Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery • Hacker News Board

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#31

Post by lupusreal » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 8:56 PM UTC

refulgentis wrote: post #28

lupusreal wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is science reporting such irredeemable clickbaity trash? Not just from the mainstream media with commercial motive, from whom I naturally expect trash, but also from nonprofit universities of all places. Seriously, who is the intended audience of this headline? People who only read the headline and think "Woweee science is amazing!" before scrolling down? Anybody who reads the article will roll their eyes at the…

I don't understand what you mean, I think the headline must have changed? It is currently (4:50 PM EST) "GRAVITATIONAL WAVE RESEARCHERS CAST NEW LIGHT ON ANTIKYTHERA MECHANISM MYSTERY" both in the article, and on the HN item. If it didn't change, I guess my confusions stems from this is an extremely straightforward way to state it. Two gravitational wave researchers wrote the paper, and the paper gave us more certain…

That's clickbait. I suppose you think it isn't clickbait because it isn't lying but I classify it as such because it seems intended to give wild impressions which are contrary to truth, namely that the mechanism had anything to do with gravitational waves. Clickbaiting without lying is a common technique among science reporters, almost as common as clickbaiting with lies.

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#32

Post by refulgentis » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 8:58 PM UTC

lupusreal wrote: post #31

refulgentis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what you mean, I think the headline must have changed? It is currently (4:50 PM EST) "GRAVITATIONAL WAVE RESEARCHERS CAST NEW LIGHT ON ANTIKYTHERA MECHANISM MYSTERY" both in the article, and on the HN item. If it didn't change, I guess my confusions stems from this is an extremely straightforward way to state it. Two gravitational wave researchers wrote the paper, and the paper gave us more certain…

That's clickbait. I suppose you think it isn't clickbait because it isn't lying but I classify it as such because it seems intended to give wild impressions which are contrary to truth, namely that the mechanism had anything to do with gravitational waves. Clickbaiting without lying is a common technique among science reporters, almost as common as clickbaiting with lies.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off as combative, I'm legitimately, genuinely, confused: what part is clickbait? They are gravitational wave researchers.

Poking around this:

I have a test for myself before I rant about science journalism: "would it be confusing without the thing my rant is angry about?"

Answer here is yes, I'm very familiar with this sort of thing from the astrophysics people in my physics department 18 years ago (monte carlo, bayesian), but it would be bizarre from archaeologists.

Poking around this, again:

If that isn't convincing: the unwashed masses who we are worried being betrayed by clickbait don't know what "gravitational waves" are, there's no reason for them to be unduly attracted to it.

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#33

Post by dsalfdslfdsa » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 8:58 PM UTC

swells34 wrote: post #23

yinser wrote: post #10

Greeks were cooking with gas (from the paper): “However, we note that the degree of manufacturing precision is remarkable, with standard errors in hole positions of only 0.028mm radially, and 0.129mm azimuthally. Budiselic et al. quote a standard deviation for their individual position measurements of 0.037 mm, so a good deal of the radial error may come from the measurements of the X-ray images themselves.”

As someone who spent a decade doing precision metrology with optical devices... there isn't a way to correctly measure that part with the precision they indicate in the measured values.

It's not that precise.

As for the method:

https://bhi.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/BHI-Antikythera...

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#34

Post by dclowd9901 » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 8:59 PM UTC

skirge wrote: post #24

itronitron wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably the best argument in favor of universal basic income (UBI). Any nation that leans into that can then focus on innovation.

People who will depend on UBI won't innovate. People who innovate don't need UBI. Slavery was expensive (guards, low productivity). In USSR Soviets realised that in Gulags it's more effective to pay Zeks regular salary and treat them as contractors than keep them as slave work force.

why do you say folks who depend on UBI won’t innovate? Logically speaking it almost seems more probable they would since they wouldn’t need to devote time and energy to a job.

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#35

Post by ordu » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 9:00 PM UTC

api wrote: post #11

yinser wrote: post #10

Greeks were cooking with gas (from the paper): “However, we note that the degree of manufacturing precision is remarkable, with standard errors in hole positions of only 0.028mm radially, and 0.129mm azimuthally. Budiselic et al. quote a standard deviation for their individual position measurements of 0.037 mm, so a good deal of the radial error may come from the measurements of the X-ray images themselves.”

It seems like the high ancient world was so close to industrializing. Just a few missing pieces, probably a more rigorous scientific method and mathematics. Maybe some economic inventions too like the stock corporation to enable venture investing. I also wonder about the abolition of slavery. It was normal through pretty much all of human history up to the last 200 years or so. Why build machines at great scale when…

> It seems like the high ancient world was so close to industrializing.

Bret Devereaux proposed that Industrial Revolution was due to a highly improbable coincidence of circumstances.[1] It all started with a steam engine, and very inefficient one at first[2]. But it had found it place, and then James Watt made the better engine and it also found its uses. It gave time for material science and thermodynamics to catch up, and then steam engines became light enough to power ships and then locomotives.

Industrial Revolution, if we look closer took a lot of relatively small steps, and some of these steps made sense only because the stars lined up. Now people consciously "line up stars" to move progress forward, but then it was really a coincidence.

[1] https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-indus... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcomen_atmospheric_engine

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#36

Post by lupusreal » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 9:04 PM UTC

refulgentis wrote: post #32

lupusreal wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's clickbait. I suppose you think it isn't clickbait because it isn't lying but I classify it as such because it seems intended to give wild impressions which are contrary to truth, namely that the mechanism had anything to do with gravitational waves. Clickbaiting without lying is a common technique among science reporters, almost as common as clickbaiting with lies.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off as combative, I'm legitimately, genuinely, confused: what part is clickbait? They are gravitational wave researchers. Poking around this: I have a test for myself before I rant about science journalism: "would it be confusing without the thing my rant is angry about?" Answer here is yes, I'm very familiar with this sort of thing from the astrophysics people in my physics department 18 year…

"it seems intended to give wild impressions which are contrary to truth, namely that the mechanism had anything to do with gravitational waves"

It's not technically lying but it will nonetheless induce people to think something which isn't true. If this confuses you, consider this article/example:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20171114-the-disturbing-a...

> "A classic example might be if your mum asks if you've finished your homework and you respond: "I've written an essay on Tennessee Williams for my English class." This may be true, but it doesn't actually answer the question about whether your homework was done. That essay could have been written long ago and you have misled your poor mother with a truthful statement. You might not have even started your homework yet."

When you say something which is true but say it in a way or context which you know will cause somebody else to believe something which isn't true, that's a form of lying.

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#37

Post by brcmthrowaway » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 9:05 PM UTC

wildekek wrote: post #6

drexlspivey wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This guy is re-creating using only materials available at the time: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZioPDnFPNsHnyxfygxA0...

Clickspring is the most skilled machinist of youtube. Watching him work is so incredibly satisfying.

What about the bald dude with the moustache?

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#38

Post by drexlspivey » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 9:05 PM UTC

refulgentis wrote: post #32

lupusreal wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's clickbait. I suppose you think it isn't clickbait because it isn't lying but I classify it as such because it seems intended to give wild impressions which are contrary to truth, namely that the mechanism had anything to do with gravitational waves. Clickbaiting without lying is a common technique among science reporters, almost as common as clickbaiting with lies.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off as combative, I'm legitimately, genuinely, confused: what part is clickbait? They are gravitational wave researchers. Poking around this: I have a test for myself before I rant about science journalism: "would it be confusing without the thing my rant is angry about?" Answer here is yes, I'm very familiar with this sort of thing from the astrophysics people in my physics department 18 year…

The "Gravitational Wave" part is clickbait. It could have said "Researchers cast new light...". Also the first paragraph is clickbait

"Techniques developed to analyse the ripples in spacetime detected by one of the 21st century’s most sensitive pieces of scientific equipment have helped cast new light on the function of the oldest known analogue computer."

it elaborates further down: "Professor Woan used a technique called Bayesian analysis, which uses probability to quantify uncertainty based on incomplete data, to calculate the likely number of holes in the mechanism using the positions of the surviving holes and the placement of the ring’s surviving six fragments."

Bayesian analysis has nothing to do with gravitational waves, it's a statistics paradigm. It was not "developed to analyse the ripples in spacetime". The whole gravitational angle is totally superfluous and is only there to get more clicks.

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#39

Post by K0balt » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 9:10 PM UTC

skirge wrote: post #24

itronitron wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably the best argument in favor of universal basic income (UBI). Any nation that leans into that can then focus on innovation.

People who will depend on UBI won't innovate. People who innovate don't need UBI. Slavery was expensive (guards, low productivity). In USSR Soviets realised that in Gulags it's more effective to pay Zeks regular salary and treat them as contractors than keep them as slave work force.

Umm… I think you are deeply misguided on this.

Earlier in life I created something that has generated a minimal stipend every month. That small security has enabled me to take risks, produce art, create technical processes, construct the water, power, data, and physical infrastructure for a private sustainable community, take a couple of years off to educate my children in technology, and, in short, prosper. It is life changing to know that the worst that can happen if you fail is that you will be mildly uncomfortable for a period of your choosing.

OTOH I see a lot of wasted potential, talented people working banal 9 to 5 jobs because they can’t risk failure, forgoing learning opportunities because they can’t take the time, and in general stuck in employment traps that prevent them from ever refining their natural talents.

Sure, some people will do nothing with their lives despite the opportunities presented to them… but many, many people would do much, much more if they weren’t trapped in a system designed to harvest, under duress of homelessness, the vast majority of their useful time in exchange for the lowest possible compensation.

Re: Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

#40

Post by refulgentis » Thu, Jul 04, 2024, 9:11 PM UTC

lupusreal wrote: post #36

refulgentis wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off as combative, I'm legitimately, genuinely, confused: what part is clickbait? They are gravitational wave researchers. Poking around this: I have a test for myself before I rant about science journalism: "would it be confusing without the thing my rant is angry about?" Answer here is yes, I'm very familiar with this sort of thing from the astrophysics people in my physics department 18 year…

"it seems intended to give wild impressions which are contrary to truth, namely that the mechanism had anything to do with gravitational waves" It's not technically lying but it will nonetheless induce people to think something which isn't true. If this confuses you, consider this article/example: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20171114-the-disturbing-a... > "A classic example might be if your mum asks if you've…

Running through this in my head again and again, and editing 500 times along the way, apologies. I'm done now:

You believe that it is narrowly true gravitational wave researchers did this, like a kid saying they "wrote their essay" in response to whether they "did [completed] their homework"

I believe it is wholly true.

I believe we agree on the narrow truth that they are gravitational wave researchers.

I believe we disagree on the wider truth.

I believe you believe its a wider lie, in that it indicates they used gravitational wave-style techniques in this endeavor.

I believe it is widely true, because they're using the specific techniques that I saw astrophysicists use in grad school.

Is it possible you saw "Bayesian", assumed that was the extent of their expertise applied, then noted that it has no relation to their expertise, since that's entry-level stats, not physics?