The Stonehenge Crop Circle of 2002

One sees most clearly how a single concrete measure such as 58 feet can take the meaning of the design into the numbers required to create it. However, metrology of feet and types of feet can hide the elegance of a design.

photo by Steve Alexander of TemporaryTemples.co.uk

I received Michael Glickman’s Crop Circles: The Bones of God at the weekend and each chapter is a nicely written and paced introduction to a given years worth of crop circles generally in the noughties. The above is the second in proximity to Stonehenge reminding keen croppers of an earlier one. This cicle preceeded the late-season (August) circle at Crooked Soley that I have an analysis of soon to be posted, drawing on Allan Brown’s small book on it.

Glickman’s chapter 10 : Stonehenge Ribbons and Crooked Soley provided a tentative analysis of the Ribbons as having the ends of the ribbons measuring 58 feet. The design was observed as making use of a single half circle building block for most of the emergent six arms emerging from the center. Michael suggested that there were 13 equal units of 58 feet across the structure.

Figure 10.4 Showing thirteen divisions of one of the three diameters of ribbons. photo: Steve Alexander.

From this I was able to observe that clearly the divisions were not equal in size and the white ones were clearly smaller as was the central circle’s diameter. Scanning the picture and placing it in my Visio program, so that a rectangle of 58mm was equal to the diameter of the right hand ribbon end, it was possible to determine that the ratio between these lengths was 5 to 4, or 5/4, from which the shorter white length must be 46.4 feet and that the diameter can be seen as 9 units across, that is 104.4 feet. The unit is 104.4 feet divided by 9 which equals 11.6 feet, which is 10 feet of 1.16 feet, the root reciprocal of the Russian foot of 7/6 feet, that is 7/6 feet divided by 175/176 (= 1.16). Going down the “Russian” root led to the diagram below.

My analysis of Michael Glickman’s figure reveals a span of 580 Russian Feet.

There are parallax errors so I have had to show the ideal designed shortened across the left-hand of the design, but the design has many numerical aspects where each arm is 27 units so that two arms are 54 which, plus the center, gives 58 times 10 equaling 580 Russian feet. But then I noted that 58 feet, divided by 5, gave the unit as 11.6 English feet while 58 feet divides into the 58 unit diameter across the crop circle.

Now we see a set of multiples of 29 are there as numbers {29 58 87 116 145 174 203 232 261 … }. The reciprocal Russian at 1.16 feet and the unit of 11.6 feet are decimal echoes of the number 29. The formula of the Proto Megalithic yard is 87/32 feet and 261/8 inches.

To be continued

One sees most clearly how a single concrete measure such as 58 feet can take the meaning of the design into the numbers required to create it.

Developmental Roots below 6

Square roots turn out to have a strange relationship to the fundaments of the world. The square root of 2, found as the diagonal of a unit square, and the square root of 3 of the diametric across a cube; these are the simplest expressions of two and three dimensions, in area and volume. This can be shown graphically as:

The first two roots “open up” the possibilities of
three-dimensional space.
Continue reading “Developmental Roots below 6”

Starcut Diagram: geometry to define tuning

This is a re-posting of an article thought lost, deriving in part from Malcolm Stewart’s Starcut Diagram. The long awaited 2nd edition Sacred Geometry of the Starcut Diagram has now been published by Inner Traditions. Before this, Ernest McClain had been working on tuning via Gothic master Honnecourt’s Diagram of a Man (fig. 2), which is effectively a double square version of the starcut diagram.

The square is the simplest of two dimensional structures to draw, giving access to many fundamental values; for example the unit square has the diagonal length equal to the square root of two which, compared to the unit side length, forms the perfect tritone of 1.414 in our decimal fractional notation (figure 1 left). If the diagonal is brought down to overlay a side then one has the beginning of an ancient series of root derivations usually viewed within the context of a double square, a context often found in Egyptian sacred art where “the stretching of the rope” was used to layout temples and square grids were used to express complex relationships, a technique Schwaller de Lubitz termed Canevas (1998). Harmonically the double square expresses octave doubling (figure 1 right).

Figure 1 left: The doubling of the square side equal 360 units and right: The double square as naturally expressing the ordinal square roots of early integers.

Musical strings have whole number lengths, in ratio to one another, to form intervals between strings and this gives geometry a closer affinity to tuning theory than the use of arithmetic to calculate the ratios within a given octave range. The musicology inferred for the ancient world by Ernest G. McClain in his Myth of Invariance (1976) was calculational rather than geometrical, but in later work McClain (Bibal 2012-13) was very interested in whatever could work (such as folding paper) but was especially interested in the rare surviving notebook of 13th century artist Villard de Honnecourt, whose sketches employed rectilinear frameworks within which cathedrals, their detailing, human and other figures could be drawn.

ā€œI believe we have overlooked Honnecourt as a prime example of what Neugebauer meant in claiming Mesopotamian geometry to approach Renaissance levels illustrated in Descartes. If Honnecourt is 13th c. then he seems more likely to be preserving the ancient picture, not anticipating the new one.ā€

This draws one into significant earlier traditions of sacred art in Egypt (Canevas) and in Indian temple and statue design, and to Renaissance paintings (see end quote) in which composition was based upon geometrical ideas such as symmetry, divisions into squares and alignments to diagonals. Figure 2 shows one of Honnecourtā€™s highly stylised sketches of a man, using a technique still in use by a 20th century heraldic artist.

Ernest McClain, Bibal Group: 18/03/2012

Figure 2 The Honnecourt Man employing a geometrical canon.

The six units, to the shoulders of the man, can be divided to form a double square, the lower square for the legs and the upper one for the torso. The upper square is then a region of octave doubling. McClain had apparently seen a rare and more explicit version of this arrangement and, from memory, attempted a reconstruction from first principles (figure 3), which he shared with his Bibal colleagues, including myself.

Figure 3 McClainā€™s final picture of the Honnecourt Man, its implied Monochord of intervals and their reciprocals.

To achieve a tuning framework, the central crossing point had been moved downwards by half a unit, in a double square of side length three. On the right this is Ā½ of a string length when the rectangle is taken to define the body of a monochord. McClain was a master of the monochord since his days studying Pythagorean tuning. Perhaps his greatest insight was the fact that the diagonal lines, in crossing, were inadvertently performing calculations and providing the ratios between string lengths forming musical intervals.

Since the active region for octave studies is the region of doubling, the top square is of primary interest. At the time I was also interested in multiple squares and the Egyptian Canevas (de Lubitz. 1998. Chapter 8) since these have special properties and were evidently known as early as the fifth millennium BC (see Heath 2014, chapter two) by the megalith builders of Carnac. In my own redrawing of McClainā€™s diagram (figure 4) multiple squares are to be seen within the top square. This revealed that projective geometry was to be found as these radiant lines, of the sort seen in the perspective of three dimensions when drawn in two dimensions.

Figure 4 Redrawing McClain to show multiple squares, and how a numerical octave limit of 360 is seen creating lengths similar to those found in his harmonic mountains.

Returning to this matter, a recently developed technique of populating a single square provides a mechanism for studying what happens within such a square when ā€œstarcutā€.

Figure 5 left: Malcolm Stewart’s 2nd edition book cover introducing right: the Starcut Diagram, applicable to the top square of Honnecourt’s octave model .

Malcolm Stewartā€™s diagram is a powerful way of using a single square to achieve many geometrical results and, in our case, it is a minimalist version that could have more lines emanating from the corners and more intermediate points dividing the squares sides, to which the radiant lines can then travel. Adding more divisions along the sides of the starcut is like multiplying the limiting number of a musical matrix, for example twice as many raises by an octave.

A computer program was developed within theĀ Processing frameworkĀ to increase the divisions of the sides and draw the resulting radiants. A limit of 720 was used since this defines Just intonation of scales and 720 has been identified in many ancient texts as having been a significant limiting number in antiquity. Since McClain was finding elements of octave tuning within a two-square geometry, my aim was to see if the crossing points between radiants of a single square (starcut) defined tones in the just scales possible to 360:720. This appears to be the case (figure 6) though most of the required tone numbers appear along the central vertical division and it is only at the locations nearest to D that ebĀ to f and C to c# that only appear ā€œoff axisā€. The pattern of the tones then forms an interesting invariant pattern.

Figure 6 Computer generated radiants for a starcut diagram with sides divided into six.

Figure 7 http://HarmonicExplorer.org showing the tone circle and harmonic mountain (matrix) for limit 720, the “calendar constant” of 360 days and nights.

Each of the radiant crossing points represents the diagonal of an M by N rectangle and so the rational ā€œcalculationā€ of a given tone, through the crossing of radiants, is a result of the differences from D (equal to either 360 or 720) to the tone number concerned (figure 8).

Figure 8 How the tone numbers are calculated via geometrical coincidence of cartesian radiants which are rational in their shorter side length at the value of a Just tone number

It is therefore no miracle that the tone numbers for Just intonation can be found at some crossing points and, once these are located on this diagram, those locations could have been remembered as a system for working out Just tone numbers.

Bibliography

Heath, Richard.

  • 2014. Sacred Number and the Lords of Time. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions.
  • 2018. Harmonic Origins of the World: Sacred Number at the Source of Creation. Inner Traditions.
  • 2021. Sacred Geometry: Language of the Angels. Inner Traditions.

Lubitz, R.A. Schwaller de.

  • 1998. The Temple of Man: Apet of the South at Luxor. Vermont: Inner Traditions.

McClain, Ernest G. 

  • 1976. The Myth of Invariance: The Origin of the Gods, Mathematics and Music from the Rg Veda to Plato. York Beach, ME: Nicolas Hays.

Stewart, Malcolm.

  • 2022. Sacred Geometry of the Starcut Diagram: The Genesis of Number, Proportion, and Cosmology. Inner Traditions.

Double Square and the Golden Rectangle

above: Dan Palmateer wrote of this, “it just hit me that the conjunction of the circle to the golden rectangle existed.”

Here we will continue in the mode of a lesson in Geometry where what is grasped intuitively has to have reason for it to be true. It occurred to me that the square in the top hemisphere is the twin of a square in the lower hemisphere, hence this has a relationship to the double square rectangle. So one can (1) Make a Double Square and then (2) Find the center and (3) a radius can then draw the out-circle of a double square (see diagram below).

The diagonal from the centre would be the square root of 5 if the top square is seen as two double squares of unit size, that is (4) Identify the units as nested double squares. One can then see (5) a cross within the circle holding 12 squares, but when (6) the root 5 comes down to the right horizontal then the familiar formula (root(5) – 1)/2 = 0.618 so there are many transcendent (not Fibonacci) versions of the Golden mean within in the diagram as shown below.

The in-circle of the cross, radius 2, shows how one can divide that circle into twelve equal portions as with the Zodiac, matching the twelve squares. The out-circle shows Dan’s insight as eight golden rectangles which, overlap over the four “missing” squares of the 16 square grid, which is a simpler framework for generating this geometry as a Whole.

Seven, Eleven and Equal Perimeters

above: image of applications involving sacred geometry based upon pi as 22/7 and a circle of equal perimeter to a square, from a previous post.

The geometrical and other relationships between different numbers are easily found to be useful through simple experiments. The earliest approximations to pi (22/7) was key in the megalithic and later ancient cultures, for making circles of a known diameter and circumference, the foremost using the numbers 7 and 11 doubled twice. A staked rope of length seven will create a circumference of 44, to a high degree of accuracy.

But what is pi? it actually connects two different worlds, of extensive linear measure and of intensive rotational measure. As the radius rope is made larger the circle expands from its center but it remains a whole circle, except that its circumference is made up of more “units” all according to the ratio pi = 22/7, in a good approximation.

But measuring a circumference is fiddly, it is circular! In contrast, it is very much easier to work with squares since their perimeter is four times their side length. And in many cases, one does not really need to measure the perimeter. Because of this, the megalithic looked for and discovered an easier procedure in which one could know the circumference of a circle if one could generate the square that has the same circumference now called the equal perimeter model. This was surprisingly simple to grasp and implement.

First of all, one can lay out a linear length, that divides by 4, lets say 28 which is 4 x 7. The length is made up of four lengths, each of 7 units and, a square of side length 7 will have a perimeter of 28, same as the linear length. The square is really just a rolled-up set of 4 lengths at right angles!

The diameter of a circle with 28 units on its circumference must be larger than its incircle of diameter 7 and, if pi is 22/7 then, the diameter will be exactly 14/11 of the side length. Notice that 14/11 is cancelling the seven and eleven in pi as 22/7.

The equal perimeter rope will be staked in the very center of the square. The side of 7 is then 7 x 14/11 or 98/11 units and this, times 22/7 equals 28 – the perimeter of both the circle, and square side-length 7 units. There is no need to calculate this if one draws a triangle ratio {11 14} from the center of the square. This triangle’s slope angle automatically “calculates” or reproportions the cardinal length (whatever this is) into a suitable rope (or radiant) length.

One often does not need to form the circle to know what its perimeter would be through measurement. Once one knows that every square has a twin circle of the same perimeter, this changes thinking. This is particularly significant when forming a circular model of the sun’s path in the year. If the “saturnian” year 364 days was used, it unusually divides by 28 days, and 13, and 7 days; the seven-day week. The square would have a side length of 13 weeks (91 days) and the radius rope would need to be (13 x 7) x 7/11 which, times 44/7 reconstitutes the circumference of 364 days.

My book Sacred Geometry: Language of the Angels has much to say on equal perimeter modelling, which is found throughout the ancient building traditions that followed on from the megalithic period, using the older techniques of metrological geometry alongside the development of arithmetic methods. Click on the Bookshop logo or Google, and find out more.

Introduction to my first book, Matrix of Creation

My first book interprets the planetary system through pure number. The numbers involved in this interpretation are surprisingly simple and will be accessible to anyone holding a basic arithmetic education. From this approach we have gained substantial new insights into the realm of mythology, religious thought and what have become known as the Traditional Arts. We show that the solar system evolved from pure number and can no longer be thought of as an accident of nature.

It is also no coincidence that this work lies poised between the realm of mathematics and the world before numeracy. In the ancient world, numbers assumed god-like powers that were continually creating the world through stable numerical relationships. The core of this ancient science developed such a view naturally through simple astronomical observations, by counting events and regular movements in the night sky. This science was then articĀ­ulated as mythological stories, calendars, sacred geometry, musical theory and monumental architecture, such as the Great Pyramid and Stonehenge.

These artefacts, found in all ancient cultures, have remained obscure to the modern world because modern science has become too sophisticated to see the simple celestial relationships which demonstrate that the planetary system, including the Sun and Moon, hold to a particular design.

Continue reading “Introduction to my first book, Matrix of Creation”