Analog clocks are dated? Let’s get rid of books because we have kindles. Just something was invented a very long time ago doesn’t make it obsolete by any means. Or should we get rid of spoons or hammers? Those things are really somewhat dated.
🤣 awesome. I’d love to see that.
Reminds me of a video where a guy tried to eat corncob by mounting it on a drill. IIRC he lot some teeth doing that “stunt”.
Dated does not mean obsolete. But it’s hard to deny a digital clock is superior in almost every way.
Unlike the other examples you’re giving, I fail to see in what aspect an analog clock beats a digital one. Sure they have a certain charm, but functionally they’re just behind their digital counterpart.
People are gonna downvote you but I definitely agree. I see why the trend is concerning but I dont think we need to keep everything around just because that’s how it used to be. Some things are allowed to change. When the quartz watch was invented, mechanical watches had to find a new niche and luckily they did. Both are still valid but their roles changed and that’s okay.
I hope you are not serious. If the shadow (hand) is on two, it’s two o’clock. If it’s on three, it’s three o’clock. If it’s exactly between those two ticks it’s half past two. There isn’t even anything to learn (at least when they were invented). That’s exactly how the hour hand on a clock works.
(Note: Today it would be a bit more complicated if you want wall-clock-time because the sun dial always tells local solar time and if you want the time in your time zone you would have to adjust for DST and use the equation of time for some smaller corrections)
You don’t know how to read one - you’ve forgotten to calibrate it.
If you don’t do that before use, it’s measurements are meaningless. Correcting for DST and dates and other minor aspects of how time is handled in the modern era is important (blech screw DST), but this issue was present even in the roman era and is why sundials have movable faces. Premodern observatories (eg. stonehenge or the observatories at pisac) have references to correct the measurements for things like change in solar position and the progression towards the equinox for the same reason.
I don’t think we should get rid of analog clocks, I just wanted to point out that your example here isn’t a very good one to use.
What is progression towards the equinoxes? You mean precession of the equinoxes? That takes millennia and is very much negligible when reading sun dials on a day to day basis, or even year to year basis.
The orbital motions of the objects in our solar system is pretty messy and you are right that there goes more into designing accurate sun dials than just a stick in the ground, but I’d still argue that that’s not part of “reading a sun dial” - which was the question I answered.
No, I mean the progression towards the equinoxes - historically the equinoxes were a common way to demark calendar dates, and as a result they’re a useful reference point. Not universal, of course, but still frequently used enough to be useful when discussing this topic.
I get you’re arguing because, well, this is the internet and I contradicted you. That’s how it works, our egos are too tied up in our comments alone and it’s too easy to read any tone into a comment that we’d like. We get defensive, our wounded egos make things heated. So in that spirit, let me be explicit that I’m not trying to be rude to you when I say this: You’re oversimplifying the metaphor to make your point.
For example: I’ve been sitting around for a full day, but the damn clock says only twelve minutes have gone by.
You adjust a sundial in the morning every day, and then can read it from there (assuming it hasn’t been jostled) - but you still have to be aware of the rules and conventions of the system, and work within it’s boundaries. If we arbitrarily dismiss critical parts of it’s operation, there will be no meaning in anything we have to say. The territory of things like “clocks don’t measure time, they measure circles and everything we derive from them is thence wild and baseless speculation”; literally true and I can defend that position until we both die of carefully-measured old age, but reduced to the point that it’s completely meaningless.
You can’t just make stuff up and then say “it’s just a description”. It looks like you just remembered precession of the equinoxes wrong and doubled down once somebody called you out on it?
If it’s a description of something, what does “progression of the equinoxes” describe? Astronomically it’s complete gibberish, so I’m not sure what it’s describing.
Update: regarding your edit
“The progression of time towards the equinoxes”
This sentence makes no sense. How can time itself progress towards equinoxes, which are points in time?
Yeah I keep an analog clock on the wall because it’s a more intuitive way to keep track of how long I’ve got to get ready to go out. I know where the angle of the minute hand will be when I have to be out the door, so it’s quicker to glance it it and know if I gotta pick up the pace or I got plenty of time or whatever.
Analog clocks are dated? Let’s get rid of books because we have kindles. Just something was invented a very long time ago doesn’t make it obsolete by any means. Or should we get rid of spoons or hammers? Those things are really somewhat dated.
I have to say, I’m quite fond of my pneumatic hammer. When will my pneumatic silverware become a thing?
I just can’t be bothered to expend any energy while I’m eating! It’s supposed to give me energy, after all!
🤣 awesome. I’d love to see that. Reminds me of a video where a guy tried to eat corncob by mounting it on a drill. IIRC he lot some teeth doing that “stunt”.
Dated does not mean obsolete. But it’s hard to deny a digital clock is superior in almost every way.
Unlike the other examples you’re giving, I fail to see in what aspect an analog clock beats a digital one. Sure they have a certain charm, but functionally they’re just behind their digital counterpart.
People are gonna downvote you but I definitely agree. I see why the trend is concerning but I dont think we need to keep everything around just because that’s how it used to be. Some things are allowed to change. When the quartz watch was invented, mechanical watches had to find a new niche and luckily they did. Both are still valid but their roles changed and that’s okay.
Do you know how to read a sundial?
Yes. The same as analogue clock, genius 🙄
I hope you are not serious. If the shadow (hand) is on two, it’s two o’clock. If it’s on three, it’s three o’clock. If it’s exactly between those two ticks it’s half past two. There isn’t even anything to learn (at least when they were invented). That’s exactly how the hour hand on a clock works.
(Note: Today it would be a bit more complicated if you want wall-clock-time because the sun dial always tells local solar time and if you want the time in your time zone you would have to adjust for DST and use the equation of time for some smaller corrections)
You don’t know how to read one - you’ve forgotten to calibrate it.
If you don’t do that before use, it’s measurements are meaningless. Correcting for DST and dates and other minor aspects of how time is handled in the modern era is important (blech screw DST), but this issue was present even in the roman era and is why sundials have movable faces. Premodern observatories (eg. stonehenge or the observatories at pisac) have references to correct the measurements for things like change in solar position and the progression towards the equinox for the same reason.
I don’t think we should get rid of analog clocks, I just wanted to point out that your example here isn’t a very good one to use.
What is progression towards the equinoxes? You mean precession of the equinoxes? That takes millennia and is very much negligible when reading sun dials on a day to day basis, or even year to year basis.
The orbital motions of the objects in our solar system is pretty messy and you are right that there goes more into designing accurate sun dials than just a stick in the ground, but I’d still argue that that’s not part of “reading a sun dial” - which was the question I answered.
No, I mean the progression towards the equinoxes - historically the equinoxes were a common way to demark calendar dates, and as a result they’re a useful reference point. Not universal, of course, but still frequently used enough to be useful when discussing this topic.
I get you’re arguing because, well, this is the internet and I contradicted you. That’s how it works, our egos are too tied up in our comments alone and it’s too easy to read any tone into a comment that we’d like. We get defensive, our wounded egos make things heated. So in that spirit, let me be explicit that I’m not trying to be rude to you when I say this: You’re oversimplifying the metaphor to make your point.
For example: I’ve been sitting around for a full day, but the damn clock says only twelve minutes have gone by.
You adjust a sundial in the morning every day, and then can read it from there (assuming it hasn’t been jostled) - but you still have to be aware of the rules and conventions of the system, and work within it’s boundaries. If we arbitrarily dismiss critical parts of it’s operation, there will be no meaning in anything we have to say. The territory of things like “clocks don’t measure time, they measure circles and everything we derive from them is thence wild and baseless speculation”; literally true and I can defend that position until we both die of carefully-measured old age, but reduced to the point that it’s completely meaningless.
Do you have a link or something that explains “progression towards the equinoxes”. I never heard of that and can’t find anything about it.
You understand that it’s just a description, right? “The progression of time towards the equinoxes”. It’s not a formal term.
You can’t just make stuff up and then say “it’s just a description”. It looks like you just remembered precession of the equinoxes wrong and doubled down once somebody called you out on it?
If it’s a description of something, what does “progression of the equinoxes” describe? Astronomically it’s complete gibberish, so I’m not sure what it’s describing.
Update: regarding your edit
This sentence makes no sense. How can time itself progress towards equinoxes, which are points in time?
Yeah I keep an analog clock on the wall because it’s a more intuitive way to keep track of how long I’ve got to get ready to go out. I know where the angle of the minute hand will be when I have to be out the door, so it’s quicker to glance it it and know if I gotta pick up the pace or I got plenty of time or whatever.