Was this artifact technologically designed and manufactured?

[Dynamo X]

Hi all. I saw recently this and found it very intriguing, what do you folks think about it. These are the results from just one artefact but there are many, many more exhibiting the same precision.

 

Edited May 24 by Dynamo X
typo

[Piney]

Oh for Christssakes!!!!!!

@Hanslune!!!!!!!!

[+OverSword]

16 minutes ago, Piney said:

Oh for Christssakes!!!!!!

@Hanslune!!!!!!!!

What's the explanation Piney?  

[acute]

Oh, come on..... They couldn't even spell "Turning Machine" correctly! 

 

Actually, I found the video very interesting. 

[Kenemet]

2 hours ago, Dynamo X said:

Hi all. I saw recently this and found it very intriguing, what do you folks think about it. These are the results from just one artefact but there are many, many more exhibiting the same precision.

 

You can make almost any argument with a single example of "one unit."  I can measure my cat's ear to within 1/1000th of an inch (look!  They're symmetrical!) but this doesn't mean she used laser cutters to fabricate her ear.

I seem to remember that there's some dubious provenance to the jar; beyond that, it's pretty easy to get those tolerances with small lathes like the Egyptians used. The fact that you can choose an angle and draw a pretty flower on it is meaningless.

If you look at a LOT of Egyptian stone vessels, you will see a number of them are "perfect" and probably the result of the king's workshops (you will find that the most symmetrical have a king's name associated, meaning they came from a royal workshop).  Others are not so perfect and there's no name or location- just relatively ordinary bowls made locally.

Some of the dramatic examples were actually made in two parts and glued together by the ancient Egyptians.

 

BTW, This one's a nice jar but if you look at the handles they aren't symmetrical (which is not something that happens if you have a high tech modern machine working it.)

Edited May 24 by Kenemet

[+OverSword]

2 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

You can make almost any argument with a single example of "one unit."  I can measure my cat's ear to within 1/1000th of an inch (look!  They're symmetrical!) but this doesn't mean she used laser cutters to fabricate her ear.

I seem to remember that there's some dubious provenance to the jar; beyond that, it's pretty easy to get those tolerances with small lathes like the Egyptians used. The fact that you can choose an angle and draw a pretty flower on it is meaningless.

If you look at a LOT of Egyptian stone vessels, you will see a number of them are "perfect" and probably the result of the king's workshops (you will find that the most symmetrical have a king's name associated, meaning they came from a royal workshop).  Others are not so perfect and there's no name or location- just relatively ordinary bowls made locally.

Some of the dramatic examples were actually made in two parts and glued together by the ancient Egyptians.

The part that gets me is the handles.  Certainly it would be easy to make a rounded cylinder with a lathe but those handles would be the tough part.

[Kenemet]

8 minutes ago, OverSword said:

What's the explanation Piney?  

It suffers from the "little brown people can't do a blessed thing, even if you hand them a lathe" syndrome.

One dearly wishes to smack the video maker with a book on AE tech.  And examples.

[Kenemet]

1 minute ago, OverSword said:

The part that gets me is the handles.  Certainly it would be easy to make a rounded cylinder with a lathe but those handles would be the tough part.

It's fairly easy the way they did it.  They just left a lump for that part and then sawed it down (made the edges even for the hole) and drilled the hole.

[+OverSword]

1 minute ago, Kenemet said:

It's fairly easy the way they did it.  They just left a lump for that part and then sawed it down (made the edges even for the hole) and drilled the hole.

Never used a lathe before have you?  

[+Hammerclaw]

24 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Never used a lathe before have you?  

I have. While that would be difficult to make with an Egyptian two-man lathe, at the same time, the slower speed would make the area between the rope mounts easier to stop-and-start turn. Ancient peoples were every bit as ingenious as modern folk and were masters of the technologies they were heirs to.

Edited May 24 by Hammerclaw

[+OverSword]

23 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

I have. While that would be difficult to make with an Egyptian two-man lathe, at the same time, the slower speed would make the area between the rope mounts easier to stop-and-start turn. Ancient peoples were every bit as ingenious as modern folk and were masters of the technologies they were heirs to.

Would have taken two people a year to make that one tiny little vase.  I think they had some technique we're not thinking of.

Edited May 24 by OverSword

[Piney]

2 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Would have take two people a year to make that one tiny little vase.  I think they had some technique we're not thinking of.

The tools were stone and it's easier to work stone with a courser stone than metal. 

[+OverSword]

3 minutes ago, Piney said:

The tools were stone and it's easier to work stone with a courser stone than metal. 

Yeah, but look at this.  Starting and stopping this to make two perfectly symmetrical handles would be tough.  How do you build the momentum from one bump to the other?

Let's just say it's more work that I think would be worth the finished product, so I think we're missing something.

Edited May 24 by OverSword

[+Hammerclaw]

Just now, OverSword said:

Would have take two people a year to make that one tiny little vase.  I think they had some technique we're not thinking of.

That's just a guess, as far as time. Its symmetry indicates it was turned and polished with something fine like jeweler's rouge.  The handles are not perfect and don't quite match. It's pretty, but utilitarian and a shop may have been churning them out by the dozen. It took so many man hours to make and it and others may have been done in stages as it was passed on down the line. I don't think it took a Stargate or mysterious disappearing technology to make. 

[+OverSword]

3 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

That's just a guess, as far as time. Its symmetry indicates it was turned and polished with something fine like jeweler's rouge.  The handles are not perfect and don't quite match. It's pretty, but utilitarian and a shop may have been churning them out by the dozen. It took so many man hours to make and it and others may have been done in stages as it was passed on down the line. I don't think it took a Stargate or mysterious disappearing technology to make. 

Yeah, I'm not saying that.  I just think they may have used something else as well as a lathe.  Or it could be that granite is way softer than I assume it is.  Maybe they left a ridge all the way around and sanded off by hand everything that was not left for the handles?

 

[Dejarma]

trying to make something out of nothing IMO

[+Hammerclaw]

10 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Yeah, I'm not saying that.  I just think they may have used something else as well as a lathe.  Or it could be that granite is way softer than I assume it is.  Maybe they left a ridge all the way around and sanded off by hand everything that was not left for the handles?

 

We're trying to guess ancient methods of doing things when, I, at least, am not familiar with the modern or classic methods. We always underestimate the past. We sent men to moon using scientists and technicians wielding slide rules! 

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, Piney said:

Oh for Christssakes!!!!!!

@Hanslune!!!!!!!!

Que Pasa?

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, Kenemet said:

You can make almost any argument with a single example of "one unit."  I can measure my cat's ear to within 1/1000th of an inch (look!  They're symmetrical!) but this doesn't mean she used laser cutters to fabricate her ear.

I seem to remember that there's some dubious provenance to the jar; beyond that, it's pretty easy to get those tolerances with small lathes like the Egyptians used. The fact that you can choose an angle and draw a pretty flower on it is meaningless.

If you look at a LOT of Egyptian stone vessels, you will see a number of them are "perfect" and probably the result of the king's workshops (you will find that the most symmetrical have a king's name associated, meaning they came from a royal workshop).  Others are not so perfect and there's no name or location- just relatively ordinary bowls made locally.

Some of the dramatic examples were actually made in two parts and glued together by the ancient Egyptians.

 

BTW, This one's a nice jar but if you look at the handles they aren't symmetrical (which is not something that happens if you have a high tech modern machine working it.)

Its also possible they accidentally or deliberately used a modern vase actually made by a machine and sold to tourists, given no provenance that cannot be ruled out. However, while remaining skeptical I'd recommend they measure a couple of hundred vases known to have come from Djoser tomb or other known sites to see what they come up with. Might also be useful to have different folks measure things to ensure no bias is occurring. For grins and giggle here is someone - first time effort I believe - to make a similar type of Egyptian stone vase- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC3Z_DBnCp8  910 hours if I remember correctly.

Edited May 24 by Hanslune

[+Hammerclaw]

7 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Que Pasa?

Aqui nada.

[Hanslune]

6 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Aqui nada.

Desde luego

[cladking]

Precision can not be achieved without precise tools and precision measurements.  If this is real, and there's no reason to believe it isn't, then we are wrong about those who made it.

Edited May 25 by cladking

[Trelane]

"Was this artifact technologically designed and manufactured?"

Simply, yes. Here is the evidence of its origins....

 

[Thanos5150]

QMFE RE: this vase: 

It's interesting that this exact style of pottery is first found in Naqada II made of clay:


Known to have elements, like the lug handles, imported from the Levant, part of a larger context of cultural exchange of the period. But it is only in Naqada II/Naqada III that they begin to be made of stone-otherwise fundamentally identical to their earlier clay counterparts.

If this stoneware did not belong to the period it is ascribed, how is it the evolution of its design and transition from clay to stone can clearly been seen chronologically in the archeological record? With elements known to have been imported from the Levant where the stone versions are not found? In other words, if these do belong to some antediluvian LC, why does Naqada II just make clay copies and Naqada II/ III-Dynasty 3 use the "real" stone ones made apparently at least 8,000yrs before their time?

We would also note the high volume of the skilled stoneware industry rapidly comes to a precipitous decline in the 3rd Dynasty directly coinciding with the sudden appearance of stone architecture and pyramid building under Djoser. Kind of like they now had better things to do....

I have brought this up many times before, but for all of the stone working thought to have been made by someone other than the Egyptians thousands if not tens of thousands of years before, how is it possible that every single item without exception is period specific in chronological order to the Egyptians? The architecture, the statuary, the stoneware- from one end of the Nile to the other from the Predynastic right to the end of Dynastic Egypt. And not just that but by and large these items are not just chronologically specific but specific to the individual pharaohs as well.

How is it possible the Egyptians imprinted themselves in chronological order of their own history right on top of the chronological order of the history of the lost civilization without exception for over 3,000yrs? Which to make matters worse, other than the stonework claimed by the Egyptians in chronological order there is zero trace of the lost civilization other than this very stone work.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Regarding the claims that only "advanced machining" could produce the stoneware it is easy to see this is clearly not the case by simply looking at any examples of the period, which ironically there are many shown in museum cases in this video itself.








Misshapen lips, lug handles, and bodies. Off-plane vertical faces of lug handles and off-centered bodies. While some examples are better or worse than others, if "advanced machines" were used none would show such clear and consistent imperfections as they all do in some form or another which are all consistent with work being done by hand. The argument is that "primitive" people could not make such things of stone at all so how can it be explained the LC with their advanced tools could make tens of thousands of examples in reality so poorly clearly indicative of not being machined?

Here are a few examples of ancient Roman igneous rock stoneware:


LARGE

From a previous post, Minoan stone vessels c.2500-1500BC:
http://www.ancient.eu/uploads/images/display-1389.jpg
http://www.ancient.eu/uploads/images/1390.jpg?v=1431030696


So if the early Dynastic Egyptians do it then it must be a lost civilization with advanced machining, but if the Minoans, Romans, Greeks, et al do it then that is understandable?

For those interested, from another post from the same thread regarding lathes and bearings:
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m92/fishfish_01/crafts/polelathe.jpg


Quoting myself from yet another post in that thread:
 

Quote

You guys argue whether it be columns or stoneware that no one in the ancient world, including the Romans, could have used a lathe to make these things so that they will remain the exclusive domain of this elusive lost civilization and "unknown" technology, yet in the same breath you all argue they weren't even made by lathes at all meaning the ALC must have had machines even more advanced. So we have an advanced lost civilization so old they are otherwise missing from time that we are told used materials akin to such space age gems as tungsten carbide, plastic, aerogel, geopolymers, et al and used an array of tools more advanced than any lathe-even more advanced than our modern tools because we are told we cannot even make them today- and yet with all of this amazing space age technology they made a ubiquitous motley crew of largely pedestrian imperfect stone dinnerware of which no two are even exactly alike?...


There are definitely some exemplary examples of early Dynastic stoneware that are masterpieces in any age, but the "95%" left over as you estimate, which is really more like 99%, are of the quality as seen above and just like the exceptional examples they are made from the same materials. Really what we are seeing often is not a difference in technology, but craftsmanship.

Edited May 25 by Thanos5150

[+Hammerclaw]

2 hours ago, Hanslune said:

Desde luego

es la verdad!