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
Hello David, I think I might be able to help clear this up. Take a look.

The difference in days between a Metonic cycle (same Moon shape same calendar date) and a Saros cycle (eclipse to eclipse) is 355 days: 6940 days (Met.) - 6585 days (Saros) = 355d

This difference, as you know, essentially is a period comprised of 13 sidereal lunar months, each 27.3216 days long.

So: 6940d - 6585d ≈ 13 x 27.32d

A quick double check: A Metonic cycle is about 254 sidereal lunar months (or 235 synodic months) and a Saros cycle is about 241 sidereal lunar months (or 223 synodic months). What does this really mean? It means that super-cycles of the Moon's position relative to the Sun are anchored in super-cycles of the Moon's position relative to the fixed stars. There is recurrent eternity to put it in terms of the ancient Egyptian concept of "Neheh". This is a key insight which matters to your analysis, because from it emerges a relationship which trickles all the way into the megalithic metric you have been studying.

Now let's look at how this is geometrically represented at Stonehenge (as per your expertise) and at "Khufu Akhet-Mr" ("GP"). I am using the terms "represented" as opposed to "encoded" to stay neutral as to intent for now. If these monuments were not designed with lunar astronomy in mind, then the occurrence of lunar astronomic geometry is incidental to some other choice including a mundane one let's say, but it cannot be random chance or co-incidental.

At Khufu Aket-Mr, the Met/Saros difference appears to close approximation in the side-slope length: 356 royal cubits. If you decompose this number, 356, you get this: 89/88 x 8/5 x 220.

Go ahead and compute 89/88 x 8/5 and see what you get.

The fraction 89/88 is basically a small correction factor which expresses the difference between the ratio of the two small Fibonacchi numbers 8 and 5 (which I know you recognize from the Venusian cycle) and a number close to φ.

Now, let's fly over to England...

One fourth of a Thom's Rod is 20.4 imperial inches, the same as 1.7 imperial feet.
Now what happens when we correct this length by 89/88? We get a royal Egyptian cubit according to the determination by Flinders Petrie in the King Chamber of Khufu Akhet-Mr:

89/88 x 20.4in = 20.632 inch = 1rc


Long story made even longer: One way you could conceptualize the difference between what Thom saw at SH and what Petrie measured at Giza is a reflection of what the original designers of these two sites may have meant to have represented (ie we are now leaping to "encoding" and intent): Tracking eclipses versus tracking time...

...and this takes me to yet another way you can view the geometry of Khufu Akhet-Mr:
356rc = 89/88 x 8/5 x 220rc
356rc = 89/88 x 8/5 x 8 x 27½rc

Representation versus Intent: Cubits = Days.

27½ is what you would count in days, if you followed the Moon's position on the ecliptic until it returns to a certain asterism nearby...ie any of the 12 zodiacal constellations. That 27½day period is what an ancient Egyptian could have easily observed to be an approximation to the sidereal lunar month. And there is good background (see Richard Parker) why the AE may have wanted to steer away from observing the synodic month to count time and instead focus on the sidereal month (what I have published). So, if we want to pursue intent related to lunar observations, we have still to consider that this intent nevertheless was based on different desires, different cultures, and different imaginations...hence different aspects of lunar behavior.

So the upshot is, if there was intent on the minds of both designers to enshrine a periodical aspect of the Moon, then s/he at Stonehenge was interested in eclipses and s/he at Rostau was interest in recurrent cycles of time and that's why we witness different metrics. The two metrics are however related, as demonstrated, by virtue of the fact that the relationship between the orbital mechanics of the two cycles at play are geometrically represented in a pyramid whose core triangle is golden (ie a Kepler Triangle)....i.e. in its side-slope and base.

I am less than two weeks away from publishing a paper which not only proves that Hemiunu was the architect of Khufu Akhet but also that he was probably aware of this relationship.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 31-Mar-18 18:10 by Manu.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 4712 molder 27-Sep-17 17:03
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 1084 molder 03-Oct-17 20:54
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 816 DavidK 22-Dec-17 23:40
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 605 magisterchessmutt 25-Dec-17 16:52
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 486 magisterchessmutt 25-Dec-17 17:20
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 522 DavidK 27-Dec-17 16:42
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 464 magisterchessmutt 28-Dec-17 02:37
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 516 magisterchessmutt 28-Dec-17 05:35
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 539 DavidK 28-Dec-17 14:21
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 406 DavidK 19-Jan-18 13:05
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 432 molder 19-Jan-18 22:57
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 401 DavidK 21-Jan-18 22:27
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 407 molder 22-Jan-18 00:13
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 405 DavidK 22-Jan-18 09:55
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 351 cloister 22-Jan-18 11:01
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 339 DavidK 22-Jan-18 12:30
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 327 cloister 22-Jan-18 12:40
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 348 DavidK 22-Jan-18 13:15
Stonehenge, Brodgar Ring and Thom 443 DavidK 22-Jan-18 13:32
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 347 cloister 22-Jan-18 16:34
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 324 DavidK 17-Mar-18 17:24
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 389 DavidK 17-Mar-18 17:30
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 578 DavidK 03-Jan-18 23:58
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 447 DavidK 05-Jan-18 18:27
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 452 DavidK 05-Jan-18 20:55
Re: Michell's Canon of Ancient Measure 372 DavidK 05-Jan-18 23:48
Re: Michell's Canon of Ancient Measure 366 molder 06-Jan-18 01:18
Re: Michell's Canon of Ancient Measure 444 DavidK 06-Jan-18 09:51
Re: Michell's Canon of Ancient Measure 514 magisterchessmutt 06-Jan-18 11:56
Re: Michell's Canon of Ancient Measure 434 DavidK 07-Jan-18 11:14
Re: Michell's Canon of Ancient Measure 455 DavidK 10-Jan-18 14:23
Eclipse Measurements on Salisbury Plain. 439 DavidK 08-Jan-18 22:07
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 354 DavidK 19-Jan-18 12:47
Extracts from another website 391 DavidK 19-Jan-18 13:31
Re: Extracts from another website 346 DavidK 22-Jan-18 20:31
Re: Duplication of the cube 347 molder 22-Jan-18 23:24
Re: Extracts from another website 417 Dr. Troglodyte 22-Jan-18 23:25
Re: Extracts from another website 422 DavidK 23-Jan-18 10:41
Re: Extracts from another website 360 molder 23-Jan-18 12:10
Re: Extracts from another website 389 cloister 23-Jan-18 14:05
Re: Extracts from another website 394 molder 23-Jan-18 21:52
Re: Extracts from another website 381 DavidK 24-Jan-18 09:59
Re: Extracts from another website 289 molder 24-Jan-18 11:39
Re: Extracts from another website 361 rodz111 24-Jan-18 18:59
Re: Extracts from another website 348 DavidK 24-Jan-18 21:12
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 391 DavidK 24-Jan-18 12:03
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 337 DavidK 25-Jan-18 07:06
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 326 molder 25-Jan-18 12:19
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 337 molder 25-Jan-18 12:36
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 398 DavidK 25-Jan-18 13:50
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 327 DavidK 25-Jan-18 13:43
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 367 DavidK 25-Jan-18 09:41
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 335 DavidK 27-Jan-18 12:17
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 427 rodz111 28-Jan-18 09:54
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 324 DavidK 28-Jan-18 20:49
Re: The Saros 426 molder 28-Jan-18 23:13
Re: The Saros 378 DavidK 29-Jan-18 12:25
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 371 rodz111 29-Jan-18 16:38
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 362 DavidK 29-Jan-18 17:07
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 353 rodz111 29-Jan-18 18:04
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 353 molder 30-Jan-18 06:05
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 351 rodz111 31-Jan-18 21:24
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 347 molder 29-Jan-18 22:32
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 354 DavidK 30-Jan-18 10:06
One last shot 363 DavidK 30-Jan-18 13:40
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 450 rodz111 30-Jan-18 18:11
Whay lies between SH and the GP? 338 DavidK 31-Jan-18 07:00
The Megalithic and Saxon Yard Relationship 385 DavidK 31-Jan-18 10:02
Re: The Megalithic and Saxon Yard Relationship 293 DavidK 31-Jan-18 21:12
Re: The Megalithic and Saxon Yard Relationship 315 cloister 31-Jan-18 21:28
Re: The Megalithic and Saxon Yard Relationship 328 DavidK 01-Feb-18 08:49
Re: The Megalithic and Saxon Yard Relationship 355 cloister 01-Feb-18 09:39
Re: The Megalithic and Saxon Yard Relationship 403 DavidK 01-Feb-18 10:05
Re: The Megalithic and Saxon Yard Relationship 332 cloister 01-Feb-18 12:01
Re: The Megalithic and Saxon Yard Relationship 337 DavidK 01-Feb-18 14:44
Re: The Megalithic and Saxon Yard Relationship 343 cloister 01-Feb-18 20:23
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 403 DavidK 29-Jan-18 19:39
The New SH GP calculator 365 DavidK 02-Feb-18 10:04
The Basic Model 366 DavidK 02-Feb-18 10:40
For Horatech 375 DavidK 02-Feb-18 10:50
Re: The New SH GP calculator 399 molder 03-Feb-18 04:16
Re: The New SH GP calculator 402 DavidK 03-Feb-18 23:28
putting 56 back into the GP using the sekhed 324 DavidK 04-Feb-18 10:37
Re: putting 90720 back into the GP 384 DavidK 04-Feb-18 10:44
Re: putting 90720 back into the GP 428 rodz111 04-Feb-18 13:30
Re: putting 90720 back into the GP 353 DavidK 06-Feb-18 15:41
Re: putting 90720 back into the GP 511 rodz111 06-Feb-18 18:13
Re: putting 90720 back into the GP 359 DavidK 06-Feb-18 22:24
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 325 DavidK 06-Feb-18 15:56
evidence for use of base 100 at SH and GP 365 DavidK 07-Feb-18 10:49
why 2.7207 feet per Hugh Franklin? 328 DavidK 07-Feb-18 12:37
Re: why 2.7207 feet per Hugh Franklin? 431 DavidK 07-Feb-18 15:29
Standard cubit 19.8 inches 465 DavidK 08-Mar-18 09:16
The Stonehenge Cubit 20.4 inches 444 DavidK 22-Mar-18 10:03
Re: The Stonehenge Cubit 20.4 inches 414 Manu 31-Mar-18 17:21
Re: The Stonehenge Cubit 20.4 inches 417 DavidK 06-Apr-18 22:26
the Giza Template 417 DavidK 30-Mar-18 05:12
Re: the Giza Template 347 DavidK 14-Oct-18 21:57
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 332 DavidK 12-Oct-18 21:21
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 192 DavidK 16-Mar-19 23:50
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 157 rodz111 17-Mar-19 14:54
Giza Great Pyramid design Proposal 209 DavidK 17-Mar-19 10:38
Re: Giza Great Pyramid design Proposal the royal cubit 20.736 imperial inches 140 DavidK 26-Mar-19 15:07
Re: Giza Great Pyramid design Proposal the royal cubit 20.625 imperial inches 167 DavidK 04-Apr-19 13:17
Finding the ancient metre in the GP base 39.375 inches 156 DavidK 08-Apr-19 14:22
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 137 DavidK 25-Apr-19 21:52
Re: David Kenworthy Cracking the Megalithic Code 158 DavidK 21-May-19 23:59


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.