RE: Dali sundial +
Bob, Wouldn't both water clocks and fire clocks (whether incense burners or graduated candles) have claims to have most moving parts - there would be more particles in the smoke than grains of sand in an hourglass, wouldn't there? Also, even for mechanical timekeepers, counting the moving parts could be subject to disagreement - in cases where many parts are made but assembled into moving constructs (such as separately inserted teeth in a wooden wheel, as in Eisinga's planetarium) do you count the assembly as lots, or one? Andrew James From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Terwilliger Sent: 13 March 2008 23:40 To: 'Sundial Mailing List' Subject: Dali sundial + Some time ago someone posted a link to a painting by Salvador Dali that included a sundial. Could someone point me to it again? == Try this: == Since it has none, I suppose a sundial could be considered the timepiece with the least moving parts. What timepiece has the most moving parts? Bob This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl http://www.mailcontrol.com/ . PRI Limited, PRI House, Moorside Road Winchester, Hampshire SO23 7RX United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) 1962 840048 Fax: +44 (0) 1962 841046 www.pri.co.uk PRI Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 2199653 The Intelligent Metering Company This correspondence is confidential and is solely for the intended recipient(s).If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose, copy, distribute or retain this message or any part of it. If you are not the intended recipient please delete this correspondence from your system and notify the sender immediately. This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl. --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
RE: Dali sundial +
Andrew / Bob, Expanding this line of thinking to the edge. Light can be considered made of an infinite number of photons that moves from the source to the target and considering that the movement of the Sun is affected by other planets, stars and even galaxies. A sundial could be a candidate as well ... BR, Ricardo Cernic -- Início da mensagem original --- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Para: Robert Terwilliger [EMAIL PROTECTED],Sundial Mailing List sundial@uni-koeln.de Cc: Data: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:55:52 - Assunto: RE: Dali sundial + Bob, Wouldn't both water clocks and fire clocks (whether incense burners or graduated candles) have claims to have most moving parts - there would be more particles in the smoke than grains of sand in an hourglass, wouldn't there? Also, even for mechanical timekeepers, counting the moving parts could be subject to disagreement - in cases where many parts are made but assembled into moving constructs (such as separately inserted teeth in a wooden wheel, as in Eisinga's planetarium) do you count the assembly as lots, or one? Andrew James From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Terwilliger Sent: 13 March 2008 23:40 To: 'Sundial Mailing List' Subject: Dali sundial + Some time ago someone posted a link to a painting by Salvador Dali that included a sundial. Could someone point me to it again? == Try this: == Since it has none, I suppose a sundial could be considered the timepiece with the least moving parts. What timepiece has the most moving parts? Bob This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl http://www.mailcontrol.com/ . PRI Limited, PRI House, Moorside Road Winchester, Hampshire SO23 7RX United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) 1962 840048 Fax: +44 (0) 1962 841046 www.pri.co.uk PRI Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 2199653 The Intelligent Metering Company This correspondence is confidential and is solely for the intended recipient(s).If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose, copy, distribute or retain this message or any part of it. If you are not the intended recipient please delete this correspondence from your system and notify the sender immediately. This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl. --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
easter
Re the Easter calculation, a simple question from a simple reader. The moon is unconcerned with the solar calendar but in time the Gregorian calendar drifts away from the true equinox. Not by much (an extra leap year will be needed in 4909, I understand) but it matters in 5,7000,000 years. How does the Easter algorithm account for this? Frank 55N 1W -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1332 - Release Date: 17/03/2008 10:48 --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
Sundial pedestals
Fellow Shadow Watchers, Anyone looking for a bespoke stone sundial pedestal of outstanding quality for a very special location could be well-advised to contact: Cliveden Conservation attn. Tom Flemons Tel: +44 (0)1761 420300 Fax: +44 (0)1761 420400 www.clivedenconservation.com These Bristol uk based craftsmen recently completed a very fine pedestal to support a part-replica dial which I completed earlier this year. Two small jpegs available on request - No 'just curiosity' responses please as I'm in process of completeing a substantial backlog of work. Tony Moss P.S. I have no commercial connection with this company. --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
easter
For an intriguing algorithm for calculating the date of easter, as proposed by the great German mathematician Gauss, see Fortran Programming by Robert V Jameson, McGraw-Hill, 1966, LCC number 65-27979 32271, page 150. This is the algorithm I used in my Basic language program... I will include the page with the copy of the Basic program to those who requested that program from me off list... John --- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
