NationStates Jolt Archive

Time to scrap the old thoughts on what it was like 2000 years ago.

This should create some very lively discussion, akin to the topic on the pyramids, although this find seems even more incredible.

http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;1282871521;fp;2;fpid;1

Details of the newest research on the ancient astronomical calculator called the Antikythera Mechanism have been published online by Nature magazine in advance of Thursday's international conference in Athens.

The 2,000-year-old device is a complex of hand-cut bronze gears and dials, inscribed with numbers and astronomical terms. It was found a century ago by accident in a wreck off the Greek island of Antikythera and has baffled scientists for much of the time since then.

Researchers in recent years have clarified the device was used to calculate and display the relative positions of sun and moon, and possibly the five then-known planets. But many mysteries remained.

Now there are fewer remaining. The latest research, aided by advanced imaging software and 3-D X-ray computed tomography, confirms some previous insights by researcher Michael Wright and expands on them. The mechanism is revealed as a sophisticated mechanical calculator that displayed a variety of astronomical events and periods, including the sun and moon moving through the zodiac, accurately predicted solar eclipses, and apparently displayed movements of the known planets.

Nature has a general story about the mechanism and its historical context, coupled with material available only via paid subscription or institutional license: diagrams, a detailed technical paper from the Antikythera Mechanism Research Project and a technical summary by science historian Francoise Charette. The latter two documents were made available to Network World.

Roughly the size of shoebox, the mechanism shows two concentric scales, the inner one showing the Greek Zodiac with 360 divisions, the outer, moveable scale is the Egyptian 12-month calendar, widely use then in Greek astronomy. The Egyptian names for the months are written in Greek letters. Pointers show the relative positions of the sun and move, and a device showing the moon's phase was probably attached to the moon pointer. On the back of the device are two dials, each based on spiral design, whose pointers show time based on two astronomical cycles.

Page 2 (http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;1282871521;pp;2;fp;2;fpid;1)

Thoughts and comments on this mind blowing development?

Saw this on AOL. Thought it was very interesting and goes to show what they had back then. To bad alot of that information was lost. Who know where we would be today if the technology had not been lost.

Heard about it awhile ago. My roomies love discussing stuff like that and ancient Egyptian batteries.

I already knew about it, Heron of Alexandria created a steam engine before the time of christ, the greeks also had vending machines.

I already knew about it, Heron of Alexandria created a steam engine before the time of christ, the greeks also had vending machines.
And how or why did this technology get lost?

I already knew about it, Heron of Alexandria created a steam engine before the time of christ, the greeks also had vending machines.As I recall, the vending machines were especially common in temples.

FROM WIKI:
A vending machine is a machine that dispenses merchandise when a customer deposits sufficient money into a slot or vent to purchase the desired item (as opposed to a shop, where the presence of personnel is required for every purchase). The money (usually coins) is validated by a currency detector. It is believed to have been first invented by Hero of Alexandria, a 1st century inventor. His machine accepted a coin and then dispensed a fixed amount of holy water.

And how or why did this technology get lost?

The Dark Ages.

The worst part is that the Greeks were just inches away from developing a steam engine, they just needed to make one tiny step, and the industrial revoultion would have been on.

The worst part is that the Greeks were just inches away from developing a steam engine, they just needed to make one tiny step, and the industrial revoultion would have been on.

Think about it, though: did we REALLY want an industrialized Rome? Because that's what we surely would have ended up with after Rome gobsmacked Greece. I think we would still be celebrating Rome's glory today, and I for one would prefer that not to be so. I doubt we'd have the kind of social reforms in terms of how we view people, the sexes, ethnicities, and what-not, and I'm much happier in my modern day reality than I would be in steampunk Rome, I can tell you that much.

Think about it, though: did we REALLY want an industrialized Rome? Because that's what we surely would have ended up with after Rome gobsmacked Greece. I think we would still be celebrating Rome's glory today, and I for one would prefer that not to be so. I doubt we'd have the kind of social reforms in terms of how we view people, the sexes, ethnicities, and what-not, and I'm much happier in my modern day reality than I would be in steampunk Rome, I can tell you that much.

A few hundred years ago, the western world was not a whole lot different from Rome, socially.

Steampunk Rome

That sounds like a band name or something. I think I'll make it my sig

A few hundred years ago, the western world was not a whole lot different from Rome, socially.

I know that. I also know that it was specific events in Western history that lead to the social reforms of which I speak. Somehow, I doubt the same series of events would occur in an industrialized Rome.

But then, we can't really know until we develop the science necessary to study alternate universes. At that point we can pretty much solve any what-if question just by looking.

The Dark Ages.
And the fact that the Romans didn't appreciate great minds nearly as much as they did strong sword arms.

They used some fancy ideas for military purpose, but devoting one's life to inventions and engineering wasn't nearly as well looked upon in Rome as it might have been in Greece.

Wow! Poor old Galileo sure could have used that thing when he was hauled into court for heresy!

Wow! Poor old Galileo sure could have used that thing when he was hauled into court for heresy!
Considering the sheer mountain of evidence in support of evolution has yet to convince Creationists, I doubt the Antikythera Mechanism would have convinced the Church.

And how or why did this technology get lost? A government that destroyed itself from within, leaving the people to follow corrupt religious officials who slid back progress for over 1000 years...

The Dark ages.

A more in depth article about this amazing discovery:

In search of lost time (http://www.nature.com/news/2006/061127/full/444534a.html)

Read about it in the new york times last week, very interesting, cool stuff.

My heart goes out to the poor soul that made it

And these inventions were lost because of a lack of interest and an unclear view on how useful they actually were, there was no dark age really

Think about it, though: did we REALLY want an industrialized Rome? Because that's what we surely would have ended up with after Rome gobsmacked Greece. I think we would still be celebrating Rome's glory today, and I for one would prefer that not to be so. I doubt we'd have the kind of social reforms in terms of how we view people, the sexes, ethnicities, and what-not, and I'm much happier in my modern day reality than I would be in steampunk Rome, I can tell you that much.

I doubt Rome would have industrialized even if the steam engine were widely available. Slave labor would have been vastly cheaper than building and maintaining machines. Machines are the slaves of the modern times without all those pesky moral issues. And Rome wasn't so bad (by ancient standards). I think we'd be much farther along today if the Roman Empire had not fallen, but it is only a personal hunch.

And how or why did this technology get lost?

The destruction of the library of Alexandria.

I doubt Rome would have industrialized even if the steam engine were widely available. Slave labor would have been vastly cheaper than building and maintaining machines. Machines are the slaves of the modern times without all those pesky moral issues. And Rome wasn't so bad (by ancient standards). I think we'd be much farther along today if the Roman Empire had not fallen, but it is only a personal hunch.
That's my belief as well.
Slave labour held back a lot of development. With ready supply of slaves, there was no need to innovate.
imo, the Bubonic Plague was perhaps one of the best things to happen to Europe. The resulting decimation in the population forced Europeans into innovation and invention, which helped to make Europe as pwoerful as it was during the period after.

And the fact that the Romans didn't appreciate great minds nearly as much as they did strong sword arms.

They used some fancy ideas for military purpose, but devoting one's life to inventions and engineering wasn't nearly as well looked upon in Rome as it might have been in Greece.


Well if you consider if the steam engine was developed as was in the industrial age. It would also lead to railroads. Which if the Romans knew about that tech you would surely see a military RR all through the empire. Anything that they could have used for a military advantage they would have. Even steam powered ships would have been extremely useful. As far as engineering the Romans were adept at it. They borrowed from conquered foes and did develop fairly sophisticated engineering tech.

Think about it, though: did we REALLY want an industrialized Rome? Because that's what we surely would have ended up with after Rome gobsmacked Greece. I think we would still be celebrating Rome's glory today, and I for one would prefer that not to be so. I doubt we'd have the kind of social reforms in terms of how we view people, the sexes, ethnicities, and what-not, and I'm much happier in my modern day reality than I would be in steampunk Rome, I can tell you that much.

Are we entirely sure that Rome could beat a steamified Greece?

And how or why did this technology get lost?
Fell down the back of the sofa one night after a hard night's drinking and was never seen again.

I doubt Rome would have industrialized even if the steam engine were widely available. Slave labor would have been vastly cheaper than building and maintaining machines.

Not really. One only has to look at the economic strengths between the North and South pre-civil war in America to see that there were some significant advantages to industrializing.

Especially in the fields of manufacturing and transport. 500 slaves wouldn't have held a patch in transportation ability as a handful of steam powered wagons/trains. All it would take would be a merchant/trader who thought it could be done more profitably and before long, the others would follow suit. Not to mention the military applications of trains in moving troops and supplies long distances in short periods of time. Or ships. Now that's a thought. Imagine a Roman era galleon with a steam engine.

Would have been interesting though, to see how it would have been had Rome not fallen.

Steam powered trains throughout all of the Roman Empire would have been quite the advantage. Much easier to hold back invading hordes when you can easily move around troops and supplies. Not to mention they have a mass of slaves to build the railroads for them.

A government that destroyed itself from within, leaving the people to follow corrupt religious officials who slid back progress for over 1000 years...

The Dark ages.

Is that a prediction?

My heart goes out to the poor soul that made it

And these inventions were lost because of a lack of interest and an unclear view on how useful they actually were, there was no dark age really

There was a lack of interest in electricity and no clear view on how useful lasers actually were, it didn't lead to the loss of the technology.

Anything that they could have used for a military advantage they would have. Even steam powered ships would have been extremely useful. As far as engineering the Romans were adept at it. They borrowed from conquered foes and did develop fairly sophisticated engineering tech.


Maybe, but there's a big difference between developing an already obviously useful technology and the Greek habit of dedicating ones life to investigating science for the sake of science.

And the fact that the Romans didn't appreciate great minds nearly as much as they did strong sword arms.

I think that was the main problem.

Would the possessors of this technology at that time have thought of the earth as being flat? Somehow I doubt that they would have considering the sophistication of the instrument and what it could do.

Would the possessors of this technology at that time have thought of the earth as being flat? Somehow I doubt that they would have considering the sophistication of the instrument and what it could do.
"Earth being flat" syndrome didn't strike the populace en masse till after Greece was gobsmacked. The Ancient Greeks knew damned well the Earth was an oblate spheroid; they even projected the circumferance accurately.

Is that a prediction?
Could well be. Our society is screwing itself in that we're increasingly using digital means to record our achievements.
Just imagine if we weren't able to use electricity. Suddenly everything digitally transcribed wouldn't be available. We'd have to rely on word of mouth and books to learn.
If society descended into chaos, within just a couple of generations, all that knowledge would be lost.

To the OP. Why do you put computer in speech marks. A computer doesn't have to be electronic. Just a system that is able to make calculations on its own. Such as the mechanical betting computer of that was designed in the 20s in Australia. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~bconlon/

I know that. I also know that it was specific events in Western history that lead to the social reforms of which I speak. Somehow, I doubt the same series of events would occur in an industrialized Rome.Why not? There would occur the shift from a feudal-like system that already has an extremely high agricultural output that has disposed many plebians. They go work in the cities, thus greatly increasing the productivity of Rome so that it can survive the economic pressures of constantly having to import grain from Egypt. The increased output of the empire leads to a swelling of the merchant classes, more than the nobility of Rome can fulfill. Hence a petty bourgeois is produced. The economy develops independently of the state. When the state suffers from the likes of bad emperors there is the power and money to bring about change. The Senate slowly regains powers, but has to accomodate the nouveau riche. All the while a theory of economics develops to cope with the huge productivity of Rome. Marxist-type thinking develops along side this economic theory. Compounded by Christianity gaining favour in Rome and the spreading of Christian ethics. It could be possible for Rome to become like the modern world within 500 years or less.

But then, we can't really know until we develop the science necessary to study alternate universes. At that point we can pretty much solve any what-if question just by looking.Not at all. There would be at least one alternate universe for every speculation that you have.

If Rome industrialised it could have carried on as an empire for the next 2000 years if the right decisions were made, or it could have collapsed from overexpansion and formed a republic again which doesn't extend universal suffrage for the 2000 years. Or it could be that a general or someone seizes power he has gained from the steam engine. He dies unexpectedly and the plebians reestablish the tribune of the plebs in the ensuing chaos and a popularist general is voted in as leader he keeps to his end of the bargain and universal male suffrage is established. And so on and so on.

And the fact that the Romans didn't appreciate great minds nearly as much as they did strong sword arms.

They used some fancy ideas for military purpose, but devoting one's life to inventions and engineering wasn't nearly as well looked upon in Rome as it might have been in Greece.Was it Cierco who said that the 'sinews of war are infinite money'?

With the development of industrialisation and the large amounts of capital it could generate then I think there would be a new found respect for those with the intelligent enough minds to invent new war machines, or to generate enough gold that they can buy generals and private armies. The roman armies were loyal to their paymasters - the generals (I think most soldiers were paid with the looted remains of conquered tribes). So if that money comes from a capitalist then that army is likely to stay loyal and generate respect for the capitalist in that he can maintain such large armies through use of his intellect.

I was hoping this would be a computer in the moon.

Time to scrap the old thoughts on what it was like 2000 years ago.

This should create some very lively discussion, akin to the topic on the pyramids, although this find seems even more incredible.

http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;1282871521;fp;2;fpid;1



Page 2 (http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;1282871521;pp;2;fp;2;fpid;1)

Thoughts and comments on this mind blowing development?

Saw a History channel episode on this--Brainy Barbarians or something. But that was over Thanksgiving break. Old news now.

Could well be. Our society is screwing itself in that we're increasingly using digital means to record our achievements.
Just imagine if we weren't able to use electricity. Suddenly everything digitally transcribed wouldn't be available. We'd have to rely on word of mouth and books to learn.
If society descended into chaos, within just a couple of generations, all that knowledge would be lost.

On a side note, many authors are switching to electronic means of writing and editing. It's becoming more and more difficult to look at an "author at work," that is to say, for example, looking at one of Hemingway's notebooks and observing his thoughts as he edited his stories. Electronic drafts all bit eliminate this element, in the name of convenience, of course. The digital age is a sad one, indeed.

You got to love the hellenic peoples for their inventive abilities!

Just a shame they're strengh was more in theoritical and applicable sciences.

BTW someone meantioned something about what if the romans have railways and how that would have affected the roman empire. They did have the equivalent. I beleive they were called 'wagonways'. these were tracks cut into the roads to be used by wagons pulled by horses/cattle.

Also whether the Roman empire would have industrialised. IMO i don't think so. Of course we can all see the benefits of industrialisation but would the ancient romans?
I think we have too look at several important points.
Romans were very conservative by nature. They took advantage of exisiting tech of conquered peoples. But not always quickly. 2 examples of this would be cement and the barrel. I think the barrel is a good example. Far easier to transport and less liekly to break than an amphora. Yet they stilled used the amphora to measure weight/value and for transportation.
Also the economy was based on agriculture and the trade of agriculture products. Manufactured goods made up only a small part of the economy. There was also the slave market... Although information varies there are claims that anything up 1/3 of the population of the Roman empire was slaves. A more conservative figure says 1/5. Still that's a huge source of cheap labour. Would it have been in the interest of landowners to make the shift from one to the other? I personally don't think so.

Last point(s) would be that although steampower was vital part of the industrial revolution, it was not the be all and end all of it. Alot of industries did not use steampower of any sort, yet made huge strides in their industries, metalurgy, textiles and machine tools come to mind. Yet Rome never achieved these improvements either.

Trade, britain industrialised because it was reliant of trade with other nations. And they had the advantage after the napoleonic wars to further strenghen their hold. Romes relied more on internal trade between the provinces. So there was less need for such drastic improvements

On a side note, many authors are switching to electronic means of writing and editing. It's becoming more and more difficult to look at an "author at work," that is to say, for example, looking at one of Hemingway's notebooks and observing his thoughts as he edited his stories. Electronic drafts all bit eliminate this element, in the name of convenience, of course. The digital age is a sad one, indeed.
very sad. Especially if you think about that much of what we know is now so specialised that there's not one person who can understand any specific thing. We need computers to build things for us now.
Lose computers and we lose more than just a way of communicating with each other, or making cool games.

We lose an enormous amount of knowledge.

I remember New Scientist ran a competition running up to the new millenium asking ppl to predict what 3000AD would be like. Aside from the usual futuristic predictions, one that stuck in my mind was:
1000AD: crossbows for weapons, coloured glass beads used as decorations and/or batering;
2000AD: nuclear missiles for weapons, coloured paper used for 'batering';
3000AD: crossbows for weapons, broken bits of CDs used as decorations and/or batering.

very sad. Especially if you think about that much of what we know is now so specialised that there's not one person who can understand any specific thing. We need computers to build things for us now.
Lose computers and we lose more than just a way of communicating with each other, or making cool games.

We lose an enormous amount of knowledge.

I remember New Scientist ran a competition running up to the new millenium asking ppl to predict what 3000AD would be like. Aside from the usual futuristic predictions, one that stuck in my mind was:
1000AD: crossbows for weapons, coloured glass beads used as decorations and/or batering;
2000AD: nuclear missiles for weapons, coloured paper used for 'batering';
3000AD: crossbows for weapons, broken bits of CDs used as decorations and/or batering.

what? no crossbows with nuclear tipped darts/bolts? awwww:(

Thoughts and comments on this mind blowing development?
What's truly mind-blowing is that the word "astrology" never appears once in either article.

Would the possessors of this technology at that time have thought of the earth as being flat? Somehow I doubt that they would have considering the sophistication of the instrument and what it could do.

Its pretty well known that Greeks and some other cultures of that era were aware the Earth wasn't flat (Eratosthenes successfully calculated the diameter well before the Anti-Kythera mechanism).

What the device primarily illustrates is that their mechanical sophistication was more substantial than previously thought.

Bear in mind, in any culture, there will frequently be small groups of people with advanced methods and understandings; unfortunately, this standard of knowledge exhibited by a particular class did not always permeate the era as a whole.

For example, an archaelogist thousands of years from now might infer a great deal about what we knew by examining a radio telescope array or reading the journals of a biochemist, but that doesn't mean our society as a whole understands everything addressed by those things.

I remember New Scientist ran a competition running up to the new millenium asking ppl to predict what 3000AD would be like. Aside from the usual futuristic predictions, one that stuck in my mind was:
1000AD: crossbows for weapons, coloured glass beads used as decorations and/or batering;
2000AD: nuclear missiles for weapons, coloured paper used for 'batering';
3000AD: crossbows for weapons, broken bits of CDs used as decorations and/or batering.

Seems like its just a play on the Einstein quote "I know not with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones."

It is truly a shame that such knowledge can be lost, but academia would be a boring pursuit if not for all the mysteries of the past to pursue. Im interested in other such mysteries as forgotten chemistry and the great history of human migration.

On a side note, many authors are switching to electronic means of writing and editing. It's becoming more and more difficult to look at an "author at work," that is to say, for example, looking at one of Hemingway's notebooks and observing his thoughts as he edited his stories. Electronic drafts all bit eliminate this element, in the name of convenience, of course. The digital age is a sad one, indeed.Not if they were using microsoft word. Try copying and pasting a whole document that you've heavily edited into a new document and save it. You should notice a difference in the size of the document.

From another article (http://technology.sympatico.msn.cbc.ca/Scientists+unlock+mystery+of+2000yearold+computer/NewsandTrends/ContentPosting.aspx?isfa=1&newsitemid=antikythera-mechanism&feedname=CBC-TECH-SCIENCE&show=False&number=0&showbyline=True&subtitle=&detect=&abc=abc), in regards to the lost technology:

"This was absolutely state of the art in astronomy at the time."

The greater question puzzling scientists is how such a useful device could have disappeared entirely from the archeological record, so much so that no record of anything as complex appears for another 1,000 years. One explanation is that the recycling of bronze in ancient times melted down older versions and caused any archeological record to disappear.

But as London Science Museum's curator, Michael Wright, told Nature in a subsequent article, a more likely possibility is that the device or plans of the device migrated in some form to the Muslim world after the fall of Rome, and reappeared years later in Europe.

"I find it as easy to believe that this technology survived unrecorded, as to believe that it was reinvented in so similar a form," said Wright.

And how or why did this technology get lost?

Christians I would expect.

What's truly mind-blowing is that the word "astrology" never appears once in either article.
The other article I linked too does mention astronomy. :)