Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by mattofak on Monday May 23, 2022 @02:26PM
(#31483072)
While the work itself is interesting, I'm also super curious to know how this was typeset. Did NASA have special typewriters with common math symbols, or go through some office with a Linotype or early digital typesetter, or something else?
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by tlb on Monday May 23, 2022 @02:53PM
(#31483430)
IBM Selectrics had a symbol ball [𝛼] you could swap for the standard one. It only takes a few seconds to change balls, though when I've seen people doing it they would normally type all the prose on a page, then go back and type all the math. Super/subscripts were done by rolling the paper up and down half a line. The big symbols like the square root were done later with pen and a ruler. Working from a handwritten manuscript, of course.
[𝛼] https://www.duxburysystems.org/downloads/library/texas/apple...
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by peter303 on Monday May 23, 2022 @07:18PM
(#31486058)
We had an amazing technical secretary in our Stanford research group (spouse of a Nobel Prize winner). She quickly visualize the order of symbols on the IBM Selectric math ball and typed the equations flawlessly. Then laser printers became affordable in 1980 with various UNIX equation hacks. Until Knuths magnus opus TeX.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by Finnucane on Monday May 23, 2022 @03:30PM
(#31483842)
The Selectric came out in 1961, after this paper.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by Fwirt on Monday May 23, 2022 @03:26PM
(#31483798)
There were some interesting Selectric balls, e.g. one specifically for writing APL! One of my CS professors wrote his dissertation on something to do with APL and had a copy of the manuscript and an APL type ball that he liked to show off.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by greggsy on Monday May 23, 2022 @06:04PM
(#31485380)
I was wondering the same, until I realised that typewriters were presumably also sold in Greece.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by wrs on Monday May 23, 2022 @03:02PM
(#31483539)
In addition to Selectric symbol balls, you could use a "normal" typewriter with a set of extra symbols on tiny plastic sticks. You would place the symbol head on the stick in the way of the typewriter's strike.
I found a Math Overflow thread full of stories about this: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/19930/writing-papers-in-p...
And see page 7 of this for pictures: https://etconline.org/backissues/ETC099.pdf
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by drfuchs on Monday May 23, 2022 @04:11PM
(#31484232)
Indeed, pre-TeX, Phyllis Winkler prepared all of Knuth's papers using TYPIT sticks for all the math symbols. Unfortunately, I didn't nab her typewriter and TYPIT box after her retirement, but here's a good set of photos and explanation: https://twitter.com/mwichary/status/1098850604640755712?lang...
Also, a TYPIT advertisement on the bottom left of the third page of https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=6500767
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by jhfdbkofdchk on Monday May 23, 2022 @02:29PM
(#31483116)
I don't know how NASA did it, but in the 60s and 70s the IBM Selectric typewriters had those replaceable balls and you could swap one in with special math symbols on it.
https://www.duxburysystems.org/downloads/library/texas/apple...
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/19930/writing-papers-in-p...
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by mindcrime on Monday May 23, 2022 @02:44PM
(#31483308)
Heh, that's a really interesting question. It's easy to forget that not everybody lived in the world of PC's running TeX / LaTeX, and Postscript enabled laser printers, etc. I have no idea how math got typeset back in those days... I'm too young to have any appreciation for that era in that regard.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by bombcar on Monday May 23, 2022 @03:28PM
(#31483818)
TeX was specifically written because Knuth was unhappy when his books went from being delicately hand-set by someone to being produced by a computer.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by ncphil on Monday May 23, 2022 @11:05PM
(#31487573)
It was the transition of commercial printing technology from "hot lead" typesetting machines (big brothers of the Linotype beasts I helped maintain while in college) to photo-offset, during which the fonts Knuth loved got "left behind" (as so often happens as proprietary tech evolves), that led him to write his own typesetting system. In the early 90s I used both vde with troff and TeX through grad school on a Kaypro 1 running CP/M. TeX was definitely the superior system for the kind of research papers I was writing (Chicago Style cites, mixed Latin and Greek text, annotated bibliographies).
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by kevin_thibedeau on Monday May 23, 2022 @05:31PM
(#31485012)
There were typewriters with math symbols:
https://www.mrmrsvintagetypewriters.com/products/hermes-3000...
Notably, Dijkstra used a modified Hermes with a mixture of different type bars to get the output he wanted in his earlier EWDs.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by curiousgal on Monday May 23, 2022 @01:39PM
(#31482250)
Thanks, the tone of voice in the video was very reminiscent of those ASMR videos which I abhor.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by mindcrime on Monday May 23, 2022 @01:42PM
(#31482305)
Yeah, I've often wondered if that's her normal speaking voice, or if she adopts that particular tone just for her videos.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by noizejoy on Monday May 23, 2022 @03:37PM
(#31483921)
I also wonder what the correlation might be, between such “wondering” about somebody’s speaking voice and the gender of the speaker.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by ARandomerDude on Monday May 23, 2022 @03:49PM
(#31484038)
Right. If you've ever thought somebody sounded weird it's because you're a biggot/racist/sexist/homophobe/other-insult-here and it definitely could not possibly be that the person just sounded a bit strange to you.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by noizejoy on Monday May 23, 2022 @06:12PM
(#31485469)
It’s less about the thinking and more about the unfiltered blurting out such (when they are personal and/or unkind) thoughts in public.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by curiousgal on Monday May 23, 2022 @05:36PM
(#31485066)
The funny part is that I'm a woman myself haha I guess I'm a misogynist!
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by aaaaaaaaaaab on Monday May 23, 2022 @05:59PM
(#31485324)
Internalized oppression!
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by noizejoy on Monday May 23, 2022 @06:09PM
(#31485425)
In my own experience (and being male), I’ve found myself compelled to remind women team members not to be more critical (and/or less forgiving) of each other than they are of male colleagues. Because it happened somewhat regularly.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by mindcrime on Monday May 23, 2022 @03:52PM
(#31484066)
I don't know. I can off-hand think of exactly two Youtubers that I am familiar with, who frequently get comments about how their voice would make good ASMR audio, etc. One is male (the guy from Far North Bushcraft and Survival) and the other is female (Tibees). shrug
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by noizejoy on Monday May 23, 2022 @06:15PM
(#31485502)
This parent comment didn’t seem to be an obvious complimentary comment, like the one’s you’re referencing.
Re:I found Katherine Johnson's calculations at NASA [video]
by cryptonector on Tuesday May 24, 2022 @01:44AM
(#31488422)
I don't see how you get that. Some people do adopt a particular voice when they narrate, and it's neither a good thing nor a bad thing, but it can be interesting.
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19980227091