It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

2008 Barbury Castle crop circle: pi solved?

page: 5
62
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Sovaka
 

I must appologize for my first post!
This was blowing my mind! And we all know the first human reaction to the unknown is to scoff and laugh it off and then run like hell to something we know as solid and concrete. Sorry, Sorry, Sorry, I am!
O.k. I think I am starting to understand this. I am by no means good at complex mathmatics, I admit that wholeheartedly! This stuff is still blowing my tiny little mind! Wow! I just can't put it in to words, but I understand now!
I still think we should all go out and have a beer though!
Maybe I would understand more if I could talk to people in person about this.
Oh and for the record I do believe some circles are not man-made. It's just that with all the hoax circles out there how do I discern the difference? The underlying math?
Please help this Medieval man to learn the difference!
Has anyone done studies on other circles to determine if the math "adds up" or not?

[edit on 6/17/2008 by BroonStone]




posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 01:23 AM
link   
Pi........????
this is not an accurate formula....
the result is 11.1111111 or 1.1111111.

this is not an accurate formula to measure a sphere
If it was the answer would be 1...wouldn`t it?

Pi is so close its almost perfect...but
almost finding the center of a sphere will cause an imbalance
and is far from perfect.

is everyone trying to tell me that in the modern world,we do not have an accurate basic formula to measure a sphere???
I find that incredible.....

and Pi does not seem to do the job........



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Evil Genius

Originally posted by Sovaka
reply to post by Evil Genius
 



Ah, but it does. Your mistake in reasoning lies with you forgetting that the numbers we are using are being taken from a GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION of the number Pi. Not the number itself. The number 7.969518456 is not the inverse of Pi, it is the inverse of the GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION of Pi within these concentric circles.

There are 9 more concentric circles where this exact same thing happens. Each "1" is a numerical expression of the GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION of the complete circle. And since there are 10 concentric circles the number 11.11111111 is 10 digits long. Therefore, the number 11.11111111 can be GRAPHICALLY REPRESENTED as the 10 concentric circles within this problem.

I sleep now.


I did read your post though with so much information to try and asbord and retain, its a little hard to keep track of all posts


Your reply to me makes a lot more sense.
And i'll admit, not a side I saw it from.

Though I still believe the second part to his theory has some merrit.
I mean the pattern forming the double helix? That is crazy.
And to only do it without '0'

If the crop circle is to ONLY represent pI as we know it... Why bother? Seems quite pointless.


----- EDIT ------
Wait...
7.969518456 is the inverse of pI.

pI = 3.141592654
10 - 3 = 7
10 - 1 = 9
10 - 4 = 6
10 - 1 = 9
10 - 5 = 5
10 - 9 = 1
10 - 2 = 8
10 - 6 = 4
10 - 5 = 5
10 - 4 = 6

Now I am confused... TOO MUCH INFORMATION!!!
The very point of my OP was to prove as much, despite the fact that you can get 11.1111111 from any two sets of opposing numbers.
The fact is that we work from what we know as pI.
Which only leads more credibility to the fact that '10' shouldn't necessarily need to be in our base numbering.
Because you take 2 opposing sets of numbers and add them together, you get 11.1111111 not 10.
So we are working with the true pI number, finding its inverse by taking the individual numbers from Base 10 math.
Exampled above...

----- Pausing to think some more ------

[edit on 17/6/2008 by Sovaka]

[edit on 17/6/2008 by Sovaka]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 05:28 AM
link   
www.markorodin.com...

has this got anything to do with it?



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by godismath
 


Wow great work! I can understand how you got this info. I've been following a little bit of the sacred math formulas for a little while although I don't have the exact math on them I can understand them perfectly. One thing I do know though is that Johan Kepler had a theory that he called the music of the spheres and I think that other such theories are not too far off. The music of the spheres was based upon intervals between musical notes... hence perfect 4th's 5ths, etc... For anyone who isn't a musician google the circle of 5ths and modal theory in relation to music and you can see how there's a perfect geometric pattern between different notes. Now why is this important you might ask ? Well isn't sound a form of energy ? As far as I understand matter is energy and energy cannot be created nor destroyed, because all forms of energy exist in a previous form no matter what they are. The must in order to exist within theoretical space / time. Since sound is a form of energy can it not have much much much higher octaves beyond our hearing range ( or any hearing range for that matter ) that are translated into different forms of energy in the whole spectrum ? In other words sound = vibration = friction = heat = plasma = light, etc at some point. Would this mean that our theoretical holographic universe has a resonant frequency that can be translated to sound ? It is indeed all math and geometrical ratios. Another great example of this is the placement of the pyramid ruins found in the Grand Canyon. If you look up the math on that they use sacred geometry to place the ruins in their locations. All of the ruins have been determined to be authentic and date back to the time of the Egyptian pyramids. This can be googled in fact ... and there is documentation from the early 30's if I'm not mistaken that a famous museum found this site in the Grand Canyon ( the smithsonian ? ) Anyway here is where this all comes together. If sacred math is being used to show us things and the universe is quite possibly holographic with theoretical or parallel universes would it be possible that there is a frequency that can distort / blend these universes via quantum tunneling ? Could the equations used in the Grand Canyon ruins actually lead us to a formula for finding these "blend / distortion / portal " spots in theoretical space / time ? The helix is a common pattern and since we might even call it binary because it is based upon duality ... hence 3.14 + ( -3.14 ) = 0 or positive and negative polarity. When reintegrated they would create zero point ... suggesting that the theoretical universe we live in is globule shaped in nature in 3D space and a 2D torus shape before the existance of 3D space, and probably before that it was 1D in nature and that is when you get into a single linear superstring existing outside of time and space ( creating opposite directions) , and before that ... likely containment or unity. I am working on a theory regarding the placement of the ruins I mentioned earlier to find out geometrically where these certain places might all be located. If this formula can be decoded then the possibility arises that stargates may indeed be real ( even if invisible because of the laws of physics. ) We could possibly map them out this way. Your ideas parallel with mine on some level. I am at this point working on decoding the resonant frequency of space time. I believe that if that "note" can be found or perhaps even if it is a "chordal box" or series of frequencies, it could be used to deliberately create holographic portals into other theoretical or parallel 3d universes that exist within the same continuum as this universe. Afterall if quantum physics is correct then there was no big bang and everything is purely theoretical and an illusion created ultimately by vibration superstrings that vibrate perpetually



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 12:34 PM
link   
To make things more clear, the Pi could be presented like this and it would be the same as the crop circle:

xxx-------
x---------
xxxx------
x---------
xxxxx-----
xxxxxxxxx-
xx--------
xxxxxx----
xxxxx-----
xxx-------


As you can see, counting the "x" + "-" from every column equals always to 10, as it should be. Very obvious. Basic base-10 math. If it was made by ETs then if anything, they wanted to show us that base-10 math is the way to go, not base-9 or base-12 as some here did speculate


The ratio nice ratio (all filled / all blank) of 40/60 (2/3) sounded interesting, at first. Too good to be true so I checked it and yes, the last digit was rounded to 4 when it should be 3. So actually the real ratio is 39/61. Ugly number


If you continue presenting Pi in this form you would expect the ratio to eventually become near 1/1. This is because Pi is totally random number. I counted the first 50 digits and here is the ratio:

Pi in 10 * 50 matrix:

x = 257
- = 243

ratio = 0.9455



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Adcra
 


While I don't have the time to show all the correlations, I thought you all would like to see an interesting correlation of PI to the Sun and Mercury.

PI * 1.9911 = 6.25522513256263 // Almost 2PI

Multiple this by 111,111 to get the Sun's radius of 695,000 km

and then divide the Sun's radius by 12 to get Mercury's orbit of 57.91 Mkm

There are two reasons this works out. The first is the French group that was assembled in the 19th century to develop a universal system of measurement, called the metric system, based their measure of kilometers on the Earth's circumference. The second reason is all of the planet orbital spacings, sizes and orbital frequencies are interrelated through a Gaussian distribution and are harmonic. The reason it is not exact is there is a slight perturbation in the distribution that follows a common Bessel function, but otherwise the solar system is quite predictable.

Ask yourself why it is that this information is not shared in our schools.

[edit on 17-6-2008 by Maxpageant]



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sovaka

Wait...
7.969518456 is the inverse of pI.

pI = 3.141592654
10 - 3 = 7
10 - 1 = 9
10 - 4 = 6
10 - 1 = 9
10 - 5 = 5
10 - 9 = 1
10 - 2 = 8
10 - 6 = 4
10 - 5 = 5
10 - 4 = 6

Now I am confused... TOO MUCH INFORMATION!!!
The very point of my OP was to prove as much, despite the fact that you can get 11.1111111 from any two sets of opposing numbers.
The fact is that we work from what we know as pI.
Which only leads more credibility to the fact that '10' shouldn't necessarily need to be in our base numbering.
Because you take 2 opposing sets of numbers and add them together, you get 11.1111111 not 10.
So we are working with the true pI number, finding its inverse by taking the individual numbers from Base 10 math.
Exampled above...


Yep, you are confused. First, you need to understand that subtracting each digit of Pi from 10 does not give you the inverse of Pi. Here is how you find the inverse of a number...


Divide 1 by the number you want its inverse you get the answer


Wiki Definition of Inverse

So divide 1/3.141592654= 0.3183098861

That is the true inverse of Pi.

7.969518456 is nothing more than the number representing the other half of the slices inside each concentric circle.

Just like 11.11111111 is nothing more than the number respresenting 10 concentric circles.

As far as the double helix goes, it doesn't really have a leg to stand on now does it? The only reason the numbers flip back and forth is by taking away the number 10, you end up with an odd number of numbers. But no one here, not one person, has stated anything of substance as to why we should be able to get rid of the number 10. Especially when you use 10 circles and 10 slices to set the problem up in the first place.


If the crop circle is to ONLY represent pI as we know it... Why bother? Seems quite pointless.


I think you figured this whole thing out. The crop circle and this thread are both quite pointless...



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Evil Genius


If the crop circle is to ONLY represent pI as we know it... Why bother? Seems quite pointless.


I think you figured this whole thing out. The crop circle and this thread are both quite pointless...


Then what would be the point of the crop circle? If it's just a hoax, then sure you can pass it off as a simple work of art. But what if it's more? I think the mere possibility that it could be a communication from a non-human intelligence warrants a closer look. And if aliens or whatever are showing us a graphical representation of pi, then we should take notice. Maybe I found something of substance, maybe not. But we'll never know what's out there or in here (the mind) unless we explore.

I think perhaps it may be a rosetta stone of sorts, showing us a different way to view mathematics. And the double helix in the numbers isn't just mere coincidence. The form doesn't flow properly with the 10s. I've tried.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I'd like to thank those who mentioned the possible corellation between crop circles and music. It's an interesting connection I will start to explore in more detail.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by godismath

Then what would be the point of the crop circle? If it's just a hoax, then sure you can pass it off as a simple work of art. But what if it's more? I think the mere possibility that it could be a communication from a non-human intelligence warrants a closer look. And if aliens or whatever are showing us a graphical representation of pi, then we should take notice. Maybe I found something of substance, maybe not. But we'll never know what's out there or in here (the mind) unless we explore.


Look, I like to play the "What If" game myself...usually right after I smoke a big fat bowl. But, if you are going to make statements mathematically, then they need to make sense. For example, right off the top of the thread, you are saying things that make absolutely no sense...


So I added the two numbers up... figured maybe 3.14 is just an infinite curve, so it's needs it's "other half" to connect the full circle.


Maybe Pi is an infinite curve??? I smoke 2 joints before I smoke 2 joints...


3.141592654 + 7.969518456 = 11.11111111 / 10 = 1.111111111

So if 1.111111111 = 1, then 9 skips 10 and goes straight to 11.


And then I smoke 2 more. Explain to me the rationale for dividing 11.11111111 by 10? And then explain to me how 1.111111111 is equal to 1? And how, if that is all somehow true (and it's not) that somehow 9 skips 10? How'd did you make that conclusion? Where is the mathematical proof?


I think perhaps it may be a rosetta stone of sorts, showing us a different way to view mathematics. And the double helix in the numbers isn't just mere coincidence. The form doesn't flow properly with the 10s. I've tried.


It might not flow the way you want it to, but numbers flow just fine with 10's. It's called a Number Line. It starts with 0 and goes infinitely forward and infinitely backward.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by godismath
 



CONVERT LIGHT-1 Dark-0 Binary code is the answer.



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 08:42 PM
link   
Even though I don't understand the conclusions of the creator of this thread either, I think I can see what his motives are. Perhaps, godismath is trying to find a more "harmonious" presentation of "π" through the use of other numerical systems or even a pattern between the numbers, like perhaps the pattern found in chemical elements. I find it very interesting as an idea, but I agree that the conclusions drawn are not mathematically sound.

Alexandros



posted on Jun, 17 2008 @ 10:36 PM
link   
I don't think you guys understand...

It goes from 9 to 11 and 11 is still treated as an odd number. It doesn't behave like a 10. Even numbers never go in sequence. Only every 9 do two odd numbers go in sequence.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 12:27 AM
link   
I just typed a big mess trying to explain this, then decided to just put it into a picture. You'd have to put it into a picture in your mind to get it anyway, so I might as well skip the hard part for you.




Why is 1 is the only number which gives the same result when both added and multiplied?
Because it's both 0 and 1. Just like 10 and 11 are the same. It's a dual nature.

[edit on 18-6-2008 by godismath]



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   
I don't know if anyone's hit on this yet but maybe it forms a helix like if you were to take the spiral structure and turn it on it's side...



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 03:42 AM
link   
reply to post by godismath
 


Yes, but in that case we lose 10 as a value, no? I would understand it if it was a numerical system from 1 to 9 without the zero where 11 would equal 10, but completely ignoring 10, 20, 30 and every tenth number after that does not sound right, does it? Also, I don't understand the diagram with the circles. Could you explain it a bit better? Thank you!

Alexandros

[edit on 18-6-2008 by Alexander1111]



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 07:44 AM
link   
More on PI.

Take the word ILLUMINATUS.

The Letter I is Roman Numeral 1
The Letter L is Roman Numeral 50
The Letter M is Roman Numeral 1000

These are the Roman Numerals used in the word ILLUMINATUS

What remains are the Letters U - NATUS

Now

I = 1 = 1
LL = 50+50 = 100
MI = 1001

The code then reveales 11001001, and 11.001001 is Binary Pi? The remaining letters can be used to form the word SATAN.

MAT(U/U)S as U/U = 1 = A, which is SATAN in reverse.

More Illuminatus developed Gematria of Pi at the Illuminatus Observor.

You got to check you the guys archives. He shows how everything is based on Pi.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 10:05 AM
link   
This makes sense because if we step away from theory into the world, there is no place for zero. If i have zero apples, i actually have -some(for example -1) apples, because as soon as the possibility of apples is even considered, once it becomes part of the equation, it becomes instantly obvious and apparent that i am missing at least part of one apple, hence i am at actually at - if i am at 0. The only way i truly have zero apples is if i never thought of them and at that point there is nothing to work out. It is akin to the idea of as soon as something is thought of it exists.

One a side note, does it seem relevant that M or string theory has decided on a total of 11 dimensions in the multiverse.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 04:59 PM
link   
something I noticed right off was that pi was rounded UP at the tenth digit...

pi is actually 3.1415926535... not 3.141592654 as depicted..

not sure how that fits into the calculations.

Sri Oracle



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join