Featured Title:
Stones Playing Cards, great gift idea |
 |
| The Henge Monuments of the British Isles: Myth and Archaeology |
 |
| Login |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like your own home page, fewer ads, and your contributions link to your page. |
| Who's Online |
There are currently, 114 guests and 1 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
Moderated by : davidmorgan , TimPrevett , Andy B , Klingon , MickM , bat400 , sem , Runemage , TheCaptain
The Megalithic Portal and Megalith Map : Index >>
Sacred Sites and Megalithic Mysteries >> Stonehenge connection to the Great Pyramid
|
 |
| Page 5 of 6 ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 ) |
| Author |
Stonehenge connection to the Great Pyramid |
ledgehammer
Joined:
29-06-2011
Messages: 746
from Surrey
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 01-11-2011 at 23:23
Quote:
|
On 2011-11-01 23:12, cerrig wrote:
The dating of the Giza pyramids is a contentious issue. It is widely accepted that they are from the 4th dynasty, roughly from the same sort of period as Stonehenge, but that is a very general approximation .
The reason for this date rests mostly on some graffiti found in chambers above the supposed Kings chamber. This graffiti contains the name of "Khufu", the pharaoh who was supposed to have built the great pyramid.This graffiti has not been carbon dated, and it is suspected that it may have been forged by victorian explorers.
There are no records or accounts of the building of these pyramids, but there is a record of repairs , and some mortar from the casing has been carbon dated.
Surrounding the pyramids are various temples and buildings that have lots of dating evidence, and it's assumed that they were built at the same time.
And, basically, that's about it. The case for a 4th dynasty date is a bit thin I'd say, based on lots of assumptions.
Stonehenge has organic remains that have been dated, which tells you when the site has been used. But it is a place that has been altered several times, and it isn't possible to date with any accuracy when a stone was worked. So , while it has more reliable evidence for usage, the design and uniqueness of it's workmanship cannot be linked to any age.
While it is obvious that they are very different in many ways, they both have design features that , according to accepted theory, didn't exist at that time. Something doesn't add up?
|
|
Cerrig,
thanks for that 
I would agree in the fact that there are discrepencies, and very circumstantial links in reference to dating. With stonehenge it seems an accepted theory that the use of the site in reference to remains may have been a different phase altogether, suggesting possible invasion or migration between cultures, this was suggested between the phases of stonehenge also i.e 1,2 and 3. The dates may have been "wider" I guess.
Kev:
I hear ya chap
Tom
 Profile
 Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1722
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-11-2011 at 23:33
What I can't my head around is that meso/neolithic man may have thought in fractions of whole numbers.
Ugge brought this home to me the other night, when after a day off work (ie on the pop) he appeared with blood-stained hands and looking euphoric:-
Me: Happy All Hallows Ugge, good zombie impression! Care for a treat?
Ugge: Treat? I've just had one. Just helped deliver my first child and a half. A bouncing baby girl with an extra leg!
Me: Sounds like she's deformed.
Ugge: Nope. The shaman assures me this sort of thing is normal nowadays. You settle down with a few cattle and eventually due to in-breeding, cows with extra legs start being born. My Welsh cousin Uggy Uggy Uggy Oy Oy Oy, once had a sheep with seven legs. His relatives came from miles around to see it.
Me: What did they think of it?
Ugge: Dunno. With seven legs it ran so fast they couldn't get near it.
Me: So you're not worried about your new-born?
Ugge: No, the shaman says the same happens with us small ex-hunter gatherer clans. She's not deformed, she's special.
Me: What are you going to call her?
Ugge: Ugge, of course! Girl with an extra leg my arse! Trick or Treat on that, moron!
Profile
Reply
|
ledgehammer
Joined:
29-06-2011
Messages: 746
from Surrey
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-11-2011 at 03:02
Sem,
dont know if you read Kindle books but this one is fantastic,: the "discord of lupinda", a guy down my street wrote it but well worth a read, I can send it if needs be but very odd for a normal kinda guy working in finance....
your post resonated very well with this fantasy kindle book...
be good to hear your thoughts....
Tom
Profile
Reply
|
cerrig
Joined:
25-09-2009
Messages: 918
from Brecon Beacons
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-11-2011 at 03:30
Quote:
|
On 2011-11-03 03:02, ledgehammer wrote:
Sem,
dont know if you read Kindle books but this one is fantastic,: the "discord of lupinda", a guy down my street wrote it but well worth a read, I can send it if needs be but very odd for a normal kinda guy working in finance....
your post resonated very well with this fantasy kindle book...
be good to hear your thoughts....
Tom
|
|
I don't think the world is ready for a look inside Sem's head. Don't do it, nooohh  .
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5598
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-11-2011 at 18:52
This link has some interesting thoughts on the alignments of SH and other places.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/thot/esp_thot_11.htm
The underlying connection is serpents, imho these are the flows often called michael and mary, basically two opposing spin charges that travel upon geometry , and acting under attraction to the least resistance.
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2707
OFF-Line
| Posted 08-11-2011 at 15:52
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GxkBDJajg4
George
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5598
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 08-11-2011 at 18:36
Whoops,
Tiompan,
Did You listen to that???
Are the "Balls" his wife plays with to do with moving the stones?
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2707
OFF-Line
| Posted 08-11-2011 at 19:38
Quote:
|
On 2011-11-08 18:36, cropredy wrote:
Whoops,
Tiompan,
Did You listen to that???
Are the "Balls" his wife plays with to do with moving the stones?
cropredy
|
|
Of course .
George
Profile
Reply
|
ledgehammer
Joined:
29-06-2011
Messages: 746
from Surrey
OFF-Line
| Posted 08-11-2011 at 20:13
LOL!
Profile
Reply
|
hewpop
Joined:
29-10-2005
Messages: 41
from Devon
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-05-2012 at 11:12
Stonehenge connection to the Great Pyramid.
I am not very good at describing things in words, so I am relying on readers to examine (and verify?) some basic geometrical diagrams in which the number 2.72+ occurs naturally, and which is to be found in the geometry of Stonehenge, and in the construction of a perfect Pi-type Pyramid whose dimensions can be none other than the intended dimensions of the Great Pyramid.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/542/3627598etcyestcw.jpg/
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/441/shgpbasic2.jpg/
Petrie’s mean base side was 9068.8 inches, and Cole’s mean base side was 9069.4 inches. (home.hiwaay.net/~jalison/cole2.html).
So their base measurement differences from the geometric perfect 9068.996821...inches, should be acceptable, taking into account the weathering of the stone over the millennia etc.. No need to say that 2.720699046.. is 3 * 0.90689968...
What is surprising ( to me at least!), is that all arises from an equilateral triangle with sides of ONE unit, enclosed in a circle, and as you can see when that side of One inch is multiplied by 10 thousand, the pyramid circumference of 3022.99894... feet is obtained.
The other figure of the ‘nested’ significant hexagons produces the same result.. The outer circumference with a diameter of 1.1547.. .inches is 3.6275987... inches. The Pyramid measures in inches divided by 10,000.
If one measures circumferences in how many units there are of 0.0906899…., then you have a formula :- circumference / 0.906899… = ‘degrees’, and the outer Sarsen/lintel circle is the only circle to contain 360 of them.
The perfect Pi Pyramid perimeter contains 40,000 * 0.90689… inches, or 833.3333 * 4 * 0.906899… feet
326.483.. / 0.906899… = 360. (Using Thom’ s 120 Meg. Yds of 2.72069.. Feet)
Play around with the geometry of these diagrams. There are some hidden gems to be found.
Hugh Franklin May 2012
Profile
 Email
Reply
|
hewpop
Joined:
29-10-2005
Messages: 41
from Devon
OFF-Line
| Posted 22-10-2012 at 13:15
Can’t resist another gem.!
As 3/4 of the number of Meg Yds. in a circumference is the number of Feet in the side of an enclosed equilateral triangle, then the number of Meg Yds. in any circle divided by 22 will give the number of Rods, Poles or Perches in the side of it’s enclosed triangle. (Remember from earlier on in this posting that a MY is 2.720699….. Feet.)
Which gives 15 Poles triangle side from an Aubrey Circle of 330 Meg Yds., And a cricket pitch side from a circumference of 88 MY..
Profile
Email
Reply
|
hewpop
Joined:
29-10-2005
Messages: 41
from Devon
OFF-Line
| Posted 17-02-2013 at 12:16
There are one or two things I would like to expand on for those people who have looked at (and maybe worked on ) the diagrams I have used to emphasize the roll of 2.72… and 0.90689… in the geometry of triangles and circles, and the part that they play in the Stonehenge / Gt. Pyramid connection.
I now realise that the diameters of the two circles (and their hexagons) either side of the fundamental One unit diameter Pi circle, namely sqrt(3)/2 and 1.1547…, are ‘multiplicative inverses’ , as would be any paired diameters either side of the Pi circle, thus the inverse of 103.923.. = .0096225.., which multiplied by 100,000 is the Gt.P circle diameter before it is morphed into a square.
A 12 degree segment of the Lintel circle has 1/30th of the circle’s area, and is 282.7433… sq.ft., This equates to 38.197… sq.Meg yds. Curious that the diameter, 103.923…. ft. is 38.197… Meg.yds. The outer arc of this segment is 4 Meg yds. (Incidentally, 282.7433… ft = 103.923.. Meg yds.). The outer lintel length of this segment is 4 MY, 10.882… ft. or 12 lengths of 0.906899….ft,, so an arc of 0.906899…ft. subtends 1 degree.
So was it the Stonehengers who first used 360 degrees in a circle ?
A circle can have any number of degrees, and if multiplied by 0.906899…. will give the circumference of that particular circle. Following on from that, when the Radian of a circle (of any number of degrees) is multiplied by 0.906899…, then you have the Radius of that circle. Thus a ONE degree circle must have a circumference of 0.906899… units, and a CD of 0.25 units, and we learn that the result of CD *4 is the same as the number of degrees in that circle. (If I could do algebra all this would be so much easier on the eye !).
360 degs * 0.906899… = 326.483…, =120 * 2.72… = Thom’s SH outer lintel circumference. ( So CD is 360/4 = 90 ft or 1080 inches.)
9068.8, and 9069.4 are the mean base sides of the Gt.P as measured by Petrie and Cole. The numbers which excited my interest and supplied the common denominator and geometrical origin of the two monuments.
Hugh Franklin Feb 2013
Hugh Franklin Feb 2013
Profile
Email
Reply
|
hewpop
Joined:
29-10-2005
Messages: 41
from Devon
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-06-2013 at 17:34
It is now a year ago that I posted the address of some diagrams on the connective geometry of Stonehenge to the Great Pyramid, and a geometric origin for the Megalithic yard.. Result? Complete silence, apart from two of my own contributions., although there have been, up to the present, over 800 views since that dismal reception.
Now that the Meg Yd. ( or should I say a measure of 2.72… units ?) has risen it’s controversial head once more, (cropped up recently in ‘Solar Alignments’ in the Mysteries forum), I’ll submit the address of an album of diagrams again, to show that 2.72… units can be found from any circle and using any units of measure .
http://imageshack.us/g/1/10181376/
The number of units in a 1/3 rd of the chord CD, (which see from the drawings), is that same number of sqrt(3) units for the radius of that circle, and also 4 times that 1/3rd of chord CD will be the number of 2.720699046…. units to be found in the circumference.
As Professor Thom measured his stone circles in‘Feet’, I am not surprised at him coming across such a measure.
It would be advantageous. if the reader went back to read the post of Stonehenge connection to the Great Pyramid from the beginning, and also had a peek at my Web Site of 10-12 year ago ‘The Megalithic Yard Unearthed”.
Incidentally, has anyone an opinion on Professor D.P. Grigg’s book “Stonehenge Codes”? You can read it here :-
www://stonehenge-codes.org/StonehengeCodesFinal-2013.pdf
Tough to follow, but some interesting stuff which I know won’t please some members of Meg Portal. !!
Hugh Franklin
null
Profile
Email
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5598
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-06-2013 at 20:07
Hewpop,
Thank You, especially Your drawings.
Can You draw one of stonehenge with all of the outer aubrey holes been a huge p0olygon, with the inner faces of such been a circle, the outer edges been the points of the polygon?
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
hewpop
Joined:
29-10-2005
Messages: 41
from Devon
OFF-Line
| Posted 09-06-2013 at 09:31
Copredy. I hope I have read you a’right.
Taking Johnson’s Aubrey diameter of “87 metres +/- a few centimetres”, gives a 56 sided polygon with sides of 4.878 m., doesn’t leave a lot to play with in fitting a circle inside and tangent to the polygon.
In a triangle with sides of ½ polygon (2.438 m), radius 43.5 m, and an included angle of 360/112 (3.2143 degs.), produces an internal circle tangent to the polygon whose radius is ( 43.5 x cos 3.1412 degs), namely 43.432 m..
Thus new Diameter = 86.864 m, a difference of 0.137 m. or 13.72 cms.
A 56 sided figure is called a “Pentacontakaihexagon” Get your tongue around that!
Hope this helps.
Hewpop
Profile
Email
Reply
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2425
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-06-2013 at 09:49
Hi Hewpop,
I couldn't get your download link to work but had success with this one for Professor D.P. Grigg’s book “Stonehenge Codes”
http://www.stonehenge-codes.org/StonehengeCodesFinal-2012.pdf
Sorry that you've had no comments on your connective geometry of Stonehenge to the Great Pyramid, and a geometric origin for the Megalithic yard, small comfort I know but at least it's not been challenged. Perhaps you need a more specialised audience to obtain the feedback you're looking for?
Rune
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5598
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-06-2013 at 12:25
Runemage,
Thank You for the link to prof Griggs book.
I know for certain that the ancients didn't need mathmatics, as it is there permanately, and that fiboncci sequencing and measure to absolute perfection is there permanately.
They are assuming certain measurements, without knowing what exactly was utilised to enable a fit to what is there.
I have tried , obviously poorly to explain that stone circles are not circles , they are polygons, or consequences of overlapping polygons .
The pure polygon which SH is enables a circuler flow around it at muliple polygonal points, these nest in overlapping sequencings to produce a spiral implosion route for the flows of least resistance.
Where overlapping polygons overlap( as at the rollrights) they then cr4eate the different shapes of flows about them , as described by prof Thom
The actual measure of the fine lines available is one inch width, and I consider them to be super high frequency sheets of universal form.
Then a different form of information flows along that provided framework in variable fashion.
That variation in a universal system will always coincide with all of the consequences out in universe, it is all scalar and symbiotic in it's nature.
The measure of that framework I gave as one inch wide is even more detectable to absolute precision, this is due to the dowsing rods aligning along the face of that one inch wide signal pathway, thus from whichever side one settles upon each signal line is the actual edge of such, it took Me months to puzzle that out , as I kept getting one inch and two inch faulty measures.
The precise measure is not the self same as inchs, but if You venture into metric, as most do, the whole fibonacci sequencing becomes veiled, as it is with prof Thoms megalithic yard.
The actual measure is totally irrelevant though , as it doesn't matter, which to all of these maths people will sound bizzare, it is the consequence locally that matters, the constructions , if fitted to the natural universal matrix framework will correspond to how the solar system operates, but the visual is not the construction reason, it is to locally interact with the consequences , and how that can be locally manipulated by installing specific resistive materials that enable the local manipulations.
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
hewpop
Joined:
29-10-2005
Messages: 41
from Devon
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-06-2013 at 13:39
Thank you Runemage,
I copied the address from his 2013 edition, which doesn't seem to work on windows. but works on my google, but there doesn't seem much difference. 2012 looks the same as 2013.
My geometry is elementary. I know some names on Meg portal who could run rings around me ! I persevere with the topic 'cos it keeps a mid 80's year old brain ticking over and senility (Ihope) at bay.
Sorry Copredy. I never could keep up with your contributions. Always got the wrong end of the stick.
Hewpop.
Profile
Email
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5598
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-06-2013 at 20:30
Hewpop,
Could I post a very heartfelt...Thank You.
Your postings have been extremely helpfull to Myself.
It is My inability to verbalise due to this strange condition called dyslexia.
But , that condition has it's advantages.... and I consider that our megalithic friends may have been totally dyslexic.
Two brains in each of ourselves.
Most people are now totally operating from left brain....physical that is dominated by the five senses.
I am a neanderthall man, and proud of what I am.
Using both My brains.
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1722
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 10-06-2013 at 22:03
Runemage wrote
"Hi Hewpop,
I couldn't get your download link to work but had success with this one for Professor D.P. Grigg’s book “Stonehenge Codes”
http://www.stonehenge-codes.org/StonehengeCodesFinal-2012.pdf
Sorry that you've had no comments on your connective geometry of Stonehenge to the Great Pyramid, and a geometric origin for the Megalithic yard, small comfort I know but at least it's not been challenged. Perhaps you need a more specialised audience to obtain the feedback you're looking for?"
Thanks for the link Rune.
The more I read about Thom the more I am convinced he was correct, but for the wrong reasons. He started out asking a simple question "Did the people who built megalithic sites use a single unit of measurement?" He then surveyed sites but needed statistical analysis to determine whether, after thousands of years of minute movement by the stones in the arrangements, their original positions could be determined "as a general rule" (my quote), in order to find if this unit existed. This element of research seems to have taken over his life - not surprising, he was an engineer!
The simple fact is that, arithmetically speaking, the ratios of any lines in a circle and a square (or any other regular shape for that matter) are constant. So for any person drawing a pure circle, the diameter is always twice the radius, the circumference always twice the radius times Pi etc, etc. Maybe Thom was actually correct when, in "Cracking the Stone Age Code" (Chronicle) he said that he thought "The Boys" were doing this for pure scientific research.
Profile
Reply
| |
| Go to Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|
|
|
|
|
IMPORTANT NOTES: This site uses COOKIES. Please do not use this web site if you do not agree to our Terms and Conditions of use.
If you plan to visit ancient sites in person, please make sure you follow our Charter.
Articles, photographs and comments are the property of their respective authors or contributors, please contact them for permission to reproduce. Site design ©1997-2012 Andy Burnham.
|
Main News