"Poetic Justice" <paradisel
...@webtv.net> wrote in message
...
>{{Because the weight on the top and
>bottom of the sphere would have been
>immense?}}
Whiskers wrote;
>The pressure at each contact point
>depends on how many 'ball bearings' and
>other supports there were.
Just focusing on the stone spheres; Yes more would distribute the weight
but I don't think they would help in cutting-down friction/resistance of
the floor's motion mainly because we're talking still about stone balls
and not a 20C hi-tech steel bearing.
>It has been suggested here that the
>moving floor may have floated on water,
Yes that was my guess:-).
_____________________________________________________
Nero had the wealth to have floated in on a pool of olive oil. This would
have reduced the friction. Bronze or granite balls running in grooves would
have taken care of any tendency to tilt or even a wooden wheel with a steel
rim or six. He could have had slaves turn it and they could have largely
done it by eyeballing the sky at night and using a very primitive sun dial
during the day. You don't have to get all that complex here. Any good Roman
military engineer should have been able to pull this off.
________________________________________________-
>in which case the load would be evenly
>distributed over the whole of the
>submerged area
True.
>- and the moving floor would not need to
>be self-supporting, so could be a lot
>simpler and lighter - essentially, a basic
>raft.
True.
>That arrangement would also make it
>possible for a very simple flow of water
>around the chamber to carry the floating
>floor with it.
True.
>High precision of time-keeping wouldn't
>be easy, but there were no high-precision
>time-keeping systems at the time anyway.
If it was to follow the Heavens 24hr cycle you'd want it in the ballpark
at least but yes it wouldn't need to be exact.
>The "spherical mechanism" then only
>needs to prevent the floating floor from
>tilting too much -
That was my guess also.
>and if the 'ball bearings' were submerged,
>that would provide some lubrication (and
>the water would support some of the
>weight of the balls too, reducing pressure
>and wear).
Plus contact would be light and occasional.
>But if the floor was floating, the need for
>large stone spheres is difficult to
>understand.
>Three or four cart wheels attached to the
>moving floor would serve to prevent
>'capsize'.
I thought of that also, so much easier, *alot* less resistance and
vibration & noise probably eliminated.
>{{And why follow the sky inside a building
>even if it had windows with a 360* view
>and an oculus?
>Would you really notice anything while
>occupied with dining and chit-chat?}}
>To display ingenuity and mastery of the
>heavens?
But if you can't notice *anything* different at 1 revolution per day
during this social function, I don't see the point?
>Rotating restaurants are not unknown in
>the present
Yes and the diners *see* the rotation which is the novelty.
>- 'novelty' seems to be an adequate
>impulse for creating them
Agree.
>{{I just think to make this rotating dining
>room a cool novelty ya gotta go faster:).
>Say 1 revolution in 4min, paint something
>cool on the circular ceiling like a 360* sky
>with day-dusk-night-dawn add wall
>painting, sculptures, etc.
>Yes no significant noise or vibration at 1
>revolution per day but at say 0.25 RPM it
>would likely be noticeable?}}
>Until it all fell apart.
Why? @ 1 revolution every 4mins?
The speed is like walking 156ft in 4min which is extremely slow.
>Did Nero want an impressive toy to
>entertain his guests in a cultured and
>gracious manner,
Hard to entertain them if they can't notice movement with the rotation @
1 per 24hrs.
>or did he want to scare them on a
>fairground ride?
With 1 turn every 4mins, ya ain't gonna be selling tickets for that
ride:).
>Cloth or leather padding on the 'rails'
>would make things quieter, too.
>{{With massive weight and they're saying
>it ran 24/7 they would wear-out in no
>time.}}
><shrug> I don't think expense was a major
>concern
Neither do I. It's the down time for no reason, *if* the stone balls
supported the massive weight and it ran 24/7 it might be a daily fix.
And Romans tended to build things to last.
Plus there might be a reason that it ran 24/7 (if that's true) and
shutting-down for maintainance might be a major hassle?
>- indeed, massive expense was rather the
>point of the whole 'Golden House' project.
Yes it was and somewhat typical.
I recall Julius Caesar built a villa I believe in the Naples area and
when it was finished or very close to being finished he had it torn
down.
And the reason was just to show-off his wealth.
Regards, Walter
