Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
And furthermore Jacob,

Who's to say that the AE's relied exclusively on purely fractional mathematical calculations at all? The instrument known as the 'Abacus' has been around a very long, long time also, as mentioned here:

[en.wikipedia.org]
quote:

<History
Mesopotamian

The period 2700–2300 BC saw the first appearance of the Sumerian abacus, a table of successive columns which delimited the successive orders of magnitude of their sexagesimal number system.[11]

Some scholars point to a character from the Babylonian cuneiform which may have been derived from a representation of the abacus.[12] It is the belief of Old Babylonian[13] scholars such as Carruccio that Old Babylonians "may have used the abacus for the operations of addition and subtraction; however, this primitive device proved difficult to use for more complex calculations".[14]
Egyptian

The use of the abacus in Ancient Egypt is mentioned by the Greek historian Herodotus, who writes that the Egyptians manipulated the pebbles from right to left, opposite in direction to the Greek left-to-right method. Archaeologists have found ancient disks of various sizes that are thought to have been used as counters. However, wall depictions of this instrument have not been discovered.[15]>

Should it be any further wonder why the art of writing down numerical values in terms of later Greek letters, words, and phrases, should be termed not numerology as so many ascribe it as being, but the name Ipsosephia, meaning "pebble counting".

Cheers,

Stephen



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 19-Mar-17 16:00 by magisterchessmutt.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
HANDS OF TIME: 220 x 280 or BETTER YET: 55 x 70 414 PhiPIandI 17-Mar-17 22:50
Re: HANDS OF TIME: 220 x 280 or BETTER YET: 55 x 70 82 magisterchessmutt 18-Mar-17 03:07
Re: HANDS OF TIME: 220 x 280 or BETTER YET: 55 x 70 64 molder 18-Mar-17 06:18
Re: HANDS OF TIME: 220 x 280 or BETTER YET: 55 x 70 55 magisterchessmutt 18-Mar-17 11:28
Re: HANDS OF TIME: 220 x 280 or BETTER YET: 55 x 70 66 Sirfiroth 19-Mar-17 13:21
Re: HANDS OF TIME: 220 x 280 or BETTER YET: 55 x 70 47 magisterchessmutt 19-Mar-17 14:42
Re: HANDS OF TIME: 220 x 280 or BETTER YET: 55 x 70 97 magisterchessmutt 19-Mar-17 15:52
Re: HANDS OF TIME: 220 x 280 or BETTER YET: 55 x 70 51 magisterchessmutt 19-Mar-17 06:50


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.