[HN Gopher] Archaeometallurgical investigation of the Nebra Sky ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Archaeometallurgical investigation of the Nebra Sky Disc
        
       Author : Archelaos
       Score  : 60 points
       Date   : 2024-11-29 16:12 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nature.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nature.com)
        
       | optimalsolver wrote:
       | Would you have deduced that stars are distant suns if you'd lived
       | in the ancient world?
       | 
       | Apparently the only pre-modern people (i.e. pre-Giordano Bruno)
       | recorded as making the claim were Anaxagoras, and Aristarchus of
       | Samos, but their ideas were completely rejected by
       | contemporaries.
       | 
       | In retrospect, it just seems so blindingly obvious that I'm
       | tempted to believe that I too would have seen through the
       | Aristotelean BS. But surely there must be aspects of reality that
       | will seem similarly obvious to future generations, and yet I
       | don't feel any insights coming on.
       | 
       | I should say, Aristarchus is the ideal of maximizing information
       | from minimal data:
       | 
       | >Aristarchus of Samos (Samos is a Greek island in the Aegean Sea)
       | lived from about 310 to 230 BC, about 2250 years ago. He measured
       | the size and distance of the Sun and, though his observations
       | were inaccurate, found that the Sun is much larger than the
       | Earth. Aristarchus then suggested that the small Earth orbits
       | around the big Sun rather than the other way around, and he also
       | suspected that stars were nothing but distant suns, but his ideas
       | were rejected and later forgotten, and he, too, was threatened
       | for suggesting such things
       | 
       | http://solar-center.stanford.edu/FAQ/Qsunasstar.html
        
         | dr_dshiv wrote:
         | A Pythagorean. The pythagoreans taught that there were 10
         | celestial bodies, but they could only observe 9, so they
         | proposed a counter earth that could not be seen -- behind the
         | sun. Aristotle mocks them for this idea, but the idea implies
         | rotation around the sun.
        
           | fph wrote:
           | Does it? If the sun were rotating around the Earth, there
           | could still be another planet behind it, rotating
           | synchronously with it.
           | 
           | At least from the point of view of the Greek, who didn't know
           | how gravitation works in detail.
        
             | dr_dshiv wrote:
             | Possibly. But I believe the mechanism for the movement of
             | the planets was believed to be crystal spheres.
             | 
             | Another possibility is that the Pythagoreans actually
             | described the earth rotating around a central fire or
             | Hestia. If that wasn't the sun, it might have been the
             | center of the earth -- and the counter earth was actually
             | the antipodes.
             | 
             | When you see the source texts describing these things, it
             | is terribly vague. Yet, Copernicus described himself as
             | bringing back the Pythagorean ideas--
        
       | theginger wrote:
       | Archaeometallurgical, If we allow words with 94 bits of entropy
       | why do we need some words with 3 or 4 different different
       | meanings?
        
         | optimalsolver wrote:
         | Because we get to have sentences like this:
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffal...
        
         | WorkerBee28474 wrote:
         | Because we value conciseness over preciseness.
         | 
         | If given enough time and use, we would probably shorten
         | "Archaeometallurgical" to "arcmet" or even "arc" in speech.
        
       | gdjskshh wrote:
       | > five-phase reconstruction of the development of the imagery on
       | the disc seems to be the likeliest sequence for the disc's
       | development. In the earliest version, an elaborately encoded
       | image reflects sophisticated astronomical knowledge. In
       | subsequent stages this was forgotten and replaced by traditional
       | knowledge, which was focused on the interaction of the heavenly
       | bodies and the horizon; and finally, this reduced knowledge gave
       | way to mythology
       | 
       | It's interesting that the oldest part of the artifact has the
       | most advanced astronomical information.
        
         | jl6 wrote:
         | It's only relatively recently in history that we have
         | relatively reliable methods for passing on knowledge. It is
         | probable that all the "firsts" we know about were just the
         | first occurrence that survived. It is probable that
         | astronomical knowledge like this was discovered and forgotten
         | and discovered over and over again, until finally it persisted.
        
       | gedy wrote:
       | > The state of Saxony-Anhalt registered the disc as a trademark,
       | which resulted in two lawsuits. In 2003, Saxony-Anhalt
       | successfully sued the city of Querfurt for depicting the disc
       | design on souvenirs. Saxony-Anhalt also successfully sued the
       | publishing houses Piper and Heyne over an abstract depiction of
       | the disc on book covers.
       | 
       | > The defenders argued that as a cult object, the disc had
       | already been "published" approximately 3,500 years earlier in the
       | Bronze Age and that consequently, all protection of intellectual
       | property associated with it has long expired.
       | 
       | This is really silly, and disappointed if this is valid under
       | DE/EU law. This is our shared history, not a trademark
        
       | JoeAltmaier wrote:
       | A modern person interprets this as a sky map. But it some round
       | and cresent shapes on a field of dots. Not sure they drew the sky
       | like that in the Bronze age? What evidence is there, that it's
       | supposed to represent the sky?
       | 
       | The stars are no evidence. A bunch of dots can be stretched to
       | fit any star configuration you please.
       | 
       | And there are way too many crescents. What, did we have three
       | moons back then? And none of them are shaped anything like the
       | actual moon looks at any time.
       | 
       | Hm.
        
         | eschaton wrote:
         | I'm sure the authors of this paper that was published in one of
         | the premiere scientific journals and the authors of all of the
         | works they cite did not consider these elementary questions
         | whatsoever and will appreciate your insight.
        
       | oezi wrote:
       | Definitely one of the most awe-inspiring museum visits for me in
       | Germany.
       | 
       | https://www.himmelsscheibe-erleben.de/
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-30 23:01 UTC)