Crop Circle at North Down, nr Beckhampton, Wiltshire. Reported 19th August 2007.

North Down, nr Beckhampton, Wiltshire. Reported 19th August.

Map Ref:

This Page has been accessed

Updated Thursday 30th August 2007

AERIAL SHOTS GROUND SHOTS DIAGRAMS FIELD REPORTS ARTICLES

Image Nick Ashron Copyright 2007

FOR VISITING THE CROP CIRCLES.

Several more notes related to the recent Crop Circles pointing to 8/18

As stated at the Toot Balden link, August 18 2007 was the date of an inferior conjunction of Venus with the Sun.

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2007/sugarhill/sugarhill2007cc.html

In addition, it is stated that August 18 293 BC was founding of the oldest known Roman temple to Venus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_18

(It is somewhat interesting that August 18 is the 230^th day of the year, and that 293 BC – 2007 AD looks like 2300 years, but I think is only 2299 due to lack of a Year 0 ?)

On the subject of Sundials and Light … August 18^th is International Lighthouse Day. And the study of lighthouses is called ... phar – ology.

Just looking at the August 19 circle. Looks to be quite a few messages there, but as a follow-up to the 8,18 ...

There are 8 and 8 circles, with a small 1 circle in reverse >> 818

Rob P

Why did the crop circle makers draw a line at the top of the circles?

Are they trying to explain us something? Again I feel they give us a puzzle and perhaps here is the solution.

Approximating Pi with Inscribed Polygons

The circle makers only draw 1 line on top of the circles. I think it’s a hint.

What I did is drawing 6 other lines on top and 7 lines to the centre of the circle. So now we have 7 polygons within a circle .

What to do with these polygons?

Well, Archimedes used a fairly simple geometrical approach to estimate PI.

Around 250 B.C., the Greek mathematician Archimedes calculated the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter. A precise determination of pi, as we know this ratio today, had long been of interest to the ancient Greeks, who strove for precise mathematical proportions in their architecture, music, and other art forms.

In Archimedes' day, close approximations of pi had been known for over 1,000 years. An Egyptian document dated to 1650 B.C., for example, gives a value of 4 (8/9)², or 3.1605. Archimedes' value, however, was not only more accurate, it was the first theoretical, rather than measured, calculation of pi.

How did he do it? The Polygons in a circle above illustrates Archimedes' basic approach. It finds an approximation of pi by determining the length of the perimeter of a polygon inscribed within a circle (which is less than the circumference of the circle) and the perimeter of a polygon circumscribed outside a circle (which is greater than the circumference). The value of pi lies between those two lengths.

By doubling the number of sides of the hexagon to a 12-sided polygon, then a 24-sided polygon, and finally 48- and 96-sided polygons, Archimedes was able to bring the two perimeters ever closer in length to the circumference of the circle and thereby come up with his approximation.

Specifically, he determined that pi was less than 3 1/7 but greater than 3 10/71. In the decimal notation we use today, this translates to 3.1429 to 3.1408. That's pretty close to the known value of 3.1416. (For simplicity's sake, we round off all figures to four decimal places.)

Like Archimedes' approach, our Polygons in a circle don't rely on specific measurements. The diameter of the circle is given an arbitrary value of 1; it doesn't matter if that number represents an inch, a foot, or a light-year. Also like Archimedes' approach, the interactive determines the length of a side of each triangle, relative to the diameter, based on the angle opposing the side being measured.

Our circle and Polygons differs from Archimedes' approach in three key ways, however. First, it makes use of algebra and modern trigonometry, which were unknown in Archimedes' day—Archimedes used geometry instead. For example, he knew the ratio between one line and another in certain triangles and with this knowledge was able to figure out the length of the perimeter of a hexagon.

Second, we use decimal notation, which wasn't invented until hundreds of years after Archimedes' death. To work with non-whole numbers, the ancients relied on ratios. Any calculator will tell you that the square root of 3 is 1.7321. For Archimedes, that value was 265/153 (which equals 1.7320 in decimal notation).

It is interesting to note that even today pi cannot be calculated precisely—there are no two whole numbers that can make a ratio equal to pi. Mathematicians find a closer approximation every year—in 2002, for example, experts at the University Of Tokyo Information Technology Center determined the value of pi to over one trillion decimal places. But this is academic: the value determined by Archimedes over 2,000 years ago is sufficient for most uses today.

The more Polygons the more precise Pi can be calculated.

That still leaves us with the cubics in the centre, we can easily notice that the lines on 2 maybe 3 cubics are not correctly drawn. I still can’t explain this! Perhaps their software has a bug, or maybe its man made!

© Glenn Aoys Netherlands

North Downs formation.

After having examined and looked at the related formations I propose a part-explanation that may be simpler than I originally thought. As we know all formations are multi-layered with information and concepts (at least 2 per formation I believe).

So we have the concept of a day, represented by a 3D cube. If you extrapolate that multi-dimensionally we derive the hyper-cube or tesserect (made up of 8 cubes). I think all that is robust. Similarly, the 'apex' shown represents a part of a cube, of which there are 8.

What do we get when we divide our day into smaller segments? We use 24 hours. Could they not be telling us simply that they divide a day into 8 segments (of 3 earth hours). To reinforce that they have included 8 circles with a rotational arm pointing to each part of a day (a 3 hour part). This has a striking resemblance to the face of a clock. Is this simply a comparison or revelation of the segmentation of their 'day clock' into 8 units?

If we examine the previous formation of six apices stemming/exploding from the centre we could derive a period of 6 x 3 hours = 18 hours. Now, that could mean an event to occur 18 hours from formation or that there would be 6 events, 3 hours apart, on the originally referred to date of 18 August. To me it looks like there were about 6 solar x-ray flares, 3 hours apart.

So perhaps it's simply a 'day clock' of 8 equal units. Often the most obvious and simplest explanation is correct.

UPDATE

Just one more addition to the previous note on the 'day clock' concept. As I mentioned I believe many formations are multi-layered and contain both mathematical clues as well as visual. Often I think we strive to unravel mathematical explanations for what is only a visual prompt.

I have been pondering on what that second line inside the circle may signify. If their day clock has 8 units, each represented by an equal rotation of an apex of a 'day cube' then to visually denote those 8 rotations you would only require one 'clock' arm within a circle. We require 2 clock arms as identifying 24 angular variations with one arm is visually striking or impossible at a distance. I propose that the second line is simply the smaller arm of 'our day' clock. It is included aside to reinforce the concept that it is in fact a 'clock face' that we are familiar with, but omitted from the centre as it is redundant in an 8 unit 'day clock'. Viola

PS. The 3 faces denoting the apex of each cube shown may be representative of 3 x 1hour sub-units. The edges of these cubes are non-symmetrical in few of the cubes portrayed. I think this is intentional and again signifies each being a unit of time, employing movable arms, or in this case edges, to depict the flow of time.

Not much so far except periodic x-ray flares on the Sun

The only interesting thing that has happened so far on August 18-22, regarding astronomy or geology in our Solar System, was a series of x-ray flares emitted from our Sun once every three hours, as shown in an attached figure from SOHO Space Weather (http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/spaceweather). Those are not particularly strong flares, yet some unknown energy caused our Sun to oscillate once every three hours. Also, it is pouring rain here and in many other places on Earth. Could slight variations of energy coming from the Sun cause our weather to vary?

Those crop messages from August 2007 really focus our attention on the underlying nature of this crop-circle phenomenon. They definitely showed a numerical countdown from "18" (Sugar Hill) to "6" (Stanton) to "2 or 3" (West Overton), beginning in early August, but nothing important seems to have happened yet. Were they really "predicating the future", or rather "responding to our group consciousness"? And if they often show symbols from the ancient British Isles next to megalithic sites such as Avebury, Silbury Hill or Stonehenge, might the actual inhabitants of the British Isles at that time be sending us messages, or some other outside group who could be aware of their ancient consciousness, just as they are of ours today?

Those are deep questions, central to the nature of this phenomenon, which we may all wish to consider. The crop-circle phenomenon is "Real", "Intelligent communication", and "Associated with ancient sites or knowledge", as Heather kindly pointed out to me ("RIA"). Beyond that, we seem not to know much!

We also know, thanks to the efforts of Terje Toftenes and his colleagues, that it involves a technology far beyond our own
(www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/misc/print.php?artid=1559662). Under other circumstances, Terje's clear and unambiguous results might win the Nobel Prize for Physics in 2007, because his was by far the most ground-breaking experiment of which I am aware recently. Nothing else from academic physics laboratories even comes close.

But then Galileo did not receive any award for discovering the four moons of Jupiter, in a similarly hostile academic climate where those moons were not "supposed to exist" (only Earth could have a Moon, because all other planets and stars were believed to revolve around it). Today only Earth is supposed to have intelligent life; and hence what Terje found was impossible within their well-entrenched if dysfunctional worldview.

AERIAL SHOTS GROUND SHOTS DIAGRAMS FIELD REPORTS ARTICLES

BACK

Mark Fussell & Stuart Dike