4 ms·

Just because a measuring device is not standards referenced does not mean it can not be used to measure. If I need a peg to match the size of a drill bit, any

Just because a measuring device is not standards referenced does not mean it can not be used to measure. If I need a peg to match the size of a drill bit, any collection of 12 holes is likely to have one the size of the drill bit that lets me tell my peg maker to "make the pegs this size." Handymen are just cussed enough* to not label any of them, and to expect the FNG (new guy) to remember which of the 12 unlabeled holes was the one. * Cussed enough is a slang adjective that describes someone who does things that annoy people. We say it in Texas, but I do not expect everyone uses that phrase. I can not think of a standard term that carries the same connotations.

hprotagonist 3y ago
implicit knowledge is everywhere. the trick is realizing that this isn’t a bad thing.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
actionfromafar 3y ago
This was indeed, cussed knowledge.
bondarchuk 3y ago
Furthermore this article only states: “They are not of a standard size, so will not be measuring devices.", which is incorrect since for use as a coincidence rangefinder (standardized to some standard) only the ratios between sizes of opposite holes would need to be standardized, not the size of the thing as a whole. The paper "Roman Dodecahedron as dioptron: analysis of freely available data" (https://arxiv.org/abs/1206.0946 https://arxiv.org/abs/1206.0946) collects measurements of opposite hole pairs for 7 artefacts for anyone wanting to do their own analysis.
- bombcar 3y ago
  Measuring devices do not need to be standard size if you're not comparing them or following a recipe of sorts. You can use anything as a "ruler" to measure something and transfer that measurement to something else. It's what a jig or form does, after all.
- throwitaway222 3y ago
  Seems to me the "experts" have no experience in construction, so they dismiss it - which makes me dismiss them.
devnullbrain 3y ago
'Of course it's a Whitworth screw, look at it!'

hprotagonist 3y ago

implicit knowledge is everywhere. the trick is realizing that this isn’t a bad thing.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

actionfromafar 3y ago

This was indeed, cussed knowledge.

bondarchuk 3y ago

Furthermore this article only states: “They are not of a standard size, so will not be measuring devices.", which is incorrect since for use as a coincidence rangefinder (standardized to some standard) only the ratios between sizes of opposite holes would need to be standardized, not the size of the thing as a whole. The paper "Roman Dodecahedron as dioptron: analysis of freely available data" (https://arxiv.org/abs/1206.0946 https://arxiv.org/abs/1206.0946) collects measurements of opposite hole pairs for 7 artefacts for anyone wanting to do their own analysis.

bombcar 3y ago
Measuring devices do not need to be standard size if you're not comparing them or following a recipe of sorts. You can use anything as a "ruler" to measure something and transfer that measurement to something else. It's what a jig or form does, after all.
throwitaway222 3y ago
Seems to me the "experts" have no experience in construction, so they dismiss it - which makes me dismiss them.

devnullbrain 3y ago

'Of course it's a Whitworth screw, look at it!'