hyper-correct graphic design

[gfish]

Last night I was walking by the Apple store in Oakridge Mall, and I noticed the pair of very prominent Rutherford-style atomic symbols glowing above the "Genius Bar". And it struck me as very ironic, that they would use a fundamentally incorrect model of the atom to symbolize genius.

"Ha ha", I said, "Isn't Apple silly?"

But that got me thinking -- why do we still use the Rutherford model symbol everywhere? Why haven't we come up with an iconic representation of electron orbitals? Surely a truly advanced civilization would be more correct in its iconography. (Yes, I'm still waiting for everyone to learn a sensible conlang, too.) If I was rich, I would totally fund an institute to work on improving this state of affairs.

Comments

[gfish.livejournal.com]

Not if you're going by number of (modern) users, no. Obviously alphabets rule, by that metric. But to the best of my knowledge -- and I'm a pretty big lexicographic nerd -- literally every other writing system not directly descended from the Phoenecians has been a syllabary (or a syllabary plus ideograms).

[caladri.livejournal.com]

Some of those syllabaries have been turned into abjads and alphabets over the years, though, and some modern constructed writing systems take inspiration from the Latin alphabet to form syllabaries. I'm not sure that the set of things in the state they were in when first invented, excluding their descendants, is a good way to divine a meaningful absolute human standard. I'd love to have a timeline showing the writing systems in use and their lineage, colored by type, and scaled by number of users.