Message boards :
SETI@home Science :
Construction technics over time and 12000 miles apart.
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Larry Monske Send message Joined: 17 Sep 05 Posts: 281 Credit: 554,328 RAC: 0 |
The ratio 1.6 to 1 is used everywhere in ancient time. Divinci,s man arms extended arm to elbow 1.6, fingertip to fingertip 1.6 to the surrounding circle. Feet spead to even with shoulders 1.6, Even cubits in the bible uses this 1.6 number. That exact same formula is used in mesioamerica also. The parthanons pillars are curved 1.6 for the lenght of the pillar inwards i forgotten the lenght of them I think 80 feet. |
Larry Monske Send message Joined: 17 Sep 05 Posts: 281 Credit: 554,328 RAC: 0 |
You guys mentioned blueing surfaces and grinding them to exact size. I was a machinest in the service and helped doing every steam valve while in drydock. Carberundum and grind away measure blue again and final check and done. I did some amazing machine work on the Enterprise CVAN 65. I even got to measure gears and swipe parts inside reduction gears. Rebuilt a feedpump entirely in 24 hours with 5 other guys. All new main bearings new shafts new valves, got a comendation for that one. |
Larry Monske Send message Joined: 17 Sep 05 Posts: 281 Credit: 554,328 RAC: 0 |
There wasnt any written language for the normal populus to know only the preists and scribes knew the writings of the nobles. Most of the population was illerate at that time. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30639 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
There is great insight to be gained in why the paradox is a paradox and how the paradox works. Seeing why that particular paradox is a paradox, and what extra detail is needed to unravel that, is very significant for understanding your reality. Heck, once the man reaches less than the Heisenberg uncertainty distance for his wave function from the object, he is there. In this case he can and will reach each object. |
William Rothamel Send message Joined: 25 Oct 06 Posts: 3756 Credit: 1,999,735 RAC: 4 |
It so happens that the series you wrote may well be infinite but it converges to 1 in the limit. The paradox exists through a fallacy. The fallacy is the ignorance to realize that that series converges. It's not a true paradox. A paradox will result in a contradiction; here it is only incorrect thinking. |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
There is great insight to be gained in why the paradox is a paradox and how the paradox works. Seeing why that particular paradox is a paradox, and what extra detail is needed to unravel that, is very significant for understanding your reality. That is indeed a good effort worthy of a beer, even if you didn't quite get there... :-( Zeno's argument is completely correct as far as his argument goes. However, to complete the story, a wider view must be taken, or additional detail included. Focussing on Zeno's argument alone, indeed "you never get there". Except for this ingenious observation that introduces a new detail outside of Zeno's argument: Heck, once the man reaches less than the Heisenberg uncertainty distance for his wave function from the object, he is there. In this case he can and will reach each object. So that one definitely gains a bonus beer! The point that Zeno is (deliberately) blind to is that velocity remains constant, and that by halving the remaining distance, you are also halving the time interval to the next iteration. Hence, as each new step in the argument causes there to be yet more steps required to complete the new distance, the time intervals are similarly shortened. So... As you get to traverse ever smaller steps, you also traverse those ever smaller steps ever more quickly through time so as to maintain constant velocity. And as mentioned by our comic scientist, the series "converges" to the correct real world observed answer. Now for mathematical integration... Exactly the same "trick" is done to gain the answer there. However, to take a short cut through the Zeno thinking, there is a set formula ("cooking recipe") to do that reliably and 'easily'. In short, integration divides a calculation into infinitely thin steps, but you equally get infinitely many of them, so that you get an infinitely accurate addition of all the area under a plotted graph of whatever function. (The description and mathematical jargon are more difficult than the doing!) That must be worth sharing some beer! ;-) Cheers, Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
And to get back onto some old real world constructions: Stonehenge WASN'T built by ALIENS - Boffins' shock claim Actually symbol of complex farm-subsidy deal ... "When Stonehenge was built, there was a growing island-wide culture - the same styles of houses, pottery and other material forms were used from Orkney to the south coast. This was very different to the regionalism of previous centuries," Prof Mike Parker Pearson from Sheffield Uni explained. "Stonehenge itself was a massive undertaking, requiring the labour of thousands to move stones from as far away as west Wales, shaping them and erecting them. Just the work itself, requiring everyone literally to pull together, would have been an act of unification.†The boffins reckon the eight stones stand for different groups of Britain's earliest farming communities, with some of them coming from southern England and some from west Wales. ... Keep searchin', Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
Johnney Guinness Send message Joined: 11 Sep 06 Posts: 3093 Credit: 2,652,287 RAC: 0 |
Stonehenge WASN'T built by ALIENS - Boffins' shock claim Martin, I'm just curious. 1. What do YOU think Stonehenge was built for? 2. Do YOU believe the interpretation of mainstream archaeology and Prof Mike Parker Pearson in that news article? 3. Do YOU think Aliens built Stonehenge? Or do you think it was built by primitive stone-age farmers? 4. Martin are the people who built Stonehenge YOUR ancestors? (I assume your British) I want to know YOUR thoughts Martin, not what someone else said in some book. I don't want to hear quotes from academics. Tell me what your instinct tells you! John. |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
Stonehenge WASN'T built by ALIENS - Boffins' shock claim You asked: 1. What do YOU think Stonehenge was built for? Religion/superstition, politics. It also forms an important astronomical calendar. 2. Do YOU believe the interpretation of mainstream archaeology and Prof Mike Parker Pearson in that news article? Yes, as one plausible interpretation. As always in Science, there is likely more to the story. Just a question of how interested you are in looking. 3. Do YOU think Aliens built Stonehenge? Or do you think it was built by primitive stone-age farmers? I think our "primitives" were not so primitive... We may well be the 'aliens' if you believe panspermia is possible or likely... 4. Martin are the people who built Stonehenge YOUR ancestors? (I assume your British) I'm British which means most likely they are NOT my ancestors. (Don't mention that to the NF/BNP misguided xenophobic 'nationalist' thugs!) I want to know YOUR thoughts Martin, not what someone else said in some book. I don't want to hear quotes from academics. Tell me what your instinct tells you! My instinct is to look for and follow the evidence. There's enough dreamy Arthurian legend in that region already without wanting to write any more of it! Note that the sizes, weights, and construction are all easily within what can be expected for an 'epic work' of the era. Also note that the distribution of stone sizes fits very nicely for division of effort vs size of task for a certain size of group doing the work... The outer rings with the more numerous stones use smaller more manageable sizes than very few very 'important' stones of the centre. Looks like a few tons is 'easily' handled whereas the larger sizes of the (fewer) centre stones were more costly and hence there are fewer of those larger sizes. Still impressive stuff. Also all done over an impressively long time. Keep searchin', Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
... Stonehenge Those Wikipedia articles can be rather good. (And far far better than my old and tired history teachers were! :-( ) Keep searchin', Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
john3760 Send message Joined: 9 Feb 11 Posts: 334 Credit: 3,400,979 RAC: 0 |
Still a bit confused here!! Can the tortoise catch the bus? john3760 |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
Still a bit confused here!! Yes depending on how you can view things and under what conditions... (A tortoise can easily BEAT the buses around here! :-( ) Keep searchin', Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
Johnney Guinness Send message Joined: 11 Sep 06 Posts: 3093 Credit: 2,652,287 RAC: 0 |
The boffins rejected popular theories that it was inspired by the Egyptians, built or inspired by aliens or the site of a druidic temple in favour of the warring farmer theory. Ohhhhhhhh Chris, my friend, That's a lot of "Facts". Are you sure they are facts Chris? And just how sure are you? Hmmmmmm ..... Wikipedia says a "fact" is; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact "A fact (derived from the Latin factum) is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is whether it can be proven to correspond to experience." Ahhhhhh.... Chris just by the definition given in Wikipedia, all your "facts" are wrong. Are you really sure Chris? Are you sure we will never know why they built Stonehenge and what they built it for? I'm very disappointed with you Chris, and your British too. John. |
Johnney Guinness Send message Joined: 11 Sep 06 Posts: 3093 Credit: 2,652,287 RAC: 0 |
Keep searchin', Martin, Responding to your answers on the Stonehenge questions, thank you for answering the questions honestly Martin! I told Chris i was disappointed with him. Martin i'm also disappointed with you. I can't believe that both of you swallow the stuff being spoon fed to you by the British archaeological community. Are you not even just the tiniest bit suspicious of Stonehenge? Does it not ring any alarm bells in your head? Did you ever stand beside those stones? I did, and they are colossal! I will never forget it! Ever!! For the rest of my life i will never forget just how large those stones are! John. |
Nick Send message Joined: 11 Oct 11 Posts: 4344 Credit: 3,313,107 RAC: 0 |
Keep searchin', I've been to Stonehenge several times, the last time being about three years ago. You do get the feeling that it was constructed purely for pagan/religious reason. Buy my current thinking leans towards Stonehenge having been constructed to mark an event. The event being that a small meteorite crashed into the ground here, witnessed by the local people. They saw this as a sign coming from their pagan God. So built this contraption, we call Stonehenge, around the meteorites landing site to act as a place of homage. The Kite Fliers -------------------- Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes. |
Johnney Guinness Send message Joined: 11 Sep 06 Posts: 3093 Credit: 2,652,287 RAC: 0 |
I've been to Stonehenge several times, the last time being about three years Nick, I like the meteorite theory, its a good one! Nick i would consider your theory to be 100 times more plausable than what Prof Mike Parker Pearson says. Its a very reasonable theory Nick. But its wrong. John. |
Nick Send message Joined: 11 Oct 11 Posts: 4344 Credit: 3,313,107 RAC: 0 |
I like the meteorite theory, its a good one! Nick i would consider your theory to be 100 times more plausable than what Prof Mike Parker Pearson says. Its a very reasonable theory Nick. You were building my hopes up that my IQ had suddenly risen to 200. But its wrong. Oh well, perhaps I'ts sunk down to below 100 now...I must try harder!! The Kite Fliers -------------------- Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes. |
William Rothamel Send message Joined: 25 Oct 06 Posts: 3756 Credit: 1,999,735 RAC: 4 |
Stonehenge is easily built--perhaps by one man after the stones were laid on the ground. Perhaps by using levers and digging a hole to tip the stones into. It is a sundial sorts. |
Johnney Guinness Send message Joined: 11 Sep 06 Posts: 3093 Credit: 2,652,287 RAC: 0 |
I like the meteorite theory, its a good one! Nick i would consider your theory to be 100 times more plausable than what Prof Mike Parker Pearson says. Its a very reasonable theory Nick. Your a clever man Nick, and you use your intelligence very well. But you could use it better. Something that is far more valuable than intelligence is logic and intuition. When someone says that he is a "professor" of archaeology, and he tells you that primitive people built Stonehenge, its your own personal logic and intuition that lets you know that the expert is wrong and your right! Just because someone is a professor, and has an IQ of 1 billion, and has studied Stonehenge all his life, does not mean he is correct in his interpretation. Use your logic and intuition Nick, its more valuable than any IQ test. Your not a monkey Nick, your a child of God. John. |
Larry Monske Send message Joined: 17 Sep 05 Posts: 281 Credit: 554,328 RAC: 0 |
Here is a video on the antickytherea device reconstructed from 2300 or more years ago. The time to hand constuct this mechanism is as good as a moderm watchmaker could do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpLcnAIpVRA&feature=g-vrec |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.