What is it? Set 348

On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 05:09:03 -0400, Rob H. wrote:

> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to be
> posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved here
> at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/

I want to say a time bomb for 2000, but I don't think that's right. ;-)

1999 is obviously an exercise in how not to Photoshop. :-p

--
Ted S.
fedya at hughes dot net
Now blogging at http://justacineast.blogspot.com

On Aug 11, 1:10=A0am, J Burns <[email protected]> wrote:
> Michael Koblic wrote:
>
> > "J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
>
> >> After I pressed SEND, I saw that I'd misread you. =A0Well, a sundial
> >> takes more than two pieces of wood. =A0A shadow clock is easy to make
> >> and mark.
>
> > Not true. An equatorial dial can be made from a flat board and a stick.
> > It is inherently more accurate than the said stick and considerably
> > easier to "calibrate".
>
> Putting sticks together with right angles and measuring millimeters to
> make four marks is easier than inscribing and marking arcs on a board
> and setting a gnomon at a particular angle.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>> However, it looks excellent for dividing the daylight into 12 hours.
> >>>> That was what people wanted before mechanical timers and neon
> >>>> lights. The shadow clock handled "daylight savings" beautifully. =A0=
In
> >>>> Cairo, summer hours were 70 minutes and winter hours 51 minutes,
> >>>> changing gradually through the year.
>
> >>> Yes. And you can also discuss Babylonian hours, Italian hours etc.
> >>> You can measure anything with anything if you define the quantities
> >>> any way
> >>> you want. If you want to measure recognized quantities, however, you
> >>> have to follow
> >>> some constraints. This shadow stick does not do that.
>
> >> In that case, I think a clock must have a digital display, a stopwatch
> >> with 99 lap times, a countdown timer, a calendar, and an alarm. =A0You=
r
> >> sundial does none of that.
>
> > No, all it has to do is measure time in equal increments . The shadow
> > stick *shown* does not do that.
>
> I'm talking about *real* shadow clocks, used to this day.
>
> The Jewish calender used equal increments: lunar months. =A0They Egyptian
> calendar used a 365-day year. =A0Our calendar does not have equal months
> or years. =A0Does that mean it's not a real calendar?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> A shadow clock would show hours as mentioned in the Bible: divisions
> >> of the time between sunup and sundown.
>
> >>>> Egyptian monuments had east-west walls. =A0All you had to do was spo=
t
> >>>> such a landmark, move until you were looking along an east-west
> >>>> wall, shim your card table so your wine jug didn't roll off, put
> >>>> your shadow clock on the table, and aim it at the landmark. =A0The
> >>>> shadow would tell you the time of day (accurate within minutes
> >>>> throughout the year) and if the livestock dealer who had agreed to
> >>>> show you his ass was late.
>
> >>> Depends which side of the east-west wall you park your table. You
> >>> could be
> >>> out of luck on the north side. Also you calculations above do not rea=
lly
> >>> support the accuracy statement.
>
> >> If you were on the north side of an east-west wall, you wouldn't be
> >> looking along it, would you?
>
> >> I calculated the accuracy of a shadow clock marked for 60-minute hours
> >> in Cairo at equinox.
>
> >> summer solstice: day length 838 minutes, mean hour 70 minutes
>
> >> dawn first =A0 second =A0third fourth fifth sixth noon
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 62 =A0 =A0 =A0 66 =A0 =A0 69 =A0 =A074 =A0 =A0 73 =A0 =A07=
5
>
> >> winter solstice: day length 604 minutes, mean hour 50 minutes
>
> >> dawn first =A0 second =A0third fourth fifth sixth noon
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 57 =A0 =A0 =A0 54 =A0 =A0 51 =A0 =A0 49 =A0 =A042 =A0 =A04=
9
>
> >> So even at the solstices, the hours are within 8 minutes of 1/12th of
> >> a day.
>
> > Are you saying that these figures correspond to the equal divisions on
> > the shadow stick? I do not think so.
>
> You're catching on. =A0Although you answered several of my posts where I
> showed the calculated measurements, apparently you did not read them.
>
> > Furthermore, for the stick to show
> > "6 o'clock" correctly the stick would have to be several yards long to
> > even catch the end of the shadow.
>
> That's why I said "counting direct observations of the sun." =A0A farmer
> doesn't need a shadow clock to see when the sun rises and sets.
>
> >Sun's altitude in Cairo at summer
> > solstice is about 11 degrees (various calculators give slightly
> > different results).
>
> You lost me there.
>
> > Given that on the same day at noon the sun is about
> > 84 degrees high the noon to 6 interval is whopping 43 times that of noo=
n
> > to 1.
>
> >> Counting direct observations of the sun, the hours were numbered from
> >> sunup to sundown, which would suit an ancient farmer. =A0It was far
> >> easier to make and set up than a sun dial. =A0The shadow of the edge o=
f
> >> a T on a bar could probably be read more precisely than a sundial.
>
> > Why? Which sundial?
>
> The edge of a T casts a shadow through an angle of less than 90 degrees.
> =A0 A gnomon casts a shadow as the sun moves more than 180 degrees. =A0Th=
at
> sounds like a source of error.
>
>
>
> > As I said before, you can measure anything if you make up your own
> > definitions.
>
> I believe you're making up your own definitions. =A0The Egyptians used a
> 10-hour day and a 12-hour night. =A0At night they used celestial
> observations. =A0If you want time in equal divisions, hourglasses synced
> with celestial observations is much better than sundials. =A0If you want
> to divide the day into 10 hours, a sundial won't do it.
>
>
>
> > Finally, here is what I take to be the artifacts themselves:
>
> >http://members.aon.at/sundials/berlin-egypt_e.htm
>
> > The labeling is somewhat confusing in places but I think in general the
> > pictures and the description are fairly conclusive.
>
> Here's a page for you.http://library.thinkquest.org/C008179/historical/ba=
sichistory.html
>
> " =A0 The Egyptians were the first people who created a twenty-four hour
> day. =A0Time was a little bit different in those days. =A0The night was
> divided up into twelve hours, which were designated by the position of
> stars in the sky. =A0The day was divided into ten hours and a shadow cloc=
k
> was used to keep track of these hours. =A0The twilight hours were the
> hours before dawn and after sunset."
>
> " =A0 The Egyptians thought they were the first to invent the shadow
> clock, but they were mistaken. =A0At the same time, the Chinese,
> Babylonians, Greeks and the Romans were using instruments to tell time.
> =A0 Sundials were used in some of these groups, not because they work
> better, just because that's how they decided to tell time."

Well, its not rocket science, but if you google "shadow clock" you get
some very good pictures and websites discussing them. So either
everyone out there is wrong, or a couple of folks here are.

--riverman

Rob H. wrote:
> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to
> be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved
> here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob

2000 - breathalyzer

2000: Nagra tape recorder with watch microphone, stethoscope earphones
and other accessories. Spy/undercover recording equipment.
2002: Appears to be a counterweight for _something_.
2003: exhaust pipe extension? (possibly for an industrial engine,
since it looks pretty utilitarian and isn't chrome plated)
2004: support for a low-voltage or solar garden lamp, with an extra
tip.


Northe

On Aug 5, 2:09=A0am, "Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/

2002 - fire extinguisher. It's hung from a hook in the ceiling, the
hot gases melt the eutectic
top, the jug falls, smashes, and releases some kind of fire retardant,
which used to be CCl4. ;-)

My Grandpa & Grandma had a much smaller version of these in their
attic (like the size of a
light bulb) - this one looks like Industrial Strength or
something. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

These are usually the ones that whine about their reader not understanding
top posting.

Just plain laziness.


"Morgans" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
What is really wrong is that nobody in this thread over the past several
posts has taken the time to trim out all the totally unnecessary previous
posts. Sombody please step up, next time?

8 kb for a three word reply? Really?
--
Jim in NC



"J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote

> Wrong about what?



--
Have your accounts been removed by other's complaints?
Do you like to force your opinions on others?
Do you need to use multiple names due to shame and fear?
Better rates for those requiring anonymity to survive!
******** easynews.com, trolling made easy **********

I've got lint in my belly button.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.


"Steve Turner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 08/11/2010 10:13 PM, Josepi wrote:
> These are usually the ones that whine about their reader not
> understanding
> top posting.
>
> Just plain laziness.

Congratulations. That far and away takes the cake as the stupidest
post I've read all day.

--
Free bad advice available here.
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

In article <[email protected]>, Rob H. <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to be
>posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
>participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved here
>at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
>http://55tools.blogspot.com/

1999: Ancient Indian ruler.
2000: Hmm. I see a watch, some wires, and some sort of reel... this
message will self destruct?
2001: Innards of a lead-acid battery
2002: I'd guess either a counterweight or a calibration weight
2003: Section of drainpipe
2004: Pocket scribe

--
The problem with socialism is there's always
someone with less ability and more need.

On Aug 12, 8:56=A0am, J Burns <[email protected]> wrote:
> riverman wrote:
> > On Aug 11, 1:10 am, J Burns <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Michael Koblic wrote:
>
> >>> "J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>news:[email protected]...
> >>>> After I pressed SEND, I saw that I'd misread you. =A0Well, a sundial
> >>>> takes more than two pieces of wood. =A0A shadow clock is easy to mak=
e
> >>>> and mark.
> >>> Not true. An equatorial dial can be made from a flat board and a stic=
k.
> >>> It is inherently more accurate than the said stick and considerably
> >>> easier to "calibrate".
> >> Putting sticks together with right angles and measuring millimeters to
> >> make four marks is easier than inscribing and marking arcs on a board
> >> and setting a gnomon at a particular angle.
>
> >>>>>> However, it looks excellent for dividing the daylight into 12 hour=
s.
> >>>>>> That was what people wanted before mechanical timers and neon
> >>>>>> lights. The shadow clock handled "daylight savings" beautifully. =
=A0In
> >>>>>> Cairo, summer hours were 70 minutes and winter hours 51 minutes,
> >>>>>> changing gradually through the year.
> >>>>> Yes. And you can also discuss Babylonian hours, Italian hours etc.
> >>>>> You can measure anything with anything if you define the quantities
> >>>>> any way
> >>>>> you want. If you want to measure recognized quantities, however, yo=
u
> >>>>> have to follow
> >>>>> some constraints. This shadow stick does not do that.
> >>>> In that case, I think a clock must have a digital display, a stopwat=
ch
> >>>> with 99 lap times, a countdown timer, a calendar, and an alarm. =A0Y=
our
> >>>> sundial does none of that.
> >>> No, all it has to do is measure time in equal increments . The shadow
> >>> stick *shown* does not do that.
> >> I'm talking about *real* shadow clocks, used to this day.
>
> >> The Jewish calender used equal increments: lunar months. =A0They Egypt=
ian
> >> calendar used a 365-day year. =A0Our calendar does not have equal mont=
hs
> >> or years. =A0Does that mean it's not a real calendar?
>
> >>>> A shadow clock would show hours as mentioned in the Bible: divisions
> >>>> of the time between sunup and sundown.
> >>>>>> Egyptian monuments had east-west walls. =A0All you had to do was s=
pot
> >>>>>> such a landmark, move until you were looking along an east-west
> >>>>>> wall, shim your card table so your wine jug didn't roll off, put
> >>>>>> your shadow clock on the table, and aim it at the landmark. =A0The
> >>>>>> shadow would tell you the time of day (accurate within minutes
> >>>>>> throughout the year) and if the livestock dealer who had agreed to
> >>>>>> show you his ass was late.
> >>>>> Depends which side of the east-west wall you park your table. You
> >>>>> could be
> >>>>> out of luck on the north side. Also you calculations above do not r=
eally
> >>>>> support the accuracy statement.
> >>>> If you were on the north side of an east-west wall, you wouldn't be
> >>>> looking along it, would you?
> >>>> I calculated the accuracy of a shadow clock marked for 60-minute hou=
rs
> >>>> in Cairo at equinox.
> >>>> summer solstice: day length 838 minutes, mean hour 70 minutes
> >>>> dawn first =A0 second =A0third fourth fifth sixth noon
> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 62 =A0 =A0 =A0 66 =A0 =A0 69 =A0 =A074 =A0 =A0 73 =A0 =
=A075
> >>>> winter solstice: day length 604 minutes, mean hour 50 minutes
> >>>> dawn first =A0 second =A0third fourth fifth sixth noon
> >>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 57 =A0 =A0 =A0 54 =A0 =A0 51 =A0 =A0 49 =A0 =A042 =A0 =
=A049
> >>>> So even at the solstices, the hours are within 8 minutes of 1/12th o=
f
> >>>> a day.
> >>> Are you saying that these figures correspond to the equal divisions o=
n
> >>> the shadow stick? I do not think so.
> >> You're catching on. =A0Although you answered several of my posts where=
I
> >> showed the calculated measurements, apparently you did not read them.
>
> >>> Furthermore, for the stick to show
> >>> "6 o'clock" correctly the stick would have to be several yards long t=
o
> >>> even catch the end of the shadow.
> >> That's why I said "counting direct observations of the sun." =A0A farm=
er
> >> doesn't need a shadow clock to see when the sun rises and sets.
>
> >>> Sun's altitude in Cairo at summer
> >>> solstice is about 11 degrees (various calculators give slightly
> >>> different results).
> >> You lost me there.
>
> >>> Given that on the same day at noon the sun is about
> >>> 84 degrees high the noon to 6 interval is whopping 43 times that of n=
oon
> >>> to 1.
> >>>> Counting direct observations of the sun, the hours were numbered fro=
m
> >>>> sunup to sundown, which would suit an ancient farmer. =A0It was far
> >>>> easier to make and set up than a sun dial. =A0The shadow of the edge=
of
> >>>> a T on a bar could probably be read more precisely than a sundial.
> >>> Why? Which sundial?
> >> The edge of a T casts a shadow through an angle of less than 90 degree=
s.
> >> =A0 A gnomon casts a shadow as the sun moves more than 180 degrees. =
=A0That
> >> sounds like a source of error.
>
> >>> As I said before, you can measure anything if you make up your own
> >>> definitions.
> >> I believe you're making up your own definitions. =A0The Egyptians used=
a
> >> 10-hour day and a 12-hour night. =A0At night they used celestial
> >> observations. =A0If you want time in equal divisions, hourglasses sync=
ed
> >> with celestial observations is much better than sundials. =A0If you wa=
nt
> >> to divide the day into 10 hours, a sundial won't do it.
>
> >>> Finally, here is what I take to be the artifacts themselves:
> >>>http://members.aon.at/sundials/berlin-egypt_e.htm
> >>> The labeling is somewhat confusing in places but I think in general t=
he
> >>> pictures and the description are fairly conclusive.
> >> Here's a page for you.http://library.thinkquest.org/C008179/historical=
/basichistory.html
>
> >> " =A0 The Egyptians were the first people who created a twenty-four ho=
ur
> >> day. =A0Time was a little bit different in those days. =A0The night wa=
s
> >> divided up into twelve hours, which were designated by the position of
> >> stars in the sky. =A0The day was divided into ten hours and a shadow c=
lock
> >> was used to keep track of these hours. =A0The twilight hours were the
> >> hours before dawn and after sunset."
>
> >> " =A0 The Egyptians thought they were the first to invent the shadow
> >> clock, but they were mistaken. =A0At the same time, the Chinese,
> >> Babylonians, Greeks and the Romans were using instruments to tell time=
.
> >> =A0 Sundials were used in some of these groups, not because they work
> >> better, just because that's how they decided to tell time."
>
> > Well, its not rocket science, but if you google "shadow clock" you get
> > some very good pictures and websites discussing them. So either
> > everyone out there is wrong, or a couple of folks here are.
>
> > --riverman
>
> Wrong about what?

I was reading an unspoken inference that this thing wasn't really for
telling time, as it would be too inaccurate to be useful.

--riverman

On 8/5/10 2:09 AM, in article [email protected], "Rob H."
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to be
> posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved here
> at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob
>
2000 Looks like a Covert recording unit.
2001 looks like the Cell from a High current Lead Acid Battery.

Crazy Ed

"Michael Koblic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> [...]
>
>> Before the railroads, noon meant local apparent noon, when the sun was
>> due south or due north and shadows were shortest. At local apparent
>> noon, the shadow of the top of the T would be even with the base of the
>> T, so it would reliably show local noon.
>>
>> I believe the formula for the distance of the shadow along the marked
>> stick relative to the height of the T is the cotangent of the sun's
>> altitude times the sine of (180 degrees minus the sun's azimuth). Here
>> are my calculated distances for Cairo 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours before or
>> after local noon.
>>
>> 1 hour 2 3 4 5
>> summer solstice .24 .51 .85 1.33 2.18
>> equinox .31 .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
>> winter solstice .42 .94 1.78 3.99 63.47
>>
>> So it doesn't look like much of a clock to measure our constant hours.
>> However, if an hour is defined as 1/6 of the time from sunup to local
>> noon, the results are more constant.
>>
>> 1/6 2/6 3/6 4/6 5/6
>> summer solstice .29 .62 1.06 1.82 3.90 equinox .31
>> .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
>> winter solstice .35 .76 1.32 2.32 5.19
>>
>> The shadow clock looks like a fairly good way to divide the time between
>> sunup and sundown into 12 approximately equal hours, using marks about
>> .31, .66, 1.15, 2, and 4 times the height of the T. Anyone with a level
>> surface and an east-west reference can check the time with his portable
>> clock.
>
> I am sure you worked out my formula as simplified: The sun is directly
> overhead at noon and travels east-west directly, hence azimuth is 90
> degrees.
>
> I did not want to get into deep analysis of obsolete technology. My point
> is that given limited resources (two pieces of wood) there are better ways
> of measuring true solar time and approximating standard time than using
> the implement shown.
>
> --
> Michael Koblic,
> Campbell River, BC
>
>
>

Now where did I put my sidereal sundial????

:-) <<<<<--------please note smiley!


Steve R.

[email protected] did gone and wrote:
>
> On 08/11/2010 10:13 PM, Josepi wrote:
> > These are usually the ones that whine about their reader not understanding
> > top posting.
> >
> > Just plain laziness.
>
> Congratulations. That far and away takes the cake as the stupidest post I've read all day.

Well, it was written by Josepi. That's almost a definition of "stupidest
post".

--
Cheers, Ade. http://meddlingmonk.blogspot.com

"Your face reminds me of a roadkill's arsehole. Certainly not on my list
of things to kiss." - http://sleeptalkinman.blogspot.com

In article <3026a64d-d3fa-41b9-ad39-23274fcff329@q16g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Rich On Google <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>On Aug 5, 2:09=A0am, "Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>2002 - fire extinguisher. It's hung from a hook in the ceiling, the
>hot gases melt the eutectic
>top, the jug falls, smashes, and releases some kind of fire retardant,
>which used to be CCl4. ;-)

The good news is you won't burn to death just yet. The bad news is you're
going to die of cancer in a few years...
--
The problem with socialism is there's always
someone with less ability and more need.

In article <[email protected]>,
Steve R. <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Now where did I put my sidereal sundial????

*sigh* You did it *AGAIN*. Sloppy housekeeping.

You were _warned_ that you had to be careful to *always* maintain it in
the same orientation as when delivered.

Those directions were apparently too complex, and you rotated it 90 degrees.

Whereupon, of course, it became a sideimaginary device, and disappeared. :)

On Aug 5, 9:39=A0pm, "Michael Koblic" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...> Finally reached number 2000 today, =
I've got hundreds of items waiting to
> > be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! =A0Thanks to everyone =
who
> > participates in these threads. =A0A lot of mystery items have been solv=
ed
> > here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
> >http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
> Congrats on 2k!
>
> 1999 - a very poorly designed sundial - no way should the scale be linear

But it would be accurate enough for telling time during a single day
or a few days in a row. Especially when the alternative method of
telling time was asking somebody, "Hey, do you think it's lunch time
yet?"

R

"Erik" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, "Rob H." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to
>> be
>> posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
>> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved
>> here
>> at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>>
>> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>> Rob
>
>
>
> Rob,
>
> Congratulations on the big 2k!
>
> I've seen them all; and always look forward to your regular Thursday
> posts.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Erik

Likewise, well done Rob.

2000 Covert recording kit, 1950's vintage. Tape recorder, earpiece,
watch/microphone, piece of underwear to hold the recorder.


2001 "Edison Cell" telephone battery, or, at least, the guts of one without
the bottle and electrolyte.
http://books.google.com/books?id=r5BEAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115&dq=telephone+battery+%22edison+cell%22&source=bl&ots=TXgAN5EaNz&sig=UF1lR1ZIUq-YWUqQdc5Tyi8JKa8&hl=en&ei=l4xaTNDsF4P58AbX6qD0Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CEkQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=telephone%20battery%20%22edison%20cell%22&f=false


2002 If it weighs about 2.2 pounds, it might be a homemade kilogram weight.

"Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to
> be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved
> here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob

In article <[email protected]>, "Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote:
>Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to be
>posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
>participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved here
>at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
>http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
1999 - solar clock
2001 - lead-acid battery, minus the case and the acid

"Alexander Thesoso" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 2000 Covert recording kit, 1950's vintage. Tape recorder, earpiece,
> watch/microphone, piece of underwear to hold the recorder.
>
>
> 2001 "Edison Cell" telephone battery, or, at least, the guts of one
> without the bottle and electrolyte.
> http://books.google.com/books?id=r5BEAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115&dq=telephone+battery+%22edison+cell%22&source=bl&ots=TXgAN5EaNz&sig=UF1lR1ZIUq-YWUqQdc5Tyi8JKa8&hl=en&ei=l4xaTNDsF4P58AbX6qD0Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CEkQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=telephone%20battery%20%22edison%20cell%22&f=false


These are both correct.

>>
>>http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>
> 1999 - solar clock

Correct, they called it a shadow stick.

>> http://55tools.blogspot.com/

>
> 2000) *Which* case? The white plastic cover which has the watch
> in it? The zipper-closed case which has everything else
> in it?


The dimension was for the zipper-closed case.


> It would be interesting to see a clearer view of some of the
> other things hidden under what is visible.


Yes but it was locked in a glass case or I would have gotten some better
photos of it.


> 2004) An arbor to carry a feed roll of something. Given the size
> I would suggest that it is likely adding machine or cash
> register tape.


No correct guesses on this one yet so I'll give a hint, it's police related
and usually this item is hidden from view.


Rob

> Hmmm ... it looks as though the cylindrical end of the cones fit
> into the ends of the cylinder. Are there springs pushing out on the
> cones?

There are no springs but the cones do not fit tightly into the tube.


> Does not look like anything usable for cleaning a weapon. The
> points of the cones might be dangerous, however -- or the electrodes of
> a Taser -- if the cylinder were of an insulating material. The cones,
> at least appear to be metal -- though blued (and likely hardened).
>
> I don't see a likely relation to handcuffs. (Hmm ... unless it
> is to keep the two hands separated once the cuffs are installed?)
>
> Perhaps a part of the riot gun (shotgun) in the cruiser? Or
> perhaps a part of the lock which holds it in place unless the key is in
> the
> ignition and turned on?

It's not related to any weapons, handcuffs, or locks. It's a part of
something that would be used in trying to capture someone.

Rob

"Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to
> be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved
> here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>
Congrats on 2k!

1999 - a very poorly designed sundial - no way should the scale be linear
2000 - an undercover listening device with recorder
2001 - guts of a battery
2002 - a big sinker/buoy (?)
2003 - a part of a monkey trap (insert paw then unable to withdraw?)
2004 - a mandrell of some sort??

--
Michael Koblic,
Campbell River, BC

Rob H. wrote:
>> Hmmm ... it looks as though the cylindrical end of the cones fit
>> into the ends of the cylinder. Are there springs pushing out on the
>> cones?
>
> There are no springs but the cones do not fit tightly into the tube.
>
>
>> Does not look like anything usable for cleaning a weapon. The
>> points of the cones might be dangerous, however -- or the electrodes of
>> a Taser -- if the cylinder were of an insulating material. The cones,
>> at least appear to be metal -- though blued (and likely hardened).
>>
>> I don't see a likely relation to handcuffs. (Hmm ... unless it
>> is to keep the two hands separated once the cuffs are installed?)
>>
>> Perhaps a part of the riot gun (shotgun) in the cruiser? Or
>> perhaps a part of the lock which holds it in place unless the key is
>> in the
>> ignition and turned on?
>
> It's not related to any weapons, handcuffs, or locks. It's a part of
> something that would be used in trying to capture someone.
>
> Rob

Looks like a tire spike strip dart. Sharp section penetrates tire,
hollow tube releases air.

--
Steve W.
(\___/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

> Looks like a tire spike strip dart. Sharp section penetrates tire,
> hollow tube releases air.


Yes, it's a spike from a Stop Stick.


Rob

Rob H. wrote:
>>>
>>> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>>
>> 1999 - solar clock
>
> Correct, they called it a shadow stick.
>
>
>
>
I believe a shadow stick was a pole in the ground, perhaps as tall as a
telephone pole.

I believe 1999 is a time stick. It faced east in the morning and west
in the afternoon. The position of the shadow would be the product of
the T height, the tangent of the sun's declination, and the tangent of
the sun's azimuth relative to south.

I think I'll use Naval Observatory data to try the math.

> I believe a shadow stick was a pole in the ground, perhaps as tall as a
> telephone pole.
>
> I believe 1999 is a time stick. It faced east in the morning and west in
> the afternoon...


The museum where it was on display had it marked as a shadow stick, I
couldn't find much on the web to disprove the use of this term, although the
link for it that I posted on the answer page calls it a shadow clock:

http://55tools.blogspot.com/2010/08/set-348.html#answers


Rob

"RicodJour" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:da522697-c6a5-4afc-8f54-821b4afb03e6@q35g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 5, 9:39 pm, "Michael Koblic" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:[email protected]...> Finally reached number 2000 today,
>> I've got hundreds of items waiting to
>> > be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone
>> > who
>> > participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved
>> > here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>>
>> >http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>
>> Congrats on 2k!
>>
>> 1999 - a very poorly designed sundial - no way should the scale be linear
>
> But it would be accurate enough for telling time during a single day
> or a few days in a row. Especially when the alternative method of
> telling time was asking somebody, "Hey, do you think it's lunch time
> yet?"
>

No, it would not. This type of sundial measures height of the sun which is
not a linear function of time on any day. Even if the scale was designed
appropriately, as you correctly point out it would only work on a couple of
days a year at any given location. Neither the latitude nor the season is
given for the dial in picture.

--
Michael Koblic,
Campbell River, BC

Rob H. wrote:
>
>> I believe a shadow stick was a pole in the ground, perhaps as tall as a
>> telephone pole.
>>
>> I believe 1999 is a time stick. It faced east in the morning and west
>> in the afternoon...
>
>
> The museum where it was on display had it marked as a shadow stick, I
> couldn't find much on the web to disprove the use of this term, although
> the link for it that I posted on the answer page calls it a shadow clock:
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/2010/08/set-348.html#answers
>
>
> Rob

I like "shadow clock!"

"Michael Koblic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "RicodJour" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:da522697-c6a5-4afc-8f54-821b4afb03e6@q35g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>> On Aug 5, 9:39 pm, "Michael Koblic" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> "Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:[email protected]...> Finally reached
>>> number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to
>>> > be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000!
>>> > Thanks to everyone who
>>> > participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items
>>> > have been solved
>>> > here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the
>>> > guesses each week!
>>>
>>> >http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> Congrats on 2k!
>>>
>>> 1999 - a very poorly designed sundial - no way should
>>> the scale be linear
>>
>> But it would be accurate enough for telling time during a
>> single day
>> or a few days in a row. Especially when the alternative
>> method of
>> telling time was asking somebody, "Hey, do you think it's
>> lunch time
>> yet?"
>>
>
> No, it would not. This type of sundial measures height of
> the sun which is not a linear function of time on any day.
> Even if the scale was designed appropriately, as you
> correctly point out it would only work on a couple of days
> a year at any given location. Neither the latitude nor the
> season is given for the dial in picture.
>
> --
> Michael Koblic,
> Campbell River, BC

Would it not work pretty good at the equator? phil

"Phil Kangas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Michael Koblic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "RicodJour" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:da522697-c6a5-4afc-8f54-821b4afb03e6@q35g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Aug 5, 9:39 pm, "Michael Koblic" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> "Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:[email protected]...> Finally reached number 2000
>>>> today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to
>>>> > be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone
>>>> > who
>>>> > participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been
>>>> > solved
>>>> > here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each
>>>> > week!
>>>>
>>>> >http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>> Congrats on 2k!
>>>>
>>>> 1999 - a very poorly designed sundial - no way should the scale be
>>>> linear
>>>
>>> But it would be accurate enough for telling time during a single day
>>> or a few days in a row. Especially when the alternative method of
>>> telling time was asking somebody, "Hey, do you think it's lunch time
>>> yet?"
>>>
>>
>> No, it would not. This type of sundial measures height of the sun which
>> is not a linear function of time on any day. Even if the scale was
>> designed appropriately, as you correctly point out it would only work on
>> a couple of days a year at any given location. Neither the latitude nor
>> the season is given for the dial in picture.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Koblic,
>> Campbell River, BC
>
> Would it not work pretty good at the equator? phil

The way it seems to be set up the sun would have to be directly overhead at
noon so yes, at the equator it would show noon on vernal and autumnal
equinoxes. However, the linear scale would be inaccurate for the other
hours. The sun moves along the arc at 15 degrees per hour. The distance of
each hour line from the foot of the gnomon (L) is:

L = tan (15h) v

where v is the height of the gnomon and h is the solar hour. It should be
clear that the hourly increments get longer as hours advance. I say 'solar
hour" as for practical purposes one ignores things like Equation of Time
etc.

The other thing to consider is that the device will only work correctly if
the scale is perfectly horizontal. Any tilt will throw the calibration off.
OTOH such tilting could be incorporated to compensate for seasons.

All in all there are much simpler devices that are more accurate than this
one such as equatorial dials.

--
Michael Koblic,
Campbell River, BC

Phil Kangas wrote:
> "Michael Koblic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "RicodJour" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:da522697-c6a5-4afc-8f54-821b4afb03e6@q35g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Aug 5, 9:39 pm, "Michael Koblic" <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> "Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:[email protected]...> Finally reached
>>>> number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to
>>>>> be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000!
>>>>> Thanks to everyone who
>>>>> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items
>>>>> have been solved
>>>>> here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the
>>>>> guesses each week!
>>>>> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>>> Congrats on 2k!
>>>>
>>>> 1999 - a very poorly designed sundial - no way should
>>>> the scale be linear
>>> But it would be accurate enough for telling time during a
>>> single day
>>> or a few days in a row. Especially when the alternative
>>> method of
>>> telling time was asking somebody, "Hey, do you think it's
>>> lunch time
>>> yet?"
>>>
>> No, it would not. This type of sundial measures height of
>> the sun which is not a linear function of time on any day.
>> Even if the scale was designed appropriately, as you
>> correctly point out it would only work on a couple of days
>> a year at any given location. Neither the latitude nor the
>> season is given for the dial in picture.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Koblic,
>> Campbell River, BC
>
> Would it not work pretty good at the equator? phil
>
>
>
Before the railroads, noon meant local apparent noon, when the sun was
due south or due north and shadows were shortest. At local apparent
noon, the shadow of the top of the T would be even with the base of the
T, so it would reliably show local noon.

I believe the formula for the distance of the shadow along the marked
stick relative to the height of the T is the cotangent of the sun's
altitude times the sine of (180 degrees minus the sun's azimuth). Here
are my calculated distances for Cairo 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours before or
after local noon.

1 hour 2 3 4 5
summer solstice .24 .51 .85 1.33 2.18
equinox .31 .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
winter solstice .42 .94 1.78 3.99 63.47

So it doesn't look like much of a clock to measure our constant hours.
However, if an hour is defined as 1/6 of the time from sunup to local
noon, the results are more constant.

1/6 2/6 3/6 4/6 5/6
summer solstice .29 .62 1.06 1.82 3.90
equinox .31 .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
winter solstice .35 .76 1.32 2.32 5.19

The shadow clock looks like a fairly good way to divide the time between
sunup and sundown into 12 approximately equal hours, using marks about
.31, .66, 1.15, 2, and 4 times the height of the T. Anyone with a level
surface and an east-west reference can check the time with his portable
clock.

"DoN. Nichols" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[...]'

> However -- I suspect that you have missed two facts in the
> posted description:
>
> 1) "Replica"
>
> 2) "over 2000 years ago"

No I did not. The description was posted with the answers after I made my
post with the guess.

> Now -- the first question in my mind is whether back then there
> were other means to calibrate the scale more accurately. Probably every
> hour glass had a somewhat different length "hour". Candles used to keep
> time would burn faster if there were gusts of wind in the room. A water
> clock would probably suffer from inaccuracies from evaporation as
> humidity changed.

Even then they (Ptolemy) knew that sun moves 15 degrees per hour. Nothing
simpler than making an equatorial dial from a flat board and a stick and
calibrate everything from there. In all fairness the equatorial dial dates
to "beginning of Christian times" but hemicyclium which follows the same
principle was known 300+ BC.

It is a fallacy that you can "calibrate" your sundial by other means such as
you suggest. Sundial measures true solar time, not rate of dripping
candles, pendulum oscillations or atomic clocks' standard time. To get to
one from the other several corrections are needed.



> Note that as the day passes on (past noon at least), as people
> get more tired with physical labor, the "hours" will go by more rapidly
> -- so who do you think would complain? :-)
>
> Second -- since the replica obviously has a metal woodscrew
> holding the T-bar (sort of serving as the gnomen) to the upright, and we
> know that these screws were not available back then (about the time of
> Christ's birth -- or perhaps somewhat earlier), so the replica is not
> that accurate to start with. What makes you think that whoever made the
> replica (probably from wall paintings in ancient Egypt) knew enough to
> make the scale semi-reasonable even if someone had calibrated the
> original to his particular hourglass. It even loks as though it was
> made from pine -- certainly not a common tree where the original was
> likely made.
>
> The original was probably accurate enough to tell when to let
> the slaves constructing the pyramids eat and go to sleep so they did not
> die of overwork.
>
> The replica could have been built by a boy scout for a merit
> badge at some time for all I know. IIRC, I encountered a drawing of
> such an object in a kid's book on time many decades ago. I have no idea
> whether it even showed the scale in the artist's rendition, let alone
> whether it was a properly designed scale.
>

All this may be true. However, the original question was "What is it?" And
my answer still stands.

--
Michael Koblic,
Campbell River, BC

"J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[...]

> Before the railroads, noon meant local apparent noon, when the sun was due
> south or due north and shadows were shortest. At local apparent noon, the
> shadow of the top of the T would be even with the base of the T, so it
> would reliably show local noon.
>
> I believe the formula for the distance of the shadow along the marked
> stick relative to the height of the T is the cotangent of the sun's
> altitude times the sine of (180 degrees minus the sun's azimuth). Here
> are my calculated distances for Cairo 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours before or
> after local noon.
>
> 1 hour 2 3 4 5
> summer solstice .24 .51 .85 1.33 2.18
> equinox .31 .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
> winter solstice .42 .94 1.78 3.99 63.47
>
> So it doesn't look like much of a clock to measure our constant hours.
> However, if an hour is defined as 1/6 of the time from sunup to local
> noon, the results are more constant.
>
> 1/6 2/6 3/6 4/6 5/6
> summer solstice .29 .62 1.06 1.82 3.90 equinox .31
> .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
> winter solstice .35 .76 1.32 2.32 5.19
>
> The shadow clock looks like a fairly good way to divide the time between
> sunup and sundown into 12 approximately equal hours, using marks about
> .31, .66, 1.15, 2, and 4 times the height of the T. Anyone with a level
> surface and an east-west reference can check the time with his portable
> clock.

I am sure you worked out my formula as simplified: The sun is directly
overhead at noon and travels east-west directly, hence azimuth is 90
degrees.

I did not want to get into deep analysis of obsolete technology. My point is
that given limited resources (two pieces of wood) there are better ways of
measuring true solar time and approximating standard time than using the
implement shown.

--
Michael Koblic,
Campbell River, BC

Michael Koblic wrote:
>
> "J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> [...]
>
>> Before the railroads, noon meant local apparent noon, when the sun was
>> due south or due north and shadows were shortest. At local apparent
>> noon, the shadow of the top of the T would be even with the base of
>> the T, so it would reliably show local noon.
>>
>> I believe the formula for the distance of the shadow along the marked
>> stick relative to the height of the T is the cotangent of the sun's
>> altitude times the sine of (180 degrees minus the sun's azimuth).
>> Here are my calculated distances for Cairo 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hours
>> before or after local noon.
>>
>> 1 hour 2 3 4 5
>> summer solstice .24 .51 .85 1.33 2.18
>> equinox .31 .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
>> winter solstice .42 .94 1.78 3.99 63.47
>>
>> So it doesn't look like much of a clock to measure our constant hours.
>> However, if an hour is defined as 1/6 of the time from sunup to local
>> noon, the results are more constant.
>>
>> 1/6 2/6 3/6 4/6 5/6
>> summer solstice .29 .62 1.06 1.82 3.90
>> equinox .31 .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
>> winter solstice .35 .76 1.32 2.32 5.19
>>
>> The shadow clock looks like a fairly good way to divide the time
>> between sunup and sundown into 12 approximately equal hours, using
>> marks about .31, .66, 1.15, 2, and 4 times the height of the T.
>> Anyone with a level surface and an east-west reference can check the
>> time with his portable clock.
>
> I am sure you worked out my formula as simplified: The sun is directly
> overhead at noon and travels east-west directly, hence azimuth is 90
> degrees.
>
> I did not want to get into deep analysis of obsolete technology. My
> point is that given limited resources (two pieces of wood) there are
> better ways of measuring true solar time and approximating standard time
> than using the implement shown.
>

Digital wristwatches?

I did not work out your formula because would work only two days a year
and only at the equator.

You said the sun moves along the arc at 15 degrees per hour. The
longitude of the spot directly under the sun will change by 15 degrees
per hour, but observed azimuths and altitudes are along great circles,
not latitudes. (An observer on the equator will see the sun along a
line of latitude two days a year, but he can't set his mechanical clock
even then. The sun is about 7.5 minutes late at spring equinox and 7.5
minutes early at fall equinox.)


You say the distance of a shadow along an east-west line is the product
of the height of the gnomen and the tan of (15 times the hour). I used
Naval Observatory data for altitude and azimuth in Cairo. Let's compare
results:

noon 1 pm 2 pm 3 pm 4 pm 5 pm

tan (15h) 0 .27 .58 1 1.73 3.73

summer 0 .24 .51 .85 1.33 2.18
equinox 0 .31 .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
winter 0 .42 .94 1.78 3.90 63.47

There can be big differences between the results of your formula and
calculations based on Naval Observatory data. It is also apparent that
a shadow stick calibrated on one way won't tell you the time in hours on
another day.

However, it looks excellent for dividing the daylight into 12 hours.
That was what people wanted before mechanical timers and neon lights.
The shadow clock handled "daylight savings" beautifully. In Cairo,
summer hours were 70 minutes and winter hours 51 minutes, changing
gradually through the year.

Egyptian monuments had east-west walls. All you had to do was spot such
a landmark, move until you were looking along an east-west wall, shim
your card table so your wine jug didn't roll off, put your shadow clock
on the table, and aim it at the landmark. The shadow would tell you the
time of day (accurate within minutes throughout the year) and if the
livestock dealer who had agreed to show you his ass was late.

"J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
{...}

>
> I did not work out your formula because would work only two days a year
> and only at the equator.

Yes. I believe I said so much. The whole point was to keep it simple.

> You said the sun moves along the arc at 15 degrees per hour. The
> longitude of the spot directly under the sun will change by 15 degrees per
> hour, but observed azimuths and altitudes are along great circles, not
> latitudes. (An observer on the equator will see the sun along a line of
> latitude two days a year, but he can't set his mechanical clock even then.
> The sun is about 7.5 minutes late at spring equinox and 7.5 minutes early
> at fall equinox.)

Yes and yes. See my previous posts.


> You say the distance of a shadow along an east-west line is the product of
> the height of the gnomen and the tan of (15 times the hour). I used Naval
> Observatory data for altitude and azimuth in Cairo. Let's compare
> results:
>
> noon 1 pm 2 pm 3 pm 4 pm 5 pm
>
> tan (15h) 0 .27 .58 1 1.73 3.73
>
> summer 0 .24 .51 .85 1.33 2.18
> equinox 0 .31 .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
> winter 0 .42 .94 1.78 3.90 63.47

True. But Cairo is not at the equator which is where the simple formula
works. Twice a year.

> There can be big differences between the results of your formula and
> calculations based on Naval Observatory data. It is also apparent that a
> shadow stick calibrated on one way won't tell you the time in hours on
> another day.
>
> However, it looks excellent for dividing the daylight into 12 hours. That
> was what people wanted before mechanical timers and neon lights. The
> shadow clock handled "daylight savings" beautifully. In Cairo, summer
> hours were 70 minutes and winter hours 51 minutes, changing gradually
> through the year.

Yes. And you can also discuss Babylonian hours, Italian hours etc.
You can measure anything with anything if you define the quantities the way
you want. If you want to measure recognized quantities, you have to follow
some constraints. This shadow stick does not do that.

> Egyptian monuments had east-west walls. All you had to do was spot such a
> landmark, move until you were looking along an east-west wall, shim your
> card table so your wine jug didn't roll off, put your shadow clock on the
> table, and aim it at the landmark. The shadow would tell you the time of
> day (accurate within minutes throughout the year) and if the livestock
> dealer who had agreed to show you his ass was late.

Depends which side of the east-west wall you park your table. You could be
out of luck on the north side. Also you calculations above do not really
support the accuracy statement.
OTOH I am not sure any of that would matter if you *really* wanted to see
the livestock dealer's ass...

--
Michael Koblic,
Campbell River, BC

"J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Michael Koblic wrote:

[...]

>> I did not want to get into deep analysis of obsolete technology. My point
>> is that given limited resources (two pieces of wood) there are better
>> ways of measuring true solar time and approximating standard time than
>> using the implement shown.
>>
>
> Digital wristwatches?

If you can make a digital wristwatch from two pieces of wood you are a
better man than I.

{...}

> I did not work out your formula because would work only two days a year
> and only at the equator.

Yes. I believe I said so much. The whole point was to keep it simple.

> You said the sun moves along the arc at 15 degrees per hour. The
> longitude of the spot directly under the sun will change by 15 degrees per
> hour, but observed azimuths and altitudes are along great circles, not
> latitudes. (An observer on the equator will see the sun along a line of
> latitude two days a year, but he can't set his mechanical clock even then.
> The sun is about 7.5 minutes late at spring equinox and 7.5 minutes early
> at fall equinox.)

Yes and yes. See above.


> You say the distance of a shadow along an east-west line is the product of
> the height of the gnomen and the tan of (15 times the hour). I used Naval
> Observatory data for altitude and azimuth in Cairo. Let's compare
> results:
>
> noon 1 pm 2 pm 3 pm 4 pm 5 pm
>
> tan (15h) 0 .27 .58 1 1.73 3.73
>
> summer 0 .24 .51 .85 1.33 2.18
> equinox 0 .31 .66 1.14 1.97 4.17
> winter 0 .42 .94 1.78 3.90 63.47

True. But Cairo is not at the equator which is where the simple formula
works. Twice a year.

> There can be big differences between the results of your formula and
> calculations based on Naval Observatory data. It is also apparent that a
> shadow stick calibrated on one way won't tell you the time in hours on
> another day.
>
> However, it looks excellent for dividing the daylight into 12 hours. That
> was what people wanted before mechanical timers and neon lights. The
> shadow clock handled "daylight savings" beautifully. In Cairo, summer
> hours were 70 minutes and winter hours 51 minutes, changing gradually
> through the year.

Yes. And you can also discuss Babylonian hours, Italian hours etc.
You can measure anything with anything if you define the quantities any way
you want. If you want to measure recognized quantities, however, you have to
follow
some constraints. This shadow stick does not do that.

> Egyptian monuments had east-west walls. All you had to do was spot such a
> landmark, move until you were looking along an east-west wall, shim your
> card table so your wine jug didn't roll off, put your shadow clock on the
> table, and aim it at the landmark. The shadow would tell you the time of
> day (accurate within minutes throughout the year) and if the livestock
> dealer who had agreed to show you his ass was late.

Depends which side of the east-west wall you park your table. You could be
out of luck on the north side. Also you calculations above do not really
support the accuracy statement.
The only way you can make this stick work *consistently* day in-day out is
to:

a) Align the top of the T on the gnomon North-South in the vertical plane
(here your monument will be helpful)
b) Tilt it so the top of the T is inclined 30 deg 03 min from horizontal (if
you are in Cairo - if you are in Giza it is a bit less, 30 deg 01 min, if
your ass is being handed to you in Luxor, it is even less, 24 deg 05 min).

Now you have a half of a polar dial. The shadow length will not be affected
by sun's declination. But you still cannot have a linear scale if you want
the last hour to be roughly equal to the first hour and not only about 7-1/2
minutes. The formula I gave before will give you the hour lines.

OTOH I am not sure any of that would matter if you *really* wanted to see
the livestock dealer's ass... :-)

--
Michael Koblic,
Campbell River, BC

The first post of this disappeared (some may think it a good thing!). So
apologies if this appears as a duplicate.

"DoN. Nichols" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[...]

> We all know (I believe) that you are seriously interested in
> sundials.
>
> However -- I suspect that you have missed two facts in the
> posted description:
>
> 1) "Replica"
>
> 2) "over 2000 years ago"
>

My sincere apologies. I did forget the description was there.

No excuse.

I agree it is a replica - of a poorly designed sundial :-)

--
Michael Koblic,
Campbell River, BC

DoN. Nichols wrote:

>
> It would at least give you a better approximation of the time
> intervals. Absolute time is a bit much to expect from something like
> that, with as fat a stick as is being used as the gnomen -- even
> ignoring the problems with the equation of time.
>
> But at least giving workers an approximation of hours worked
> would be a help but not really *required* given that they were slaves
> then and there.

It is now thought that the gangs who dragged rocks to the pyramids were
conscripts, much as the National Guard built the local park and rural
Americans used to have to put in time maintaining public roads. In
general, the slaves in Egypt worked for institutions, like nuns,
soldiers, and civil servants these days. They were typically volunteers.

According to the Science Museum at Kensington, shadow clocks are still
in use in Egypt.
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/images/I010/10240476.aspx

A farmer's day ran from dawn to dusk. An hour would be a twelfth of
that time. That seems to be what the Bible means by hours. This would
help to schedule meals and the arrival of laborers, for example.

With a mechanical clock or a sundial, the hours of sunup and sundown
change. I can see why the shadow clock has remained popular.
>
> And the real thing (not this replica) was quite likely somewhat
> better calibrated for the time and application than this replica.
>
On the web I saw a Tibetan shadow clock with lots of intricate markings.

Michael Koblic wrote:
>
> "J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Michael Koblic wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> I did not want to get into deep analysis of obsolete technology. My
>>> point is that given limited resources (two pieces of wood) there are
>>> better ways of measuring true solar time and approximating standard
>>> time than using the implement shown.
>>>
>>
>> Digital wristwatches?
>
> If you can make a digital wristwatch from two pieces of wood you are a
> better man than I.

After I pressed SEND, I saw that I'd misread you. Well, a sundial takes
more than two pieces of wood. A shadow clock is easy to make and mark.




>> However, it looks excellent for dividing the daylight into 12 hours.
>> That was what people wanted before mechanical timers and neon lights.
>> The shadow clock handled "daylight savings" beautifully. In Cairo,
>> summer hours were 70 minutes and winter hours 51 minutes, changing
>> gradually through the year.
>
> Yes. And you can also discuss Babylonian hours, Italian hours etc.
> You can measure anything with anything if you define the quantities any way
> you want. If you want to measure recognized quantities, however, you
> have to follow
> some constraints. This shadow stick does not do that.

In that case, I think a clock must have a digital display, a stopwatch
with 99 lap times, a countdown timer, a calendar, and an alarm. Your
sundial does none of that.

A shadow clock would show hours as mentioned in the Bible: divisions of
the time between sunup and sundown.
>
>> Egyptian monuments had east-west walls. All you had to do was spot
>> such a landmark, move until you were looking along an east-west wall,
>> shim your card table so your wine jug didn't roll off, put your shadow
>> clock on the table, and aim it at the landmark. The shadow would tell
>> you the time of day (accurate within minutes throughout the year) and
>> if the livestock dealer who had agreed to show you his ass was late.
>
> Depends which side of the east-west wall you park your table. You could be
> out of luck on the north side. Also you calculations above do not really
> support the accuracy statement.

If you were on the north side of an east-west wall, you wouldn't be
looking along it, would you?

I calculated the accuracy of a shadow clock marked for 60-minute hours
in Cairo at equinox.

summer solstice: day length 838 minutes, mean hour 70 minutes

dawn first second third fourth fifth sixth noon
62 66 69 74 73 75

winter solstice: day length 604 minutes, mean hour 50 minutes

dawn first second third fourth fifth sixth noon
57 54 51 49 42 49

So even at the solstices, the hours are within 8 minutes of 1/12th of a
day.

Counting direct observations of the sun, the hours were numbered from
sunup to sundown, which would suit an ancient farmer. It was far easier
to make and set up than a sun dial. The shadow of the edge of a T on a
bar could probably be read more precisely than a sundial.

It reminds me of the clocks in my school. Nobody bothered to read them
exactly except between the warning bell at 8:20 AM and the dismissal
bell at 2:45 PM. They were were regulated by a pendulum clock and often
out of sync with the real time. Class periods were not in round numbers
of minutes and I don't remember if they were equal.

What mattered was that all the clocks in the school behaved the same and
could be read without ambiguity, and we knew how to interpret them in
terms of the schedule. Marked according to established proportions,
shadow clocks could once have served the same function. If people were
supposed to arrive for a meal at the beginning of the sixth hour, they
could be punctual.

"J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Michael Koblic wrote:
>>
>> "J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Michael Koblic wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> I did not want to get into deep analysis of obsolete technology. My
>>>> point is that given limited resources (two pieces of wood) there are
>>>> better ways of measuring true solar time and approximating standard
>>>> time than using the implement shown.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Digital wristwatches?
>>
>> If you can make a digital wristwatch from two pieces of wood you are a
>> better man than I.
>
> After I pressed SEND, I saw that I'd misread you. Well, a sundial takes
> more than two pieces of wood. A shadow clock is easy to make and mark.

Not true. An equatorial dial can be made from a flat board and a stick. It
is inherently more accurate than the said stick and considerably easier to
"calibrate".

>
>
>>> However, it looks excellent for dividing the daylight into 12 hours.
>>> That was what people wanted before mechanical timers and neon lights.
>>> The shadow clock handled "daylight savings" beautifully. In Cairo,
>>> summer hours were 70 minutes and winter hours 51 minutes, changing
>>> gradually through the year.
>>
>> Yes. And you can also discuss Babylonian hours, Italian hours etc.
>> You can measure anything with anything if you define the quantities any
>> way
>> you want. If you want to measure recognized quantities, however, you have
>> to follow
>> some constraints. This shadow stick does not do that.
>
> In that case, I think a clock must have a digital display, a stopwatch
> with 99 lap times, a countdown timer, a calendar, and an alarm. Your
> sundial does none of that.

No, all it has to do is measure time in equal increments . The shadow stick
*shown* does not do that.

> A shadow clock would show hours as mentioned in the Bible: divisions of
> the time between sunup and sundown.
>>
>>> Egyptian monuments had east-west walls. All you had to do was spot such
>>> a landmark, move until you were looking along an east-west wall, shim
>>> your card table so your wine jug didn't roll off, put your shadow clock
>>> on the table, and aim it at the landmark. The shadow would tell you the
>>> time of day (accurate within minutes throughout the year) and if the
>>> livestock dealer who had agreed to show you his ass was late.
>>
>> Depends which side of the east-west wall you park your table. You could
>> be
>> out of luck on the north side. Also you calculations above do not really
>> support the accuracy statement.
>
> If you were on the north side of an east-west wall, you wouldn't be
> looking along it, would you?
>
> I calculated the accuracy of a shadow clock marked for 60-minute hours in
> Cairo at equinox.
>
> summer solstice: day length 838 minutes, mean hour 70 minutes
>
> dawn first second third fourth fifth sixth noon
> 62 66 69 74 73 75
>
> winter solstice: day length 604 minutes, mean hour 50 minutes
>
> dawn first second third fourth fifth sixth noon
> 57 54 51 49 42 49
>
> So even at the solstices, the hours are within 8 minutes of 1/12th of a
> day.

Are you saying that these figures correspond to the equal divisions on the
shadow stick? I do not think so. Furthermore, for the stick to show "6
o'clock" correctly the stick would have to be several yards long to even
catch the end of the shadow. Sun's altitude in Cairo at summer solstice is
about 11 degrees (various calculators give slightly different results).
Given that on the same day at noon the sun is about 84 degrees high the noon
to 6 interval is whopping 43 times that of noon to 1.

> Counting direct observations of the sun, the hours were numbered from
> sunup to sundown, which would suit an ancient farmer. It was far easier
> to make and set up than a sun dial. The shadow of the edge of a T on a
> bar could probably be read more precisely than a sundial.

Why? Which sundial?
>
> It reminds me of the clocks in my school. Nobody bothered to read them
> exactly except between the warning bell at 8:20 AM and the dismissal bell
> at 2:45 PM. They were were regulated by a pendulum clock and often out of
> sync with the real time. Class periods were not in round numbers of
> minutes and I don't remember if they were equal.
>
> What mattered was that all the clocks in the school behaved the same and
> could be read without ambiguity, and we knew how to interpret them in
> terms of the schedule. Marked according to established proportions,
> shadow clocks could once have served the same function. If people were
> supposed to arrive for a meal at the beginning of the sixth hour, they
> could be punctual.

As I said before, you can measure anything if you make up your own
definitions.

The best I can suggest is to get a copy of Mayall& Mayall's "Sundials, their
construction and use". One of their first chapters shows pictures of actual
Egyptian sundials. The first one is a dial which was unearthed by
archaeologists and dates back to 1500 BC. It is uncannily similar to the
stick in question and I have a distinct feeling (which I cannot
substantiate) that the 'replica" was made on the basis of that. The salient
points are that the T bar was longer, the whole thing was made of stone.
Most relevant, however are the time markers *which are spaced by
progressively increasing intervals* as would be consistent with correct
design. Note that there are only five markers.
There are two other pics of sundials dated 660 to 30 BC. There are
significant improvements on these in that the hour scale is inclined and the
newest one has correction for seasons.

Finally, here is what I take to be the artifacts themselves:

http://members.aon.at/sundials/berlin-egypt_e.htm

The labeling is somewhat confusing in places but I think in general the
pictures and the description are fairly conclusive.

--
Michael Koblic,
Campbell River, BC

Michael Koblic wrote:
>
> "J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

>>
>> After I pressed SEND, I saw that I'd misread you. Well, a sundial
>> takes more than two pieces of wood. A shadow clock is easy to make
>> and mark.
>
> Not true. An equatorial dial can be made from a flat board and a stick.
> It is inherently more accurate than the said stick and considerably
> easier to "calibrate".

Putting sticks together with right angles and measuring millimeters to
make four marks is easier than inscribing and marking arcs on a board
and setting a gnomon at a particular angle.
>
>>
>>
>>>> However, it looks excellent for dividing the daylight into 12 hours.
>>>> That was what people wanted before mechanical timers and neon
>>>> lights. The shadow clock handled "daylight savings" beautifully. In
>>>> Cairo, summer hours were 70 minutes and winter hours 51 minutes,
>>>> changing gradually through the year.
>>>
>>> Yes. And you can also discuss Babylonian hours, Italian hours etc.
>>> You can measure anything with anything if you define the quantities
>>> any way
>>> you want. If you want to measure recognized quantities, however, you
>>> have to follow
>>> some constraints. This shadow stick does not do that.
>>
>> In that case, I think a clock must have a digital display, a stopwatch
>> with 99 lap times, a countdown timer, a calendar, and an alarm. Your
>> sundial does none of that.
>
> No, all it has to do is measure time in equal increments . The shadow
> stick *shown* does not do that.

I'm talking about *real* shadow clocks, used to this day.


The Jewish calender used equal increments: lunar months. They Egyptian
calendar used a 365-day year. Our calendar does not have equal months
or years. Does that mean it's not a real calendar?

>
>> A shadow clock would show hours as mentioned in the Bible: divisions
>> of the time between sunup and sundown.
>>>
>>>> Egyptian monuments had east-west walls. All you had to do was spot
>>>> such a landmark, move until you were looking along an east-west
>>>> wall, shim your card table so your wine jug didn't roll off, put
>>>> your shadow clock on the table, and aim it at the landmark. The
>>>> shadow would tell you the time of day (accurate within minutes
>>>> throughout the year) and if the livestock dealer who had agreed to
>>>> show you his ass was late.
>>>
>>> Depends which side of the east-west wall you park your table. You
>>> could be
>>> out of luck on the north side. Also you calculations above do not really
>>> support the accuracy statement.
>>
>> If you were on the north side of an east-west wall, you wouldn't be
>> looking along it, would you?
>>
>> I calculated the accuracy of a shadow clock marked for 60-minute hours
>> in Cairo at equinox.
>>
>> summer solstice: day length 838 minutes, mean hour 70 minutes
>>
>> dawn first second third fourth fifth sixth noon
>> 62 66 69 74 73 75
>>
>> winter solstice: day length 604 minutes, mean hour 50 minutes
>>
>> dawn first second third fourth fifth sixth noon
>> 57 54 51 49 42 49
>>
>> So even at the solstices, the hours are within 8 minutes of 1/12th of
>> a day.
>
> Are you saying that these figures correspond to the equal divisions on
> the shadow stick? I do not think so.

You're catching on. Although you answered several of my posts where I
showed the calculated measurements, apparently you did not read them.

> Furthermore, for the stick to show
> "6 o'clock" correctly the stick would have to be several yards long to
> even catch the end of the shadow.

That's why I said "counting direct observations of the sun." A farmer
doesn't need a shadow clock to see when the sun rises and sets.

>Sun's altitude in Cairo at summer
> solstice is about 11 degrees (various calculators give slightly
> different results).

You lost me there.

> Given that on the same day at noon the sun is about
> 84 degrees high the noon to 6 interval is whopping 43 times that of noon
> to 1.
>
>> Counting direct observations of the sun, the hours were numbered from
>> sunup to sundown, which would suit an ancient farmer. It was far
>> easier to make and set up than a sun dial. The shadow of the edge of
>> a T on a bar could probably be read more precisely than a sundial.
>
> Why? Which sundial?

The edge of a T casts a shadow through an angle of less than 90 degrees.
A gnomon casts a shadow as the sun moves more than 180 degrees. That
sounds like a source of error.

>
> As I said before, you can measure anything if you make up your own
> definitions.
>

I believe you're making up your own definitions. The Egyptians used a
10-hour day and a 12-hour night. At night they used celestial
observations. If you want time in equal divisions, hourglasses synced
with celestial observations is much better than sundials. If you want
to divide the day into 10 hours, a sundial won't do it.

>
> Finally, here is what I take to be the artifacts themselves:
>
> http://members.aon.at/sundials/berlin-egypt_e.htm
>
> The labeling is somewhat confusing in places but I think in general the
> pictures and the description are fairly conclusive.
>
Here's a page for you.
http://library.thinkquest.org/C008179/historical/basichistory.html

" The Egyptians were the first people who created a twenty-four hour
day. Time was a little bit different in those days. The night was
divided up into twelve hours, which were designated by the position of
stars in the sky. The day was divided into ten hours and a shadow clock
was used to keep track of these hours. The twilight hours were the
hours before dawn and after sunset."

" The Egyptians thought they were the first to invent the shadow
clock, but they were mistaken. At the same time, the Chinese,
Babylonians, Greeks and the Romans were using instruments to tell time.
Sundials were used in some of these groups, not because they work
better, just because that's how they decided to tell time."

riverman wrote:
> On Aug 11, 1:10 am, J Burns <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Michael Koblic wrote:
>>
>>> "J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> After I pressed SEND, I saw that I'd misread you. Well, a sundial
>>>> takes more than two pieces of wood. A shadow clock is easy to make
>>>> and mark.
>>> Not true. An equatorial dial can be made from a flat board and a stick.
>>> It is inherently more accurate than the said stick and considerably
>>> easier to "calibrate".
>> Putting sticks together with right angles and measuring millimeters to
>> make four marks is easier than inscribing and marking arcs on a board
>> and setting a gnomon at a particular angle.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> However, it looks excellent for dividing the daylight into 12 hours.
>>>>>> That was what people wanted before mechanical timers and neon
>>>>>> lights. The shadow clock handled "daylight savings" beautifully. In
>>>>>> Cairo, summer hours were 70 minutes and winter hours 51 minutes,
>>>>>> changing gradually through the year.
>>>>> Yes. And you can also discuss Babylonian hours, Italian hours etc.
>>>>> You can measure anything with anything if you define the quantities
>>>>> any way
>>>>> you want. If you want to measure recognized quantities, however, you
>>>>> have to follow
>>>>> some constraints. This shadow stick does not do that.
>>>> In that case, I think a clock must have a digital display, a stopwatch
>>>> with 99 lap times, a countdown timer, a calendar, and an alarm. Your
>>>> sundial does none of that.
>>> No, all it has to do is measure time in equal increments . The shadow
>>> stick *shown* does not do that.
>> I'm talking about *real* shadow clocks, used to this day.
>>
>> The Jewish calender used equal increments: lunar months. They Egyptian
>> calendar used a 365-day year. Our calendar does not have equal months
>> or years. Does that mean it's not a real calendar?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> A shadow clock would show hours as mentioned in the Bible: divisions
>>>> of the time between sunup and sundown.
>>>>>> Egyptian monuments had east-west walls. All you had to do was spot
>>>>>> such a landmark, move until you were looking along an east-west
>>>>>> wall, shim your card table so your wine jug didn't roll off, put
>>>>>> your shadow clock on the table, and aim it at the landmark. The
>>>>>> shadow would tell you the time of day (accurate within minutes
>>>>>> throughout the year) and if the livestock dealer who had agreed to
>>>>>> show you his ass was late.
>>>>> Depends which side of the east-west wall you park your table. You
>>>>> could be
>>>>> out of luck on the north side. Also you calculations above do not really
>>>>> support the accuracy statement.
>>>> If you were on the north side of an east-west wall, you wouldn't be
>>>> looking along it, would you?
>>>> I calculated the accuracy of a shadow clock marked for 60-minute hours
>>>> in Cairo at equinox.
>>>> summer solstice: day length 838 minutes, mean hour 70 minutes
>>>> dawn first second third fourth fifth sixth noon
>>>> 62 66 69 74 73 75
>>>> winter solstice: day length 604 minutes, mean hour 50 minutes
>>>> dawn first second third fourth fifth sixth noon
>>>> 57 54 51 49 42 49
>>>> So even at the solstices, the hours are within 8 minutes of 1/12th of
>>>> a day.
>>> Are you saying that these figures correspond to the equal divisions on
>>> the shadow stick? I do not think so.
>> You're catching on. Although you answered several of my posts where I
>> showed the calculated measurements, apparently you did not read them.
>>
>>> Furthermore, for the stick to show
>>> "6 o'clock" correctly the stick would have to be several yards long to
>>> even catch the end of the shadow.
>> That's why I said "counting direct observations of the sun." A farmer
>> doesn't need a shadow clock to see when the sun rises and sets.
>>
>>> Sun's altitude in Cairo at summer
>>> solstice is about 11 degrees (various calculators give slightly
>>> different results).
>> You lost me there.
>>
>>> Given that on the same day at noon the sun is about
>>> 84 degrees high the noon to 6 interval is whopping 43 times that of noon
>>> to 1.
>>>> Counting direct observations of the sun, the hours were numbered from
>>>> sunup to sundown, which would suit an ancient farmer. It was far
>>>> easier to make and set up than a sun dial. The shadow of the edge of
>>>> a T on a bar could probably be read more precisely than a sundial.
>>> Why? Which sundial?
>> The edge of a T casts a shadow through an angle of less than 90 degrees.
>> A gnomon casts a shadow as the sun moves more than 180 degrees. That
>> sounds like a source of error.
>>
>>
>>
>>> As I said before, you can measure anything if you make up your own
>>> definitions.
>> I believe you're making up your own definitions. The Egyptians used a
>> 10-hour day and a 12-hour night. At night they used celestial
>> observations. If you want time in equal divisions, hourglasses synced
>> with celestial observations is much better than sundials. If you want
>> to divide the day into 10 hours, a sundial won't do it.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Finally, here is what I take to be the artifacts themselves:
>>> http://members.aon.at/sundials/berlin-egypt_e.htm
>>> The labeling is somewhat confusing in places but I think in general the
>>> pictures and the description are fairly conclusive.
>> Here's a page for you.http://library.thinkquest.org/C008179/historical/basichistory.html
>>
>> " The Egyptians were the first people who created a twenty-four hour
>> day. Time was a little bit different in those days. The night was
>> divided up into twelve hours, which were designated by the position of
>> stars in the sky. The day was divided into ten hours and a shadow clock
>> was used to keep track of these hours. The twilight hours were the
>> hours before dawn and after sunset."
>>
>> " The Egyptians thought they were the first to invent the shadow
>> clock, but they were mistaken. At the same time, the Chinese,
>> Babylonians, Greeks and the Romans were using instruments to tell time.
>> Sundials were used in some of these groups, not because they work
>> better, just because that's how they decided to tell time."
>
> Well, its not rocket science, but if you google "shadow clock" you get
> some very good pictures and websites discussing them. So either
> everyone out there is wrong, or a couple of folks here are.
>
> --riverman

Wrong about what?

Morgans wrote:
> "J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote
>
>> Wrong about what?
>
> What is really wrong is that nobody in this thread over the past several
> posts has taken the time to trim out all the totally unnecessary previous
> posts. Sombody please step up, next time?
>
> 8 kb for a three word reply? Really?

I did not know what Riverman's remark had to do with the topic.
Something about everybody with a web page agreeing on something and two
unnamed people being wrong. I left the material he quoted so he could
point it out.

Your trimming leaves no connection to the topic. You really should have
started a new thread and marked it OT.

On 08/11/2010 10:13 PM, Josepi wrote:
> These are usually the ones that whine about their reader not understanding
> top posting.
>
> Just plain laziness.

Congratulations. That far and away takes the cake as the stupidest post I've read all day.

--
Free bad advice available here.
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

Josepi wrote:
> These are usually the ones that whine about their reader not understanding
> top posting.
>
> Just plain laziness.
...

More like plain rudeness... :( (including top-posting)

--

riverman wrote:
> On Aug 12, 8:56 am, J Burns <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Wrong about what?
>
> I was reading an unspoken inference that this thing wasn't really for
> telling time, as it would be too inaccurate to be useful.
>
> --riverman

I like what library.thinkquest.org said, that the sundial wasn't
necessarily better.

For centuries, longitudes in the New World were unknown because ships
didn't know the "real time." Still, sailors turning hourglasses
maintained watch schedules.

When I was a kid in Rutland VT, the fire whistle blew daily at 8:50 AM
and 8:50 PM. The morning whistle told every kid it was time to get to
school. The evening whistle said it was time to get home. I'd say
those whistles functioned like marks on a shadow clock.

"Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to
> be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved
> here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob

2001 DC rectifier. ??

2003 Muffler extension for a motorcycle. ??

WW

In article <[email protected]>,
J Burns <[email protected]> wrote:

> DoN. Nichols wrote:
>
> >
> > It would at least give you a better approximation of the time
> > intervals. Absolute time is a bit much to expect from something like
> > that, with as fat a stick as is being used as the gnomen -- even
> > ignoring the problems with the equation of time.
> >
> > But at least giving workers an approximation of hours worked
> > would be a help but not really *required* given that they were slaves
> > then and there.
>
> It is now thought that the gangs who dragged rocks to the pyramids were
> conscripts, much as the National Guard built the local park and rural
> Americans used to have to put in time maintaining public roads. In
> general, the slaves in Egypt worked for institutions, like nuns,
> soldiers, and civil servants these days. They were typically volunteers.

I just finished listening to a lecture series on Ancient Egypt. The professor
said that the laborers building the Pyramids were for the most part not slaves.

During the annual flood, no farming can be done, so the farmers (and associated
trades) were paid in grain and beer to work on the current Pyramid, which was
out in the desert to the West. So, it's more like the WPA, only it was
seasonal, and continued for millennia.

Joe Gwinn

"J Burns" <[email protected]> wrote

> Wrong about what?

What is really wrong is that nobody in this thread over the past several
posts has taken the time to trim out all the totally unnecessary previous
posts. Sombody please step up, next time?

8 kb for a three word reply? Really?
--
Jim in NC

1999 snow depth gage
2000 cosmetic case, wtih old style hearing aid
2001 the guts from some kind of wet cell storage battery.
2002 marker bouy for the harbor
2003 tail pipe for car
2004 no clue


--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.


"Alexander Thesoso" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
2000 Covert recording kit, 1950's vintage. Tape recorder, earpiece,
watch/microphone, piece of underwear to hold the recorder.


2001 "Edison Cell" telephone battery, or, at least, the guts of one
without
the bottle and electrolyte.
http://books.google.com/books?id=r5BEAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115&dq=telephone+battery+%22edison+cell%22&source=bl&ots=TXgAN5EaNz&sig=UF1lR1ZIUq-YWUqQdc5Tyi8JKa8&hl=en&ei=l4xaTNDsF4P58AbX6qD0Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CEkQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=telephone%20battery%20%22edison%20cell%22&f=false


2002 If it weighs about 2.2 pounds, it might be a homemade kilogram
weight.

"Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items
> waiting to
> be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone
> who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been
> solved
> here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each
> week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob

On 2010-08-05, Rob H. <[email protected]> wrote:
> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to be
> posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved here
> at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/

Posting from Rec.crafts.metalworking as always.

1999) An early implementation of a sundial.

2000) *Which* case? The white plastic cover which has the watch
in it? The zipper-closed case which has everything else
in it?

An old Burgess battery near the right.

At a guess -- I would suggest that this is an early
implementation of a "wire" -- provisions for recording a
conversation. The "watch" is the microphone -- and hopefully
also is a functional watch.

The white case (which the lid under the "watch" fits) is a
recorder -- likely tape or wire.

The cloth under the lid is likely a case for wearing the
recorder under a suit jacket.

The tubing with the twisted-pair wire wrapped around it is
likely the headphone for playing back the recordings.

It would be interesting to see a clearer view of some of the
other things hidden under what is visible.

And the gray rectangle at the bottom-right of the image
presumably shows something which would give it away completely.

2001) A set of plates for a rebuildable lead-acid cell -- likely
for powering a phone exchange (with lots of other cells
series connected to form a 48V battery).

The terminal with the red insulators is the positive terminal,
and the one wit the black insulators is the negative one.

2002) Given the presence of the sand, and the ring on the top, I
would suggest that it is a counterweight for something. It was
probably filled with sand until it was a proper weight to
counterbalance whatever was on the other end of the line and
then sealed. Is that just glue, or could it have been poured
melted lead to complete the seal?

2003) Looks like an exhaust scavenger -- and the scale suggests it is
for a larger model aircraft or model wheeled vehicle. (The
"scavenger" function is that the shape (pointing in the opposite
direction of travel) produces (at speed) a partial vacuum, which
assists purging the burnt fuel gasses from the cylinder and
pulling in fresh fuel/air mix.

2004) An arbor to carry a feed roll of something. Given the size
I would suggest that it is likely adding machine or cash
register tape.

The points snap into small spring-loaded holes to produce
minimum drag on the feed of the paper roll.

Now to see what others have suggested.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: <[email protected]> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 2010-08-05, Rob H. <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>>
>> 2000) *Which* case? The white plastic cover which has the watch
>> in it? The zipper-closed case which has everything else
>> in it?
>
>
> The dimension was for the zipper-closed case.

O.K. I suspected that, based on the size of the
watch/microphone vs the lid for the recorder. But there was so little
of the zipper case visible that it made things somewhat uncertain
whether you would even mention it.

>
>> It would be interesting to see a clearer view of some of the
>> other things hidden under what is visible.
>
>
> Yes but it was locked in a glass case or I would have gotten some better
> photos of it.
>
>
>> 2004) An arbor to carry a feed roll of something. Given the size
>> I would suggest that it is likely adding machine or cash
>> register tape.
>
>
> No correct guesses on this one yet so I'll give a hint, it's police related
> and usually this item is hidden from view.

Hmmm ... it looks as though the cylindrical end of the cones fit
into the ends of the cylinder. Are there springs pushing out on the
cones?

Does not look like anything usable for cleaning a weapon. The
points of the cones might be dangerous, however -- or the electrodes of
a Taser -- if the cylinder were of an insulating material. The cones,
at least appear to be metal -- though blued (and likely hardened).

I don't see a likely relation to handcuffs. (Hmm ... unless it
is to keep the two hands separated once the cuffs are installed?)

Perhaps a part of the riot gun (shotgun) in the cruiser? Or
perhaps a part of the lock which holds it in place unless the key is in the
ignition and turned on?

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: <[email protected]> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 2010-08-06, Rob H. <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hmmm ... it looks as though the cylindrical end of the cones fit
>> into the ends of the cylinder. Are there springs pushing out on the
>> cones?
>
> There are no springs but the cones do not fit tightly into the tube.
>
>
>> Does not look like anything usable for cleaning a weapon. The
>> points of the cones might be dangerous, however -- or the electrodes of
>> a Taser -- if the cylinder were of an insulating material. The cones,
>> at least appear to be metal -- though blued (and likely hardened).
>>
>> I don't see a likely relation to handcuffs. (Hmm ... unless it
>> is to keep the two hands separated once the cuffs are installed?)
>>
>> Perhaps a part of the riot gun (shotgun) in the cruiser? Or
>> perhaps a part of the lock which holds it in place unless the key is in
>> the
>> ignition and turned on?
>
> It's not related to any weapons, handcuffs, or locks. It's a part of
> something that would be used in trying to capture someone.

O.K. Designed to puncture and deflate tires? Perhaps part of a
caltrops designed for tires instead of horses' hooves?

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: <[email protected]> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 2010-08-07, Michael Koblic <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "Phil Kangas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Michael Koblic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> "RicodJour" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:da522697-c6a5-4afc-8f54-821b4afb03e6@q35g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Aug 5, 9:39 pm, "Michael Koblic" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> "Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> news:[email protected]...> Finally reached number 2000
>>>>> today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to
>>>>> > be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone

[ ... ]

>>>>> >http://55tools.blogspot.com/

[ ... ]

>>>>> 1999 - a very poorly designed sundial - no way should the scale be
>>>>> linear
>>>>
>>>> But it would be accurate enough for telling time during a single day
>>>> or a few days in a row. Especially when the alternative method of
>>>> telling time was asking somebody, "Hey, do you think it's lunch time
>>>> yet?"
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, it would not. This type of sundial measures height of the sun which
>>> is not a linear function of time on any day. Even if the scale was
>>> designed appropriately, as you correctly point out it would only work on
>>> a couple of days a year at any given location. Neither the latitude nor
>>> the season is given for the dial in picture.

[ ... ]

>> Would it not work pretty good at the equator? phil
>
> The way it seems to be set up the sun would have to be directly overhead at
> noon so yes, at the equator it would show noon on vernal and autumnal
> equinoxes. However, the linear scale would be inaccurate for the other
> hours. The sun moves along the arc at 15 degrees per hour. The distance of
> each hour line from the foot of the gnomon (L) is:
>
> L = tan (15h) v
>
> where v is the height of the gnomon and h is the solar hour. It should be
> clear that the hourly increments get longer as hours advance. I say 'solar
> hour" as for practical purposes one ignores things like Equation of Time
> etc.
>
> The other thing to consider is that the device will only work correctly if
> the scale is perfectly horizontal. Any tilt will throw the calibration off.
> OTOH such tilting could be incorporated to compensate for seasons.
>
> All in all there are much simpler devices that are more accurate than this
> one such as equatorial dials.

We all know (I believe) that you are seriously interested in
sundials.

However -- I suspect that you have missed two facts in the
posted description:

1) "Replica"

2) "over 2000 years ago"

Now -- the first question in my mind is whether back then there
were other means to calibrate the scale more accurately. Probably every
hour glass had a somewhat different length "hour". Candles used to keep
time would burn faster if there were gusts of wind in the room. A water
clock would probably suffer from inaccuracies from evaporation as
humidity changed.

Note that as the day passes on (past noon at least), as people
get more tired with physical labor, the "hours" will go by more rapidly
-- so who do you think would complain? :-)

Second -- since the replica obviously has a metal woodscrew
holding the T-bar (sort of serving as the gnomen) to the upright, and we
know that these screws were not available back then (about the time of
Christ's birth -- or perhaps somewhat earlier), so the replica is not
that accurate to start with. What makes you think that whoever made the
replica (probably from wall paintings in ancient Egypt) knew enough to
make the scale semi-reasonable even if someone had calibrated the
original to his particular hourglass. It even loks as though it was
made from pine -- certainly not a common tree where the original was
likely made.

The original was probably accurate enough to tell when to let
the slaves constructing the pyramids eat and go to sleep so they did not
die of overwork.

The replica could have been built by a boy scout for a merit
badge at some time for all I know. IIRC, I encountered a drawing of
such an object in a kid's book on time many decades ago. I have no idea
whether it even showed the scale in the artist's rendition, let alone
whether it was a properly designed scale.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: <[email protected]> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 2010-08-08, Michael Koblic <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "DoN. Nichols" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> [...]'
>
>> However -- I suspect that you have missed two facts in the
>> posted description:
>>
>> 1) "Replica"
>>
>> 2) "over 2000 years ago"
>
> No I did not. The description was posted with the answers after I made my
> post with the guess.

The description in the "puzzle" part was (and still is):

"1999. 8" long, this is a replica of something that was
used over 2000 years ago:"

so the "replica" and "over 2000 years ago" were present then.

When we get to the "Answer" portion:

"1999. An Egyptian Shadow Stick or Shadow Clock, the
ancient Egyptians were among the first to use the the
shadow cast by a stick to tell time. As the sun rises in
the sky, the shadow acts like the hands on a mechanical
clock, it moves along the stick and falls on the hour
markers carved into the wood. At mid-day, the stick has
to be turned around as the sun descends."

which tells us that it was in Egypt.

>> Now -- the first question in my mind is whether back then there
>> were other means to calibrate the scale more accurately. Probably every
>> hour glass had a somewhat different length "hour". Candles used to keep
>> time would burn faster if there were gusts of wind in the room. A water
>> clock would probably suffer from inaccuracies from evaporation as
>> humidity changed.
>
> Even then they (Ptolemy) knew that sun moves 15 degrees per hour.

At least *he* knew that. How widely was his knowledge broadcast
at the time?

> Nothing
> simpler than making an equatorial dial from a flat board and a stick and
> calibrate everything from there. In all fairness the equatorial dial dates
> to "beginning of Christian times" but hemicyclium which follows the same
> principle was known 300+ BC.
>
> It is a fallacy that you can "calibrate" your sundial by other means such as
> you suggest. Sundial measures true solar time, not rate of dripping
> candles, pendulum oscillations or atomic clocks' standard time. To get to
> one from the other several corrections are needed.

It would at least give you a better approximation of the time
intervals. Absolute time is a bit much to expect from something like
that, with as fat a stick as is being used as the gnomen -- even
ignoring the problems with the equation of time.

But at least giving workers an approximation of hours worked
would be a help but not really *required* given that they were slaves
then and there.

And the real thing (not this replica) was quite likely somewhat
better calibrated for the time and application than this replica.

>> Note that as the day passes on (past noon at least), as people
>> get more tired with physical labor, the "hours" will go by more rapidly
>> -- so who do you think would complain? :-)
>>
>> Second -- since the replica obviously has a metal woodscrew
>> holding the T-bar (sort of serving as the gnomen) to the upright, and we
>> know that these screws were not available back then (about the time of
>> Christ's birth -- or perhaps somewhat earlier), so the replica is not
>> that accurate to start with. What makes you think that whoever made the
>> replica (probably from wall paintings in ancient Egypt) knew enough to
>> make the scale semi-reasonable even if someone had calibrated the
>> original to his particular hourglass. It even loks as though it was
>> made from pine -- certainly not a common tree where the original was
>> likely made.
>>
>> The original was probably accurate enough to tell when to let
>> the slaves constructing the pyramids eat and go to sleep so they did not
>> die of overwork.
>>
>> The replica could have been built by a boy scout for a merit
>> badge at some time for all I know. IIRC, I encountered a drawing of
>> such an object in a kid's book on time many decades ago. I have no idea
>> whether it even showed the scale in the artist's rendition, let alone
>> whether it was a properly designed scale.
>>
>
> All this may be true. However, the original question was "What is it?" And
> my answer still stands.

Your actual answer has now been lost in the quoting trims, and
I'm not going to bother to track back-thread to see precisely what you
said. (It was easier when I had my own local server -- now it takes a
lot of time because the article history goes back a long ways.

I'm not objecting to the answer itself -- I think that we all
can agree that it is a sort of primitive sundial -- but the complaint
about the inaccuracy. If it is a "replica", it is quite likely not a
good enough replica to tell how good the original was for the purpose.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: <[email protected]> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

In article <[email protected]>, "Rob H." <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items waiting to be
> posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been solved here
> at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob



Rob,

Congratulations on the big 2k!

I've seen them all; and always look forward to your regular Thursday
posts.

Thanks!

Erik

I long ago filtered Gmail, the source of much usenet spam. Please
change your email addy in "properties".

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.


"Alexander Thesoso" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
2000 Covert recording kit, 1950's vintage. Tape recorder, earpiece,
watch/microphone, piece of underwear to hold the recorder.


2001 "Edison Cell" telephone battery, or, at least, the guts of one
without
the bottle and electrolyte.
http://books.google.com/books?id=r5BEAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115&dq=telephone+battery+%22edison+cell%22&source=bl&ots=TXgAN5EaNz&sig=UF1lR1ZIUq-YWUqQdc5Tyi8JKa8&hl=en&ei=l4xaTNDsF4P58AbX6qD0Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CEkQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=telephone%20battery%20%22edison%20cell%22&f=false


2002 If it weighs about 2.2 pounds, it might be a homemade kilogram
weight.

"Rob H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Finally reached number 2000 today, I've got hundreds of items
> waiting to
> be posted so my next goal is to make it to 3000! Thanks to everyone
> who
> participates in these threads. A lot of mystery items have been
> solved
> here at the newsgroups and I still enjoy reading the guesses each
> week!
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob