|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 11, 2008 15:25:39 GMT -5
29 as the difference between G1 and G2 sides: nah, no accident i came across it unassumingly, measuring circles, doing SC's OCT ...it's a prime number, and i've seen those peek their heads out from time to time but not enough data yet to put together any pattern... just noticing they're there it's like they're being teasers in an early chapter (maybe we'll only understand their role later on) i don't know why i didn't think to reciprocate again i guess the gods were leaving you something to do i get 5.8 even, when i start at the beginning formula, and then subtract the whole number (the actual ratio still fresh in the calculator's memory) so that distant 81 yer getting, might be from a missing tail-end i get that too when i just copy n paste... giving it a hard ending ah, we're both slackers, with slacker-itis 1/3 of 100 tells us those 3 pyramids (or some 3 pyramids) are doing something on that 100 scale, like arcs angles etc further out, it's 1000... like 1000 root235 for the rectangle from www.dudeman.net/astra/giza/4445.htmlthe 555 intersection point here, on a 3000 diameter, 1500 radius arc which is 3 times 500, and that's 120 south of G1 south 220 which is 3 times 40, so now i want to look for 3 and 6000 there is a tiny sliver triangle on S1 with a (3 cubed) 27 side www.dudeman.net/astra/giza/g1s.htmlthe small side in a 27,120,123 triangle which would seem silly, if not for the numbers i suspect that duplicate digit trick might be inherent to 11 actually n therefore relevant to rounding pi just outta reach for me to crunch on tho but also, the 81, as 9x9 then 99 n then 11 again but since it's a square, i continued 440/25 = 17.6 ... / 5 = 3.52 415/25 = 16.6 ... / 5 = 3.32 ... their difference, 0.2 ... from about 1/3 of 10 ... so there's our 5 again the 88 piano keys is for what wiggy reason ? i know there's 12 half tones per octave is that the traditional 2 arms reach maybe 2 cubed times 11 yeah, A440 always made me wonder, hertz being cycles per second what were instruments tuned to, before accurate timepieces ? i wouldn't be surprised to find Pythagoras was referring to S1 etc also but it looks like from this ancient diagram he's talking about chords n waves agh, more stuff for me to read i'll never get any work done ;oP got thru page one of this thread so far jus responding to replies immediately but reflecting back on that, now that it's explained to me i do see where the earth-mars correlation is obviously intentional the satellites represent earth and mars equally, between them, like an embassy but so far i've just seen cubits relating to earth days i wonder what happens when we plug in mars days a martian day is something like 39 minutes longer ? still, my earlier cautionary conclusion, favoring the big-picture direction while perhaps premptive, premature n presumptory still valiently validly points to the big poster on the wall behind us that mighty swing arc which charts us all, the golden mean, spiral, etc in a flower, or a face, solar systems to galaxies if not thoroughly top down, it's still gotta be bottom up n so i do still wonder how those ratios etc apply to the outer gas giants these large planet things all being where nature put them and, i suspect, not so random or unique patterns from any others wish i had other planetary data to compar it to, other systems but we do have a few extrasolar planets, 2 or 3 in the same system someone should compare those numbers, extreme examples or not
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 11, 2008 15:36:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Don Barone on Jun 11, 2008 21:43:36 GMT -5
Hi all I posted this over at Graham's where we are starting a rather interesting discussion on Phi at Giza. here is my post: "Re: Golden ratio in Great Pyramid Author: Ahatmose (24.57.231.---) Date: 12-Jun-08 03:32 Hi Jim ... Speaking of The Golden Mean I believe I am the first and only one so far who has noticed that if one takes the right upper intersection of the Queen's and King's shafts and use as a line the centre of The King's Chamber and then as a final line the opposite side of The GP one is treated to a ratio, a Golden ratio. This is mainly what I had discovered before after the startling revelation from John Legon that a projection of the right shafts of The Queens and Kings meet at a point at the same elevation as the top of the pyramid. This to me was an amazing discovery by John and seemed to define several of Nicolas Poussin's paintings as well as The Wood Pentagram. However on analyzing your diagram much more has revealed itself to me. Observe this diagram ... On this diagram are some amazing things. Firstly let's take a look at distance GH. This distance is the same ( as near as I can tell) to distance AE and DF which in turn is equal to 0.618033988 of the overall distance of DC which is equal to 1.618033988 or The Golden Mean but it does not stop there. If we use distance GH as a base unit and draw a square with sides of distance GH [ square = GHJI where GH = HJ = JI = IG] we get the lower side of this square to define (apparently exactly) the bottom of a golden rectangle with overall length DC. This is extremely interesting however we are still not done. If we draw a line joining the diagonal points of this rectangle [Line BD] we define (again apparently exactly) the right shaft of The King's Chamber. As a proof of this in a triangle of sides 1 and 1.618033988 the tan angle of these sides is 31.718 and this is well within any tolerances of anyone who has ever measured the angle as it appears to vary from around 30.5 to 32.6 degrees. However we still are not done just quite yet. A line [ Line BI] joining our top right point of our rectangle and drawn to a point directly under the point where the left Kings Chamber shaft exists the pyramid [point I] appears to define again apparently exactly the right side Queen's Chamber shaft. So it appears to me that there can be little doubt as to The Golden Mean and also a Golden Rectangle being incorporated into The Great Pyramid and I think that if the drawing was exactly to scale the projection of the right side Kings Chamber shaft downward would hit the circle where line GI crosses it and the right side Queens Chamber shaft would hit point "I" exactly. Best Regards Don Barone" Cheers Don Barone
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 12, 2008 3:27:04 GMT -5
not that i'm really exactly ready for em yet, or anything but where did you get those interior measurements ? ...n while i know you like translating to inches etc what do those lengths etc work out to in cubits ? i'm guessing that circle is 300, which is 60 times 5 ...and i think there's an obvious pentagram in that ...addendum... i been staring at that butterfly for days now n i still don see the picture within the picture ;oP
|
|
|
Post by Don Barone on Jun 12, 2008 6:12:19 GMT -5
Not the best picture but remember watching the movie when he closed his eyes and smiled. Cheers db
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Jun 12, 2008 9:02:43 GMT -5
Funny, I can still see the cacoon in the butterfly and I do like your "Flower of Life" there between G1 and G2, spaceyhippie. Dead Head Charlotte
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 12, 2008 16:56:53 GMT -5
well, thank you, charlotte - by "flower of life" i assume you mean that's an actual thingy of some sorts, 3 pairs o vesica circles, rotated in a hex pattern - do go on - that was inspired by don - something about a golden rectangle implied mathematically, in that square between G1 and G2, which i didn't understand, asked for further clarification, didn't get any, assumed i musta asked it too silly, and just poked around with it myself, expecting answers any day, which none were forthcoming - so i'm a little embarassed, having just left it, n long moved onto somethings elses (it doesn't fit exactly, just outside a comfortable margin of error) - but i think i am beginning to see an upside-down squished pentagram in the butterfly now ;o) n speaking of not getting any, i been working on SC's OCT, for like a week now - n am feeling categorically ignored - simple question for anybody: in order to make L3 a straight line... what should the diameters of these circles be ? i was able to prove this larger circle is a 1200 cubit radius but those are fixed points, n fairly easy to measure considering i mean, i wonder if i've committed some kinda gaseous faux-pas where nobody is responding to me, except to pat me on the head... like i'm some silly little kis who just doesn't get... well, doesn't get any ...n no risk bein rude, now: the dude is ignoring me... i'm bein blown off... i show up with my ruler, waggin tail, n the smiles slink off, posting other places i'm patient, send em direct emails, get no reply to that either same thing happened with hendrik a couple weeks ago when i discovered 44/45 ...from a circle he celebrated... (i'm sayin i discovered it now, no one else is claiming it) no direct reply, but an ad for his book in my thread about it, eventually i am gonna pull out every one o my silly hippie hairs n weave a rope 440 cubits n suspend it from an imaginary point in the sky, 3000 cubits high above G1-G2 center there will likely be little interesting interlocking circles arcing on the ground eventually i don't care who gets credit for any of this, i just want to measure it n prove it etc ...either no one believes that, or no one's even into that... even a little silly bit... funny part is: i wonder how many are snake oil salesmen, unaware it's real magic those are the guys we name things after... thus, they're sittin silent, smilin, soakin unless there's another reason why some silly hippie offering to prove their thesis for em doesn't even get sent to the showers, left on the field til the big lights chunk off, "guys?" I'M FEELING UNDER-UTILIZED ;oP i'll post a 2nd new thread on it "over at grahams" justa rule out, as a control but my overwhelming conclusion is alotta these guys'd be happy if i just went away i mean, who do i think i am, poppin up outta nowhere, offering to prove the angles etc for free get real, eh ? *grumble*
|
|
|
Post by Don Barone on Jun 12, 2008 18:34:27 GMT -5
Relax hippie ! Many of your diagrams and such simply go over my head and if they go over my head they are probably going over a lot of other heads as well. My advice to you is to assume we are in kindergarten and you are the teacher. On stuff like yours it must be explained step by step beginning at the beginning. If you notice when I post ideas I try to do this. Step by step so that it can be followed easily. As to the golden mean and not getting back to you that is me bad. I thought it worked but it does not. I used 213/250 and got 0.852 and then took the sine of that but that was in error for 250 IS NOT THE HYPOTENEUSE as it would have been in sine. I should have used Tan so tan of 0.852 = 40.43 NOT 31.71 and the golden angle. [Golden angle is angle defined by a RIGHT ANGLED triangle with base 1 unit and side 1.618033988 units] Trust me I would never brush anyone off so if I don't respond it's usually because I did not understand and have not had time to analyze it for myself in depth. cheers Don Barone
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 12, 2008 21:04:00 GMT -5
yeah, i assumed politely as such in general for any other lifeform i may happen to courteously encounter, until they started throwin calculus at me... witta side o compliments that G1-G2 box is equally almost a hex Home site of Space Hippiebut i have no tangible reason to squish it or draw any other lines anywhere but i was assuming somebody somewhere in anomaly-land was more versed on the basics and where to start here, yer a musician: it's like trying to figure out how to play a song just by listening to the record, but having no previous intro to the theory n then once ya learn how to play it... well, it doesn't require such an expert ...there's so much i hafta teach meself, dropping everything many times... it's gotten to the point where my own thoughts are truncated by conditioning n then i feel like... man, there 10 people here who already know, but they're not telling it's the exact same thing ya say to yer little brother when ya don't want him in yer treehouse runnin around the yard, pickin up acorns... wonder why he turns out to be a juvenile delinquent n how many silly nipples before me just up n quit after about as many weeks on the impenetrable case ? n i appreciate yer musings on 213/250 but that's like one of the first things i went to look at n i can't believe... you n me... are the automatic authorities i don't even know what a slide rule is for and i can't get anybody to tell me
|
|
|
Post by Don Barone on Jun 12, 2008 22:27:40 GMT -5
Not sure if this will help at all spacey ... cheers Don Barone
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 12, 2008 23:36:28 GMT -5
is the root5 angle of a half square really 30°/60° ? i have another right triangle, right there, which i don't have a pic for yet but i stumbled across it rummaging thru SC's images directory ...and oh, it's actually from C Wayne Taylor (whom i have yet to meet) anyways, the pink circle measure angle for G2ne to G1s right angle point = (G2e,G1s) 220 + 213 = 433 G2ne ( 433, -470 ) G1s ( 0, -220 ) rap ( 433, -220 ) hypotenuse: A2 + B2 = C2 (250)2 + (220+213)2 = C2 62,500 + 187,489 = 249,989 note: only 11 from 250,000 ...a conspicuous 11 though and the square root of 249,989 is... 499.98899987899733792679274521159... = 0.01100012100266207320725478840... from a nice round 500 cubits exactly anyways... there's no way that's an accident ...the architects were artists and math geeks
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 12, 2008 23:41:40 GMT -5
rounding that 139.75... up to 140, and doubling to 280 that's the height of G1, and radius for S1 so maybe that's telling us to do a 3D object here, like another sphere n sorry, forgot image tags... install a preview mechanism
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 12, 2008 23:46:05 GMT -5
so what is the deal with that ? 250 on the short side, 500 for the angle which leaves 433 for the medium side rounding to 2/3 of 100 from 500 so maybe it's telling us a hex is here after all which... a hex is root 3, so... maybe another geometrical shape unless i'm being too rigid, in looking for perfect angles i guess i still jus don't understand that 213
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 13, 2008 3:05:39 GMT -5
and i'll just post a link to this pic i did: my hexagon worksheet www.dudeman.net/astra/giza/hex.gifn there's where i got that groovy flower from, charlotte n this is the page where i planned to post giza hex www.dudeman.net/astra/giza/hex.htmlbut i got distracted, all excited now about OCT and then get back to getting caught up in this thread it takes me awhile to read stuff, longer than most people the idea's been put forth that i may be somewhat autistic etc n while i would love to justify throwin around spontaneous swearing jus basically: i got about 15-20 minutes with any text before my eyes glaze over which is more easily accomplished as i fade off more easily into me early old age hence, i tend to be long winded
|
|
|
Post by Don Barone on Jun 13, 2008 5:43:57 GMT -5
Minor correction to The Chase Line ... cheers Don Barone PS: The new store I am working at opens today so I don't know how much time I will have in the near future so don't panic if I go missing.
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Jun 13, 2008 8:08:42 GMT -5
This "groovy" flower is the "flower of life" I meant, found in Egypt and all over the world Flower power Charlotte
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 13, 2008 22:20:48 GMT -5
here, this seems like it should be something large red circle diameters are equal to yellow hex sides
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 13, 2008 23:09:52 GMT -5
...and then. of course, the first thing i think to do is...
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 13, 2008 23:35:03 GMT -5
above: all hex lines are 20 units, and center of center dot is coords: (0,0) ...coords (X=left-right, Z=up-down), defined as: pos or neg from there... below: purple dot centered at coords: (0,10) green dot is at (10, 17.32)
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 14, 2008 0:56:17 GMT -5
just barely beginning to grasp the fundamental concept of this
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 15, 2008 4:05:01 GMT -5
...and then... i felt really silly... the yellow line is bisected by the orange line the orange circle is on the center of the yellow line the pink crossed circles are the stars of Orion's Belt but according to allison (and i'll get started on that bit, right away) ...the pyramids' centers... have a 10:11 proportion... on the 45° angle but i wonder how that changes, if 1:1 is approached closely or even met if i spin that black outline framework around to match the above circle set i already measured from G1 to G3nw and come up with about 1775 cubits centered at ( -598.75 , -655.25 ) compare G2c ( -638.5 , -675.5 ) a difference of 39.75 and 20.25 one quarter from 40 ...over 20 so, that's definitely something
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Jun 15, 2008 12:25:24 GMT -5
I don't presume you are replying to me, but just in case, I am clueless about math, but love the geometry and stary firmament.
Charlotte
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 15, 2008 18:55:47 GMT -5
it's just... that's the freakiest thingy... on the yellow and blue lines (L1, L3) from the middle orange line (L5)... which is the center star of Orion's Belt it's exact equal distance to either of the purple or green lines (L2, L4) also, it appears the red n brown line have an automatic 2:1 proportion which, if blue and yellow (L1, L3) are made parallel to each other both larger circles become 2:1 to the smaller green on the right and these are the stars of Orion's Belt SC did it with squares, and it matches proportions exactly for positioning, i'm using the same inherent scaling mechanism bottom half of this page (for now) www.dudeman.net/astra/giza/oct3.htmlextending the circle around G2 an additional 22.5 cubits ...exactly ...and it meets the ~1775 cubit line from G1se to G3se ...exactly
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 15, 2008 18:56:57 GMT -5
here, i'll post that pic again so you don't hafta scroll up
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 16, 2008 6:13:57 GMT -5
getting caught up with this thread, my witty commentary, starting on page 1 5.5 years ago, Marburger was thrilled that, in particle physics, "experiment is driving theory at the fronties, and not the other way around." resonates with me so deeply, that i am profoundly moved to forget about whatever else i was going to say when he sez, "Nature functions in such a way as to bring together the science of the very large with the science of the very small" to that, i would add: in its own sweet perhaps pre-appointed time... ...and i wonder now, when we'll find out just where we fit on this fractal... if it's a precessional clock with 2012 midnight, then i guess we have a while... just when i was thinking i may be onto something substantial, something soon and remembering we're the unsanctioned underground independent civilians every number i'm missing, and many i'm not, are measured exactly already i am making no contribution to humanity, it's like a puzzle i found ...literally, on the ground, captivating me curiosity indefinitely... but the robots are the celebrated public face ...only allowing the team that finishes first... ...instead of taking their time ...are they renting the hall ? and the inches to cubit correlation... i found a degrees to cubit correlation... which is more comprehensible/understandable... there being a mathematically valid reason for a 360 degree circle... but what again are the modern inches and meters based on, and when ? ...and i wonder, jus briefly, how did Legon come up with his royal cubits... ...yes, thank you for providing the link to this presentation... ...i feel like i'm back in jr high school again... with filmstrips... ...n that's when i think i would have prefered learning this... www.wsville.com/clive-ross-giza/Giza/08-Norsouth_files/frame.htmslide 15, conclusion: "overall length of the giza site is equal to the total length and heigh of the 3 large pyramids" aha same goes for the earth mars orbital relationships such wiggy numbers, and their inherent wigginess ...are not explored in my jr space cadet star book ! ...we need to have names for these things... that 162k as a circumference 162,000 = 2 pi radius 162,000 / 2 pi = radius = 25,783.100780887044394559169666347 = 25,783 for short ... 25 as 1/4 of 100k and 75 as 3/4 of 1k plus 33 as 1/3 of 100 or just 24,000 + 1783
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Jun 16, 2008 8:45:56 GMT -5
I very much like the first 2 paragraphs of your last post, and your mind. Pardon me.
The rest must be your and Don's work.
Charlotte
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Jun 16, 2008 18:51:20 GMT -5
Hey Spacey H. I know you were caught up on that 44 - 45 or 54?? thingy too.. if you use the 22/7 Pi given your 162K circumference... then, 162000/(22/7) = diameter of: 51545.45454545 ... [cyclic] interesting eh? then, take that & divide by 2 gives you: 25772.7272 [cylcic] look famaliar? Simon Newcomb's calculation at the end of the nineteenth century for general precession (known as p) in longitude gave a value of 5,025.64 arcseconds per tropical century, and was the generally accepted value until artificial satellites delivered more accurate observations and electronic computers allowed more elaborate models to be calculated. Lieske developed an updated theory in 1976, where p equals 5,029.0966 arcseconds per Julian century. Modern techniques such as VLBI and LLR allowed further refinements, and the International Astronomical Union adopted a new constant value in 2000, and new computation methods and polynomial expressions in 2003 and 2006; the accumulated precession is: pA = 5,028.796195×T + 1.1054348×T² + higher order terms, in arcseconds per Julian century, with T, the time in Julian centuries (that is, 36,525 days) since the epoch of 2000. The rate of precession is the derivative of that: p = 5,028.796195 + 2.2108696×T + higher order terms The constant term of this speed corresponds to one full precession circle in 25,772 years. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession_(astronomy)cheers Rob
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 16, 2008 20:23:55 GMT -5
hey, rob yeah, 44/45 is a definite acknowledgement or representation of a 360th of a circle, exactly... the sphere of G1's height: S1 (280r) at 45° NE = aG2sw (1500r) at 44° NE (clockwise from N) their intersect point is 22 cubits S and W of G1ne www.dudeman.net/astra/giza/4445.htmljust to get everybody caught up on what that is but, this new thingy... 162k so, somewhere there's a circle wherein the circumference of which demarks precession in years as cubits and as an aside a line from ~G2sw, through ~G1ne points to Baalbek (4:5 square, in degrees) so, we may have a time reference there, for that, on the clock wheel thingy and if the design maintains cheeky, the 4s and 5s clue 45 (and 360 and 10) back on track, tho ...so, now i'm thinking the degrees to cubits correlation i found at G2se (line AG, bottom half of www.dudeman.net/astra/giza/oct3.html)might be a clue where to find that circle, perhaps its center and maybe there are 3 circles from the mini OCT inside G2 25,772 - 25,783 = 11 is this the scale where the difference in pi actual, and rounding to 22/7 = 11 ? what are these numbers in other counting schemes, especially hex ? n not hexidecimal (00-FF), but simple hex (0123456) seems like it might be something very round thanx, charlotte - further insight: dudeman.net/dudeman
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Jun 17, 2008 8:17:29 GMT -5
Hi Scott, Interesting... I will have to dig deeper into your work. I have to commend you for the effort and skills you are displaying... You truly are an artist in many ways...!! I have added your site to my links page. I call you the 3D man dude...! www.2dcode-r-past.com/links.htmlet me know if it needs editing... or logo etc. I am the 2D art guy... you are the 3D art guy!! haha! But, I have to understand something... why the OCT push... I am not convinced of the connection yet... I am blank to the data... You have been really pushing this for SC ... why? There was a time a short moment ago.. that SC actually came out and said it as nothing to do with the geometry... and that was right when you and myself were trying to help him... vigorously…Now, i think he has since realized his blunder and come back in line to correlate geometry... But, this brings up many questions to ponder as to the why and how in processes undertaken to get to conclusive data... I have since stepped back... and let the data lead...wherever it leads... Although the sqrt2 [circle/square/circle] stuff really got Wendy [R&M] fired up... I took all my public info regarding down... to alleviate that whirl wind.... And, am left with a "what now"?? feeling...? Please do not expand too much on that layout… If you want to know what it is … lookup Euclid’s #47. I think we all can agree that if there is a message on this plateau.. that it might involve a clock like message of sorts.. Or, it could be zero. nothing…zilch too!!?? I cannot get past moving G2 though... i feel that there has to be another way without moving G2... And, naturally saw G2 as center spoke?? And, showed it align perfect given the formula i presented... Now, after i saw you mention that SC was going to "discover" a new sacred geometry formula... I posted what i already had shown you in my own rendition….given that was the 1/.925 ratio i found in the system and how t all aligned… I felt forced to bring it out…. Before somebody took credit for my work. So, i hope you do not think i was racing you... Or, trying to steal the spotlight… Because I let it fade..after I made my point…. I just do not want anybody taking credit for my stuff... unfairly... and, especially given that the comment of no geometry was made... But, personally… I do not want any credit at all… and would assume remain in the shadows..! like yourself. I also truly respect Don's approach and drive… he is and has been an inspiration in all this too!! So, I think I am staying away from GHMB for a while…until the winds blow through… I do not want the attention that is growing… nor the assumptions being made. As far as i am concerned... I am still clueless... and see no end solution to any of it. Therefore, it is chill time pending direction!! So, what now spacey? A 3D game of --- ? Your move… Seriously… we still ”think tanking” it? That was awesome by the way!! Truly Inspirational!! cheers R
|
|
|
Post by spaceyhippie on Jun 17, 2008 20:11:44 GMT -5
thanx rob, n thanx for the link n listing y4u take stuff down tho ? dude, oct is legit n i am amazed no one has jus simply measured as i have, as we are, currently doing, us sillies, right now, presently - the circles diagram above is orion's belt - the larger circles for G1 n G2 have a 2:1 relationship to the smaller circle for G3 - on the ground the positioning proportions are slightly different, but it all works - it's jus done in a real wiggy artistic way - we need to stop saying there's nothing so we can quit looking - jus keep trying, n i can't do it all meself - i don have the expertise required i hadda take awhile n unplug from it, which disappoints me to do when i'm so reasonably close to something - i thought SC was ignoring me, mebbe seeing me as competition, or even that he was crunching numbers, stuck as i am, n din wanna work together, n me jus tryin to help so i'm like wtf - i see now that prolly isn't true - he jus isn't a numbers guy, n neither am i - we give numbers to rob n don, n anyone else who breathes trigonometry - today, scott is arguing his argument is worth arguing, again - to me, those potential points are all moot the moment i or someone else points out to me, what a few other certain more relevant points are on the mighty map in the diagram above, i hafta build that tool now, as a 3D collection o objects - i keep thinking the basic tool starts out as 2:2:1 ratios, with middle circle centered, n this is for G2 n center star (but i don't know how far apart they are, or the circles' diameters) - n then protract n expand it out to the 11:10 ratio from JA - it's jus the numbers elude me - n it's been days now unplugged, so i hafta backtrack n find me place again n this, me homework ? aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/java/elements/bookI/propI47.htmlfrom www.dudeman.net/astra/giza/triangles.htmln i'm not about moving G2, but don worry about it being off - it's off the basic thingy for a beyondo wiggy but real reason - n several reasons simultaneously, which will be clear as we keep looking - i see so many arguing there's nothing there - i guess we're sposedta feel silly n frustrated, n mebbe get all discouragey - but their impetus is actually more flimsy, hugging SA soothingly - nah, there's classes after whatever - on the shoulders o clive - if JA's still around, i think it's time to page him ? please repost that data yer referring to, i mighta missed it - i'm new to this boards n have not read this whole thread yet even n don worry about credit - the buncha us know who did what, or it's all on record n we're the one's who are gonna continue, or be able to, or whatever etc, after oct giza is not about soundbytes or ego or anything silly everything else may easily seem to be we wanna approach this scientifically, reasonably, responsibly - let's get our rulers out n rule my move, 3D - oh, u saw these ? www.dudeman.net/starhex/me gonna make 3d giza movies, eventually
|
|