And his personal selection of his 25 least sucky posts. Go congratulate him.
Also, Parisian nude models strike over pay. Please show your support.
|
Return to Protein Wisdom homepage
« Obama plays Lucy, offers Israel the part of Charlie Brown [Darleen Click] | Home | Kirsten Powers Is Lying, or Wrong . . . [Dan Collins] »
December 16, 2008
Five Years of Iowahawk [Dan Collins]
And his personal selection of his 25 least sucky posts. Go congratulate him. Also, Parisian nude models strike over pay. Please show your support. 14 Comments ::: Post a comment »RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI: http://proteinwisdom.com/wp-trackback.php?p=13918 Leave a commentIf you want to leave a feedback to this post or to some other user´s comment, simply fill out the form below. |
||
Comment by SarahW on 12/16 @ 11:29 am #
That Antikythera is amazing.
Comment by Ed Flinn on 12/16 @ 12:18 pm #
Antikythera is a speculative reconstruction. Not wrong, but speculative.
Comment by JohnAnnArbor on 12/16 @ 1:37 pm #
They have pretty good x-rays of the gears and even markings on the brass. Do you mean they’ve added parts that are missing from the original?
Comment by happyfeet on 12/16 @ 8:36 pm #
Iowahawk is very mysterious to me. Has he ever commented here before ever?
Comment by Sdferr on 12/16 @ 8:40 pm #
I can remember once at least hf. Only a few months ago even.
Comment by Rusty on 12/17 @ 6:34 am #
The amazing part isn’t that it exists,the antikythera, but that there were artisans with the machines to manufacture precise gears and shafts. The cutting of gears requires a solid repeatable system to devide a circle.Which also implies a sophisticated system ot metrology.
Comment by Dan Collins on 12/17 @ 6:35 am #
All of the parts are amazing, Rusty.
Comment by Sdferr on 12/17 @ 10:44 am #
The solid repeatable system you want to look for Rusty is a human brain crammed full of mathematics capable of systematizing the motions of the spheres, a thing the Greeks had in some abundance. Cutting one-off chunks of brass with precision isn’t really that big a deal in comparison, I don’t think.
Comment by happyfeet on 12/17 @ 10:47 am #
when he comments does he use “Iowahawk” for his name?
Comment by maggie katzen on 12/17 @ 10:50 am #
I think he uses his Burge name. can’t remember the first name…
Comment by Sdferr on 12/17 @ 10:53 am #
Dave Burge is what he used, I think.
Comment by Rusty on 12/17 @ 9:01 pm #
Sed. It doesn’t seem so , but divide that circle into even, small teeth that must mesh with precision is a very difficult thing. The accuracy of the machine is directly linked to how accurate ALL the parts are.In any mechanical system errors tend to accumulate.Any variation in the relationship of even one tooth in a cog to another will effect the accuracy. If you think that isn’t difficult, keep in mind truly accurate clocks werent commonplace until late in the 18th century. think of what these guys could have accomplished if they had the concept of a coil spring.
Comment by Sdferr on 12/17 @ 9:13 pm #
Don’t you have to begin with theoretical ratios Rusty? It is harder to get them (starting from scratch, so to speak) I think, than to inscribe a circle (or two) with those ratios on a piece of brass, or a hundred and then apply a file or knife to the project. Excellent light, good eyes, steady skilled hands, well made tools for the jobs to be done, an enduring purpose, none of that is to be dismissed lightly (and I do not, having done something like this kind of work myself), but the underlying mathema is, to me at least, far more wondrous.
Comment by Rusty on 12/18 @ 5:39 am #
No. No. That’s a given. But the execution takes an equal amount of talent. Making the theoretical real. The difference between E=mc2 and an actual working bomb. The ability to achieve a measurement in the millionths of an inch was done in the late 1600s, making a standard for the guilds to use. Routinely manufacturing in the millionmths of an inch wasnt achieved until the middle of the last century.
You can conceive and draw an accurate representation of a gear, but you still have to build the machine that will accurately divide and cut those gear teeth. Not on just one gear, but on all of them. Each gear not only accurate and precise in itself , but also in relation to every other gear. Any error is multiplied by the number of components it comes in contact with. A progressive accumulation of errors if you will. It is something engineers struggle with even today.
There is no doubt that the idea was-still is- brilliant. The execution, in my opinion, was equally as brilliant. It may have been the same the mind.
it makes you speculate. What other marvels have been lost?