[HN Gopher] Alternative Egyptology and scientific archaeology we...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Alternative Egyptology and scientific archaeology were born on the
       Giza Plateau
        
       Author : Tomte
       Score  : 21 points
       Date   : 2022-09-12 07:27 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
        
       | lukehollis wrote:
       | I 3d scanned the Khufu Pyramid interior for the Giza Project this
       | summer for education about Giza:
       | https://giza.mused.org/en/guided/266/inside-the-great-pyrami...
       | 
       | Partly because it's what our users most wanted to know about--but
       | partly also because there's been so much miseducation about the
       | site. At least everyone can explore for themselves now.
        
         | bitcurious wrote:
         | Neat! One of the more unexpected things to happen on my first
         | day in Egypt was the guard inside the inner chamber telling me
         | to climb into the tomb for a photo.
        
           | lukehollis wrote:
           | That's so funny! A study in the OG encryption.
        
         | mistrial9 wrote:
         | .. reaching for Her-Bak by Isha Schwaller de Lubicz ..
        
         | irrational wrote:
         | Very cool! I'm going to show this to my kids after school. One
         | of the "steps" mentions that the cosmic ray detector found a
         | void near the King's Chamber. Have they been able to find a way
         | into that void (and how big is the void?)
        
           | lukehollis wrote:
           | Awesome! Would love to know how the interpretative text is or
           | if there's other questions to include on the tour.
           | 
           | I haven't heard that they've been able to enter the void yet,
           | but there's more information about the project and findings
           | here: http://www.scanpyramids.org/index-en.html
        
       | gumby wrote:
       | > He claimed that the old, so-called "imperial" standard was not
       | only "more perfect" than the alternative--a highly dubious claim
       | at best...
       | 
       | What a slur. Division into twelfths (and sixtieths) was quite
       | common in measurements and currencies around the world because of
       | the convenient affordances of all the factors. Most also relied
       | heavily on powers of two (most notably the US version of the
       | "imperial" system) which are extremely convenient. The reliance
       | on rational numbers makes computation in the head very easy.
       | 
       | And the units are more "humane" for customary activity (a stair
       | riser is 2/3 of a foot; a cup is a common quantum for food
       | consumption, a mile is roughly a thousand paces etc). A mm or cc
       | is way too small and a meter is kind of gigantic (yards are less
       | common than feet). A litre works fine though.
       | 
       | There's a lot to like about the si system, but division by ten
       | was a disaster, and the lack of convenient units is a persistent
       | bug.
        
         | ewgoforth wrote:
         | All in all I prefer the SI system, but the Imperial system has
         | it's advantages. 5280 feet seems really arbitrary, but can
         | halve it five times and still get an integer.
         | 
         | It also divides evenly by 3.
         | 
         | For comparison:
         | 
         | 1/3 of a mile is 1760 feet. 1/2 of that is 880 feet 1/2 of that
         | is 440 feet 1/2 of that is 220 feet 1/2 of that is 110 feet 1/2
         | of that is 55 feet.
         | 
         | 1/3 of a km is 333.333333 meters 1/2 of that is 166.666667
         | meters 1/2 of that is 83.333333 meters 1/2 of that is 41.666667
         | meters 1/2 of that is 20.833333 meters 1/2 of that is 10.416667
         | meters
        
         | pavlov wrote:
         | The only reason to believe that a "cup" is more convenient than
         | a deciliter, or a "mile" is more convenient than a kilometer,
         | is that you grew up with those units.
         | 
         | 16 cups in a gallon, 12 inches in a feet, 1760 yards in a mile.
         | It's not humane that children should memorize these completely
         | arbitrary scales and weird names.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | partdavid wrote:
           | For lots of measures you're correct, but that's not really
           | true for all cases. Even in highly-metric France they use but
           | cuielleres a soupe and so forth in addition to mL, because
           | it's a more convenient measure. An egg matches with about a
           | cup of flour for a batter--eggs don't exist in fractional
           | powers of ten.
           | 
           | I also think (again in common household uses like setting a
           | thermostat or talking about the weather or a fever) a
           | fractional degree celsius is false precision, since you can't
           | feel it, and a whole degree celsius is too coarse, so
           | something that ranges from 0-100 in the temperatures you're
           | likely to encounter is better than a scale which ranges from
           | 0-100 over (the equally arbitrary) liquid phase of water. Of
           | course it's marginal, but it's not entirely true that (unlike
           | the metric system) all these measures are totally arbitrary.
           | 
           | There are advantages and disadvantages to these systems. If
           | you have to convert inches to miles a lot--yeah, the metric
           | system performs much better for that. But conversions of
           | scale or dimension--while extremely common in science and
           | engineering--are not likely in common usage, while fractional
           | division is much more common. It's likely that you don't
           | recognize the advantages of an alternate system merely
           | because you're unfamiliar with it.
        
           | gumby wrote:
           | > The only reason to believe that a "cup" is more convenient
           | than a deciliter, or a "mile" is more convenient than a
           | kilometer, is that you grew up with those units.
           | 
           | From this statement I doubt you know where I grew up.
        
         | partdavid wrote:
         | I've made these arguments before. The lack of wide, common
         | adoption of the metric system is a common plank in
         | U.S.-bashing.
         | 
         | The metric system is convenient for calculations involving
         | conversions of scale or dimension (e.g. "How long is my finger,
         | in kilometers?" "What is the rough mass of a cubic meter of
         | water?"). The standard units are more convenient for
         | calculations involving division, as you point out.
         | 
         | These are convenient in different arenas and it doesn't
         | surprise me that these different arenas use different systems.
         | For science and engineering uses, the metric system is a lot
         | better, and it's in wide use. For the common human-scale uses
         | you point out, the standard units are more convenient.
         | 
         | People often pooh-pooh the matter of "convenient" units but the
         | fact is that teaspoons and tablespoons are _still_ used for
         | cooking, even in France itself. And these aren 't
         | approximations but (as they are in the U.S.) strictly defined
         | according to a standard.
         | 
         | The metric system makes a great standard, which is why the U.S.
         | fully adopted it and all weights and measures are defined in
         | terms of the metric system. The metric system is taught in
         | schools. There's just not a compelling reason to, for common
         | and mundane uses, to switch to it; and some disadvantages.
         | 
         | (I always wondered why decimeters weren't more popular with
         | metric users, they seem convenient enough. But they do seem to
         | get by fine with piles of centimeters.)
        
         | asdff wrote:
         | For common use the imperial system is the best, more human
         | scale for all relevant measures.
         | 
         | For scientific use, nothing beats the metric system of course.
         | Having to go imperial would probably significantly increase the
         | amount of migraines scientists have on a daily basis.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-09-15 23:01 UTC)