Scales of the past, and deciding the weight by the deviation of a hand
Hello,
I was asked about the following: Scales from the past, with two spoons. I was told that if there is up to a taf between one spoon and the other spoon, the weighing is acceptable. In the Hushenan Mishpat 13, scales appear with a different length of the barrel (arm twice two) for each type of commodity. 12 tafshim, 9 tafshim, etc. From what I know, if there were no friction on the central axis of the barrel, then the smallest difference in weights would cause one spoon to go down and the other to go up. Therefore, it must be assumed that there is some friction. What is not clear is how they gave a measure of tafshim between the spoons when the length of the arm was not defined. If the length of the arm is large, then a tafshim expresses a relatively small difference in weight, but if the length of the arm is small, a tafshim can indicate a large difference between the spoons. Therefore, the same difference between the weight of the commodity and the weight on the other spoon will be considered a valid weighing on small scales, but on scales with a long barrel, the weighing will be invalid. Have you encountered such a question? I would appreciate an answer or a thought on the subject. In my opinion, all scales need a special calibration with a table and the difference between the weights allowed in percentages will determine whether it is more or less accurate. I hope the question is understandable. Thanks in advance, Zeev
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thanks for the quick response, from the rabbi who wrote to me I understood that this is what is ruled according to the law, so what is the meaningless interpretation? I would like to understand or direct me to where it is suggested that these are H-shaped scales and understand what helps, because there are probably arms there too.
Have a good week
The interpretation is that this is an error and there is no meaning to such a ruling. This ruling is null and void because it is based on an error.
Some of the first ones there in the Sugiya speak of scales in the shape of an animal, meaning that the scales hang on a thread at the bottom of each leg of the animal. In such a situation, it is clear that the scales stop at a height that depends on the weight differences.
Sorry for the bother. I drew the situation. I compared the moment of the heavier weight m1 with the moment of the lighter one m2 and a little trigonometry, I got that the angle of inclination of the barrel alpha depends on the difference in masses divided by their sum but also on the length of the barrel L. The difference in height between the two spoons is the amount by which one dropped to the height by which the other rose and this amount is equal to twice the drop of the end of the barrel.
And this drop depends on the length of the barrel. In short, I was not able to get a dependence on only the 2 masses. I will check myself again. Thanks anyway. Zeev
Completely unnecessary accounts. You don't know what the sizes were there, and there may have been standard scales they were talking about. What's the point of all these accounts?
Thank you very much. I really thought that maybe they were referring to certain scales and not relevant to other scales.
All the best
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
