The science behind RHCs liver thread

Erik Von Danneken. When I was in fifth year in school in the 70's, I read all his books and was a complete devotee. Told everyone in school and my family to watch the Horizon special on him that was coming up. They ****ing destroyed him. I screamed conspiracy for a few weeks, but just had to give up in the end - no science whatsoever to back up his claims.

But the best I remember was the Inca drawings, that he said in his book could only have been done with directions from an altitude of 30k feet: then some archaeologist, who'd studied them all her life, patiently explained how and why they did them. They worshipped sky gods and were, like a lot of ancients around the world, more mathematically competent and ingenious than we like to give them credit for. Just because we lack the skills to do any of this without computers and powered mechanical aids nowadays, that doesn't mean they couldn't. It's like doubting hunter-gatherers could feed themselves as they didn't have Tesco's back then.

 

Yeah, I don't remember the specific threat to pregnant women, but I know women aren't supposed to change litter boxes when pregnant (or at least wear rubber gloves and have extra caution).

I remember another article a while back. Men infected by it had more car accidents than men who didn't.

 

I read von Daniken as well, and I too believed it for a while. My elder sister introduced me to his books and I think she still believes it to this day. She was always more interested in pseudoscience than the real thing.
It never ceases to amaze me just how competent the Ancient Greeks and others were at maths - especially as I'm so useless at it.

 

The Arabs in the Middle Ages were **** hot too.

 

I'm still astounded that the Greeks were able to produce this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism

please log in to view this image

 

Although they couldn't know what the stars were, their understanding of the mathematics of celestial bodies was phenomenal.
Eratosthenes calculated the size of the Earth in the 3rd century BC using two sticks and was only a few percent out.
Amazing.

 

Doesn't the Great Pyramid correspond to the planet in height and width very accurately?........scaled down obv.

 

They're lined up precisely to Orion's Belt, aren't they? Or where Orion's Belt was 3000 years ago.

 

There's also some suggestions, as crazy as it sounds (no conclusive evidence) that Egyptians might have had some form of electric lighting at the time of the pyramids... Bit circumstantial (no evidence of soot found in any of the pyramids or tombs, pictures that appear to show Egyptians holding electric torches, and they DID have battery technology in ancient Egypt that they used for electroplating metals)

It's a very disputed theory, seems feasible... Just no concrete evidence and a crazy theory like that needs evidence before people accept it

 

With respect there is absolutely no evidence of such a thing and none in tuts treasures so you would expect some intact tomb to haves aid lighting.

Electric lighting is merely resistance through wire in thin filaments and air/oxygen will burn it through in rapid order.

If you want to think ancient Egyptians also has knowledge of oxygen and how to prevent it burning a filament fine but again. Absolutely zero imperial evidence.

The absence of "soot" is not evidence for presence of electrical lighting sorry.

It merely indicates potentially something to look for in terms of smokeless oils etc.

 

Yeah, basic battery technology was around at the time. Wasn't the Arc Of The Covenant said, bu some, to have been some sort of electrical weapon? Very contentious idea though.

 

Of course there are other possible explanations.

Their battery tech at the time only did about 3v, so it wouldn't have been very bright or hot. It's not like the modern lightbulbs. If such a device existed it would probably have been restricted to priestly classes or there would be more evidence of it existing.

You would have expected something so important to be left with a pharoah. Although I suppose, the pharaoh, being a God didn't need light when he transformed in the next life.

 

Empirical?

 

Yeah, think of a lightbulb going off, but in Nadine Dorries' head.

 

Thank you. That one.

 

I haven't heard that one.

I have heard claims lighthouse of Alexandria could have used battery-light technology too though... Although, how a 3v battery could provide enough light for a lighthouse eludes me... Unless they used some sort of in series power.

That claim (lighthouse) though seems even less likely to me.

 

Speaking of modern day technologies the ancients had... This one is less controversial or disputed.


Romans had whoopie cushions.

 

Again with 3 volts total like a battery using the type of jars they had, acid and copper and zinc would be a rather large and immobile construct.

You'd seal in the core with pitch and then need copper wire and then that 3volts needs to make a wire glow.

A little.led torch and light an led which can emit light after 0.6volts so now we are up to semiconductor tech ology in ancient Egypt.

We used to have filament bulbs with about 9 volt battery in big heavy hand held torch at home.

So now you'd need to have
A) 3 clay pot batteries using copper, zinc and acid with pitch sealing.
B) the ability to wore them in series to boost the voltage
C) a very thin filament to get glow (we ended up using tungsten. They didn't even have iron.)
D) a means to protect the glow form oxidisation and failure.

It's so highly unlikely that it would be easy to dismiss that hypothesis and come up with a far more testable one for how they lit the interior of caves and pyramids while decorating/paintijg/ burying etc.

 

Probably easier to take a hollowed out tubes, plant material coated in wax, and seal the ends than to carry pots around. As for filaments used, who knows? It might be something we don't use because it's inefficient or expensive, or just not discovered. (We only just have discovered how to make concrete as well as the Romans, and still haven't figured out how to make Greek Fire)

I would not assume it's what we use because they wouldn't have had the ability to produce tungsten for example. If you're not using iron you don't have to worry about oxidization necessarily... And withower voltages and heat any such reaction would happen much slower. If they had such devices they would have been crap by our standards.

 

The issue is one of scale. The weight of the contraptions to generate the current would be prohibitive.

The thickness of wire to get that low a voltage to actually produce better than a candle would be difficult

But most of all.... the kiss principle applies. A light bulb has to be better than a clean burning oil lamp or candle. The amount of really expensive copper in this light contraption would make such a solution utterly.impractical compared to the really simple and clean burning oil lamp freely available at the time

Plus the only reason this **** comes up is cos actually there's 1000s of years of soot in there from lamps and candles throughout antiquity so it's hard to date the soot.