Remembering the Slide Rule

This came up as a thread in the “Off-Topic Observatory” of the Cloudy Nights discussion board for amateur astronomers. People have all kinds of hobbies and among the stargazers are skiers, rally racers, runners, and rock climbers, though understandably many more bird watchers, radio hams, and numismatists. Several of us collected slide rules accidentally or on purpose. In response to the topic, one poster just bought a circular slide rule to add to the collection. Aside from the engineer’s slipstick, my circular calculators are all for publishing to reduce or enlarge images and paper pages. 

 

Calculators - and I do use my phone, holding it sideways for the technical functions - give us a false sense of precision, when all you need is accuracy. In other words: will it fly? will it overflow the container? will it carry the load? For backyard stargazing, given that the atmosphere is a roiling ocean, what is the (approximate) limit of observable stellar magnitude with a 115 mm versus 102 mm refractor? The difference between pi=22/7 and pi=3.141 is 0.0018: two thousandths. Not much in life is that close. 

The one at the bottom was special because about 1988 or so, Pickett
(or their inheritors) found a large number of them in a warehouse
and in a publication (Scientific American or Science News or similar)
announced that they would give one (one) to everyone who
sent in a letter asking for one. (Email was not common back then),
after which, the instruments would be no longer available.
The one down from topmost came in a leather scabbard
with a fastener on the back so that you could wear it on your belt.
Long after those days, I wore it in to work.
"What's that?"
"This is the formal computing device of a Jedi,
from a simpler, more elegant time."

Clearly, the slide rule has been eclipsed by devices with storage and memory. Back in the 70s, I joined a round-robin newsletter called The Libertarian Connection, which was based on the medium known to science fiction fanzines. We sent in mimeograph stencils; the editors ran them off, collated the magazine, and mailed it out. Back when one ounce first class was 3 cents the saying was “a penny a day from coast to coast.” Then they went to photo-offset, which I enjoyed immensely. And here we are in the age of George Jetson, with a somewhat better BBS via integrated fiber optics into the house instead of a telephone dial-up at 300 baud. 

 The device is based on logarithms which allowed the transformation of multiplication and division into addition and subtraction. With a five-place or six-place tables of logarithms and trigonometric functions, you could achieve 100 times the precision of daily life. (Consider common retail pricing, for example.) That, in turn, allows efficiencies in engineering and production. Compared against working with tables, the slide rule traded speed for precision. You only get three places, but it is much easier, with the likelihood of errors reduced. If you need more precision, there were the books of tables, and an adding machine, then, later a comptometer.

The slide rule shows ratios and proportions so that you do not need to recursively enter numbers 4.1, 4.2, 4.3,… And it is designed to address basic problems involving circles and square roots. 

 

Even in the 1990s, engineers had AutoCAD and its competitors that let you draw something and the program would show the calculations off to the side. Would you rather start a fire with a BiC lighter or two sticks? Still, it is nice to get away from the computer, sit on a couch or chair, and move the numbers and see what is under the cursor or at the index

 

23 squared times Pi.
Set the Index to 23 on the D scale and
read the square at the Index on the A scale.
Set the cursor to Pi on the B scale and read the answer on the A scale.

For the telescope of diameter 115 mm, set the index on the D scale, read the square on the A scale and then set the cursor to pi, and you get 417 or close to. The calculator says 41,547.562843725015579. Ignoring all the noise, 415 is within half a percent. The 102-mm refractor has an area of about 327. Set either the AB or CD scales to 415/327 and the larger telescope has 127% the area of the smaller—and the calculator agrees: 1.27114… But you could do most that in your head anyway. 

In astronomy, the paradigm shifts in understanding the so-called “expansion of the universe” i.e., the Hubble Constant has been measured in orders of magnitude, not decimal places. 

  

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS

Claude M. Watson (1922-2013) 

The Rational Optimist and The Grand Complication 

Celestial Mechanics 

Measuring Your Universe: Alan Hirshfeld’s Astronomy Activity Manual 

ChatGPT and the Historical Forms of Academic Dishonesty

 In one criminology class, our professor said that 80% of people are honest 80% of the time; about 20% of the goods on the market have no clear title. 

Back in 1968, at my small liberal arts college, at the end of the school year, several of my classmates found themselves faced with a final paper in world history that some of them could not complete. At least one of them had done (most of) the work. He gave his pals his paper to copy, which they did, apparently verbatim in small or large passages. However, our school had an Honor Code, a Pledge, which was to be written in full at the top of each examination or paper. (Usually, for quizzes and such, we just wrote "Pledged" at the top.) Also, as it happened, the center of the conspiracy copied a section directly from the assigned textbook without attribution. The textbook was a reference for our benefit. We never read from it in class; we had no assignments from it. So, at least one of my classmates may have assumed that the professor would not recognize the passage or passages. In any case, it did not occur to them that their nearly identical papers would betray them. Of course, they should have been expelled and of course they were not. The story is not unusual in any way.

We have one day a month assigned away from the workplace and on that day, we receive a task from a manager. They call this "Mental Spa Day." My work away from work included completing an introductory class about ChatGPT and then having ChatGPT write a story. "Use a favorite character from two of your favorite tv shows/movie/book – so, you have two characters; Have them meet while on vacation in ____________(location of your choosing);  Have them describe the location surrounding them;  Have them go on two adventures." This is the result.

My instructions to ChatGPT: Write a story in which the character of Temperance Brennan from the televisions series "Bones" meets the character of Sherlock Holmes as played by Benedict Cumberbatch in the television series "Sherlock." They are separately on vacation in Austin, Texas. They meet on a tour of the Lady Bird Johnson Wild Flower Center. While admiring the plants and other wildlife, they see a foot under a bush and discover a body. Call this "Intro One."

Title: Botanical Bones: An Unexpected Encounter

Intro One: Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center

In the heart of Austin, Texas, the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center sprawled with vibrant colors and the fragrant scents of nature. Temperance Brennan, a forensic anthropologist known for her meticulous attention to detail, found herself on vacation in the Lone Star State, seeking solace amidst the blooming wildflowers.

Meanwhile, Sherlock Holmes, the enigmatic detective with a penchant for deduction, had chosen Austin as his destination for a much-needed break from the hustle and bustle of London.

Their paths converged unexpectedly on a guided tour of the Wildflower Center, where they found themselves admiring the indigenous flora and fauna.

[Edit in: 7 June 2024. I rarely edit entry to this blog after a work has been posted. I sometimes fix typographical errors such as "its" for "it's" though most errors survive because that is the record. In this case, I removed the story so that I can edit it and post it on 8 June as "Fan Fic by ChatGPT: Part 3."] 

The work needs editing. Among the weaknesses was the use of the same key word in a sentence: "...they forged a bond forged in the crucible of investigation..." However, it is a good beginning for someone who does not want to create and needs to fill a requirement. I have several books of newly published science fiction like this purchased last summer on a whim. I got through half of one and cannot read the others. I did read two novels by Marion Zimmer Bradley and four short stories by H. G. Wells. To produce literature at that level would require training ChatGPT, which is the intent of its creators: you recursively teach the program to develop what you want. At that level, you might as well do all the work yourself, or, at least you will have the learning experience of teaching the subject. 

In 2008, I had a class in symbolic logic. Our first exercises were to program a logic engine to produce certain truths. After a few weeks, we were on our own: the homework was to solve this or show that or demonstrate some other. Well, I had the logic program to do that. I just entered the Boolean expressions and turned the handle. That worked fine until the problems got harder. I had to do a lot of paper-and-pencil to know what to give the machine. Eventually, although there was one that took me five hours, it was easier just to do the work myself. 

I recently read some discussions on Reddit among professors who were worried (or not) about how to test their students in the era of interactive AI. Here at the University of Texas Austin, they have large lecture classes assigned to teaching assistants: your "professor" is some kid two years older than you. At Eastern Michigan University, we did not have TAs. If your name was in the book, then you were the person in front of the class. Granted, you might not know every freshman in an auditorium of 200, but you should know every senior in your seminar.  

Addendum: April 28. 11:23 AM. For the more recent topic here on the slide rule, I was going to add a comment about calculators. Then, I realized that my phone will do that, of course. I seldom use an actual calculator any more. But how about math class? If you have a phone, you do not need to do any calculations. You enter “Bill can mow the lawn …” in your search engine and you get lots of answers. 

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS

Goofing to a Meltdown? 

Engines of Creation 

Lost in Translation 

Invisible Cheating and Visible Rights 

Hermann Zapf on Alphabets

Hermann Zapf's legacy remains today in the typefaces offered by Microsoft Word: Optima, Palatino, and Zapfino. Other platforms deliver Melior and Linotype Aldus. Searching Google for Hallmark Jeannette will not take you to the font he designed for the greeting card company. The Blogspot platform is woefully underpowered for typography. We make do with what we have.

The whole duty of Typography, as of Calligraphy, is to communicate to the imagination, without loss by the way, the thought or image intended to be communicated by the Author. – Thomas James Cobden-Sanderson. (Frontispiece.) 

[Thomas James Cobden-Sanderson (né Sanderson; 2 December 1840 – 7 September 1922) was an English artist and bookbinder associated with the Arts and Crafts movement. ... He was the godfather of Bertrand Russell. -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._J._Cobden-Sanderson]

“While visiting the United States in 1954 and 1957, I often talked with friends about printing types and modern industrial design. It seemed odd to find ultra-modern folk there for whom a plane that needed nineteen hours to fly from Frankfurt to New York was already a hobbling vehicle, but who in their own printed works preferred the most old-fashioned types of the 19th century. How one wished to ask these fanatics of ‘progress’ whether they still drive cars built in 1900, or furnish home or office in turn-of-the-century style. […]

The type of today and of tomorrow will hardly be a faithful recutting of a 16th century roman of the Renaissance, nor the original cutting of a classical face of Bodoni’s time—but neither will it be a sans-serif of the 19th century. It will surely be said that most book printers and their customers demand the historical forms. But on the other hand most of the public, too, demands cheap imitations of Chippendale furniture, Renaissance writing tables and romantic reproductions. Nor is it always the little people for whom the modern forms lack appeal, since taste only too often fails to keep pace with the growth of the bank account. Progress always demands courage; and as the powers of conservatism were and are always in the majority, they will not stop the entire development, they can only retard it. But where do we stand today? There is much talk of modern design, but if we study the catalogues and promotional printing we often find late 19th century printing types used to promote these ‘modern forms’. Just to which point in the 19th century do our lives and endeavors seek to return? Can the second half of the 19th century, the time of stylistic confusion and historicism, offer any basis for a future development? One has only to think of railway stations with Doric columns of iron, and of neo-gothic churches, or simply the ample beards of our great-grandfathers.” – pg. 36-37.

And is it not an anachronism when Albert Einstein’s relativity theory, or works by Bertrand Russell, Pasternak, and other such are printed with types of historic design? Pg. 59-60

 

 

See also Hunt Roman: The Birth of a Type,
George H. M. Lawrence, ed., Pittsburgh Bibliophiles, 1965.
Zapf designed this face for the Hunt Botanical Library.
(See also https://typographica.org/typeface-reviews/hunt-roman/)

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS

 

Words into Type 

Start the Presses! 

For the Glory of Old Lincoln High 

Money as Press and Speech