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).

correction

as it represents 19 units should be 10 units

Stephen sais

'Astronomic cycles are a big part of the Metric systems I've studied, but also such factors as the relative ratio differential's of orbiting bodies such as the Earth around the Sun being the elliptical factor 24/25, which shows up in the measurement of the Sun's diameter at Apogee and Perigee near the Solstice points of the Earth's orbit. And also the ratio 25/22 in the Moon's diameter measurements during it's elliptical orbital cycle. These ancient astronomers had a very different way of calculating these factors than are used today to express them. I'm also wondering now how you or A.Thom reconcile the differential of a Saros period of 6600 days, with it's actual periodicity of 6585 1/3rd. days. That is a differential of close to 440/439 ratio. Does this ratio ever pop up in your equations? '

yes the ratio's are all important of course.

The reconciling number is 5280/360 = 14.666r days and this divided by 22/7 gives 4.666r so the circ less diam is 10 a sacred number according to Thom.

This gives the ratio of 449 to 450 and also another ratio of 223 to 224.5 or 446 to 449 using the adjustment of one lunation.

So all natural numbers.

We know the speed of light is in the metre and now have the technology to calculate it. The fact that they used natural ratios possibly explains why this number(the speed of light) is apparent in your workings because it certainly is.

39.375 is very interesting because when i see a number like this it will always represent another number when a comparative is available using a simple a-b=c test dividing c into a and b.

The comparative is obviously the metre at 39.37

A 39.375 - B 39.37 = C 0.005

a/c = 7875

B/c = 7874.

These numbers can be investigated

7875 / 7 = 1125 so base 7 is in there so we are looking at a diamster using 22/7 so the circle is 24750 and circ minus diam is 16875 keep dividing by 5 to hit base 3. but we are looking for 450

24750 / 11 = 2250 / 5 = 450

There it is.

using the eclipse rato produces a comparative of 24695 and a difference of 55. This is the imperial system.

7874 is more interesting

It only divides by 2 to give 3937

This divides by 10/9 or 1.1111111r to give 3543.3 and takes us straight into Jim Wakefield territory.

The astronomical cycles you refer to are also within the canonical numbers as 24/25 often descibed as the Roman foot but is actually the Welsh (Druidic) system and 100/88 - this is the imperial turned to the sacred - but i have it as 100/99 or 1.010101010101010 in decimal notation, just up one notch. I was not aware of these cycles till you pointed them out, so thank you for sharing.

88 days is the Mecury orbit. or 4 Pi weeks where pi is 22/7 giving 88 days.

So our calculations converge.

Also 39.37 is a scalar factor and to use it to relate the metre to the foot seems to be a complete misundertanding of what is happening. 39.60 seems to be the correct factor to me at any rate.

The ratios quite scarily all seem to indicate design by higher intelligence especially concerning the SOL - i have a open mind on this.

If you take 132000000 feet (Michell) and divide it by 39.60 and multiply it by 39.37 you get 131233333.3 feet this is 24854.79798 the polar circumference.

In inches it is 1574800000 / 40000000 = 39.37. the modern metre.

So the ancients knew the metre and used it at the GP to represent the polar circ and the equatorial circ is represented at the GP by the imperial using the eclipse calc to produce the ratio that gives 24901 miles at the equator. It all works using Michell's system with a few tweaks here and there. This is in my latetst book but I have only figured out why since i published it.

The question is always why as you so eloquently put when addressing Neal's conclusions.

The great delight to me is that the metric system is actually a scaled down version of the imperial system and all the imperial numbers work in it, quel domage pour les francais!! One metre represents 39.60 units.

Note: Michell's 132000000 is 1000000 units of 132 feet and this again is Jim Wakefield and also a sacred circumference because it is 1000000 units in the circle. It is also Thom related because the Aubrey circle is 132 megalithic Thom rods.

Pour les Francais.

Stonehenge is 897.60 feet at the Aubrey circle.

This is 10771.20 imperial inches.

The metre is 39.60 x 2.525252525252 centimetres.

The aubrey circle is 10771.20 inches x 2.5252525252525 metric units

10771.20 x 2.525252525252525r = 27200 units -

2.5252525225r is actually 2.5 x 100/99 the ratios governing the imperial and metric (sacred) systems.

Stephen i also hear what you say about coinage systems being astronomically related.

Our old systems was based on Babylonian floating point maths where 1.1.1.1 represents 450 as follows

1 pound 240 pence

1 ten shiing note 120 pence

1 five bob crown 60 pence

1 half crown 30 pence

total 450 and the first two are 360 and we gave this system up when no one else except us could understand it!! Great for mental agility.All base 60.

My ideas are based on two units 14.666r the eclipse unit and 15.84 the venus unit. They are imperial units.

They are easily identifies as 5280/360 and 5280 / 333.3333r

14.666r is tricky but the other one has Jim Wakefield written all over it as /12 = 1.32.

What this represents as 5280 / 1584 is 3/10ths of one day.

This means Jiom's unit represents 3/120ths of one day and this is 6 minutes ( this is using the conclusion in my first book that the mile can represent one day in time.)

So Jim's unit is 0.025 of one day and this is 36 minutes.

This system can be taken down to the second to find the barleycorn

5280 / 86400 = 0.0611111r x 6 = 0.36666r the barleycorn x 10 = 3.6666r the minute ( in the first book ) x 1440 = 5280 the mile.

So the mile represents one day in Babylonian time.

It was a proposal in my first book but it is a proof now. I hope this explains better where i am coming from.

The reason I quote Jim Wakefield so much is because he has had his paper 'Rollright to Stonehenge' accepted by the scientific branch of the European Association of Archaeologists' a giant leap for metrologists taken from pseudo science to science at the drop of a hat. he deserves as much recognition as he can get and more.

Jim is no slouch whn it comes to GP metrology either, I have read as much of his work as i can lay my hands on, Rollright to SH is golddust.

It is important to understand what you are looking at when you see these units in metric form.

0.0611111r as one second in time is 605/10000 x 100/99.

605 is 121 x 5 and 121 is 11x11

99 is 9 x 11

So the unit is

(11x11x5)/(9 x 11) x (100/10000) it is a far cry from 0.061111r

So when i say they didn't do metric they absolutely did but in a different format.

Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 02-Jan-18 12:07 by DavidK.

as it represents 19 units should be 10 units

Stephen sais

'Astronomic cycles are a big part of the Metric systems I've studied, but also such factors as the relative ratio differential's of orbiting bodies such as the Earth around the Sun being the elliptical factor 24/25, which shows up in the measurement of the Sun's diameter at Apogee and Perigee near the Solstice points of the Earth's orbit. And also the ratio 25/22 in the Moon's diameter measurements during it's elliptical orbital cycle. These ancient astronomers had a very different way of calculating these factors than are used today to express them. I'm also wondering now how you or A.Thom reconcile the differential of a Saros period of 6600 days, with it's actual periodicity of 6585 1/3rd. days. That is a differential of close to 440/439 ratio. Does this ratio ever pop up in your equations? '

yes the ratio's are all important of course.

The reconciling number is 5280/360 = 14.666r days and this divided by 22/7 gives 4.666r so the circ less diam is 10 a sacred number according to Thom.

This gives the ratio of 449 to 450 and also another ratio of 223 to 224.5 or 446 to 449 using the adjustment of one lunation.

So all natural numbers.

We know the speed of light is in the metre and now have the technology to calculate it. The fact that they used natural ratios possibly explains why this number(the speed of light) is apparent in your workings because it certainly is.

39.375 is very interesting because when i see a number like this it will always represent another number when a comparative is available using a simple a-b=c test dividing c into a and b.

The comparative is obviously the metre at 39.37

A 39.375 - B 39.37 = C 0.005

a/c = 7875

B/c = 7874.

These numbers can be investigated

7875 / 7 = 1125 so base 7 is in there so we are looking at a diamster using 22/7 so the circle is 24750 and circ minus diam is 16875 keep dividing by 5 to hit base 3. but we are looking for 450

24750 / 11 = 2250 / 5 = 450

There it is.

using the eclipse rato produces a comparative of 24695 and a difference of 55. This is the imperial system.

7874 is more interesting

It only divides by 2 to give 3937

This divides by 10/9 or 1.1111111r to give 3543.3 and takes us straight into Jim Wakefield territory.

The astronomical cycles you refer to are also within the canonical numbers as 24/25 often descibed as the Roman foot but is actually the Welsh (Druidic) system and 100/88 - this is the imperial turned to the sacred - but i have it as 100/99 or 1.010101010101010 in decimal notation, just up one notch. I was not aware of these cycles till you pointed them out, so thank you for sharing.

88 days is the Mecury orbit. or 4 Pi weeks where pi is 22/7 giving 88 days.

So our calculations converge.

Also 39.37 is a scalar factor and to use it to relate the metre to the foot seems to be a complete misundertanding of what is happening. 39.60 seems to be the correct factor to me at any rate.

The ratios quite scarily all seem to indicate design by higher intelligence especially concerning the SOL - i have a open mind on this.

If you take 132000000 feet (Michell) and divide it by 39.60 and multiply it by 39.37 you get 131233333.3 feet this is 24854.79798 the polar circumference.

In inches it is 1574800000 / 40000000 = 39.37. the modern metre.

So the ancients knew the metre and used it at the GP to represent the polar circ and the equatorial circ is represented at the GP by the imperial using the eclipse calc to produce the ratio that gives 24901 miles at the equator. It all works using Michell's system with a few tweaks here and there. This is in my latetst book but I have only figured out why since i published it.

The question is always why as you so eloquently put when addressing Neal's conclusions.

The great delight to me is that the metric system is actually a scaled down version of the imperial system and all the imperial numbers work in it, quel domage pour les francais!! One metre represents 39.60 units.

Note: Michell's 132000000 is 1000000 units of 132 feet and this again is Jim Wakefield and also a sacred circumference because it is 1000000 units in the circle. It is also Thom related because the Aubrey circle is 132 megalithic Thom rods.

Pour les Francais.

Stonehenge is 897.60 feet at the Aubrey circle.

This is 10771.20 imperial inches.

The metre is 39.60 x 2.525252525252 centimetres.

The aubrey circle is 10771.20 inches x 2.5252525252525 metric units

10771.20 x 2.525252525252525r = 27200 units -

**Vive Le Thom**!!.2.5252525225r is actually 2.5 x 100/99 the ratios governing the imperial and metric (sacred) systems.

Stephen i also hear what you say about coinage systems being astronomically related.

Our old systems was based on Babylonian floating point maths where 1.1.1.1 represents 450 as follows

1 pound 240 pence

1 ten shiing note 120 pence

1 five bob crown 60 pence

1 half crown 30 pence

total 450 and the first two are 360 and we gave this system up when no one else except us could understand it!! Great for mental agility.All base 60.

My ideas are based on two units 14.666r the eclipse unit and 15.84 the venus unit. They are imperial units.

They are easily identifies as 5280/360 and 5280 / 333.3333r

14.666r is tricky but the other one has Jim Wakefield written all over it as /12 = 1.32.

What this represents as 5280 / 1584 is 3/10ths of one day.

This means Jiom's unit represents 3/120ths of one day and this is 6 minutes ( this is using the conclusion in my first book that the mile can represent one day in time.)

So Jim's unit is 0.025 of one day and this is 36 minutes.

This system can be taken down to the second to find the barleycorn

5280 / 86400 = 0.0611111r x 6 = 0.36666r the barleycorn x 10 = 3.6666r the minute ( in the first book ) x 1440 = 5280 the mile.

So the mile represents one day in Babylonian time.

It was a proposal in my first book but it is a proof now. I hope this explains better where i am coming from.

The reason I quote Jim Wakefield so much is because he has had his paper 'Rollright to Stonehenge' accepted by the scientific branch of the European Association of Archaeologists' a giant leap for metrologists taken from pseudo science to science at the drop of a hat. he deserves as much recognition as he can get and more.

Jim is no slouch whn it comes to GP metrology either, I have read as much of his work as i can lay my hands on, Rollright to SH is golddust.

It is important to understand what you are looking at when you see these units in metric form.

0.0611111r as one second in time is 605/10000 x 100/99.

605 is 121 x 5 and 121 is 11x11

99 is 9 x 11

So the unit is

(11x11x5)/(9 x 11) x (100/10000) it is a far cry from 0.061111r

So when i say they didn't do metric they absolutely did but in a different format.

Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 02-Jan-18 12:07 by DavidK.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.