Broken Stone and Heavens’ Henge

by Dennis on June 15, 2011

A little while ago, I was contacted by a gentleman named Jon Morris, and as a result of our correspondence, I invited him to submit a guest post for Eternal Idol, which reads as follows:

The Broken Stone and the Secret of the Heavens’ Henge

This project started life as renewable energy research: I’m a Fellow of a couple of engineering institutions, on a sustainability panel and a whole bunch of other things that have a lot to do with sustainability… and nothing whatsoever to do with either archaeology or Stonehenge.

In brief, the method is a system of concentrating solar energy using fixed, and possibly irregular, plates of polished metal (mirrors). It seems that polished plates of metal have been with us for an exceptionally long time (up to 8000 years) and that Britain was, in antiquity, the source of the easiest metal to produce mirrors from (tin). I made a tin mirror in my back garden using a simple fire, pottery, a small amount of oil and chalk. It took me a few months to work out how to do it, and a few months more to get the enthusiasm to actually try it, but, when you’ve worked it out, it only takes about an hour to make one:

I patented some of the original ideas for these solar designs back in 2008/9 after starting the research on 2007. We then developed the system some more and came across a whole set of new patentable ideas. Most of these are ‘submerged’ but some are described in the book (ISBN 978-0-9568617-0-2).

Then, in 2010, whilst on a trip to Salisbury to visit my uncle, my boys wanted to visit Stonehenge (technically speaking it’s more of a case that they didn’t want to visit Salisbury Cathedral and Stonehenge was the only other choice that we gave them.) When we got there, I noticed that all the features of Stonehenge seemed to be the same as one of the forms of the later designs, so I built a CAD model of Stonehenge and then fitted my design in to see if there was any correlation: It was a precise fit. However, there was one exception: Stones 55 and 56 (the Great Trilithon) appear to be 500mm or so further South West than the computer model’s preferred predicted location.

Then I read “Solving Stonehenge” by Anthony Johnson: He thinks that these two stones were moved South-West (by about 500mm) during the Victorian era.

Which provided a small dilemma: If, and it’s a big if, this design had already been done at Stonehenge, should I be claiming inventor rights? The configuration of Stonehenge is also not what you would expect from a modern renewable energy design. Instead, the system seems to be specifically set up to prove the Spherical Nature of the Movement of the Heavens, and to do that task in a particularly spectacular and dramatic way, using a rising “mini-sun”.

To show why, I made some videos using the CAD model: Videos generated from the CAD model can be seen on this YouTube link.

Everything else about Stonehenge seems to fit well with the theory: The internally facing circular bank, the Aubrey holes, Station Stones 92 & 94 opposing Station Stones 91 and 93 (raised and low stone sets), the orientation of the axis, the heel-stone and the ‘slaughter-stone’; these all appear to be perfect two-dimensional descriptions of the movement of the heavens assuming that the Earth is a fixed, central, World. In other words, these seem to be a library of knowledge that allows participants to remain on Earth but to physically walk (in one’s imagination) amongst the stars.

The video sequence on the web, parts 1 to 4, shows how the “mini-sun” is generated on Earth to show the spherical nature of the movement of the heavens. Later videos show why the outer stones, bank and so on must be placed exactly where they are. However, I wasn’t sure how much interest there would be in the videos so I haven’t posted up the latter video sequences. The theory also anticipates the position of the far barrows (eg King’s Barrows) and provides an explanation why bell barrow 11 is where it is and of such prominence.

Inside Stonehenge itself, the theory predicts the reason for every single recorded feature of the Stones; their height, size, their cut, their position and their sequence of construction. It also predicts some extra features; essential elements without which the device cannot function. These also exist at Stonehenge but, as they are not recorded as significant by textbooks, I had to go inside the circle to see if these features existed in the precise positions dictated by the design.

On the other hand, these might all be coincidence and I took the view that I shouldn’t abandon the patents just because of an unusual set of coincidences.

So I decided to write a novel in such a way that the meaning of the coincidences could be understood: This became a “Young Adult” adventure fictional novel written in a style that allows the mathematics to be gradually introduced and explained. However, although the bulk of the story is adventure fiction, the book’s Epilogue and the Appendix are non-fiction and relatively high level.

Hyperion and then Atlas (see Bibliotheca Historica by Diodorus Siculus) were recorded in mythology as the first publishers of the Spherical Nature of the Movement of the Heavens. It is possible that the means of publication was of stone rather than paper. For this reason, I made “Heavens Henge” part of the title because, to prove spherical movement, you need to define where the hinge is (the angle at which the heavens sit on the “Shoulders of Atlas” or, in modern parlance, the North and South Poles.) A common memory of this may be stored in the words Stone and Henge (possibly meaning Hinge,) which are very old words with similarities in all North European languages.

The book’s data can be found on this link, while this is
the current videos playlist stream
.

{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }

jon June 15, 2011 at 10:15 am

Hi Dennis

Just re-reading my email, it strikes me that the 3-season holes aren’t easy to see at Stonehenge (though google-earth shows them well):

From the centre of the monument, directly South, are the Stone sets 53 and 54. Stone 54′s adjacent edge is precisely South and below is a good photo of the three sockets that are required to be on that Stone for the three-season device:

http://viewfinder.english-heritage.org.uk/search/reference.aspx?uid=108844&index=72&mainQuery=stonehenge&searchType=all&form=home

Aynslie Hanna June 19, 2011 at 10:31 pm

Hinge and hang are closely related words, therefore henge is as well.

Gilbert June 21, 2011 at 9:06 pm

Inspiring. A great reflection. And to imagine they could have handled this thousands of years ago without PCs, videos or the written word. I tried to explain your theory to a friend. And couldn’t.

But the species that made a switch from Mesolithic to Neolithic must have been highly intelligent. This change from hunter-gatherer to farmer really separated man from beast because suddenly you are behaving now to reap the harvest for you and the community months later. This awareness of the long-term. A year was greater part of their short lives than today. Stonehenge and attendant observations of the heavens all came with this awareness of the long-term.

What I like about this theory is that it comes from taking the opposite approach from conventional archaeology. Don’t wrack your brains trying to figure it out. Go away and return when you recognise something similar, however improbably it may seem. Look for matches and if they exceed the statistical threshold for coincidence – make a claim. In this particular case it may have been an advantage that the Patent Office weren’t better informed.

What I like about this theory is that the more you study it the better it gets. To begin with I didn’t like anything to do with solar reflection to be related to Stonehenge simply because Stonehenge isn’t orientated due south. The practical problem is that if you are orientated due south the focus of the reflection stands in the middle of the transmission. Anything like this works better if offset. And hey, I have one of those on my house. It’s called a satellite antenna.

Then there is the aspect of heat. I can accept the use of tin 4,000 years ago, but I don’t accept titanium. Yes titanium was also discovered in Cornwall, but that was in the 18th Century. The potential problem I’m thinking of is that with all those reflections from the sun, including the infra-red waveband, any focus not made of titanium – with a melting point 8 times higher that tin – will simply melt down.
If the structure of Stonehenge could function as a giant reflector, then yes it could be used to show the spherical nature of the heavens, but in the ritual landscape Stonehenge might also have worked as a solar powered crematorium.

Thank you Jonathan for providing more nourishment for etymologists.
We have already covered Henge is the sense of Hange, stones hanging in the air. You have an explanation for Stone Hinge. We have just two vowels left to consider – Stone Honge and Stone Hunge.

Unless you are living in China there is not much to go on today with Honge. There are few short words that don’t exist or no longer exists and this is one of them.

Hunge could be hunch. And this is delightful. Quote “originally (c.1500) a verb, “to push, thrust,” of unknown origin. Meaning “raise or bend into a hump” is 1590s, in hunchbacked. Perhaps a variant of bunch. The noun is attested from 1620s, originally “a push, thrust.” Figurative sense of “hint, tip” (a “push” toward a solution or answer), first recorded 1849, led to that of “premonition, presentiment” (1904).

It was much earlier but there was a lot of shoving going on so Stone Hunch works. It also works in modern times. The monument is just a Hunch, an Idea. A glorious intellectual pursuit.

The next step – we need to re-examine the tops of the lintels.

Geo Cur June 21, 2011 at 9:50 pm
jon June 22, 2011 at 10:40 am

Thanks for the comments. I came back to this page to crib some text for an article for the Institution of Civil Engineers!

The reflector, used to create the mini-sun, doesn’t need to be a high temperature material even through the concentration is very high (it burnt through rubber, accidentally, on one of the tests). The reason for this is that all it’s doing is reflecting the heat away: So even highly polished tin would have done the job (though I think I would have used a polished copper or brass plate with indentures were I trying to achieve the effect of a sparkling ‘mini-sun’)

I also looked into the idea of a ‘solar crematorium’ in the book: If you’re burning at only several hundred degrees, close grained wood would do the job (as a one-off) because it forms a protective charcoal layer on the outside: Timber, particularly Oak, can be an exceptionally good fireproof material.

Here’s a forum where they’ve discussed some of Oak’s fire resisting properties

http://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/properties-of-oak-t2558.html

I’ve added another video (the 5th) to the sequence. When I get round to it, the seventh video is the best (it’s only knocked up in preliminary format at the moment)

jon June 22, 2011 at 11:50 am

Another thought about configuration:

If you go with the idea of a solar crematorium, then the only possible configuration in as found at Stonehenge (ie to the North-East): The reason for this is that if you configure for the North or North-West then at some point during the day your departed will be going downwards as they burn. If you configure it for North East, they will always, under every season and every timing, be going upwards.

Also, if you want to prove the Spherical Nature of the movement of the Sun, then your counter-weight (which drops down to the inner horseshoe) will conflict with the pole at Midday unless you align it to either the North East (for afternoon use only) or the North West (for morning use only). Given the choice I would go for afternoon because it allows time for people to get ready.

Aynslie Hanna June 26, 2011 at 2:22 pm

I just finished watching videos 1 – 5. The whole concept is extremely interesting, especially when you show your specifications for the device to work, then strip it all away to reveal a framework that exactly matches the structure of Stonehenge.

The only question I have is this: Why might there have been so great a need to prove the spherical nature of the movement of the sun that a structure which would stand for millennia was built? Any thoughts?

jon June 27, 2011 at 9:34 am

Hi Aynslie

I do not know: As well as requiring all of Stonehenge’s features (including the avenue, bank, station stones and so on) the theory also makes some very interesting predictions about what else there would be. Perhaps it throws up as many questions as it answers?

The rest of the surrounds at Stonehenge appear to be a library of knowledge about our solar system, as would have been seen then: I think Dennis should have a copy of the book by now and that describes all of the other features, and some other local landscape requirements, in a lot more detail (see Chapter 25 for the reasons for the positioning of the inner bank, the Stations, Aubreys, Slaughter, Heel and so on).

There’s no better method of teaching than seeing it for yourself. The inner arrangement allows people to see the movement of the heavens for themselves: The layout of the outer area allows you to walk within a mini-solar system (as defined by a fixed central Earth) and then check by eye how the real thing matches up. If the theory is true, the Stonehenge people published their phenomenal discoveries (about our world) using stone set in the paper of our landscape.

Perhaps it is the same as today? We build some public buildings, particularly libraries, to be a permanent legacy for our children and future generations.

Jon

Aynslie Hanna June 28, 2011 at 2:11 pm

Jon – I find your theory even more tantalizing now. I’ve looked into purchasing your book, but the price is more than I can justify paying for a single book at this point in time. Maybe sometime in the future. Once he’s had a chance to read it, would you object to Dennis sharing some of your ideas regarding how you see the area surrounding Stonehenge fitting into your theory as a whole? Or would that be too much of a spoiler for your book?

jon June 29, 2011 at 7:23 am

Hi Aynslie

The thing to do is to pinch Dennis’s copy! It is a bit expensive for a novel: The printer did mention that my specification (for the first edition) was the most expensive combination possible. In my defence, there was a set of very specific things I wanted to show and ordinary paper and/or digital printing might not have worked.

When I drew this out for a technical paper a few years back, the idea of explaining using a fixed earth model was to show how the system works (it’s much easier to understand this way). It was a bit spooky to overlay my old drawing onto a proper plan (from “Stonehenge in its Landscape”) and find that they match. The trick is that the points of the compass are defined by the logic of a fixed World, thought to be located at the centre of the Universe, and not by a compass.

No objection to sharing the main ideas and principles. There’s a shed-load of other coincidences: Some are just alluded to in the novel and the graphics, but the main ones, the first two dozen or so, are listed and referenced to archaeological data in the Appendix. We couldn’t figure out how to make a bayesian probability analysis work; the figures always exceeded unity by a big margin, so I thought it would be better to just lay out the data at the back of the book (particularly the first edition) for anyone who’s interested and knows how to do the analysis properly.

Makes it sound like a really technical book doesn’t it? It isn’t, it’s the opposite.

Jonathan September 27, 2011 at 1:10 pm

The ideas are also being looked at in more detail at: http://www.megalithic.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=Forum&file=viewtopic&topic=4660&forum=4&start=200
I’d be particularly interested in Dennis’s comments.

Jonathan December 11, 2011 at 7:30 pm

Just an update:
Original arrangement here:http://ow.ly/7SE0A (Origins)
Additional data here: http://ow.ly/7SEcy (Of Hyperion)
Avebury (new coincidences) later this month
Other monuments (new coincidences) next year
Cheers
jon

Jonathan February 8, 2012 at 6:09 pm

Starting to work my way through other monuments. Here’s an interesting one from a fixed world perspective (Thornborough Henges)

http://www.megalithic.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=Forum&file=viewtopic&topic=4660&forum=4&start=320

Jonathan February 13, 2012 at 11:31 am
Jonathan June 21, 2012 at 9:25 am
Jonathan November 18, 2012 at 8:07 am
Jonathan January 8, 2013 at 6:05 pm

Solving the Neolithic Universe also done as a paperback. Been published today:

http://www.stonehinge.co.uk

A bit surprised that nobody had already taken that domain name!

Jonathan June 5, 2013 at 7:32 am

I’m now running scale prototype tests to see if there is anything new to be learned from Stonehenge. So far, it’s been seriously useful:

http://heavenshenge.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/full-prototype-test-of-stonehenge-model.html

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: