Signs to look for, ancient high tec

reply to post by punkinworks10



They were referring to accuracy, not scale for example a satellite is a lot smaller then the hover dam yet it represents higher accuracy.

Originally posted by Jekka

Originally posted by punkinworks10

With all due respect, that statement is utter rubbish.
The great pyramid weighs 5.9 million tons, Hoover dam on the other hand is 6.6 million tons, and it was completed in five years, along with all of the excavations in the canyon to prep the site. Which included several huge tunnels some 25. miles of roadbeds, electrical transmission lines , and the condtruction of the forms.

This is true, but you need to consider that there is a far greater deal of precision in the pyramids than is present in the Hoover dam. I'm not saying that we couldn't do it today, but until the recent advent of computers, laser leveling, etc. it would have been a serious undertaking to get a technically eight sided pyramid, which faces only 3/60th degree of error from magnetic north/south(while sitting on the equator, making this measurement more difficult because of the distance) and has a light show of sorts during certain celestial events(solstices and equinoxes) which kept track of those days passing. Especially since the concavity of the sides of the pyramid is not visually apparent on close inspection. In short, we could do this today, but even as little as 100 years ago, it would have been sheer dumb luck that would make it accurate to the degree it is now.

Considering that magnetic north changes over time, it actually would have more error thousands of years ago when it was built and magnetic error actually gets worse as you get closer to the poles.

It still is an interesting topic. Carry on!

The magnetic declination in a given area may (most likely will) change slowly over time, possibly as little as 2–2.5 degrees every hundred years or so, depending upon how far from the magnetic poles it is. For a location closer to the pole like Ivujivik, the declination may change by 1 degree every three years. This may be insignificant to most travellers, but can be important if using magnetic bearings from old charts or metes (directions) in old deeds for locating places with any precision.

Originally posted by ezekielken
The great pyramid was a sonic waterpump. Standpipe, check valve, regulator, sonic amplification chamber, refracting chamber for standing wave. I just wonder what they did with the booms?

Quartz crystal is highly available in granite. When you get it to vibrate it can produce energy.

I think a good analogy of memory's of this high technology would be the Ark of the covenant, outwardly it is just a box and nobody would say it was sophisticated yet there are records of it electrocuting people, emitting a glow/pillars of light. When the Palestinians stole it and took the lid off to look inside they developed tumors, the Ark could also lift into the air and rush into the enemy. The torah tells us that inside the ark there were two blue sapphire like crystals and not the tombstone slabs often depicted in christian art.

Originally posted by LUXUS
reply to post by punkinworks10

 

They were referring to accuracy, not scale for example a satellite is a lot smaller then the hover dam yet it represents higher accuracy.

The statement is still balderdash, now you are talking about what i do for a living.
A satellite is a relatively small object, electronics aside, the accuracy if the vehicle which puts it on space is orders of magnitude above the satellite itself.
Then there are things like SLAC (Stanford linear accelerator) that has a postional accuracy of + or -.0025" per mile.
That's accuracy and it was done before the use of laser positioning.

I think some ancient high-technology may be stuff we know of, but just overlooked.

Move a large stone? You're not going to do it on rollers. However if you were to take a large stone and build one big roller around it, rolling resistance greatly works to your advantage with increased diameter. Furthermore you can stick a lever into the side and use torque, and use toothed or pegged guide rails to keep that roller from sliding and take advantage of that torque action to move that large rolling object uphill with less force than it would take otherwise. Playing with some basic math plugged into rolling resistance formulas, under a dozen people could move one of the large stones used in an Egyptian pyramid that way.

Finely polished stone blocks? I think much of the secret to that one is in China of all places. The Bi and Cong artifacts. These artifacts look very much like parts of a rotary tool. Even textured surfaces where it would make sense and whatnot. Imagine the bi being connected to a shaft and that shaft goes through the cong. Wind a rope around that shaft and have the ends anchored to two distant points. A cutting compound is put between the surface to be polished and the bi, the weight of the cong keeps it firmly against the surface, and pushing the cong back and would cause rotary action like a bow drill allowing the cutting compound to work. A day or so with something like that and you should be able to get flat and highly polished stones with relatively primitive means. (Of course a lot of these artifacts are stylized and made of materials that aren't always durable, but they may be symbolically representative of trade tools. Perhaps gifts given to those who helped complete certain projects or whatever.)

Fine cuts and difficult cuts in hard materials? Ultra-sonic cutters. Not piezo-electric as with modern cutters, but made to vibrate by other means. Somebody could stumble upon that concept in ancient times, and musical instruments may give a clue. Perhaps it has a mouthpiece with a reed, and you blow it like a whistle. Or maybe you draw against part of it with a bow like a stringed instrument. Regardless, you have a tool that vibrates at high frequency and brings a hard cutter to bear on a surface. May not be the fastest tool, but may offer the highest precision where clean cuts are desired. Also it may allow you to drill around corners and do other things rotary drilling or typical chiseling can't. Such technology to large blocks is likely an adaptation of lapidary tools, and scaled up.

All of those could be considered high-tech for what they were, but are still quite antiquated compared to what we have now. Just that stupid-simple ways are overlooked, such that we assume we "can't" do those things anymore. No magic or aliens or whatever - just that the ancients were clever, that's for sure.

There may be some other tricks up their sleeves (more mechanically precise mechanisms or even steam power), but I'm going with what I can picture given most of the other technology we could find from those times.

reply to post by punkinworks10


I was referring to the complex sensors and other electronics in the satellite, not the tin can that holds it!

In the vid below you can hear modern Structural Engineers and architects talking about the difficulty they would have in building the great pyramid today.

Originally posted by pauljs75

Fine cuts and difficult cuts in hard materials? Ultra-sonic cutters. Not piezo-electric as with modern cutters, but made to vibrate by other means. Somebody could stumble upon that concept in ancient times, and musical instruments may give a clue. Perhaps it has a mouthpiece with a reed, and you blow it like a whistle. Or maybe you draw against part of it with a bow like a stringed instrument. Regardless, you have a tool that vibrates at high frequency and brings a hard cutter to bear on a surface. May not be the fastest tool, but may offer the highest precision where clean cuts are desired. Also it may allow you to drill around corners and do other things rotary drilling or typical chiseling can't. Such technology to large blocks is likely an adaptation of lapidary tools, and scaled up.

This is exactly what I believe! When I say they had high tec what I really mean is that their technology was at a level higher then we have credited them with for example ultrasonic drilling. When people today think of ultrasonic drilling their minds automatically jumps to power electronics controlling piezoelectric transducers, they forget that a simple dog whistle is also capable of generating ultrasonic sound. I believe they had a very simple mechanical device which could when excited vibrate at ultrasonic frequency's. Such a device could cut the hardest stone with a copper tool. John worral keely over a hundred years ago also made such a device which was completely mechanical yet could disintegrate granite/quartz using focused ultrasound!

Keely was alleged to have invented a mineral disintegrator which could be tuned to a given substance to reduce it to dust. In this particular account, the device was tuned to Quartz. Sometime during the 1880's, Keely was experimenting with an instrument originally intended to be used to overcome gravity. When a block of quartz was used as a weight, the intense vibrations generated by the device partially disintegrated the quartz block.

It isn't only building the great pyramid that is highly complex its also so many ancient sites where the builders have used huge stones, cut, dressed, moved and placed slabs weighing tons and tons that a modern crane could not do today.

Two prime sites in the Southern Hemisphere are intriguing Easter Island and Nan Madal where huge basalt blocks were moved over the sea and placed into harbours and man-made constructions. These date back to ancient times. Its fine moving huge blocks over land but over water also.

I think that because the funding has never been available, apart from wondering about these ancient sites, we can only wonder because many have not been investigated thoroughly.

Its crystal clear that there has been a civilisation that has created the most magnificent pyramids, beautiful sites and cities. There could be a number of civilisations in the past as we are at least 100,000 years old. Its also clear that at some point in time, that civilisation stopped its building. We can see in Egypt modern man 's efforts at pyramid building by the lob-sided pyramid and the step pyramids. We know that satellite imaging shows us where a large number of pyramids were built in the past but were taken down for their stone.

If you look at building in our modern world we manage skyscrapers and some beautiful sites, but we don 't and probably couldn't finance or physically build/create the fascinating cyclopean architecture of that ancient civilisation.

I also think in some strange way that there may have been some kind of mental high tech at work. The reason bein g that Christ said in the bible that with our minds we could move mountains. Why he said such a strange thing is hard to figure. Taken metaphorically was he commenting on purely our willpower to do things ourselves. Were this the case then we would hardly need his or God's help. So was he referring to something from the ancient world he knew of but today we don't?

He was clearly more than just a healer and apart from his miracles, he 'disappeared' cleverly in the Temple when the Temple Police wanted to arrest him. It should also be remembered that there were several other men like him at that time who also did miraculous work. I hesitate to use the word magik but I believe in keeping an open mind and technology to the uninitiated, appears to be magical.

I've always felt this theory has a degrading effect on humanity. It says that people can't do the things we do without some higher power helping us along, like aliens, or technology. There are plenty of theories on how these fantastic structures were built, using nothing more than man power. All of them completely possible. And a key thing about the past, something they had plenty of, is time. Patience. That's all it would take, to build something like the pyramids. Planning and time.

Originally posted by TobinHatcher
I've always felt this theory has a degrading effect on humanity. It says that people can't do the things we do without some higher power helping us along, like aliens, or technology. There are plenty of theories on how these fantastic structures were built, using nothing more than man power. All of them completely possible. And a key thing about the past, something they had plenty of, is time. Patience. That's all it would take, to build something like the pyramids. Planning and time.

If we wanted to apply Occam's razor and use those theories that require making the least assumptions, then yes: they'd have done it with manpower, lots of time, skill, simple but efficient tools and everything would perfectly fit into our essentially linear development in human history.

However, I always like keeping an open mind about things like that. Once we're on a certain trail, we often subscribe to it and it's hard to stay objective or admit we were wrong. That's not different in certain branches of science. While a really good theory is likely to be accepted, it can really take a long time until the last pieces of a previous school of thought have been dismissed.

Apart from that, I ask myself why so many generations before us stood in awe and wonder in front of those megalithic structures. And they also came from different societies & cultures (perhaps with more time at their hands) and yet: they were just as amazed as we are today ...

When I think about the pyramids at Giza and imagine what they would have looked like completely coated in smooth casing stones, it would also be a completely out-of-place concept in terms of design & layout, IMO, not to mention what purpose the interior might have had. I don't know the answers, but I doubt that current paradigms really explain what happened, and when it happened.

Just my 2 cents (as usual) ...

klaus dona has a few interesting presentations floating around you tube..

the one im linking here is about curious artifacts from the past...

www.youtube.com...

regarding our past..

It is obvious that a high culture (or more than one) existed here on earth in what we call "pre-history".
Honestly we do not know very much about them.

The "Ancient Aliens" hypothesis (one of my old favorites since the von daniken 70s) is really only attractive if we DENY ANCIENT HUMAN INTELLIGENCE...

but the conservative anthro/archeo crowd still agree that humans (truly modern homo sapiens sapiens) have been around here for 100k years or so...

in the approximate 6-8k years of recorded history we have managed to do some noteworthy things, we invented toothpaste, yo-yos, air conditioning...

what do you think we(they/us) could have done in the first 92 thousand years? (or MORE)


it is not unreasonable to assume that the ruins on the moon (if real) are OURS. If there really is a mars/egypt connection it makes more sense in terms of a human culture than an alien one.

considering the distances involved, it is really MORE LIKELY, that any genetically compatible "space brothers" actually came from here and returned.

the "Gods" of old could simply be survivors of some deep space exploration team. time dilation and all, many years pass here and when the team finishes their mission in 20 years of "ship time"... they return to a post acopalypse earth where their only surviving brothers are "cavemen" with no real tech or culture, and a LOT of DNA damage caused by the weapons that destroyed everything...

planet of the apes, or a real life mutant cannibal apocalypse, civilization is gone, so we hole up somewhere safe from the idiot herds, and we try to rebuild...

every now and then we make contact with the herd in a beneficent gesture, medicine, agriculture..

more often than not our envoys are attacked. many of our outposts (mere camps) are over run by the barbarians who trample our treasures because they do not know how to operate the tech they stole from us. eventually we are wiped out all they way, or we retreat to a truly remote place of safety.

so heres a tradition of gods, space brothers, enlightened ones, atlantis, agharti, lost technology...

im trying to find a way to explain some of the "dumb" uses of obvioulsy high tech, because the common objections to this hobby pursuit revolve around OUR WORLD VIEW.

meaning if THEY had high tech, their culture would look like US.

that is a bias, an understandable one, but a bias nonetheless...

im looking right now for an article that hit the web about 2 years back... the smithsonian reported that ceremonial jade axe heads from an ancient chinese burial site had been polished with diamond dust.

polished to a finish that they called "space age"... the researchers were amazed not only that diamond was used industrially, but that THE DIAMOND DUST HAD TO SEPARATED BY PARTICLE SIZE for the technique to be effective..

ok so we can reliably separate particles that small, and apply an "optical" finish to worked crystal... and we are making GRAVE GOODS?

what really confuses me is NOT the presence or absence of TECH, im ALL IN on the YES to TECH side...

but why use high tech to make some of the USELESS things that history offers us?

ever heard of the PLAIN OF JARS?
image search
someone did that ON PURPOSE, my guess is that is was easier for them to work stone than we think.. it just doesnt make SENSE (to my way of thinking at least ... sigh, bias again)


ok its just a hypothesis..

but we need open ended thinking. in particular when we see some of the STRANGE objects that history has left for us.

when i say strange i mean not obvious, stinking of mystery, inexplicable..

like the flute in the Klaus Dona video at about 24:10

this flute has a U shaped hole running through it. thats just a mind bender..

when i say strange i mean that if you have this kind of technology why are you making STONE FLUTES?

Christopher Dunn has some great stuff about precision in egypt...

if you can make mirror flat truly opposed GRANITE surfaces with hard interior 90 degree corners.... then what are you doing using tech like this TO BURY MUMMIFIED BULLS?

www.gizapower.com...

also in the OP you mentioned that a HIGH DRILL SPEED THROUGH HARD STONE would seve as a "smoking gun"

chris dunn has a great argument surrounding the "flinders petrie drill core" that you ATSers might enjoy.. u can find it at the same link above.


high tech in the past? yes. even higher than we revisionists might want to admit to..

now that this argument is becoming more mainstream, "regular" folk are starting to admit to the possibility of

whoops ran outta room

was on my way to mentioning shadow herders thread about ultrasonic drilling in a low-tech setting. good stuff and available HERE

www.abovetopsecret.com...

if anyone has a link to that smithsonian article regarding jade curiosities, please post in this thread

Originally posted by LUXUS

Originally posted by cheesy
it's cool! would you give the picture sir..

Much of the above in fact has been found, engineers who have examined the great pyramid which contrary to belief actually has 8 sides have said they could not build a structure which would achieve the same overall accuracy.

I have seen holes drilled into granite block at acute angles which could not be done with a copper bow drill.

Please could you provide a link to engineers claiming they couldn't achieve the same accuracy.

Not saying they're wrong, but I'm a Mathematician and see no reason why they couldn't be built with the maths they had at the time, in fact most of their maths was far more advanced than that required to plan out these shapes. It'd take me an hour at most to plot one using their maths with current tech, but a few days/weeks doing it all longhand. A long as the 'bricks' are the same size and 'instep' of one layer ontop of the other remains constant, you have a pyramid.

My suspicion is they may have fallen foul to the false idea pyramids were built using Phi and Pi as references.

That's not to say that these aren't absolutely amazing examples buildings that should inspire awe though.

Originally posted by jeep3r


If we wanted to apply Occam's razor and use those theories that require making the least assumptions, then yes: they'd have done it with manpower, lots of time, skill, simple but efficient tools and everything would perfectly fit into our essentially linear development in human history.

However, I always like keeping an open mind about things like that. Once we're on a certain trail, we often subscribe to it and it's hard to stay objective or admit we were wrong. That's not different in certain branches of science. While a really good theory is likely to be accepted, it can really take a long time until the last pieces of a previous school of thought have been dismissed.

Apart from that, I ask myself why so many generations before us stood in awe and wonder in front of those megalithic structures. And they also came from different societies & cultures (perhaps with more time at their hands) and yet: they were just as amazed as we are today ...

When I think about the pyramids at Giza and imagine what they would have looked like completely coated in smooth casing stones, it would also be a completely out-of-place concept in terms of design & layout, IMO, not to mention what purpose the interior might have had. I don't know the answers, but I doubt that current paradigms really explain what happened, and when it happened.

Just my 2 cents (as usual) ...

I agree with keeping an open mind. Never dismiss a theory, concept or idea right away, but don't accept it right away either. As for the pyramids, or something like, say Stone Henge, where the stone used is found in mountains a rather ways away, I believe (correct me if I'm wrong). Moving those stones is addressed in the original topic, where they mention moving them using a sort of log conveyor belt. I see no problem with that theory. And a while back on the Television (color, no less), I saw a program that detailed a proposed way that they built Stone Henge, and then they went and built their own replica, using those concepts available at the time. I'm all for mysteries and far out explanations, but there should be a problem first. If we didn't have strong theories about how these societies did what they did. And I like that you mention the outer layer the pyramids had. No one seems to think about those.
Now, if we want to talk about something that I've never heard a good explanation for, I think there's a city in Central America that, supposedly, acts as a model for the solar system. I can't recall the name, but it's been an interest of mine for some time. How'd they pull that off?

Originally posted by TobinHatcher
Now, if we want to talk about something that I've never heard a good explanation for, I think there's a city in Central America that, supposedly, acts as a model for the solar system. I can't recall the name, but it's been an interest of mine for some time. How'd they pull that off?

Perhaps you mean Teotihuacan?

Image source: wikipedia (public domain)

There's been a thread on that some time ago. I think that's a good example for where we need to step back and not jump to any conclusions as of yet, although I'm not an expert. In order to post a qualified opinion on that, I'd need to know a lot more about the site itself and read the documents referenced in that thread ...

But as far as I know, it would be difficult to represent a scale model of the solar system including the required accuracies for planet sizes and distances. At first glance, I don't see anything there that indicates such a reference and I ask myself: wouldn't they have done it differently and in a more obvious way if they really wanted to represent our planets?

As usual, a lot of questions remain unanswered regarding sites like this, but I always suspect that established views sometimes prevent us from seeing the bigger picture ... that's why I really love it when people continue asking uncomfortable questions!

Yes! Thank you. I'll save that thread for later. But, back on topic, whether or not the pyramids were built with some higher technology, or at least more advanced for their time than we've thought, there is one thing I think is very plausible, and that's that telescopes have been around for much longer then we've thought. So many of the ancient civilizations have astronomically centered ideas, and, if Teotihuacan does model our solar system (I'll be doing some looking into that later), that, I think, stands in evidence to ancient civilizations having access to some sort of magnification. reply to post by jeep3r

Originally posted by uwascallywabbit

 

klaus dona has a few interesting presentations floating around you tube..
the one im linking here is about curious artifacts from the past...

Interesting: I don't know if these artifacts are legit but if they are, then more scientists should look into that and publish their findings for peer-review.

I could see two possible reasons for this not happening: (1) there's nothing to it cause it's fake or (2) renowned researchers don't want to risk their reputation and fight against current academia even if this was something of importance ...

But the idea of an ancient and unkown global culture is intriguing, no doubt, and I think there are indeed some clues pointing to such a scenario.

If you can make mirror flat truly opposed GRANITE surfaces with hard interior 90 degree corners.... then what are you doing using tech like this TO BURY MUMMIFIED BULLS?

Now, this is something that baffled me as well: the granite sarcophagi at the Serapeum/Egypt. I think those are the right questions to ask in order to challenge traditional views. Bulls obviously were sacred and important at the time, but is that really the reason to go to such lengths in terms of construction, precision & architecture?

I'm glad you brought that up ...

P.S.: The whole compound actually does look more like a nuclear waste repository!

High technology is fairly difficult to find, apart from the obvious stones however chemical tests for high temperatures on particulary well cut stones can tell you if someone used advanced tools.

If anyone cares to read the Mahabharata, or any of the other ancient Vedic texts, one would see that this is all something which has transpired before. Today, man sits atop a mountain of modern conveniences, believing that they are the pinnacle of all human development. Most are ignorant to the fact, that incredibly advanced civilizations, can and do, disappear without leaving a trace. Or should I say, they disappear leaving sparse evidence, which is usually buried or under water.

Which brings me to another point....which is that we are looking in the wrong places for evidence of our ancient, lost civilizations. I believe that we need to look underwater, or perhaps under the sands of the middle east, in order to find the traces of mankind's glorious past.