Antikythera Mechanism : New-ish findings

[Matt HarringtonParticipant @mattharrington87221]

A new report to keep up your enthusiasm!

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84310-w

Matt

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Matt Harrington on 13/03/2021 10:40:33:

A new report to keep up your enthusiasm!

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84310-w

Matt

.

Just like the Antikythera mechanism … we’re going round in circles

No harm in that, Matt … but your link is the very report referenced in the concurrent thread.

https://www.model-engineer.co.uk/forums/postings.asp?th=171769&p=1

MichaelG.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 13/03/2021 10:53:20

[Dave HalfordParticipant @davehalford22513]

Posted by Tim Stevens on 28/02/2021 15:29:28:

My guess is that the ship captain was himself the new owner, and had promised his pennyless mate to send a heap of shekels / denarii / pieces of 8 / etc as soon as he got back home. So, somewhere on the shores of the Mediterranean, an inventor sits, with tears in his eyes and nothing in his wallet, waiting, so patiently, as he looks towards Greece …

Cheers, Tim

My guess is the maker on his way to sell it to someone very rich went to the bottom with the ship and his greatest work.

Unless someone finds another one!

[Matt HarringtonParticipant @mattharrington87221]

Michael, apologies – I hadn't seen the other thread. Always seems a shame that information get diluted like this.

Matt

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Matt Harrington on 13/03/2021 11:34:34:

Michael, apologies – I hadn't seen the other thread. Always seems a shame that information get diluted like this.

Matt

Look on the bright side, Matt

We're adopting the LOCKSS principle:

Lots Of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe

MichaelG.

[JAParticipant @ja]

I know very little about the Antikythera device but I realise that its discovery and study is very well documented. What worries me is the sophistication, maths and construction, of the device. It appears to be far more advanced than anything else of the period. The only thing that approaches it is Hero's steam engine (which may have been later). I have always been suspicious of "proof" based on reconstruction using tools of the time. Just because it can be done it does not mean it was done.

To me it has the appearence of the Piltdown skull. OK, call me a sceptic.

JA

[Tim StevensParticipant @timstevens64731]

Well, JA, do you really think that were the Piltdown Skull to be put before a bunch of modern scientists and anatomists, armed as they are with modern understandings, modern analytical kit, etc, they would have failed to detect the signs of a fake? If so, you might care to explain why a fake would have been made? Perhaps by a Greek museum needing to attract visitors? And how exactly, would the museum have acquired the astronomic, as well as the metalwork, and then the corrosion science skills, without anyone else finding out? You might even try to make, or have made, something which could sit alongside the possibly ancient device, and not be distinguishable from it in terms of mechanical complexity, or corrosion effects?

I'm not saying you are wrong. I would just like you to support your hypothesis with a bit of rigour. That is how science works. So, over to you …

Cheers, Tim

Edited By Tim Stevens on 13/03/2021 18:30:30

[JAParticipant @ja]

Tim

I do not have a hypothesis, just doubts.

The Piltdown skull was examined with all the scientific rigour of the time and was generally accepted. There were doubters but the science held until modern chemical analysis showed it was a hoax in the 1940s.

JA

[Neil LickfoldParticipant @neillickfold44316]

I have been subscribed to Chris youtube site for quite some time. Initially I wondered what he was up to, then soon realised that the objective was to make to a certain degree an as accurate as possible replica. Using those methods most likely available in those days. Even making files, drills etc. Such a great journey. My biggest question has often been, why did they not make lathes with gear cutting capabilities until something like 1500 odd years later.

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

I have tried searching the forum for the thread on here where we discussed the probable numbers of hole based on only having a small segment of an array.

This recent article popped up on my phone randomly (as they do) on Instagram.

https://www.sci.news/archaeology/antikythera-mechanisms-calendar-ring-13085.html

Ian P

[Ian P]

On Ian P Said:

I have tried searching the forum for the thread on here where we discussed the probable numbers of hole based on only having a small segment of an array.

[…]

Try this, Ian:

https://www.model-engineer.co.uk/forums/topic/antikythera-mechanism-2/

MichaelG.

[Ian P]

On Ian P Said:

[…]
This recent article popped up on my phone randomly (as they do) on Instagram.

https://www.sci.news/archaeology/antikythera-mechanisms-calendar-ring-13085.html

Thanks for sharing the link, Ian

… I read the article this morning [after jumping through many hoops to decline ‘legitimate interest’ cookies] and finally discovered the embedded link to:

https://bhi.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/07-HJJuly24-AOTM-2.pdf

which I had seen already 🙁

MichaelG.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

… not really conclusive

.

MichaelG.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Lest it becomes lost in the noise … I must share this which [after all those big words and hard sums] I consider to be the punchline:

.

.

MichaelG.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Readers of the earlier thread may be aware that my own humble geometric efforts led me to consider 352 my best estimate.

I have just thrown that number into a Google search and found one interesting reference … albeit on a site apparently lacking any academic credentials:

https://calendars.fandom.com/wiki/352_Or_384_Day_Calendar

Is this somebody’s invention for game-play, or what ??

MichaelG.

[david bennett 8Participant @davidbennett8]

Has nobody given thought that the purpose of 352 holes in the backplate is to achieve an accurate leap year adjustment?

dave8

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

I did, Dave … when I found that site

it might be taken more seriously if/when somebody finds the companion 384, or whatever clever mechanism provides its equivalent.

Until then, like most of the analysis, it is mere speculation.

MichaelG.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Maybe we should start here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_algorithm

[ I think the answer for GCD is 32 ]

MichaelG.

[david bennett 8Participant @davidbennett8]

Michael, wan’t it 354 holes? – memory is going again.

dave8

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Dave

352 … I was referencing my own estimate, not any of the various others.

384 … Not in any of the other discussions; it refers only to that ‘8 day week’ calendar that I found.

 

Hope that clarifies.

MichaelG.

[david bennett 8Participant @davidbennett8]

There has been rigorous testing of the number of holes in the backplate, but very little to prove the front calendar dial has the same number of divisions.

dave8

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Rigorous testing and statistical analysis … Yes

Definitive answer for the number of holes .. No

MichaelG.

[david bennett 8Participant @davidbennett8]

Can you point me to the rigorous testing of the calendar dial? It just seems to be assumed the same as the backplate.

dave8

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Probably not, Dave

… I was actually referring all the [futile] effort that’s gone into ‘reverse engineering’ the ring of holes.

MichaelG.

[david bennett 8Participant @davidbennett8]

Yes, rhat’s what I thought. It leaves the calendar dial question still open. If the backplate holes are known or not,it is important to know if the calendar divisions are the same. A lunar calendar depends on this.

dave8

[Author]

Posts