Down Tor Stone Circle Down Tor Stone Circle is a stone circle near Down Tor, Dartmoor. Also called Hingston Hill Cairn. Foggintor Quarry is not far to the northwest, where the stones could have been quarried, along with Down Tor, which is currently a national park. Crazywell Cross is to the north and Drizzlecombe to the south. Coordinates 50.506060,-3.994103 Description Down Tor Stone Circle consists of a long stone row with a circle of stones at the end towards the southwest. This can be considered similar to Drizzlecombe in shape and construction, and is 2 kilometers away. Measurements This tor and circle are angled at 22° towards the southwest, with the row at a length of 755 feet or 230 metres. Analysis It is possible that Down Tor Stone Circle is similar to Drizzlecombe, which was shown to be possibly connected with the golden ratio and π or 9πφ together. The circle is 40 meters wide. If using the 22° on the circle towards the northwest, then all stones pair...
Breeny More Stone Circle 
It is short of a circle and would be better described more as a row of stones with a further group adjacent to it, it could also be considered as a monument but it is also possible that there are some stones missing from it's original design.
Coordinates
51.741520,-9.375912
Description
Due to the shape, this row and group of stones could be considered as two rectangles, outer as the row plus odd stones and inner as the four which are grouped together. They produce the following angles and measurements.
57° outer
64° inner
Best fit outer
48 ft x 18 ft
864 sq ft
Best fit inner
6.66 x 8.66 ft
57.6756 sq ft
(Is there a simple calculation or visual description for the monument?)
Archeology77 ©
Breeny More Stone Circle is described as an axial stone circle and National Monument located in County Cork, Ireland.
It is short of a circle and would be better described more as a row of stones with a further group adjacent to it, it could also be considered as a monument but it is also possible that there are some stones missing from it's original design.
Coordinates
51.741520,-9.375912
Description
Due to the shape, this row and group of stones could be considered as two rectangles, outer as the row plus odd stones and inner as the four which are grouped together. They produce the following angles and measurements.
57° outer
64° inner
Best fit outer
48 ft x 18 ft
864 sq ft
Best fit inner
6.66 x 8.66 ft
57.6756 sq ft
(Is there a simple calculation or visual description for the monument?)
(1)
Using radians, as the 57.6756 number is near to 57.296 with a possible measurement inaccuracy, then dividing this number by seconds in a day gives radians÷100.
864×57.296=49503.74
49503.74÷3600=13.75104
13.75104÷24=0.57296
This could mean 1/100, in a triangle of 90° the 0.57296 as radians would equal 32.82832°
32.82832÷57.296=0.57296
From the perimeter, a measure 283.5208m is produced if subtracted from 360 as if degrees in a circle equals 76.4792°. Using this number divided by radians and then multipled by 100 gives a possible distance of 133 km at 76°.
76.4792÷57.296=1.332
1.332×100=133.2 kms
This distance and angle would put it just north of Ennis. In that area, there are multiple lakes with one group in the shape of the four stones. The other stones could be defined by some of the lakes there, but there are quite a few, which in turn could mean that some stones could be missing.
(2)
Another possibility would be to use the inner and outer angles and apply this to the areas.
864÷57.296=15.0795
√(57.296)=7.5694
Or
57×864=49248
64×57=3648
49248÷3648=13.5
13.5-90=76.5
The latter gives the 76.5 number used for the angle, showing it could be an error check.
Also, the root of the coordinates at both maximum tilt and when built, produce.
√(51.7−9.38)=6.505
51.7−9.38=42.32
So assuming this was 6.505° ago, then its coordinates would have been.
45.2, -9.496.
40075×cos(51.74)=24815.68
68.9324/° latitude
40075×cos(45.2)=28238.22
78.4394/° latitude
A difference of 9.5 kms at 45.2 increases its longitude by 0.121.
√(45.2−9.496)=5.975
45.2−9.496=35.704
Obliquity
Assuming the difference between these two numbers is obliquity and measured from maximum tilt, then the following is produced.
6.505−5.9752=0.5298
(0.5298÷1.2)×10250=4525.375
4525.375−1985=2540.375
Here, a date of 2540 bc is produced
Conclusion
What seems like an elaborate monument centred around the coordinates 52.911354,-9.127157 near Ennis which derived from 83° north (76.5+6.5=83) which uses stones to represent lakes in that area and with 6.5° rotation aligns it at 76.5° where larger lakes of a similiar pattern exist, with the monument built in 2540 bc, seems to be correct.
An analogy would be a group of people moving and expanding in size inside that time. A monument would be fitting for such an ideology.
Using radians, as the 57.6756 number is near to 57.296 with a possible measurement inaccuracy, then dividing this number by seconds in a day gives radians÷100.
864×57.296=49503.74
49503.74÷3600=13.75104
13.75104÷24=0.57296
This could mean 1/100, in a triangle of 90° the 0.57296 as radians would equal 32.82832°
32.82832÷57.296=0.57296
From the perimeter, a measure 283.5208m is produced if subtracted from 360 as if degrees in a circle equals 76.4792°. Using this number divided by radians and then multipled by 100 gives a possible distance of 133 km at 76°.
76.4792÷57.296=1.332
1.332×100=133.2 kms
This distance and angle would put it just north of Ennis. In that area, there are multiple lakes with one group in the shape of the four stones. The other stones could be defined by some of the lakes there, but there are quite a few, which in turn could mean that some stones could be missing.
(2)
Another possibility would be to use the inner and outer angles and apply this to the areas.
864÷57.296=15.0795
√(57.296)=7.5694
Or
57×864=49248
64×57=3648
49248÷3648=13.5
13.5-90=76.5
The latter gives the 76.5 number used for the angle, showing it could be an error check.
Also, the root of the coordinates at both maximum tilt and when built, produce.
√(51.7−9.38)=6.505
51.7−9.38=42.32
So assuming this was 6.505° ago, then its coordinates would have been.
45.2, -9.496.
40075×cos(51.74)=24815.68
68.9324/° latitude
40075×cos(45.2)=28238.22
78.4394/° latitude
A difference of 9.5 kms at 45.2 increases its longitude by 0.121.
√(45.2−9.496)=5.975
45.2−9.496=35.704
Obliquity
Assuming the difference between these two numbers is obliquity and measured from maximum tilt, then the following is produced.
6.505−5.9752=0.5298
(0.5298÷1.2)×10250=4525.375
4525.375−1985=2540.375
Here, a date of 2540 bc is produced
Conclusion
What seems like an elaborate monument centred around the coordinates 52.911354,-9.127157 near Ennis which derived from 83° north (76.5+6.5=83) which uses stones to represent lakes in that area and with 6.5° rotation aligns it at 76.5° where larger lakes of a similiar pattern exist, with the monument built in 2540 bc, seems to be correct.
An analogy would be a group of people moving and expanding in size inside that time. A monument would be fitting for such an ideology.
Along with the possibility that the numbers 24 and 15 could have been used as a directional marker when reaching the correct lake, due to the sea level rise and rainfall rivers and lakes could have be much larger in 2540 bc
This could also be interpretate as moving due to a volcanic eruption, which is known to have occurred twice in about 2500 bc.
In the article 'Dolmens of Spain' in particular the Dolmen de Guadalperal, it is shown as representing Mt.Vesuvius/Mt.Etna.
Dates for eruption are 2635 bc, 2497bc, 2474bc, and 2439 bc with the latter as a documented eruption.
In the article 'Dolmens of Spain' in particular the Dolmen de Guadalperal, it is shown as representing Mt.Vesuvius/Mt.Etna.
Dates for eruption are 2635 bc, 2497bc, 2474bc, and 2439 bc with the latter as a documented eruption.
The Breeny More Stone Circle is thought to be accurate as it uses the root of the coordinate differences and is dated to 2540 bc, which is coincidentally exactly 100 years before the documented eruption.
This could possibly suggest that it is incorrect in the infavour for the earlier date.
Archeology77 ©
Comments
Post a Comment