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
Go to: Forum HomeBoardNew Topic

Pages: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 2 of 4
Results 31 - 60 of 111
1 year ago
gjb
cloister I've tended to move away from pure construction to measured geometrical forms, which is why I look for approximations to trigonometric ratios for the common constructional angles. My thought on the diagram in question has for some time been that this may have been one case that the ancients perceived that perhaps led them to formulate a hypothesis for a general rule applicable to r
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
In another thread (The 47th Problem), molder wrote: > People said I was dreaming if I thought the ancients used Trigonometry. I’d go one step further and venture that some people might say he was mad to do so. However, I have some sympathy with his view, but feel that the matter might be more simple than Jim suggests. In my analysis of stone circles, I have noticed that, in addition t
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
The Folkton Drums were found in Yorkshire, and it is claimed that the unit of measure they reveal was used at Stonehenge, which is about 280 miles to the south. Archaeologists have declared against Thom’s suggestion that there was a uniform or common unit - unless they’re now changing their minds - so I assume that they believe the drums to have been fashioned near Stonehenge and then traded t
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
Below is an image from the preface to my book on stone circle design and measurement suggesting that the three prominent glyphs on the Folkton Drums might be stylised representations of pi, which led to the thought that the dimensions might encapsulate both pi and the megalithic unit of measure. Analysis generated the thought that the dimensions of the drums might reflect a progression of
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- ... if you take the 2007 paper into consideration the evidence for the long foot is very well supported because it overlaps Thom's Aubrey circle analysis And this is necessarily correct?
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
It does seem to me that this may be going way beyond the evidence. I’m confident that had I suggested this there would have been contributors here informing me in no uncertain terms that it’s all due to numerical coincidence. The diameters of the drums are approximately in the ratio 40: 50: 57, but, somehow, it’s known that this was not the intention. It also seems to be known that the maker h
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
cloister Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There's nothing new in any of this. Sorry I spoke!
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
Simply to put this into perspective, we’ve effectively been discussing this in a thread for the past two weeks: grahamhancock.com In that thread, the suggestion is that there was a megalithic diametric measure (103.6mm, one eighth of a megalithic yard) that when multiplied by pi produces a foot measure of 325.5mm (12.8 inches) that was used in stone circle construction. Now, some four ye
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
My thought was that the diameter of the small drum might be one-eighth of a megalithic yard, as might the height of the middle drum, and that they could be a celebration of the values of pi. But that would make a foot of 12.8 inches. Just goes to show how wrong you can be!
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
molder Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ... they ... went one step further because to solve the problem of 'squaring a circle' a square with the same perimeter as circumference has to be created. Jim It strikes me that squaring the circle was all about the calculation of area not circumference. This certainly seems to be how it’s used in the Rhind Pa
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Egyptian pi is in your preface and Jim Wakefield (Molder) will be interested to know what you say about it. Dave In case anyone else might be interested! The Ancient Egyptians developed a procedure to determine the area of a circle by subtracting one-ninth from the diameter and squaring the result. It is not
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
molder Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Have thought about the Gallic foot for a while so for what it is worth I propose 12.672 inches and the reason it is part of the Saxon/Northern foot system of measure. Jim Thanks very much for having taken the time out to think about this. I was simply struck by the similarity between Dassié’s Gallic Foot and tw
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am currently co writhing a book with Hugh Franklin and his megalithic yard is worthy of serious study as I notice you flag root 3 in the preface to your book. Dave I have to confess to having some doubts about the intentional presence of root 3 in this, but I’ve long wondered why, by my hypothesis, the megalith
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Certainly I go with 30 stones based on this comprehensive piece of work > Dave You're right about the quality of the work. Great stuff. You then observe: > Thom gives as 125 x 3.1416 = 392.7. This divides by 30 to give 13.09 / 7 = 1.87 / 1.1 = 1.7 and this is the Thom base unit for his system
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For me proving the megalithic yard became an obsessive challenge. Dave I applaud your objective, but, surely, the way to demonstrate that Thom was right is to establish that the megalithic yard truly exists in the data and to explain why archaeologists failed to find it. That is to say, the archaeology has to pro
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is a summary of what Alexander Thom said about the people trashing his lifetime's work on megalithic stone circles. > There are 3 types of people my work has been presented to: > Those who read it, assess the evidence, and accept that my conclusions are valid > Those who read it, assess the ev
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Your survey does not look much different, is there anything between the two? Dave There’s actually a difference of a few degrees in alignment, but if you tilt one or the other then the stones line up. My design has five arcs and is a variation on Thom’s Egg-shape classification, but Thom’s design is of his specia
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
cloister I like it! I'd noticed the corollary when constructing regular polygons, but never thought about it this way, which appears to have more 'magic'!
Forum: Misc.
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Pi arcs seems to fit in with Thom's discovery of the Avebury design which is a series of arcs designed around a huge circle diameter 520 megalithic yards. The arcs turn the circle into a perimeter of 521 megalithic rods. > Do you have lengths in inches feet for meg x and meg y because I feel sure you are using t
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
cloister Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Obtaining Thoms plans from their archive at Canmore has been a bit troublesome for me, the first one, Stonehenge, took 3 months. cloister I envy your having Thom’s Stonehenge! It’s frustrating not to be able to get out onto the site oneself with a theodolite to resolve questions as they arise. Incidentally, I’m
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
cloister Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Interesting geometry gjb. Do you use A Thoms plans at all? cloister I have Thom’s major trilogy, but don’t find the few plans therein satisfactory. Years ago, I consulted Thom’s BAR publication to prioritise site visits, but I’ve been unable to obtain my own copy. Because true north is particularly important to
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DUNE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thought i would see what Google Earth's ruler > would give for the two open circles, for their > center to center distance, also as you can see by > the top pic from below the two corridors leading > to inside of the circles are aligned therefore > giving evidence of a plan. > > As you can see
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > variations in Pi are being investigated on this website and 3.1416 is a recurring one. Have you found this in your work? Dave I’ve only noticed 22/7 and 19/6, mostly the former. I believe the builders constructed what I call ‘Pi Arc Circles’ in which there are arcs on the circumference intentionally introduced t
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
molder Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Have you really studied 300 sites? Jim I’ve actually visited well over 300 sites and surveyed most of them, including Stanton Drew, Avebury and Brodgar. Not all the circles are productive - as you no doubt know, some sites are ruinous or, at least, much disturbed. Nevertheless, I’ve selected those that I feel mi
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
DavidK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Interestingly the ratio of Stonehenge to Brodgar and Avebury in Thom's books is SH 84 Brodgar/Avebury 100 Dave I have problems with some of Thom’s interpretations: Avebury and Brodgar being cases in point. You’ll appreciate that because I suggest there’s likely to have been a whole number of perimetric units
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
molder Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The French measure which you mention I call the > toise pronounced 'too-arrse' suggested to me by a > bartender in Noumea was damaged at some time and > repaired, its length is in doubt 12.672 inches is > a reasonable bet. > > Trade was and is the driver in all this and so > measures had to
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
Dave Thanks. You may have noticed that the second part of my paper on the perimetric unit has been published in the December issue of Northern Earth. You’ll be aware that one of my contentions is that there would likely have been an integer number of perimetric units between orthostats on the perimeters of all stone circles. In this case, the circumference of the Aubrey Ring would have to
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
It is generally conceded that in Iron Age Western Europe a foot measure of about 335mm (13.2 inches) was in use. The length of this ‘Northern Foot’ was an ancient unit even at that time and was eventually adopted by the Romans as the Drusian foot. The Northern Foot may not have been the only European Iron Age unit. The French archaeologist Jacques Dassié presents an argument for the existence
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
Avry While we're speculating, one might bear in mind that a radius of 100 Royal Cubits is equal to 140 Remen which might be pertinent to circular measure with a circumference of 880 Remen. Furthermore, the inscribed square would have sides of 200 Remen. Of course, we see this also operating in a circle with a diameter of 1 cubit of 28 digits having an inner square of 1 Remen. More coincidence!
Forum: Mysteries
1 year ago
gjb
I recall having read that Pliny described how an obelisk was loaded onto two barges for transport down the Nile to Alexandria. A canal was dug to the obelisk, the barges were loaded with ballast to twice the monument’s weight, they were positioned under the obelisk (presumably undercut and supported as the canal was dug underneath) and then unloaded. The Romans moved a number of obelisks to R
Forum: Mysteries
Pages: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 2 of 4