|
|
 Up |
|
  |
Author: deemsbilldeemsbill Date: Dec 18, 2007 00:42
On Dec 17, 6:32 pm, Jack Linthicum earthlink.net>
wrote:> On Dec 17, 6:14 pm, "deemsb...@ aol.com" aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> On Dec 17, 5:12 pm, Jack Linthicum earthlink.net>
>> wrote:>
>>> Gold Pocket Watch May Help Solve a Timeless Mystery
>>> 12/14/2007
>
>>> According to experts, the antique pocket watch carried by the captain
>>> of the Hunley did not wind down gradually after the world's first
>>> successful combat submarine was lost at sea in 1864; nor did it have
>>> its hands moved by some outside force. Instead the watch stopped at
>>> 8:23. Scientists say it is likely water or a strong concussion caused
>>> his watch to stop working, offering a vital clue in their efforts to ...
|
| Show full article (5.95Kb) |
|
| | 36 Comments |
|
|
Author: Jack LinthicumJack Linthicum Date: Dec 18, 2007 01:08
On Dec 17, 6:42 pm, "deemsb...@ aol.com" aol.com> wrote:> On Dec 17, 6:32 pm, Jack Linthicum earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>> On Dec 17, 6:14 pm, "deemsb...@ aol.com" aol.com> wrote:>
>>> On Dec 17, 5:12 pm, Jack Linthicum earthlink.net>
>>> wrote:>
>>>> Gold Pocket Watch May Help Solve a Timeless Mystery
>>>> 12/14/2007
>
>>>> According to experts, the antique pocket watch carried by the captain
>>>> of the Hunley did not wind down gradually after the world's first
>>>> successful combat submarine was lost at sea in 1864; nor did it have
>>>> its hands moved by some outside force. Instead the watch stopped at
>>>> 8:23. Scientists say it is likely water or a strong concussion caused
>>>> his watch to stop working, offering a vital clue in their efforts to ...
|
| Show full article (6.22Kb) |
|
| | 2 Comments |
|
|
Author: mikemike Date: Dec 18, 2007 03:48
On Dec 17, 5:42 pm, "deemsb...@ aol.com" aol.com> wrote:>
> Been there. I don't have any problem with trying to find out what
> really happened. That's part of history/archaeology....I just think
> it's a bit of a leap to assume the watch can give anything near an
> exact time.
There was no such thing as exact time during the ACW.
Wasn't till 1883 till todays four time zones were adopted.
During the War, most times in cities were what the Railroads
used, about 300 different zones, so you can bet that Charleston
and Savannah Railroad time would not be the same as
Union Navy time, except by chance
**
mike
**
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Ray O'HaraRay O'Hara Date: Dec 18, 2007 04:20
>
> Been there. I don't have any problem with trying to find out what
> really happened. That's part of history/archaeology....I just think
> it's a bit of a leap to assume the watch can give anything near an
> exact time.
>
what was the watch set to?
was it local time? did he set it to noon by his own observations.
was it slow or fast.
all they will ever determine is the watch was saying 8:30 when it stopped
and nothing more.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: deemsbilldeemsbill Date: Dec 18, 2007 05:19
On Dec 17, 10:20 pm, "Ray O'Hara" rcn.com> wrote:>
>> Been there. I don't have any problem with trying to find out what
>> really happened. That's part of history/archaeology....I just think
>> it's a bit of a leap to assume the watch can give anything near an
>> exact time.
>
> what was the watch set to?
> was it local time? did he set it to noon by his own observations.
> was it slow or fast.
> all they will ever determine is the watch was saying 8:30 when it stopped
> and nothing more.
Might it have been broken before the last voyage? Might it have
been broken during the voyage, but before the sinking?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Ray O'HaraRay O'Hara Date: Dec 18, 2007 06:50
> On Dec 17, 10:20 pm, "Ray O'Hara" rcn.com> wrote:>> aol.com> wrote in message
>>
>>>>
>>
>>> Been there. I don't have any problem with trying to find out what
>>> really happened. That's part of history/archaeology....I just think
>>> it's a bit of a leap to assume the watch can give anything near an
>>> exact time.
>>
>> what was the watch set to?
>> was it local time? did he set it to noon by his own observations.
>> was it slow or fast.
>> all they will ever determine is the watch was saying 8:30 when it
stopped ...
|
| Show full article (1.25Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: TMOliverTMOliver Date: Dec 18, 2007 18:29
"Jack Linthicum" earthlink.net> wrote ...> On Dec 17, 6:42 pm, "deemsb...@ aol.com" aol.com> wrote:>>
>> Been there. I don't have any problem with trying to find out what
>> really happened. That's part of history/archaeology....I just think
>> it's a bit of a leap to assume the watch can give anything near an
>> exact time.
>
> Where there's a grant there's a way
May I propose a simpler solution. On low pay and bad prospects, the CO had
not been able to afford to have his watch cleaned for several years, and
like some of my watches in my 50s era childhood, the sumbitch was simply
slow. Occam's razor certainly suggests that if (a) the watch seems to have
stopped by shock while still wound (partly at least), and (b) that there are
enough observers' reports and deck logs establishing time spread for the
detonation of the spar torpedo, the nearby "Thump" stopped a slow watch.....
TMO
|
| |
| 5 Comments |
|
|
Author: Jack LinthicumJack Linthicum Date: Dec 18, 2007 18:36
On Dec 18, 12:29 pm, "TMOliver" hot.rr.comFIX> wrote:> "Jack Linthicum" earthlink.net> wrote ...
>>> On Dec 17, 6:42 pm, "deemsb...@ aol.com" aol.com> wrote:>
>>> Been there. I don't have any problem with trying to find out what
>>> really happened. That's part of history/archaeology....I just think
>>> it's a bit of a leap to assume the watch can give anything near an
>>> exact time.
>
>> Where there's a grant there's a way
>
> May I propose a simpler solution. On low pay and bad prospects, the CO had
> not been able to afford to have his watch cleaned for several years, and
> like some of my watches in my 50s era childhood, the sumbitch was simply
> slow. Occam's razor certainly suggests that if (a) the watch seems to have
> stopped by shock while still wound (partly at least), and (b) that there are
> enough observers' reports and deck logs establishing time spread for the
> detonation of the spar torpedo, the nearby "Thump" stopped a slow watch.....
> ...
|
| Show full article (1.20Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Ian MacLureIan MacLure Date: Dec 19, 2007 21:37
Brad Meyer gmail.com> wrote in
news:jtjgm3l3bba6076ngcf0rdenc737j0isk7@4ax.com:
[snip]
> Aside: IMO one of the least studied changes of my lifetime has been
> the revolution in time keeping. "Accurate within two minutes a month"
> was once a real selling point for a good quality dress watch. Anything
> that was Chronometer rated was ungodly expensive. Nowadays you have a
[snip]
Expensive yes, but not ungodly so.
My dad bought a Rolex gold oyster chronograph(?) for something
like $80 at the PX on Harmon AFB in the late 1940's. That was a
week's wage for a radio operator in those days and more than a
junior engineer was liable to make.
IBM
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Brad MeyerBrad Meyer Date: Dec 19, 2007 22:27
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:37:12 -0600, Ian MacLure svpal.org> wrote:
>Brad Meyer gmail.com> wrote in
>news:jtjgm3l3bba6076ngcf0rdenc737j0isk7@4ax.com:
>
> [snip]
>>> Aside: IMO one of the least studied changes of my lifetime has been
>> the revolution in...
|
| Show full article (0.97Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
