Foamhenge

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
20 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Foamhenge

VictorEngel
Dear Calendar People,

Did any of you watch the National Geographic show on Stonehenge last night?
For those who didn't, here are some things I remember from the show (in no
particular order).

* A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed about 10 miles
from Stonehenge. The pieces were manufactured carefully at a special effects
studio and shipped by train and truck (lory?) to the site. It took 5 days
just to load the train. Individual hollow styrofoam pieces weighed as much
as several hundred pounds.
* A group of 25 men successfully moved a 12 ton block of concrete at a rate
that would be equivalent to moving the stones to the Stonehenge location
from the source location in three months. They did this using logs as
levers. It looked kind of like rowing a boat, with the 25th person standing
on the stone calling commands to keep everyone synchronized.
* A sarsen collected from a local field was readily carved using a stronger
stone dangling by a rope from a frame, much to the surprise of a local stone
worker. These round stronger stones are plentiful around Stonehenge.
* The person organizing the reconstruction project stated that despite much
research, they remain puzzled about the fact that one of the 30 sarsens
seems designed to be smaller than the rest (I'm thinking, hmmm -- Stonehenge
was designed to track the sun and the moon. The moon's orbit takes 29 1/2
days. There are 29 1/2 sarsens....).
* Alignment of the site was probably more likely to coincide with winter
sunset than summer sunrise, because that way, the alignment would occure and
be presented for people appreaching the site (they'd be walking toward
rather than away from the phenomenon).
* Because of a shift in the orientation of the sun over the past 4000 years,
the actual location of the sun 4000 years ago was approximated using a
powerful truck-mounted spotlight (it was closer than 93 million miles).
* An acoustics professional set up shot in Foamhenge and discovered some
interesting things, for example, if pink noise is broadcase within the
circle, a very strong change in pitch is noticed when walking around. Also,
sound seems to be focused toward the entrance.
* It is very difficult to see into or out of the circle.
* The druids performed a religious ceremony at Foamhenge.
* In investigating where the blue stones came from, they discovered a wall.
* Woodhenge is for the living -- stonehenge is for the dead.
* The partial sarsen may have been supplemented with wooden posts and topped
with wooden lintels.
* Lots of pig bones were found in the area (I seem to recall reading
previously about sheep bones and am now curious about this discrepancy).
* There is a Stonehenge alignment of the moon pointing to its southernmost
extent, which happens once in 19 years. This was designed to track the
longest moonlit nights that otherwise would be dark.
 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Lance Latham
RE:

> ...the National Geographic show on
> Stonehenge last night?

> * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was
> constructed about 10 miles
> from Stonehenge.

Lance replies:
I missed that show. On the subject of Pseudohenges, I
recall seeing a model of Stonehenge in Texas, in the
area around Hunt, between the north and south forks of
the Guadalupe river. It's sitting out in a field,
visible from the road.

I couldn't be sure of the scale, but I'm guessing it's
smaller than 1:1, and it may not be a complete model.
Materials I'm not sure about. It could be plaster or
concrete over chicken wire on a frame. The area has
plenty of rock, but I doubt that someone went to the
trouble of moving large rocks for what appears to be
an entirely trivial purpose.

The henge appears to be on private property, and I
couldn't determine the orientation of it from the
road.

I don't live in the area any more, so I can't visit
for more details. But it would be a pleasant day trip
for you, Victor. It's not too far from the famous
'Boot Fence' in the same area, so you could take a
camera and have some fun. The area is very scenic
anyway, lots of big cypress trees on the rivers.

Some phone calls would probably track down an owner,
and/or you could probably just knock on some doors and
get permission to see it up close and personal.


> It took 5 days
> just to load the train.

Lance replies:
Remember that labor in the UK is heavily unionized...

>> * A group of 25 men successfully moved a 12 ton
> block of concrete at a rate
> that would be equivalent to moving the stones to the
> Stonehenge location
> from the source location in three months. They did
> this using logs as
> levers. It looked kind of like rowing a boat, with
> the 25th person standing
> on the stone calling commands to keep everyone
> synchronized.

Lance replies:
It has been suggested that the work of moving stones
over ground was done in the winter, when men were not
otherwise occupied with agriculture, and the frozen
ground would have made sledding a heavy object easier.
I like the idea of log rollers better than a sled
system, but harder ground might have been
advantageous.

I recall seeing a large sled designed to haul logs in
the Adirondack Musuem last year. The hauling work was
done in winter, at night. The process was facilitated
by splitting workers into several specialized groups,
one of which had the job of melting and smoothing the
ice on the ground and letting it refreeze before the
sled passed over it.

> * Because of a shift in the orientation of the sun
> over the past 4000 years,
> the actual location of the sun 4000 years ago was
> approximated using a
> powerful truck-mounted spotlight (it was closer than
> 93 million miles).

Lance replies:
In Alaska, a reporter learned that the Alyeska company
was experiencing problems with its communications
satellites due to solar flares, and she interviewed
one of the chief engineers about their plans to
correct the problem. He apparently quickly tired of
her goofy questions, and told her that Alyeska was
going to solve the problem by moving the sun. Her
story appeared in the newspaper with a 'Alyeska to
move the Sun' header shortly thereafter, much to the
delight of readers.

> * The druids performed a religious ceremony at
> Foamhenge.

Lance replies:
Given that these modern-day nuts have no connection
with ancient Druids, and given that the Druids had
nothing to do with construction at Stonehenge, why are
'the Druids' allowed to conduct 'ceremonies' at
Stonehenge? Or anywhere else? Who makes these
decisions anyway?

-Lance




Lance Latham
[hidden email]
Phone:    (518) 274-0570
Address: 78 Hudson Avenue/1st Floor, Green Island, NY 12183
 





               
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

VictorEngel
In reply to this post by VictorEngel
Dear Lance and Calendar People,

> Lance replies:
> I missed that show. On the subject of Pseudohenges, I
> recall seeing a model of Stonehenge in Texas, in the
> area around Hunt, between the north and south forks of
> the Guadalupe river. It's sitting out in a field,
> visible from the road.

I've heard of it, but I've not yet seen it. I'll have to make a point of
seeing it at some point. Sounds like something akin to Cadillac Ranch.
 
> > It took 5 days
> > just to load the train.
>
> Lance replies:
> Remember that labor in the UK is heavily unionized...

The excuse by the commentator was that they didn't want to damage the
"stones".
 
> Lance replies:
> It has been suggested that the work of moving stones
> over ground was done in the winter, when men were not
> otherwise occupied with agriculture, and the frozen
> ground would have made sledding a heavy object easier.

Level or downhill, I can see that, but there was a lot of uphill involved.

> I like the idea of log rollers better than a sled
> system, but harder ground might have been
> advantageous.

There was another place (I don't remember where, but Indonesia is coming to
mind) the show referred to where stone construction is currently being done.
The clips they showed of that showed that they used log rollers.

I once saw a show about logging in the Amazon, and they showed how huge logs
(three feet diameter trunks) were moved through the forest by sliding them
along a trail made of logs. The logs didn't roll, but the huge logs easily
slid across them after the bark was removed to reveal a slippery smooth
surface. It didn't take many men to move the huge logs this way.

> going to solve the problem by moving the sun. Her
> story appeared in the newspaper with a 'Alyeska to
> move the Sun' header shortly thereafter, much to the
> delight of readers.

<G>
 

> > * The druids performed a religious ceremony at
> > Foamhenge.
>
> Lance replies:
> Given that these modern-day nuts have no connection
> with ancient Druids, and given that the Druids had
> nothing to do with construction at Stonehenge, why are
> 'the Druids' allowed to conduct 'ceremonies' at
> Stonehenge? Or anywhere else? Who makes these
> decisions anyway?

But I wonder if they'd allow Christmas festivities? Here's a quote from
Cactus Pryor on today's morning program. Cactus goes into a store and is
greeted, "Helllo, how are you doing today?" Cactus: "Politically incorrect."
Clerk: "Good. Merry Christmas." Cactus: "Merry Christmas."

Victor
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Ivan Van Laningham
Hi All--

I googled "stonehenge replica" and found several:

Maryhill Museum in Washington state:

http://www.maryhillmuseum.org/about.htm
and
http://www.spokaneoutdoors.com/stonehg.htm

There is a new one in New Zealand, "about an hour's drive from New
Zealand's capital of Wellington":

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4264945.stm

Some guy in Michigan:

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/07/20/michigan_carpenter_b.html

U of Texas of the Permian Basin may get one:

http://www.oaoa.com/news/nw050904c.htm

This may be the one Lance spotted from the road; it's near Kerrville TX:

http://www.alfredshepperd.com/stonehenge/untitled.html

The welcome page says "The original, located on the Salisbury plain in
England, was built over 3,500 years ago. Its purpose is unknown and
perhaps unknowable."  That fits with my memory of news reports when it
was built, that the guy who built it didn't do any research and
therefore the thing's alignments are all out of whack.  I can't remember
if he plotted it out to have exactly the same orientation as the
original, or if he just plonked it down any old way, but in any case the
"reproduction" is unusable as a calculator.

Here's a whole shitload of links to various stonehenges (including
Cadillac Ranch):

http://www.luckymojo.com/stonehenge.html

And my own favorite; don't forget this one:

http://www.carhenge.com/

Metta,
Ivan

"Engel,Victor" wrote:
>
> I've heard of it, but I've not yet seen it. I'll have to make a point of
> seeing it at some point. Sounds like something akin to Cadillac Ranch.
>
----------------------------------------------
Ivan Van Laningham
God N Locomotive Works
http://www.andi-holmes.com/
http://www.foretec.com/python/workshops/1998-11/proceedings.html
Army Signal Corps:  Cu Chi, Class of '70
Author:  Teach Yourself Python in 24 Hours
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Simon Cassidy
In reply to this post by VictorEngel
"Engel,Victor" wrote:
> Did any of you watch the National Geographic show on Stonehenge last night?
> For those who didn't, here are some things I remember from the show (in no
> particular order).
...
> * The person organizing the reconstruction project stated that despite much
> research, they remain puzzled about the fact that one of the 30 sarsens
> seems designed to be smaller than the rest (I'm thinking, hmmm -- Stonehenge
> was designed to track the sun and the moon. The moon's orbit takes 29 1/2
> days. There are 29 1/2 sarsens....).

Simon notes:
Finally some experts are beginning to realise what I have been talking and writing
about for many years (since 1984) in regard to the number of stones in the central
sarsen structure of Stonehenge (as erected prior to the return of the bluestones,
see http://www.hermetic.ch/cal_stud/cassidy/#reconstruction and see the zero page
of my acrobat file http://www.hermetic.ch/cal_stud/cassidy/shspk1zc.pdf).

Not only does a half-height circle-upright allow the representation of a lunar
synodic month as 29 and a half days, but also it makes the total number of central
sarsen stones represent the number of days in one fifth of a usual seasonal year
(5 trilithons times 73 total stones = 365 days in a normal year).


"Engel,Victor" also noted that Nat. Geo. claimed:
...
> * The partial sarsen may have been supplemented with wooden posts and topped
> with wooden lintels.

Simon continues:
As I have noted in a prior message to CALNDR-L, the resultant ambiguity in the number
of lintels (if e.g. two extra but temporary wooden lintels connected a ring of 28 stone
lintels) could have been intentional, in order to allow the representation of BOTH
the METONIC LUNAR CYCLE (thirty small lintels representing 6 synodic months each, plus
the five larger lintels representing 11 synodic months for a total of 235 synodic months)
and the SAROS ECLIPSE PREDICTION INTERVAL (twenty-eight stone lintels of 6 months each
plus five of 11 months each totalling 223 synodic months).

6 and 11 lunar synodic months are the shortest possible intervals between risk of
naked eye lunar eclipses (eclipsed full moons).

The two temporary wooden lintels (connecting the ring of 28 stone lintels above the
half-height southernmost sarsen standing stone, #11) would represent the two eclipse
intervals (of 6 synodic months each) that extend an accurate and reliable Saros
prediction interval of 223 months into the calendrically useful period of nineteen
solar years (235 synodic lunar months, a much less reliable eclipse cycle).

Dee's Years,
Simon Cassidy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Tom Peters-2
In reply to this post by VictorEngel
Op 5-dec-2005, om 16:18 heeft Engel,Victor het volgende geschreven:

> Dear Calendar People,
>
> * The person organizing the reconstruction project stated that  
> despite much
> research, they remain puzzled about the fact that one of the 30  
> sarsens
> seems designed to be smaller than the rest (I'm thinking, hmmm --  
> Stonehenge
> was designed to track the sun and the moon. The moon's orbit takes  
> 29 1/2
> days. There are 29 1/2 sarsens....).

That is in fact the reconstruction by Simon Cassidy.  See:
http://www.hermetic.ch/cal_stud/cassidy/
http://www.hermetic.ch/cal_stud/cassidy/shspk1zc.pdf

It seems pretty obvious.  When will people get a clue?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Lance Latham
In reply to this post by VictorEngel
RE:

> The excuse by the commentator was that they didn't
> want to damage the
> "stones".

Lance replies:
Right...

> Level or downhill, I can see that, but there was a
> lot of uphill involved.

Lance replies:
I think I'd feel safer sledding stuff along over ice
on a downhill. Downhill with rollers could get you
into trouble pretty quick; losing control of a large
stone block is not my idea of fun.
 
> But I wonder if they'd allow Christmas festivities?
> Here's a quote from
> Cactus Pryor...

Lance replies:
Aw, jeez, Victor, don't get me started on that
sawed-off little runt.

-Lance


Lance Latham
[hidden email]
Phone:    (518) 274-0570
Address: 78 Hudson Avenue/1st Floor, Green Island, NY 12183
 





               
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL ? Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Lance Latham
In reply to this post by Ivan Van Laningham
RE:

> This may be the one Lance spotted from the road;
> it's near Kerrville TX:
>
>
http://www.alfredshepperd.com/stonehenge/untitled.html

Lance replies:
It's in the Kerrville area; that's very likely. Hunt
and Ingram are smaller towns in that vicinity. And the
general appearance suggests that it was plopped down
with the idea of having a general similarity of
appearance, rather than any fidelity to details. I
can't imagine the thing being usable, given that
alignments and even general shape would have to be
recalculated for the different coordinates.
 
-Lance


Lance Latham
[hidden email]
Phone:    (518) 274-0570
Address: 78 Hudson Avenue/1st Floor, Green Island, NY 12183
 





               
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Vladimir Pakhomov
In reply to this post by Tom Peters-2
Hello all of you,

There is a new mathematical theory of Stonehenge.
Andrei Zlobin - Solution of a problem of german scientist Dirichlet for the
equation of Laplace.
See "The Soviet UFO Files: Paranormal Encounters Behind the Iron Curtain" by
Paul Stonehill.

Vladimir Pakhomov
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

John Hynes
In reply to this post by VictorEngel
> * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed

Actually, it was 1:12 scale because someone wrote 18" instead of 18'...

(For those who miss the reference, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap:

"A memorable segment of the film occurs when a miniature replica of
Stonehenge is lowered onto the stage behind the band and two dwarves come on
stage to dance around it. The band members were expecting a full sized
18-foot replica, but were instead presented with an 18-inch model, made
exactly as indicated on the original plan that Tufnel had sketched hurriedly
(with two tick marks after the '18' instead of one) and handed to the band's
manager. St Hubbins laments during the gig debrief, 'I think that the
problem may have been... that there was a Stonehenge monument on the stage
that was in danger of being crushed... by a dwarf.'")

--
John Hynes
www.decimaltime.org
2005 Dec. 6.165 UT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Engel,Victor" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 7:18 AM
Subject: Foamhenge


> Dear Calendar People,
>
> Did any of you watch the National Geographic show on Stonehenge last
> night?
> For those who didn't, here are some things I remember from the show (in no
> particular order).
>
> * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed about 10
> miles
> from Stonehenge. The pieces were manufactured carefully at a special
> effects
> studio and shipped by train and truck (lory?) to the site. It took 5 days
> just to load the train. Individual hollow styrofoam pieces weighed as much
> as several hundred pounds.
> * A group of 25 men successfully moved a 12 ton block of concrete at a
> rate
> that would be equivalent to moving the stones to the Stonehenge location
> from the source location in three months. They did this using logs as
> levers. It looked kind of like rowing a boat, with the 25th person
> standing
> on the stone calling commands to keep everyone synchronized.
> * A sarsen collected from a local field was readily carved using a
> stronger
> stone dangling by a rope from a frame, much to the surprise of a local
> stone
> worker. These round stronger stones are plentiful around Stonehenge.
> * The person organizing the reconstruction project stated that despite
> much
> research, they remain puzzled about the fact that one of the 30 sarsens
> seems designed to be smaller than the rest (I'm thinking, hmmm --  
> Stonehenge
> was designed to track the sun and the moon. The moon's orbit takes 29 1/2
> days. There are 29 1/2 sarsens....).
> * Alignment of the site was probably more likely to coincide with winter
> sunset than summer sunrise, because that way, the alignment would occure
> and
> be presented for people appreaching the site (they'd be walking toward
> rather than away from the phenomenon).
> * Because of a shift in the orientation of the sun over the past 4000
> years,
> the actual location of the sun 4000 years ago was approximated using a
> powerful truck-mounted spotlight (it was closer than 93 million miles).
> * An acoustics professional set up shot in Foamhenge and discovered some
> interesting things, for example, if pink noise is broadcase within the
> circle, a very strong change in pitch is noticed when walking around.
> Also,
> sound seems to be focused toward the entrance.
> * It is very difficult to see into or out of the circle.
> * The druids performed a religious ceremony at Foamhenge.
> * In investigating where the blue stones came from, they discovered a
> wall.
> * Woodhenge is for the living -- stonehenge is for the dead.
> * The partial sarsen may have been supplemented with wooden posts and
> topped
> with wooden lintels.
> * Lots of pig bones were found in the area (I seem to recall reading
> previously about sheep bones and am now curious about this discrepancy).
> * There is a Stonehenge alignment of the moon pointing to its southernmost
> extent, which happens once in 19 years. This was designed to track the
> longest moonlit nights that otherwise would be dark.
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Victor Engel
John Hynes wrote:

>> * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed
>
>
> Actually, it was 1:12 scale because someone wrote 18" instead of 18'...
>
> (For those who miss the reference, see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap:

For the url to work, omit the trailing colon thus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Simon Cassidy
In reply to this post by John Hynes
Simon notes:
John Hynes is wrong. The styrofoam Stonehenge in question is a full scale
replica erected on Salisbury plain near Stonehenge itself for Channel 5
(English TV broadcaster) and for National Geographic Channel, to a design of
the official Stonehenge and Avebury archaeologist, Mike Pitts. It was completed
for the summer solstice of 2005. See the following web pages for more detail:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alun/sets/482095/
http://archaeoastronomy.co.uk/?page_id=310
http://archaeoastronomy.co.uk/?p=335

Dee's Years,
Simon Cassidy


John Hynes wrote:

>
> > * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed
>
> Actually, it was 1:12 scale because someone wrote 18" instead of 18'...
>
> (For those who miss the reference, see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap:
>
> "A memorable segment of the film occurs when a miniature replica of
> Stonehenge is lowered onto the stage behind the band and two dwarves come on
> stage to dance around it. The band members were expecting a full sized
> 18-foot replica, but were instead presented with an 18-inch model, made
> exactly as indicated on the original plan that Tufnel had sketched hurriedly
> (with two tick marks after the '18' instead of one) and handed to the band's
> manager. St Hubbins laments during the gig debrief, 'I think that the
> problem may have been... that there was a Stonehenge monument on the stage
> that was in danger of being crushed... by a dwarf.'")
>
> --
> John Hynes
> www.decimaltime.org
> 2005 Dec. 6.165 UT
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Engel,Victor" <[hidden email]>
> To: <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 7:18 AM
> Subject: Foamhenge
>
> > Dear Calendar People,
> >
> > Did any of you watch the National Geographic show on Stonehenge last
> > night?
> > For those who didn't, here are some things I remember from the show (in no
> > particular order).
> >
> > * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed about 10
> > miles
> > from Stonehenge. The pieces were manufactured carefully at a special
> > effects
> > studio and shipped by train and truck (lory?) to the site. It took 5 days
> > just to load the train. Individual hollow styrofoam pieces weighed as much
> > as several hundred pounds.
> > * A group of 25 men successfully moved a 12 ton block of concrete at a
> > rate
> > that would be equivalent to moving the stones to the Stonehenge location
> > from the source location in three months. They did this using logs as
> > levers. It looked kind of like rowing a boat, with the 25th person
> > standing
> > on the stone calling commands to keep everyone synchronized.
> > * A sarsen collected from a local field was readily carved using a
> > stronger
> > stone dangling by a rope from a frame, much to the surprise of a local
> > stone
> > worker. These round stronger stones are plentiful around Stonehenge.
> > * The person organizing the reconstruction project stated that despite
> > much
> > research, they remain puzzled about the fact that one of the 30 sarsens
> > seems designed to be smaller than the rest (I'm thinking, hmmm --
> > Stonehenge
> > was designed to track the sun and the moon. The moon's orbit takes 29 1/2
> > days. There are 29 1/2 sarsens....).
> > * Alignment of the site was probably more likely to coincide with winter
> > sunset than summer sunrise, because that way, the alignment would occure
> > and
> > be presented for people appreaching the site (they'd be walking toward
> > rather than away from the phenomenon).
> > * Because of a shift in the orientation of the sun over the past 4000
> > years,
> > the actual location of the sun 4000 years ago was approximated using a
> > powerful truck-mounted spotlight (it was closer than 93 million miles).
> > * An acoustics professional set up shot in Foamhenge and discovered some
> > interesting things, for example, if pink noise is broadcase within the
> > circle, a very strong change in pitch is noticed when walking around.
> > Also,
> > sound seems to be focused toward the entrance.
> > * It is very difficult to see into or out of the circle.
> > * The druids performed a religious ceremony at Foamhenge.
> > * In investigating where the blue stones came from, they discovered a
> > wall.
> > * Woodhenge is for the living -- stonehenge is for the dead.
> > * The partial sarsen may have been supplemented with wooden posts and
> > topped
> > with wooden lintels.
> > * Lots of pig bones were found in the area (I seem to recall reading
> > previously about sheep bones and am now curious about this discrepancy).
> > * There is a Stonehenge alignment of the moon pointing to its southernmost
> > extent, which happens once in 19 years. This was designed to track the
> > longest moonlit nights that otherwise would be dark.
> >
> >
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Lance Latham
In reply to this post by John Hynes
> > * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was
> constructed
>
> Actually, it was 1:12 scale because someone wrote
> 18" instead of 18'...

Lance replies:
But note that the original statement, that five days
were required to load the pieces onto a train, is
entirely accurate. I was initially puzzled, knowing
the productivity of UK labor, but this information
actually makes things fall into place.

-Lance


Lance Latham
[hidden email]
Phone:    (518) 274-0570
Address: 78 Hudson Avenue/1st Floor, Green Island, NY 12183
 





               
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL ? Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

Lance Latham
In reply to this post by Simon Cassidy
RE:

> Simon notes:
> John Hynes is wrong. The styrofoam Stonehenge in
> question is a full scale
> replica

Lance replies:
Uh, John's message was satirical in nature. As was
mine.

-Lance



Lance Latham
[hidden email]
Phone:    (518) 274-0570
Address: 78 Hudson Avenue/1st Floor, Green Island, NY 12183
 




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

John Hynes
In reply to this post by Simon Cassidy
As Lance indicated, my tongue was firmly planted in my cheek when I posted
that, and I expected anybody who has seen the mockumentary "This is Spinal
Tap" to get the reference, and quoted from Wikipedia for those who have not.
It was the first thing that came to mind when the phrase "styrofoam
Stonehenge" was uttered.  Actually, only one set of stones, with two
uprights and a top piece, were built, and little people were hired in a
futile attempt to make them not appear as small as they were.

In the sequel, 1:1 scale replicas were built, but the roadies could not fit
them through the doors.  I believe that this was based upon an actual
incident with a real band.

--
John Hynes
www.decimaltime.org
2005 Dec. 8.509 UT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon Cassidy" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 1:55 AM
Subject: Re: Foamhenge


> Simon notes:
> John Hynes is wrong. The styrofoam Stonehenge in question is a full scale
> replica erected on Salisbury plain near Stonehenge itself for Channel 5
> (English TV broadcaster) and for National Geographic Channel, to a design
> of
> the official Stonehenge and Avebury archaeologist, Mike Pitts. It was
> completed
> for the summer solstice of 2005. See the following web pages for more
> detail:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/alun/sets/482095/
> http://archaeoastronomy.co.uk/?page_id=310
> http://archaeoastronomy.co.uk/?p=335
>
> Dee's Years,
> Simon Cassidy
>
>
> John Hynes wrote:
>>
>> > * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed
>>
>> Actually, it was 1:12 scale because someone wrote 18" instead of 18'...
>>
>> (For those who miss the reference, see
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap:
>>
>> "A memorable segment of the film occurs when a miniature replica of
>> Stonehenge is lowered onto the stage behind the band and two dwarves come
>> on
>> stage to dance around it. The band members were expecting a full sized
>> 18-foot replica, but were instead presented with an 18-inch model, made
>> exactly as indicated on the original plan that Tufnel had sketched
>> hurriedly
>> (with two tick marks after the '18' instead of one) and handed to the
>> band's
>> manager. St Hubbins laments during the gig debrief, 'I think that the
>> problem may have been... that there was a Stonehenge monument on the
>> stage
>> that was in danger of being crushed... by a dwarf.'")
>>
>> --
>> John Hynes
>> www.decimaltime.org
>> 2005 Dec. 6.165 UT
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Engel,Victor" <[hidden email]>
>> To: <[hidden email]>
>> Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 7:18 AM
>> Subject: Foamhenge
>>
>> > Dear Calendar People,
>> >
>> > Did any of you watch the National Geographic show on Stonehenge last
>> > night?
>> > For those who didn't, here are some things I remember from the show (in
>> > no
>> > particular order).
>> >
>> > * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed about 10
>> > miles
>> > from Stonehenge. The pieces were manufactured carefully at a special
>> > effects
>> > studio and shipped by train and truck (lory?) to the site. It took 5
>> > days
>> > just to load the train. Individual hollow styrofoam pieces weighed as
>> > much
>> > as several hundred pounds.
>> > * A group of 25 men successfully moved a 12 ton block of concrete at a
>> > rate
>> > that would be equivalent to moving the stones to the Stonehenge
>> > location
>> > from the source location in three months. They did this using logs as
>> > levers. It looked kind of like rowing a boat, with the 25th person
>> > standing
>> > on the stone calling commands to keep everyone synchronized.
>> > * A sarsen collected from a local field was readily carved using a
>> > stronger
>> > stone dangling by a rope from a frame, much to the surprise of a local
>> > stone
>> > worker. These round stronger stones are plentiful around Stonehenge.
>> > * The person organizing the reconstruction project stated that despite
>> > much
>> > research, they remain puzzled about the fact that one of the 30 sarsens
>> > seems designed to be smaller than the rest (I'm thinking, hmmm --
>> > Stonehenge
>> > was designed to track the sun and the moon. The moon's orbit takes 29
>> > 1/2
>> > days. There are 29 1/2 sarsens....).
>> > * Alignment of the site was probably more likely to coincide with
>> > winter
>> > sunset than summer sunrise, because that way, the alignment would
>> > occure
>> > and
>> > be presented for people appreaching the site (they'd be walking toward
>> > rather than away from the phenomenon).
>> > * Because of a shift in the orientation of the sun over the past 4000
>> > years,
>> > the actual location of the sun 4000 years ago was approximated using a
>> > powerful truck-mounted spotlight (it was closer than 93 million miles).
>> > * An acoustics professional set up shot in Foamhenge and discovered
>> > some
>> > interesting things, for example, if pink noise is broadcase within the
>> > circle, a very strong change in pitch is noticed when walking around.
>> > Also,
>> > sound seems to be focused toward the entrance.
>> > * It is very difficult to see into or out of the circle.
>> > * The druids performed a religious ceremony at Foamhenge.
>> > * In investigating where the blue stones came from, they discovered a
>> > wall.
>> > * Woodhenge is for the living -- stonehenge is for the dead.
>> > * The partial sarsen may have been supplemented with wooden posts and
>> > topped
>> > with wooden lintels.
>> > * Lots of pig bones were found in the area (I seem to recall reading
>> > previously about sheep bones and am now curious about this
>> > discrepancy).
>> > * There is a Stonehenge alignment of the moon pointing to its
>> > southernmost
>> > extent, which happens once in 19 years. This was designed to track the
>> > longest moonlit nights that otherwise would be dark.
>> >
>> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

John Hynes
In reply to this post by Victor Engel
FWIW, Outlook Express properly ignores punctuation when converting URLs to
clickable links, as I believe do other mail agents I've used.  I don't know
what you're using to read mail, but I will try to remember to insert a space
after URLs in the future.

--
John Hynes
www.decimaltime.org
2005 Dec. 8.514 UT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Victor Engel" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: Foamhenge


> John Hynes wrote:
>
>>> * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed
>>
>>
>> Actually, it was 1:12 scale because someone wrote 18" instead of 18'...
>>
>> (For those who miss the reference, see
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap:
>
> For the url to work, omit the trailing colon thus:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Foamhenge

VictorEngel
In reply to this post by VictorEngel
Dear John,

Properly? Punctuation could be a part of the URL. Colons are used in URLs,
for example. Years ago I remember a standard format proposed to be used for
URL citations, but I haven't seen it largely adopted. The format was <URL:
x> where x is the actual URL. So in this case, you could unambiguously cite
the URL thus: <URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap>. BTW, I
don't like using underscores in URLs because URLs are frequently underlined,
and then they can't be distinguished from spaces.

Victor

> FWIW, Outlook Express properly ignores punctuation when
> converting URLs to
> clickable links, as I believe do other mail agents I've used.
>  I don't know
> what you're using to read mail, but I will try to remember to
> insert a space
> after URLs in the future.
>
> --
> John Hynes
> www.decimaltime.org
> 2005 Dec. 8.514 UT
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Victor Engel" <[hidden email]>
> To: <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 10:03 PM
> Subject: Re: Foamhenge
>
>
> > John Hynes wrote:
> >
> >>> * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed
> >>
> >>
> >> Actually, it was 1:12 scale because someone wrote 18"
> instead of 18'...
> >>
> >> (For those who miss the reference, see
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap:
> >
> > For the url to work, omit the trailing colon thus:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

URLs; was Re: Foamhenge

John Hynes
Colons have special meaning in URLs, and there can only be one, following
the URI scheme name, i.e. http:.  According to the standard for URLs, RFC
1738, URLs use a limited subset of ASCII:

   Thus, only alphanumerics, the special characters "$-_.+!*'(),", and
   reserved characters used for their reserved purposes may be used
   unencoded within a URL.

The colon is a reserved character, which is used for certain reserved
purposes.  These are terminated by a slash, after which follows the
url-path, which cannot contain a colon.  If the url-path contains a colon,
e.g. if a directory or filename on the server contains one, it should be
encoded in hex as %3a.  Interestingly, Outlook Express is able to correctly
recognize what is part of the URL and what is punctuation, in spite of any
other deficiencies it may suffer from.

The problem is not how the user sends the URL, because it is being sent as
plain text, not as a link.  It is the recipient's mail reader which marks up
the plain text, by converting certain text strings into URLs.  Some mail
readers are better than others at doing so.  The sender is not responsible
for how the recipient's software changes the text.  The recipient could
always copy-and-paste the URL, like we used to do before mail readers edited
plain text mail.

As for underscores, Wikipedia put those in the URL, not I.  However, it is
easy to distinguish spaces from underscores in URLs, becuase there are NO
spaces in URLs, so anything that looks like a space MUST be an underscore.
And the primary reason for using underscores in URLs is to create the
appearance of spaces, without which the URL string would be more difficult
for humans to read.

Anyway, I already said that I would try to remember to add a space after the
URL, since all readers which mark up plain text mail seem to recognize that.

--
John Hynes
www.decimaltime.org
2005 Dec. 10.034 UT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Engel,Victor" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 7:00 AM
Subject: Re: Foamhenge


> Dear John,
>
> Properly? Punctuation could be a part of the URL. Colons are used in URLs,
> for example. Years ago I remember a standard format proposed to be used
> for
> URL citations, but I haven't seen it largely adopted. The format was <URL:
> x> where x is the actual URL. So in this case, you could unambiguously
> cite
> the URL thus: <URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap>. BTW,
> I
> don't like using underscores in URLs because URLs are frequently
> underlined,
> and then they can't be distinguished from spaces.
>
> Victor
>
>> FWIW, Outlook Express properly ignores punctuation when
>> converting URLs to
>> clickable links, as I believe do other mail agents I've used.
>>  I don't know
>> what you're using to read mail, but I will try to remember to
>> insert a space
>> after URLs in the future.
>>
>> --
>> John Hynes
>> www.decimaltime.org
>> 2005 Dec. 8.514 UT
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Victor Engel" <[hidden email]>
>> To: <[hidden email]>
>> Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 10:03 PM
>> Subject: Re: Foamhenge
>>
>>
>> > John Hynes wrote:
>> >
>> >>> * A styrofoam 100% scale model of Stonehenge was constructed
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Actually, it was 1:12 scale because someone wrote 18"
>> instead of 18'...
>> >>
>> >> (For those who miss the reference, see
>> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap:
>> >
>> > For the url to work, omit the trailing colon thus:
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Spinal_Tap
>> >
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: URLs; was Re: Foamhenge

Victor Engel
John Hynes wrote:

> Colons have special meaning in URLs, and there can only be one,

Not true. There frequently is a second one, following which is a port
number. In general, though, I agree with everything you said.

Victor
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: URLs; was Re: Foamhenge

John Hynes
Excuse me, I thought I had edited that line before I sent it, because there
can actually be three.  There may also be one between the username and
password.

   In general, URLs are written as follows:

       <scheme>:<scheme-specific-part>

...syntax for the scheme-specific data:
//<user>:<password>@<host>:<port>/<url-path>
   Some or all of the parts "<user>:<password>@", ":<password>",
   ":<port>", and "/<url-path>" may be excluded....John

----- Original Message -----
From: "Victor Engel" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 11:45 PM
Subject: Re: URLs; was Re: Foamhenge


> John Hynes wrote:
>
>> Colons have special meaning in URLs, and there can only be one,
>
> Not true. There frequently is a second one, following which is a port
> number. In general, though, I agree with everything you said.
>
> Victor
>