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...
Alignements du Vieux-Moulin
Alignements du Vieux-Moulin is a monument in Bretagne, France, thought to be Neolithic.
Coordinates
47.606274,-3.119612
Alignements du Vieux-Moulin consists of a row of six stones varying in height from 2m to 4m, and they are grouped in pairs with pairs of stones angled at 90°, 73° and 63°.
Also, in this area of France is the Neolithic monuments Gravinis and Carnac at an angle of 14° and 30° towards the southeast.
14° Gravinis
30° Carnac
Interpretation
It is possible that the angles in pairs, angle to the ground, and height may show its purpose. The following are their angles in pairs multipled.
12×13=156
8×10=80
6×90=540
23×10=230 separation angles
If the angles in pairs (from above) are multipled by their angles north then a number of 64268 is produced, if this is divided by 3600 a possible right ascension of 17hr 51.133' is produced or 267.78° as an angle.
((63×156)+(73×80)+(90×540))=64268
÷ 3600 =17hr 51m 13.3s
Or
267.78°
Another way would be to interpret the separation angles, which are 23°, 10°, 10° or because they are 63° and 73° at 10° separation this could be considered as (10×3)+(10×3)=60. The purpose of the 23° is then 2×(3×10)=60.
From the following which is a possible celestial connection the coordinates in degrees multipled and divided by the polar distance in kms gives a number of 2.6778 which is exactly 1/100 of 267.78° from the right ascension above.
Eta Arae
Right ascension 16h 49m 47.15653s
Declination –59° 02′ 28.9575″
253.036×59.04138=14939.59
40007÷(14939.59)=2.6778
It is also possible that Eta Arae is the associated star with a difference of
1hr 1m 26.143s by 0° 57' 31.0535"
Or
267.78-253.036=14.744°
60-59.04138=0.95862°
This is quite a big difference for right ascension, so using the two angles produced from the difference as sides in a triangle an angle of 3.72° is produced, with a perimeter of 30.48 and area of 7.07.
It is possible this is some measurement for feet/degrees, and it is forward aligned but doesn't include drift even if it is quite small.
(There is a connection with 30.48 to a month and a distance of a mile).
Also, a number could be obliquity if using the above two angles as if part of obliquity and then subtracted, a duration is obtained of about 126 years.
23.26778-23.253036=0.014744
(0.014744÷1.2)×10250=125.94
=125.94 years
This then connects to the difference from Eta Arae of 1m 26s, leaving 1hr right ascension.
This then suggests a unit of one or one itself or points towards the declination difference of 0.95862.
Eta Arae drift
+0.0069194°/1000 years
60-59.04138=0.95862
If obliquity produces a year of 6203 bc, then the difference off from 1985 to mid point of obliquity is 1568.25, but this is 55 years short.
23.253−23.4366=0.1836
0.1836÷1.2=0.153
0.153×10250=1568.25
(1568.25+1985+6642)−10250=-55
With a proximity to the monument Gravinis and a number associated with it of 4655 bc, the difference could equate to the obliquity difference of 1568 with a 20-year difference.
6203-4655=1548
From the year 6203, bc drift can be added, bringing it to about 1.
+0.0069194×6.203=0.04292
0.04292+0.95862=1.00154
(+0.0069194°/1000 years)
(60-59.04138=0.95862)
From 1.00154° obliquity a year is produced and peak obliquity is subtracted giving a date of 1912.
8554.82−6642=1912.82
Conclusion
The year 1912 is unconnected to any astrological events but is very similar to a number equal to 1000 cubits.
1.912×1000=1912
(The cubit has been shown to have been derived in the 27th century bc).
Without drift then obliquity gives the difference in years between maximum tilt and mid point obliquity, a year of 6203 bc is obtained and it is from this number that drift can be added to give the 1000 cubits.
(1000×(1/0.523)) or (3600+55×(0.523))
Two angles originally of the different sites were 14°/30°, the 30° has been used, and the 14° was the difference in degrees between the two right ascension points.
From earlier the addition of drift rounds, the number to about 1, with the site also in the shape of a '1', suggests obliquity is correct. The astrological connection to Eta Arae is correct as it gives the obliquity, but the year of 6203 bc is incorrect as it suggests to something that doesn't exist at that time connecting to Gravinis.
Alignements du Vieux-Moulin is a monument in Bretagne, France, thought to be Neolithic.
Coordinates
47.606274,-3.119612
Alignements du Vieux-Moulin consists of a row of six stones varying in height from 2m to 4m, and they are grouped in pairs with pairs of stones angled at 90°, 73° and 63°.
Also, in this area of France is the Neolithic monuments Gravinis and Carnac at an angle of 14° and 30° towards the southeast.
14° Gravinis
30° Carnac
Interpretation
It is possible that the angles in pairs, angle to the ground, and height may show its purpose. The following are their angles in pairs multipled.
12×13=156
8×10=80
6×90=540
23×10=230 separation angles
If the angles in pairs (from above) are multipled by their angles north then a number of 64268 is produced, if this is divided by 3600 a possible right ascension of 17hr 51.133' is produced or 267.78° as an angle.
((63×156)+(73×80)+(90×540))=64268
÷ 3600 =17hr 51m 13.3s
Or
267.78°
Another way would be to interpret the separation angles, which are 23°, 10°, 10° or because they are 63° and 73° at 10° separation this could be considered as (10×3)+(10×3)=60. The purpose of the 23° is then 2×(3×10)=60.
From the following which is a possible celestial connection the coordinates in degrees multipled and divided by the polar distance in kms gives a number of 2.6778 which is exactly 1/100 of 267.78° from the right ascension above.
Eta Arae
Right ascension 16h 49m 47.15653s
Declination –59° 02′ 28.9575″
253.036×59.04138=14939.59
40007÷(14939.59)=2.6778
It is also possible that Eta Arae is the associated star with a difference of
1hr 1m 26.143s by 0° 57' 31.0535"
Or
267.78-253.036=14.744°
60-59.04138=0.95862°
This is quite a big difference for right ascension, so using the two angles produced from the difference as sides in a triangle an angle of 3.72° is produced, with a perimeter of 30.48 and area of 7.07.
It is possible this is some measurement for feet/degrees, and it is forward aligned but doesn't include drift even if it is quite small.
(There is a connection with 30.48 to a month and a distance of a mile).
Also, a number could be obliquity if using the above two angles as if part of obliquity and then subtracted, a duration is obtained of about 126 years.
23.26778-23.253036=0.014744
(0.014744÷1.2)×10250=125.94
=125.94 years
This then connects to the difference from Eta Arae of 1m 26s, leaving 1hr right ascension.
This then suggests a unit of one or one itself or points towards the declination difference of 0.95862.
Eta Arae drift
+0.0069194°/1000 years
60-59.04138=0.95862
If obliquity produces a year of 6203 bc, then the difference off from 1985 to mid point of obliquity is 1568.25, but this is 55 years short.
23.253−23.4366=0.1836
0.1836÷1.2=0.153
0.153×10250=1568.25
(1568.25+1985+6642)−10250=-55
With a proximity to the monument Gravinis and a number associated with it of 4655 bc, the difference could equate to the obliquity difference of 1568 with a 20-year difference.
6203-4655=1548
From the year 6203, bc drift can be added, bringing it to about 1.
+0.0069194×6.203=0.04292
0.04292+0.95862=1.00154
(+0.0069194°/1000 years)
(60-59.04138=0.95862)
From 1.00154° obliquity a year is produced and peak obliquity is subtracted giving a date of 1912.
8554.82−6642=1912.82
Conclusion
The year 1912 is unconnected to any astrological events but is very similar to a number equal to 1000 cubits.
1.912×1000=1912
(The cubit has been shown to have been derived in the 27th century bc).
Without drift then obliquity gives the difference in years between maximum tilt and mid point obliquity, a year of 6203 bc is obtained and it is from this number that drift can be added to give the 1000 cubits.
(1000×(1/0.523)) or (3600+55×(0.523))
Two angles originally of the different sites were 14°/30°, the 30° has been used, and the 14° was the difference in degrees between the two right ascension points.
From earlier the addition of drift rounds, the number to about 1, with the site also in the shape of a '1', suggests obliquity is correct. The astrological connection to Eta Arae is correct as it gives the obliquity, but the year of 6203 bc is incorrect as it suggests to something that doesn't exist at that time connecting to Gravinis.
It is possible Alignements du Vieux-Moulin is Neolithic to about 4655 bc similiar with Gravinis but the stones were moved and modified at sometime after the 27th century bc.
Comments
Post a Comment