Stonehenge construction

[upperworld]

This video is pretty fascinating, a retired construction worker from Michigan moving and lifting megalithic blocks with his hands and simple tools.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRRDzFROMx0

All of the tools he used to stand the block straight up were readily available to ancient civilizations...except the garden hose. Hollow wooden tubes or pails of water would accomplish the same goal.

[Saxoneer]

Unnfortuately his theory doesn't hold water. It may well be easy to move a huge block of stone if you have a stone base in which to sandwich the pebbles. However, there isn't and wasn't a 200 mile stone road between Wales, where they originated and Wiltshire, the stones destination.

[Moon]

The above video does show how humans can move some very large stones and make a megalithic structure out of them. While it does not account for the amazing accuracy or the immense weight of some of the stones, it does show humans are very inventive and imaginative.

[Buzi-Blu]

On a documentary I just watched recently there was one comment I hadn't heard previously: that Stonehenge could have been made from glacial erratics. That would eliminate the problem of moving them over such a distance. Just a thought.

[cRush]

Come on guys, we can't even move megalithic stones with today's most advanced technology (/sarcasm). Isn't that the rhetoric that some keep repeating over and over here? You think they want to see video evidence that a single person was able to do it without employing the use of aliens, giants, or anti-gravity?

[Jeff Sheets]

So what are you are saying "don't let the truth get in the way of a good story"?

All of these neat methods work best on various sizes of blocks. However, once you get past a certain size and weight, it quits working. Come up with a modern method that works to move something the size of the Baalbek stones, and I might concur.

Three of the blocks, however, weigh more than 800 tons each. This block trio is world-renowned as the "Trilithon"...
Elsewhere in the Roman empire, just a little over 300 metric tons seemed to be the limit for the transport of big blocks, achievable only with the greatest difficulty. Transport of the 323 ton Laterano obelisk to Rome spanned the reigns of three emperors....In a quarry about half a mile away from the Trilithon is an even bigger block It measures 69 x 16 x 13 feet, ten inches, and weighs about 1,170 metric tons. --- http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2006/02feb/baalbek.html

-Just sayin'

[cRush]

So what are you are saying "don't let the truth get in the way of a good story"?

All of these neat methods work best on various sizes of blocks. However, once you get past a certain size and weight, it quits working. Come up with a modern method that works to move something the size of the Baalbek stones, and I might concur.

Three of the blocks, however, weigh more than 800 tons each. This block trio is world-renowned as the "Trilithon"...
Elsewhere in the Roman empire, just a little over 300 metric tons seemed to be the limit for the transport of big blocks, achievable only with the greatest difficulty. Transport of the 323 ton Laterano obelisk to Rome spanned the reigns of three emperors....In a quarry about half a mile away from the Trilithon is an even bigger block It measures 69 x 16 x 13 feet, ten inches, and weighs about 1,170 metric tons. --- http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2006/02feb/baalbek.html

-Just sayin'

Of course, we can also cite: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Horseman#Thunder_Stone which was documented in recent history, using tools that also would have been available to ancients, of course very unlikely considering they created ball bearings out of bronze essentially. The same idea probably could have been applied with a different material like wood or stone even. The ball shape was meant to reduce friction.

Also, the massive Baalbek megaliths weren't actually moved.

[Pons Asinorum]

Here is how human beings moved a 1700 ton stone in 1770 (possibly the biggest stone ever move by mankind):



Engraving by I.F.Schley of the drawing by Y.M.Felten. 1770
(source: http://www.encspb.ru/en/bigimage.php?kod=2803982964
Cribbed from: http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/extremasonry.htm#moving)

Here is a large stone moved by native people in 1915 on Nias island in Indonesia:


(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:COLLECTIE_TROPENMUSEUM_%27Het_verslepen_van_de_steen_%27Darodaro%27_voor_de_gestorven_Saoenigeho_van_Bawamataloea_Nias_TMnr_1000095b.jpg
Cribbed from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_megalithic_sites)

Here is how the Ancient Egyptians claimed to have moved a 1000 ton statue in the 12th Dynasty:



(Source with translations: http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/thuthotep.htm)

--

It really is not a question of if human beings can move these weights with wood levers and sledges (they can), but rather what is the limit given their available resources (about 2000 tons if the unmoved, but cut stones at Baalbeck, Lebanon are any indication).

[Jeff Sheets]

Also, the massive Baalbek megaliths weren't actually moved.

It really is not a question of if human beings can move these weights with wood levers and sledges (they can), but rather what is the limit given their available resources (about 2000 tons if the unmoved, but cut stones at Baalbeck, Lebanon are any indication).

OK, I am convinced that it is and was possible. I hadn't realized that the largest Baalbek stones were not actually moved from their quarry spot, that might suggest a limit of some sort.

So, ball bearings? Could that have been the purpose of the various different sizes of round rock balls found in Costa Rica? Were there any monoliths there, that were moved?

[Pons Asinorum]

Great idea Jeff!

Just to clear up my lack of explanation; some Baalbek stones were moved and are quite massive. The Baalbek stone I was referring to is known as the Stone of the Pregnant Woman or the Stone of the South and it was quarried, but not moved.

There are several estimates of its weight (I used the maximum cited on all my examples above), and there are several factors related to moving such a stone (cracks, strength of the stone, quality of the timber levers), but 2000 tons appears to be a valid limit as there is nothing of greater weight that has been moved without modern machines, as far as i know (we, of course, have dwarfed that figure in modern times moving structures such as the Saturn V, which weighed 3040 tons, and the Fu Gang Building at 15000 tons: http://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/structural/heaviest-building-moved5.htm).

Not sure about the purpose of the stone sphere's found in Costa Rica, but that is an interesting theory -- most of the energy that goes into moving structures across a horizontal distance is to overcome friction (formally, known as the coefficient of friction). If the spheres did indeed act as ball-bearings, they would have been ideal for such purposes and would have reduced the coefficient of friction enormously.

If there were giant monuments on Costa Rica that needed moving, what a great idea about the spheres.

(Jeff, an aside: your avatar! Was it not the avatar of a computer of a sci-fi show? I use to watch that show when I was a boy. IIRC, a giant space ark, where different habitats were sectioned-off and different cultures had developed over the ages (?), but there was some sort of accident... Would you happen to know the name of that show? Thank you!)

[Saxoneer]

Come on guys, we can't even move megalithic stones with today's most advanced technology (/sarcasm). Isn't that the rhetoric that some keep repeating over and over here? You think they want to see video evidence that a single person was able to do it without employing the use of aliens, giants, or anti-gravity?

Also, the massive Baalbek megaliths weren't actually moved.

So, ball bearings? Could that have been the purpose of the various different sizes of round rock balls found in Costa Rica? Were there any monoliths there, that were moved?

I would think most people here have watched the video and there is no doubt this man can move blocks all by himself. However, the idea of using stones as ball bearings is silly, as I said earlier, to use a stone or any other material for ball bearings would require the surface they are rolling on to be stone or in the case of the video, concrete! Any other surface wouldn't work as the bearings would be squashed into the ground by the weight of the giant blocks and then you are going precisely no where!!!

[Moon]

The problem with the stones at Baalbek is they were moved and placed around 9000BCE. What was the population back then and did they have enough manpower to move those truly massive stones?

Plus on a human side, can you imagine pulling that huge stone only to realize there are thousands of those behemoths waiting to be pulled to their locations? I can see the pharaoh saying: These stones aren't moving by themselves!

[Pons Asinorum]

Any other surface wouldn't work as the bearings would be squashed into the ground by the weight of the giant blocks and then you are going precisely no where!!!

The secret, Saxoneer, is to distribute the load across a surface. For example, noting that:

* in Costa Rica, the Mayans built their roads so that they were flat -- no uphill or downhill
* compact soil makes for an extremely hard surface (hard pack is about the same consistency as concrete)
* laying down wood-planks so that: (a) a groove can guide the ball bearing and (b) the planks can distribute the weight.

Given, say, 2000 tons = 2000000 kg or 4409245.24 lbs; and say 200 ball bearings, each in contact with the structure, with each over an area of 10 cm square or 24 inches square:

4409245.24/ ( 200 X 24 X 24 ) = 38.3 lbs per square inch per bearing. This is comparable to my truck (about 30 pounds per square inch per tire). Any fair surface could easily sustain that. Also, the smaller the structure, the less the number of stone spheres.

Now, if the underlying surface was soft, there may be problems with setting such a system up, but that is true with just about any system -- wheels, rollers, ball bearings, sleds, etc -- almost certainly some sort load distribution would be needed.

A bigger problem would be keeping the sizes of each ball bearing uniform and maintaining the ball bearing in the groove, but the Russians did it in the late 1700's with metal, so maybe the Mayans did it with stone.

With all that said, it is speculation, but no more silly than any other theory that I have heard (a stone sphere would work and they are in evidence, but I am not even sure if monoliths were moved in Costa Rica), so who knows.

--

The problem with the stones at Baalbek is they were moved and placed around 9000BCE.

Not all the stones were moved and placed; the largest one, known as the Stone of the Pregnant Woman, was quarried, but not moved (I cited 2000 tons, but most of the scientific literature estimates 1200 tons, while the lesser stones of between 800 to 1000 tons were moved and placed. For comparison, the largest stone in Egypt's Great Pyramid was 80 tons. ) The 1200-ton weight appears to be the limit when it comes to moving stones with such primitive resources.

The scientific papers I have read suggest the "8th millennium BC" as the earliest evidence of occupation (although many claims outside of peer-reviewed sources have been made):

The area of the modern town of Baalbek was first settled at the end of the 8th millennium BC. The tell preserved underneath the temple of Jupiter was almost continuously settled until the Hellenistic period.

(Source: http://www.dainst.org/en/project/baalbek?ft=all)

[Moon]

Pons, can you find any reference to what the population was back then? Even at 8000BCE, I wonder if they had enough people to move all of those blocks.

When was the first city established is another question as I do know they had small villages at that time and trading posts.

Is it possible that Baalbek is even older than the current 10,000 year old date?

I will also look for some of these answers and report back here. I do think Baalbek is a real mystery which needs much research.

[Pons Asinorum]

Pons, can you find any reference to what the population was back then? Even at 8000BCE, I wonder if they had enough people to move all of those blocks.

Well, not really, as there was no census done, however there are some mathematical methods that do model human population growth. Taking our current population and counting backwards using birth rates and death rates (projecting backwards where one can test there accuracy), one can guesstimate, but no hard data either way.

Here is a model from a sociology class at Fairchild University in Connecticut, put together by Professor Dennis Hodgson:

http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/so11/population/population.htm

He explicitly calculates that in 8000 BC the global population was 100 million.

The manpower needed to move a 1000-ton block has been estimated to be 1000 men (from experiments showing one man could pull a one ton load given a lubed path -- like sled to a water-downed path):

http://www.catchpenny.org/movebig.html

So if that is all true, then yes, the available labor would have been sufficient.

Is it possible that Baalbek is even older than the current 10,000 year old date?

Possible, but unlikely as this would have been in the Ice Age.

I do think Baalbek is a real mystery which needs much research.

Yes, for sure, it is one of many truly astounding places with many unsolved mysteries.

[Saxoneer]

The Stones at baalbeck, there are lots of theories on how they were moved from the quarry site 1km away, dragged, rolled etc. However, the route from the quarry to Baalbeck is uphill over rough and winding terrain and with no evidence of a flat hauling surface. Then there is the problem of setting them in place, earthen ramps, sand, ropes and pulleys, I don't think so!

Costa Rica spheres, many of the spheres are huge, scientists that have examined them say they most are smooth and 96% perfect, does this sound like they were used as ball bearings?

[Pons Asinorum]

The Stones at baalbeck, there are lots of theories on how they were moved from the quarry site 1km away, dragged, rolled etc. However, the route from the quarry to Baalbeck is uphill over rough and winding terrain and with no evidence of a flat hauling surface. Then there is the problem of setting them in place, earthen ramps, sand, ropes and pulleys, I don't think so!

It does seem like a piece of the puzzle is missing and maybe a clue is in the largest stone that they did not move.

Costa Rica spheres, many of the spheres are huge, scientists that have examined them say they most are smooth and 96% perfect, does this sound like they were used as ball bearings?

No, however it would be interesting to note what size the Russians used and whether or not it is comparable. In any event, it is a reach and a much more reasonable theory might be anti-grav devices or, and I'm gong on a limb here, ice machines

Just kidding, I have no idea.

[Saxoneer]

I like the idea of ice machines except for one tiny thing, it would be a bugger trying to push them up a slippery slope. Although, they could all sit on the top and ride down the other side.

It does seem like a piece of the puzzle is missing and maybe a clue is in the largest stone that they did not move.

The stone still attached to the bedrock is a puzzle, why didn't they finish it? Maybe they just decided enough was enough? Maybe they decided they weren't being paid enough, the union called a strike that was never resolved and in the end the workers just drifted away? Perhaps the aliens left and without their help and guidance the whole project fell apart?

[Buzi-Blu]

The huge unfinished obelisk at Aswan gives an insight to techniques, and looks like basic tools.

http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/egyptunfinishedobelisk.htm
http://www.ancientworldegypt.com/unfinishedobelisk.html

[Augmented Ape]

Hi, I'm sticking my neck out a bit as a newbie, but getting back to Stonehenge, the flat road is a bit unlikley in Britain, with its hilly terrain, the unseasing rain makes a hard earth track impossible, unless it was a drought year, and then there is the slight problem of the Severn Estuary to cross.....
I think a device not disimilar to Ed Leedskalins' Perpetual Motion Holder could be the answer, that or sound waves as used in ancient Tibet.

[Saxoneer]

Hi, I'm sticking my neck out a bit as a newbie, but getting back to Stonehenge, the flat road is a bit unlikley in Britain, with its hilly terrain, the unseasing rain makes a hard earth track impossible, unless it was a drought year, and then there is the slight problem of the Severn Estuary to cross.....
I think a device not disimilar to Ed Leedskalins' Perpetual Motion Holder could be the answer, that or sound waves as used in ancient Tibet.

Your thoughts, comments and theories are just as welcome as someone that has a great many posts, so keep them coming!

Your comments back up what I've been saying, the idea of using ball bearings etc at Stonehenge doesn't make sense. We also forget the lintels, (I have this in another post), how did they get a 6 ton lego block on top? It only takes one of them to be out by a fraction and the whole thing doesn't work!

[allspark]

Hi, I'm sticking my neck out a bit as a newbie, but getting back to Stonehenge, the flat road is a bit unlikley in Britain, with its hilly terrain, the unseasing rain makes a hard earth track impossible, unless it was a drought year, and then there is the slight problem of the Severn Estuary to cross.....
I think a device not disimilar to Ed Leedskalins' Perpetual Motion Holder could be the answer, that or sound waves as used in ancient Tibet.

Your thoughts, comments and theories are just as welcome as someone that has a great many posts, so keep them coming!

Your comments back up what I've been saying, the idea of using ball bearings etc at Stonehenge doesn't make sense. We also forget the lintels, (I have this in another post), how did they get a 6 ton lego block on top? It only takes one of them to be out by a fraction and the whole thing doesn't wok!

I think one of the main reasons that these momuments astound us can be seen in the precision of the works. If this is the mindset of those who were building at that time, then we have to bow down to the discipline of their intellect. It wasn't enough that they could build with enormous stone blocks, they also wanted to show their superior ability in showing perfection. As seen in the great pyramid along with stonehenge and puma punka, the mathematics is also perfect.

I just cannot see any of these momuments being built using brute force. The two are opposite ends of any civilisation and are a contradiction to eachother. A civilisation using brute force over intellect cannot produce anything with the precise qualities shown in the many momuments all over the world.
Therefore, any theory pertaining to the large use of brute force in the building of these beautiful, harmonious mysteries, does not seem to have any value.

[Augmented Ape]

Thats a really good point Allspark, (got a bit caught up on the moving wieght side of things ) the idea of a society made up of mathematical geniuses ( should that be genii ?) with an astounding knowledge of astronomy on one side and knuckle dragging types in animal skins on the other is a bit of a stretch, as you say it would have to have been the 'brutes' who did all the carving of those huge blocks, which would be a real head ache with computers, lazers, and modern cutting equipment.
I suppose there are those who would say, well there were three classes, The Intellectual (priest mathematician ) The Artisan (the sculptors ) The labourers (haulers), well maybe, but what if the first two knew something we dont / have forgotten ?
It still dosn't answer the nigh on impossibity of moving the blocks or why ? Why did humanity invest SO much effort in building these structures ? What if they are a message to US right now, to tell us we have forgotten who we really are ?

[allspark]

Thats a really good point Allspark, (got a bit caught up on the moving wieght side of things ) the idea of a society made up of mathematical geniuses ( should that be genii ?) with an astounding knowledge of astronomy on one side and knuckle dragging types in animal skins on the other is a bit of a stretch, as you say it would have to have been the 'brutes' who did all the carving of those huge blocks, which would be a real head ache with computers, lazers, and modern cutting equipment.
I suppose there are those who would say, well there were three classes, The Intellectual (priest mathematician ) The Artisan (the sculptors ) The labourers (haulers), well maybe, but what if the first two knew something we dont / have forgotten ?
It still dosn't answer the nigh on impossibity of moving the blocks or why ? Why did humanity invest SO much effort in building these structures ? What if they are a message to US right now, to tell us we have forgotten who we really are ?

Your last point is interesting. Perhaps they are educational lessons in stone, something for us to work out. I'm reminded of the math & geometry that shows phi,pi,speed of light,circumference of the earth,equinoxis,longtitude & latitude,magnetic nodes,distance to other planets, cycles of other planets & stars [past & future] and much, much more information. I can't wait until someone makes the connection to other areas such as biology or the elements seen in the periodic table, as i'm confident they will have also been encoded within these structures.
Maybe it's our first day at school and we have only just discovered where the classroom is !

[Buzi-Blu]

Your comments back up what I've been saying, the idea of using ball bearings etc at Stonehenge doesn't make sense. We also forget the lintels, (I have this in another post), how did they get a 6 ton lego block on top? It only takes one of them to be out by a fraction and the whole thing doesn't work!

The lintels do indeed have mistakes, and signs that the mortice joints were done incorrectly so they turned it over and did it again.

[Augmented Ape]

Your last point is interesting. Perhaps they are educational lessons in stone, something for us to work out. I'm reminded of the math & geometry that shows phi,pi,speed of light,circumference of the earth,equinoxis,longtitude & latitude,magnetic nodes,distance to other planets, cycles of other planets & stars [past & future] and much, much more information. I can't wait until someone makes the connection to other areas such as biology or the elements seen in the periodic table, as i'm confident they will have also been encoded within these structures.
Maybe it's our first day at school and we have only just discovered where the classroom is !

Most of us have got lost on the way to school more like !
I read once, in a book written by a very wise man, that the great cathedrals were books, for those who could read them, and if you agree with Carl Jung about the nature of the subconcious then the symbology would speak directly to ones inner depths. I have a strong feeling the ancients knew where we were heading, the type of conciousness we were going to fall foul of, being consumed by the Ego, by which we are being lead by the nose to self destruction.
As for major connections being made, I sure they already have, and are locked away from the public like so much else.

The lintels do indeed have mistakes, and signs that the mortice joints were done incorrectly so they turned it over and did it again.

Quite possible, it would be very hard to line such things up at that scale, but they could have been made on purpose to hold something else long gone, like lamps or a wooden structure, erosion would have obliterated all traces by now

[allspark]

I read once, in a book written by a very wise man, that the great cathedrals were books, for those who could read them, and if you agree with Carl Jung about the nature of the subconcious then the symbology would speak directly to ones inner depths. I have a strong feeling the ancients knew where we were heading, the type of conciousness we were going to fall foul of, being consumed by the Ego, by which we are being lead by the nose to self destruction.
As for major connections being made, I sure they already have, and are locked away from the public like so much else.

Some of that book must have rubbed off on you, wise words indeed Sir.