'It's generally held that the dimensions of G1 make good sense with respect to the observed ratios. However, this does not apply well to G2 as I’ve described it above. Should this specification be correct then it might be suggested that a height of 272 cubits and a base of 408 cubits would be more in keeping with the design. However, this would suggest a G2 cubit of 528mm. '
this analysis ties in with the work of Howard Crowhurst at Carnac France who has root 5 as 42500/19008
42500 is divisible by the megalithic yard and 19008 is 6336 x 3 the imperial system integrating Thom's and the imperial systems.
this version of root 5 divides into 816 to give 364.9536 x 360 x 1000 = 131383296 / 5280 = 24883.20 Michell's meridian circumference exactly.
So can the independent findings of Thom, Michell, Crowhurst, Bath, and several other metrologists all be wrong? I really do not think so. Everything can be expressed and reconciled in whole numbers
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05-Jan-19 14:56 by DavidK.