|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:20 pm
The Hieronymous machine is a machine invented by Dr. Thomas Galen Hieronymous and patented in 1949. It is an analytical machine that uses a "tactile detector" in order to determine the composition of samples. The sample is placed near a copper coil on the machine which is connected to an amplifier circuit (either vacuum tube or solid-state; the exact type doesn't seem to matter), and a vernier dial that rotates a prism inside the box alters the readout somehow. The amplifier circuit is connected to a coil of wire sandwiched between two plastic plates that form the tactile detector. The machine works by rotating the dial and stroking the detector simultaneously until the operator feels a physical change in the tactile detector. Looking at the dial, and assuming the machine has been calibrated previously, one can determine from the reading what the composition of the sample is. Dr. Hieronymous postulated "eloptic radiation" as the working principle behind his machine but this seems to be highly speculative. This machines does not make physical sense, but experiments with it have determined that subjects will get the same reading for the same material even if they cannot see the dial. That is, the people that can actually get the machine to work. As with other types of "mind machines", not everyone can get the Hieronymous machine to work. What's even more amazing about the Hieronymous machine is that a "symbolic" version works exactly the same as the original. By "symbolic" I mean that the physical electronic components can be replaced by a drawn electronic circuit diagram and connected to the machine by sewing thread and the machine will function exactly the same as the original. The prism can be replaced by a "symbolic prism" that is just a piece of clear plastic. The symbolic version of the machine doesn't even require a power supply; the electrical circuit symbols of batteries are sufficient to make the machine work. So, what do you guys think about this machine? I haven't been able to try either version personally, but the construction seems pretty straightforward if you have basic knowledge and skill in elementary electronic circuits. I have played around with drawing the symbolic circuits though, just to practice. I know we talk about symbols sometimes in this guild, but what do you think about the idea that a symbol (or set of symbols) can have so much power that it can produce objective results? This sparked an interest in me to see how simplistic the symbols could be and what applications this kind of thing might have. Full Metal Alchemist comes to mind when I think about this. Does anyone have any thoughts or experiences to share? Related Linkshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hieronymus_machinehttp://cdn.makezine.com/make/09/in_search_of_psi.pdfHere are the collected pics that I took of my own symbolic machine. http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa80/genagafuzen/machinefront.jpghttp://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa80/genagafuzen/machinerear.jpghttp://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa80/genagafuzen/circuitboard.jpghttp://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa80/genagafuzen/prismassembly.jpghttp://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa80/genagafuzen/plateassembly.jpghttp://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa80/genagafuzen/pickupcoil.jpghttp://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa80/genagafuzen/dialassembly.jpg
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:10 am
Oh my... do you have any links to sites this is pretty facinating.
I have drawn a couple symbols which were soo charged that I guess they freaked out a couple people when I showed them what they were. All I knew is that they felt powerful to me and other people could tell they were powerful
Thats about it for symbols. I don't usually use actual symbols when I work. I just draw from my subconscious and it seems to be effective whatever it is that I do. I found out a couple of them were real symbols and had the meanings I meant them to convey. So I guess all good?
I think sometimes it might depend on whose drawing the symbols or who is embuing them with meaning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:59 am
I'll try and dig up some links later tonight. I learned about this machine primarily from a book called Mind Machines You Can Build by G. Harry Stine. I'm positive you can find it online if your Google-fu is strong enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:50 pm
Obscurus I'll try and dig up some links later tonight. I learned about this machine primarily from a book called Mind Machines You Can Build by G. Harry Stine. I'm positive you can find it online if your Google-fu is strong enough. Its pretty strong but I'm writting research papers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:50 pm
I just added a couple of links to the first post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:59 pm
Nice write-up, Obscurus. I definitely want to see more stuff like this in the MPRILC.
As for my opinions on the machine itself, it sure sounds nifty. I'd like to see someone here try and make one and post some pics or something. Better yet, it'd be neat to see a set of instructions that anyone here could try and replicate for themselves. Note here that I'm just being general and not trying to say you should, Obscurus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 8:04 pm
Subrosian Nice write-up, Obscurus. I definitely want to see more stuff like this in the MPRILC.
As for my opinions on the machine itself, it sure sounds nifty. I'd like to see someone here try and make one and post some pics or something. Better yet, it'd be neat to see a set of instructions that anyone here could try and replicate for themselves. Note here that I'm just being general and not trying to say you should, Obscurus. I've had plans to make a symbolic version for a few weeks, but I have a short attention span with this stuff. Like I said, I've been playing around with the symbolic circuits. I've read about a version of the machine that is just a two inch bathroom tile with the circuitry drawn on the back. I don't suspect it will be too hard to rig up a symbolic version. There are some instructions for making the Hieronymous machine in the second link I have; the .pdf. I'm sure that's not the only place you can find them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2010 4:52 am
This looks awesome. I've always loved the way circuit diagrams looked, and tried to incorporate that kind of style into the sigils I make, but if you could take that further and make a full working machine out of a schematic, that would be so bitchin'. This makes me wonder what other machines we could end up making out of stand-in symbols.
The idea about a symbolic machine is interesting, but given what I believe about symbols and how they work with the human mind, I question why the machine would work if the participants can't see the machine they're interacting with; perhaps the person operating the dial and who can see the diagram acts as the "virtual machine" by processing the symbols on the diagram, and he himself is the one causing the change in the plate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2010 7:25 pm
Mitsh This looks awesome. I've always loved the way circuit diagrams looked, and tried to incorporate that kind of style into the sigils I make, but if you could take that further and make a full working machine out of a schematic, that would be so bitchin'. This makes me wonder what other machines we could end up making out of stand-in symbols. The idea about a symbolic machine is interesting, but given what I believe about symbols and how they work with the human mind, I question why the machine would work if the participants can't see the machine they're interacting with; perhaps the person operating the dial and who can see the diagram acts as the "virtual machine" by processing the symbols on the diagram, and he himself is the one causing the change in the plate? Most of these units are actually self-contained. In a properly done symbolic Hieronymous machine, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between it and a full component Hieronymous machine. I've even seen plans that incorporate a "dummy" power supply and on/off switch/light just to give it the right look. The machine seems to operate solely on the power of the symbols or the power of the person using the machine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:13 pm
Do you have any links to a person trying to create one of these?
I understand that the mechanics and concepts used in constructs can be similar to the mechanics used in real life but to make physical changes seems a bit far fetched to me. Or well very difficult.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 8:01 pm
Ishtar Shakti Do you have any links to a person trying to create one of these? I understand that the mechanics and concepts used in constructs can be similar to the mechanics used in real life but to make physical changes seems a bit far fetched to me. Or well very difficult. by G. Harry Stine goes over the construction pretty well. Most of what you'll find online has to do with building the mechanical version of the machine, rather than the symbolic version. All you really need to do is just replace the electronic circuit with a diagram of that circuit though. You can also replace some of the other parts, like the prism, with stand-ins. The MAKE Magazine article (the .pdf file) that I have linked has some pictures and instructions on making the symbolic machine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 7:30 pm
I built a symbolic Hieronymous machine today. Here are some pictures.  "Front". The side visible during operation.  "Rear". This is the side with all the important stuff visible.  This is the circuit board by itself, for curiosity's sake. I tested it with a coil of copper wire and got an arbitrary reading of 40 on the dial. I tried testing a coil of iron and then zinc wire after this but got no clear response. Upon inspection, I discovered that one of my "wires" had come loose. I didn't play around with it anymore after fixing it because I wanted to take the pictures and get them up. I plan to experiment with it more to see what happens. I have pictures of the individual components, but unless there's interest I won't clutter the thread with them. Let me know what you guys think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 12:36 am
-bangs gavel-
More, i say! More!
I am extremely interested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 7:47 pm
-X-Luciferin-X-Bandit-X- -bangs gavel- More, i say! More! I am extremely interested. More pictures or more experimentation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 12:42 am
Pictures and experimentation o.o
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
