Ancient precision

[oil pan 4]

A little more modern.
https://youtu.be/TdoaHK5TRh8

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TdoaHK...ature=youtu.be

I didn't know cnc dated to 1958.

[freebeard]

I was wondering where I'd find a thread where this would fit. Thanks for going modern.

Hot Tesla DOJO Update !

Note especially ?t=261 where it shows the traditional architecture of chip/package/board/box/rack/data center is superceded by chip/tile/exapod-->data center. Each tile is a sandwich of layers, one with 25 chips, that draws 15kW in at the bottom and rejects heat off the top.

The whole thing eats megawatts of power.

Anastasii has a mezmerizing accent.

[oil pan 4]

https://archaeology-world.com/oricha...ck-off-sicily/

[oil pan 4]

Metrologists examine a pre-dynastic stone vase and the results are astonishing. None of this was supposed to be possible until at least 1700s.
https://youtu.be/PrhFnai2TGs

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PrhFna...ature=youtu.be

Archeologists: "just another totally lame, unimportant, pre-dynastic stone vase".
Machinist and stone mason's "we don't know how this was made and we can't reproduce it".
Archeologists: "but they hasn't even invented the wheel yet".

I think we have clear evidence that pre-dynastic civilization has been comically under estimated.

[freebeard]

Reminds me of what I noticed in the previous video -- one thousandth of an inch? Why not 1/10,000ths [aerospace levels]? Disclaimer: I've never worked to more [less?] that 1/100ths myself.

Had to pause at 11:38. I see they will get to the Serapeum. I saw a primer on the nomenclature they use in their call-outs, an example at 7:11 as Controls. But I went back though my history and couldn't find it. Maybe later.

In case I don't get back to it, here's a PDF: brlcad.org/design/drafting/Drafting_Manual_DimensioningAndTolerancingSymbols_ 6-1.pdf

[oil pan 4]

Yes theres one where they examine the serapeum.

[freebeard]

At 51;17 they state the need to go to 10/1000ths.

[oil pan 4]

Ya 1 thousands or 10,000s makes me think they used a surface grinder, not a cutter.
Seems kind of odd they didn't have the wheel, but appear to have a lathe with surface grinder setup.

[Piotrsko]

Making something like this that's accurate to .001 isn't hard, you just need a solid tool holder and some really light feed pressure and oddly: climate control or a way to keep the part uniformly cool or warm. Rinse repeat. Making a part repeatable to .001 or making it that accurate to start with: THAT'S difficult because you need to also build a system that measures more accurately than you can cut. Light powered optical measurements are good to .0001 or 1 ten thousanths but it's only accurate to how accurate the profile is. If they found a couple of these that are that accurate, now I'm impressed, but a one off cherry picked for youtoob..... not so much.

I am also contemplating the visuals this guy is pushing with his measurement equipment, like how come the dial indicator foot isn't on the visible side where you can see it touch? I am also suspicious of his position locator arm sitting in a room temprature not clean room.

[oil pan 4]

We don't know if they were made with a few thousands of an inch of each other as only one of these stone vases have been examined by metrologists. It seems museum curators who control vase sets that appear to be identical are not eager to have these vases examined by metrologists.
The idea that we are supposed to believe that these stone vases some with hardness from about 7 up to 9.25 on the mohs scale were precision ground by farmers and hunter/gathers who by all accounts hadn't invented the wheel is both preposterous and insulting.
Clearly they came from somewhere else, hunter gatherers didn't make these objects.
Then when they did try to make reproduction vases out of alabaster in the 3rd dynasty they were poor knockoffs. Alabaster maxes out at about a 2 on the mohs scale.
Steel is only about a 4 to 5 on the mohs scale.