moment how many fiction books you read in another language than your own (I don't need to know the answer ;-) ).

This said, I think there are wonderful novelists in the US at the moment, and this is pretty exciting. But even Clive Cussler is someone to be proud of, this is a kind of litterature we used to have at the end of the XIXth century in France, and in my opinion, we badly miss it. Alexandre Dumas was widely despised too, in his days, for plotting unrealistic stories, and lambasted for his "poor" style. Nevertheless, his books remains because they were bigger than life (and made better stories than historical accuracy would have produced alone ; Dumas used to say you could rape history, in order to produce beautiful offsprings).

Nowdays, most french novelists are writing about their own navel, and it's awfully boring. This is largely the product of the narrow minds of professional critics who value style over everything. Crafting a good story seems to be a lost art. Fear the day when you might think the same of your own country writers !

Re:fiction plot

[RockDoctor]

Hum. My english level is not good enough for me to take such a stance.

The original poster was making a joke. Your use of "prolific" was correct, since it means "someone who has done a lot of [whatever]".
I couldn't comment on the quality of Clive Custler's writing ; I don't recall having read any of his books. But I do see lots of them cluttering up the bookshops, so he's undoubtedly a prolific author.

Re:fiction plot

[AshtangiMan]

Yes, a joke. I started reading CC novels when I was 15, and I loved them. If I had never read any until today, and started today then I would probably really enjoy them.

My joke really was based on the idea that his books are fairly formulaic (essentially the reluctant hero model that most hollywood and pop fiction novels are based on . . . the Joseph Campbell model). I have felt that the american art of the novel has been dead for a long time, perhaps the 50s and 60s saw the last of the good ones, though I'm sure there are gems here and there. I think the eastern european novelists were the best out there for a while, but I have mostly stopped reading any kind of fiction.

Still I would put Stephen King over Clive Cussler, and King is critically mauled perhaps as much as Dumas was. A better comparison to Dumas might be Crichton, another one whos books I continue to read.

Re:fiction plot

[Anne Honime]

I confess a sweet spot for David Baldacci. Not that his plots are better, or his characters more balanced, but I enjoy his witty writing. Another author I very much like is Cathy Reichs ; the TV Bones show is pretty bad, but her books are IMO very very good.

An even earlier "device" for calculations

[vorlich]

Existed in prehistory and takes the form of the Harry Potter Wizards hat, where the markings are used to calculate the position of the moon and to predict the seasons. You can see a magnificent example of this in the Staatliche Museen Berlin http://www.smb.museum/smb/sammlungen /details.php?lang=en&objID=15&p=24&typeId=1&img_id=2 .

a 3,000-year-old 30in high Bronze Age cone of beaten gold that was discovered in Switzerland in 1995 and purchased by the museum the following year.

Full story in a Telegraph article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/1388038/Mysterious-gold-cones-hats-of-ancient-wizards.html

And, no it doesn't run linux but it may be possible to imagine a beowulf cluster of them.

Am I the only one

[Anonymous Coward]

who thinks the amphora(?) in the background are much more desirable, and beautiful, than the encrusted subject of the article?

Re:Baghdad Battery, Homopolar Motor & Antikyth

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you sure about this?

How many volts can a Baghdad Battery produce?

How many volts would a homopolar motor need?

How much current could a Baghdad battery produce?

How much current would a Baghdad battery need to draw?

How could you make a homopolar motor if the Baghdad Battery is ceramic?

If it is possible, why is there not one example of anyone doing it?

I ask because I am truly curious, and lack knowledge on the subject...

Thanks!

Let's get formal.

[Clueless Moron]

If we define "computer" as "turing machine", then yes it is a computer.

People are using "IF-THEN-ELSE" as a touchstone for this. This is wrong. What the Antikythera machine is (if you're willing to encode the input and output digitally, which you may as well because of gear lash slop) is a Turing machine with an unwritable tape, otherwise known as an FSA (Finite State Automaton).

An FSA, since it's a Turing machine, does effectively do IF-THEN-ELSE operations. The important thing is that it is not programmable.

To put it in layman's terms, I could build a standalone computer that emulates the Antikythera, with the programming in ROM. It'll do everything the Antikythera does and vice versa, but nothing else. They are interchangeable. But mine does use IF-THEN-ELSE.

Years back people used the two phrases "Computer" and "Programmable Computer" fairly distinctly. These days the word "Programmable" has become implied, hence the confusion.

Maybe we should start saying "Nonprogrammable Computer" and "Computer" to clarify things.

Re:Let's get formal.

[JCCyC]

Let's write an Antikythera driver for MESS then!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Computer?

[Mozk]

It's a mechanical device that deterministically computes planetary data based on user input.
It's a highly specialized computer in my book.

But does it run Linux?

(Don't worry; I hated typing that joke as much as you hated reading it.)

Re:It it hadn't been for the romans

[beadwindow]

I sometimes wonder what the world would look like today if the Romans hadn't burned down the Ancient Library of Alexandria.

Re:Computer?

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

It's merely a non-"Von Neumann architecture" computer. (read second paragraph)

All computers before a certain point were non-Von Neumann computers. This limited them, obviously such computers were not reprogrammable. But things like calculators of all kinds did exist. There were mechanical cash registers (even with day totals).

In theory there is no difference between what a mechanical computer can do and what our supercomputers can do. Of course, not quite at the same speed.

Did YOU read the article?

[Roger W Moore]

FTA:

a form of computer that uses the continuously-changeable aspects of physical phenomena such as electrical,[1] mechanical, or hydraulic quantities to model the problem being solved.

Sounds exactly like a stick in sand is an analogue computer. You change the height of the sand (a physical phenomenom) to model your problem using a specific representation (letters and numbers). Perhaps you ought to have read it before posting?

Re:Did YOU read the article?

[RockDoctor]

Sounds exactly like a stick in sand is an analogue computer.

You could make a description like that, but you'd be missing the point (deliberately, I suspect). The stick and sand "analogue computer" you describe depends entirely on the software in the stick-user, who must not only understand what the problem is ("I want to know what the positions of the planets was/ will be on such-and-such a date"), but also all details of how to solve the problem. Without the user having both of these software packages installed, the stick-and-sand "analogue computer" is unable to compute the solution.
In contrast, the hardware of the Antikythera mechanism embodies a method of solution, so that it's user only needs to understand the problem and how to enter it into the computer, but not the detailed method of solution.

Re:Did YOU read the article?

[Roger W Moore]

In contrast, the hardware of the Antikythera mechanism embodies a method of solution, so that it's user only needs to understand the problem and how to enter it into the computer, but not the detailed method of solution.

It depends entirely how you view it. The Antikythera machine is certainly a more advanced computer: the required actions for solving the problem are certainly less complex than a stick and some sand. However if you regard the stick and sand as a machine with a set of actions you must take the two are alike (you do not have to understand why you do them - you just do them): the only difference is the complexity of the instructions. Did you understand the complete reasoning behind the method of long division and multiplication when you first learnt it as school?

You do need to know more details about the method with the stick but you undoubtedly need to know a reasonable amount with the Antikythera machine as well. I see no way to define a defendable line between the Antikythera machine and a stick in the sand which would allow you to call one a computer and not the other. Both are computational tools - one is more advanced, simpler to operate but more restricted, than the other.

Re:Did YOU read the article?

[RockDoctor]

Both are computational tools - one is more advanced, simpler to operate but more restricted, than the other.

Logically you are correct. There is no logical distinction between (for example) Wossname's 1000-odd-strong Beowulf cluster for playing a fair amateur strength of Go and performing the same computation using a Maxwellian demon and a couple of billion atoms of hydrogen for working memory. Both, being physical devices for assisting with a computation, are computers. However, this then leaves the concept "analogue computer" as an utterly useless concept since there is no way to not argue that a pile of used condoms isn't actually an analogue computer.
One of the important uses of terminology is to distinguish between significantly different classes of object. I, for example, deliberately take mild umbrage at people who talk about the "extinction of the dinosaurs", because to me, dinosaurs are not extinct. I've just looked out of the window to see a Lesser Black-Backed dinosaur sitting on top of a street lamp and shitting on my car. I'm deliberately using (most) people's (generally) poor understanding of phylogenetics to stimulate a discussion about an interesting part of the evolution of present-day life on Earth. The distinction I describe between dinosaurs and non-dinosaurs is technically defensible and deliberately challenges many people's understanding of the relatedness of organisms.
In contrast, the way that you want to use the term "analogue computer" shows there to be no logical distinction between a cloud of hydrogen molecules combined with a valve, a stick combined with a beach, dozens of precisely machined gears combined with several support plates, and Pascal's Trisector (as Cundy & Rollett describe it ; Wikipedia has it as a geometrical theorem which can be realised as a linkage ; linkages are machines).

I'm not up to the century (maybe not even the current millennium) on the terminology of philosophical and rhetorical classification ; I think your meaning of the term "analogue computer" may be more usefully studied by asking what is it about your stick and beach or cloud of hydrogen atoms that makes them particularly designed for the problem of planetary motion (as the Antikythera Mechanism seems to be) or the trisection of angles (as Pascal's Trisector is). Were I to present you with two sticks and two beaches and assert to you the one is an analogue computer designed for the planetary motion problem, and the other an analogue computer for trisecting angles with ... how could you tell the difference. Here I think we may have the crux. An analogue computer is not a general purpose computer - it's a computer designed for a particular task and which embodies that task within it's structure ; until recently the only general purpose computers were the stick and the beach (or their technological derivatives).

Re:Did YOU read the article?

[Roger W Moore]

In contrast, the way that you want to use the term "analogue computer" shows there to be no logical distinction....

Actually, if you reread my original post, I do not want to use the term that way. My argument was in fact that you you accept the Antikythera machine as a computer you also have to accept a stick in the sand - basically reductio ad absurdum.
My definition of a computer would be limited to devices capable of following a programmed series of instructions by themselves. Indeed Wikipedia says that "The ability to store and execute lists of instructions called programs makes computers extremely versatile, distinguishing them from calculators." The Antikythera machine is a calculator, not a computer.

Re:Did YOU read the article?

[RockDoctor]

Indeed Wikipedia says that "The ability to store and execute lists of instructions called programs makes computers extremely versatile, distinguishing them from calculators."

That is one meaning of the sequence of letters that make up the word "computer" ; another, utterly valid, meaning of that same word is "a human who specialises in carrying out computations without any deep understanding of the meaning of the calculations. That definition of that meaning of "computer" is correct, but it is not the only meaning associated with that symbol. Wikipedia is perhaps not the appropriate "authority" to cite in this discussion, and Wiktionary might be better, though I see that it's range of definitions is similarly lacking.

Wiki[n]s are great, but they do tend to have biases like this. If I didn't have a lawn waving it's arms at me, I'd think about how to improve this. The article you cite doesn't really have a good grasp of the range of meaning that's associated with the word.

Re:Did YOU read the article?

[Roger W Moore]

That definition of that meaning of "computer" is correct

You have to allow for meanings to change with time. That might have been a common definition 50+ years ago when humans needed to do that sort of thing. However they have been replaced with machines that carry the same name. Stop someone in the highstreet and ask them what a computer is and I can just about guarentee you (unless I'm really unlucky and stop you!) that they will describe a computer as a machine. That doesn't mean that the original meaning is now wrong it just means that the most common meaning of the term has changed.

Sorry for quoting Wikipedia - I'm not particularly fond of it either - but it was top of the heap of a quick google search and is often quick and convenient.

Re:Computer?

[Roger W Moore]

A stick and some sand is a mechanical device which can deterministically compute planetary data based on user input too. If your definition of a computer has such a low basis then it must also include basic writing implements which precede just about everything else. Why does the fact that it is free form exlcude it?

Re:Baghdad Battery, Homopolar Motor & Antikyth

[j-stroy]

Those are the obvious questions. Seems pretty basic tho, gotta build one I guess. The battery charging stage @ Instructables is only used to condition the battery, it works without that, just at a lower capacity... Think Lemon/Potato Battery. The Greeks were creating electricity rubbing amber circa 600 BC, so charging is not impossible. Heck, just drive the motor backwards and it will produce current. If you compare a Leyden Jar with a Baghdad Battery, they are similar. Some illustrations show an internal asphalt plug, but others don't. Batteries fit into things so I expect some kind of holder to complete it. The "battery" clay has also been described as porous, so contact completing the circuit (battery) could be external. Ben Franklin made a simple electrostatic (no magnet needed)electric motor powered by Leyden Jars

As far as I can tell without building one and metering it, The voltage/amperage required for a homopolar motor is very small, just enough to overcome the friction of the "bearing" point, When work is used then, of course it is the force of friction + the energy extracted for work. The fabrication "hack" of sticking a magnet on a battery is not required for a homopolar motor. I believe it is using the battery to extend the magnetic field lines such that the field from the current in the wire has something to push against. An iron rod on a magnet would suffice. The wire rotor does not need to contact the magnet (stator). It only needs current flowing through it to spin, or conversely, could be built with the wire as the stator and the magnet spinning.

Why has this not been done? We have lots of better motors, batteries and so on, so why would anyone dabble in less efficient ancient devices? We regularly dismiss our past as primitive, that is why we are surprised when we truly learn of their accomplishments.

It is so easy to do that I totally will build these as fun experiments...

How does this actually date it?

[Nom du Keyboard]

How does this actually date it? So what if it has a word older than the previous dating? WTH does that have to do with it. Now if it had a word newer than the estimated date then I'd say that the date has to be adjusted. But once a word is created it continues to exist forward in time so how real really is this discovery. This is hardly 1984 where the whole language was changed to suit political ends as required.

ancient Greek word on of the device's dials...

[Doghouse Riley]

It's the Greek word for "Eleven".....

The Most Important Question: Heliocentric

[Nom du Keyboard]

The most important question I have about the Antikythera mechanism is: does it compute utilizing a heliocentric solar system model? If it does, then constructing a device to model the existing solar system would have given you the heliocentric answer as the most simplified solution to the heavens very much pre-Copernicus.