On 01/09/16 11:27, Patrick Gosling wrote:
> In article <nq3la2$tk3$
1...@dont-email.me>,
> Paul Bird <
pa...@nospamcamtutor.co.uk> wrote:
>> Some of us on here are "of a certain age" and remember the 1960s
>> Childrens Gallery and its exhibits. The museum themselves are remarkably
>> light on archive (I've been in touch), there are few photographs on the
>> web, and their website practically ignores its existence after 1931.
>>
>> A long shot but if anybody reading this went as a child and has
>> photographs I'd be very grateful and interested. I think I've exhausted
>> the publicly available material (got the guide books etc) so now it's
>> down to personal memorabilia.
>
> No photographs, I'm afraid; and my recollections are of the 70's rather
> than the 60's .
>
> The Children's Gallery was in the basement, as I remember it; there was
I remember the children's section of the Science Museum. It was the only
museum I liked going to because you could actually do things. (My view
hasn't really changed.)
There was a yellow line on the ground that you followed to get there,
which I always looked forward to at the time.
Not strictly in the children's section, but also a fun gadget at the
time, was the radar-operated traffic light at the entrance.
[...]
> Just ahead and then continuing round to the left, were the pulleys and
> weights demonstrating the effect of mechanical advantage; these were
> perhaps 3-4m high, I think; you pulled horizontally on the rope and in
> some cases lifted some impressively heavy weights (one of the pulleys
> had something like eight loops, I think).
There were three or four rope pulleys, as you say in increasing order of
mechanical advantage. And to the right of these there was a different
kind of lever: you pumped this arm up and down and it very slowly lifted
some rather large cuboid weight (1 tonne, possibly). There was also a
release valve which would let the weight down again. I used to like
spending some minutes raising it a few inches then releasing the valve
as quickly as I could to see if I could get it to crash down with a
bang.
[...]
> Somewhere off to the right, there was a colour-blindness-testing
> demonstration, and a reaction-tester (you held something, and then
> when a signal (light? sound?) occurred you had to touch a plate, and a
> rather 60's neon-tube digital display showed you how many 100ths of a
> second it took you.
The colour blindness test was a booklet of Ishihara plates.
There was also a large demonstration of polarised light, with a
full-length backdrop that looked white if you looked at it directly, but
appeared like a coloured stained glass window image when you looked at
it through the polarised glass plates they provided.
There was a demonstration of the magnetic properties of various metals:
rings of iron, copper, zinc, etc, which you could move around a
hoop. You could control an electromagnet (with a pedal?), which was
quite strong, making it hard to remove the iron ring without switching
it off.
>
> There was the automatic door triggered by you interrupting a beam
> which others have mentioned - I seem to remember it involving a
> "corridor" constructed in the middle of a large-ish open area in
> the basement; for some reason I strongly associate a particular shade
> of dark-ish green with it.
Was that the place with a model of the solar system where they tried to
explain the seasons and days by casting shadows over the planets as they
went round?
> I also have a vague recollection of some kind of model of a lift
> mechanism in a model house or building of some kind.
>
> [ I also remember very much liking the huge array of models of industrial
> devices with working mechanisms that you could operate with a push
> button or turning knob, that were located on the ground floor, to the
> side of the big steam engines ]
There was also the "million volt bang", though unfortunately we were
rarely there at the right time to see it demonstrated.
>
> Recent visits have been oddly disappointing, and I'm not quite sure
> why, although I _think_ that part of it is a tendency to go for smaller
> numbers of bigger "more impressive" displays, rather than large
> numbers of smaller but incredibly intricately designed and build
> mechanisms and devices.
>
> Perhaps the things that entertained me then would not seem remotely
> as impressive to a generation used to CGI and augmented reality.
I think they've got some pretty well-thought out children's exhibits
now, which subliminally teach some scientific principle while also being
fun. (I know one of the designers.) But I also have the feeling that it
somehow isn't as magical as before. To be fair to the modern designers,
this is may be mostly just the fact that I am older and more jaded. Also
nowadays everyone has technology that they consider commonplace, but
would essentially be considered magic a few years ago, and it's hard to
compete with that.
>
> -patrick.
>