Wilton Windmill Crop Circle Decoded

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Most crop circle fans will be aware of this circle from May this year:



As always there are many interpretations of these crop circles, usually by the "new agers", "doomsdayers" and the "aliens made them" crowd, we'll call them croppies.

So, here's another interpretation for everyone's perusal.

Oddly (or not), this has been ignored by the above mentioned groups, I wonder why!



Here is the animation:

logosmythos.net...


When I saw the photos of the Wilton Windmill crop circle, reported on 22nd May, I was immediately struck by the possibility of a message encoded in 8-bit binary.

After transcribing the binary digits, I translated each byte (8 bits) into its corresponding ASCII character with this handy online converter, starting from the direction of the windmill, and working clockwise around the circle and out from the centre.

The result was this: e^(hi)pi)1=0

It looked like some kind of equation, and when I looked it up, Google asked if I meant: e^(i)pi)1=0, for which the top result was Euler's identity: eiπ+1=0.

This has been called "the most beautiful theorem in mathematics". No surprise that it should turn up in a crop circle then!

One of the things that had caught my attention on initially seeing the pictures of the crop formation had been the way that it referenced both the turning wheel of the windmill and the twelve-part division of the zodiacal cycle, the cosmic wheel. On looking a little deeper into the mathematics, it becomes clear that the formation also represents Euler's formula, of which Euler's Identity is a special case, in graphical form - as a circle, with radii represented at different angles. On reflection, this is a very cleverly executed and elegant design, in which mathematical and symbolic meanings are fused into a single 'identity'.

Not being a mathematician, I wasn't sure about the odd notation of the formula as expressed in the crop circle, but I assumed that, for the circle-maker, it could be a way to get around the limitations of ASCII text, and was a near enough approximation for me to get the intended result.

One thing that bothered me was the inclusion of the anomalous 'h' in the message/formula. Certainly, with the absent '+', it made up the number of characters to the symbolic number twelve.

Perhaps significantly, the 'h', with the adjacent 'i', reads 'hi' - an embedded message from the circle-maker? It was only when a Facebook contact suggested that 'h' could be a reference to the Planck constant, taking us from the world of maths into the world of physics, that I realised a possible new layer of meaning within the embedded message. Could the makers have left a 'Planck' in the design as a subtle joke on all the croppies who might pronounce this a 'genuine' crop circle as opposed to a circle made with a plank?! I wonder if anyone has looked down that arc that represents the binary digit in question - could there be a physical plank there?

Less flippantly, I think that the more likely scenario is that the circle-makers made a genuine mistake. The binary encoding for 'h' - 01101000 is just one binary digit different to that for '(' - 00101000. The extra opening bracket would pair up with the otherwise unpaired closing bracket in the message to give us e^((i)pi)1=0.


No, crop circles aren't made by Doug and Dave on a drunken night, they're made by very clever people who probably have a bit too much time on their hands.

And having a good old laugh at the croppies







[edit on 6/7/10 by Chadwickus]




posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Damn you Chad, why do you always have to piss on our croppy fire with your logic and reason. It's much more fun to believe aliens did 'em.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:24 AM
link   


Oddly (or not), this has been ignored by the above mentioned groups, I wonder why!


I'm having trouble finding even one of these groups that has ignored this decoding, perhaps you can provide an example.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Wide-Eyes
 


Ha!

It's just one of many interpretations.

This one just errs on the houmorous side.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by polarwarrior
 


You've misunderstood me.

Most consider it to be in Binary, it's just no one (until now) had picked up on hi as well as Planck (Plank) being linked to it.

A curious coincidence don't you think?



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by polarwarrior
 


You've misunderstood me.

Most consider it to be in Binary, it's just no one (until now) had picked up on hi as well as Planck (Plank) being linked to it.

A curious coincidence don't you think?


No coincidence there mate, it was obviously a joke... In terms of complexity, the code was very obvious and designed for people to decypher quite easily. Nice touch putting the 'H' in



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


My bad I skimmed that bit. Applause to them, that was clever.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Hi mate,
Great work there as always.

One thing, I do understand that many crop circles are man-made, but what of those when CC researchers are camping out and find new circles right near them in the morning?

Just curious as to how that might be explained if the researchers aren't making them and do not see the number of people necessary to create a good sized and highly detailed circle going about their work in the night?



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:41 AM
link   
One thing that I dont get. You know when you take out the lines and put them into a row of 12. How do you know the message was meant to be read that way? What if its supposed to be upside down from what you have??? Do you know what I mean?

So like this


Never Mind, that way spells nothing. So yea, I think I'm sold on this being a prank

[edit on 6-7-2010 by YouCanCallMeKM]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Tayesin
 


I wonder if those "researchers" are affiliated with a group like this?

www.wccsg.com...

They (and associates) have a vested interest in crop circles.

Financial interests.

These people are the other sort that go out and make circles, you'll find that these people will be pretty busy in a couple of weeks.

Can't have a crop circle conference without crop circles right?



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by YouCanCallMeKM
 


Good question, I guess it's a matter of trial and error of different combos until you get a result.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Nope that does not work, I just checked here home2.paulschou.net...

His


Mine


So it is probably just a prank

[edit on 6-7-2010 by YouCanCallMeKM]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 10:27 AM
link   
If there was a crop circle done in one night, yet completely outside the realm of human possibility, like covering half a county (or a hole county) but still remained readily harvest-able after a couple days, I might start believing in them.

Until then, I see nothing but bored, slightly clever, yet sometimes lazy people trying to entertain themselves while spreading fantasy and myth, exploiting people who would rather believe in that than cold hard reality.

It's really rather depressing when I think about it, but mostly because it's never a clear indication of something undoubtedly outside the realm of an industrious human's (or group of humans) ability and/or ingenuity. :/

Nice distraction though; thanks for that.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by YouCanCallMeKM
 


Try using an 8-bit converter.

www.cs.princeton.edu...



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 

Thanks Chad... I can see where your coming from mate. I'm not 100% convinced they are all man made, but time will show I suppose.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Thank you for this, I'd noticed the e^(hi)pi)1=0 but the added Planck's Constant spin on it? Just funny
I'd just assumed it was a mistake with the binary by the makers, they are only human after all


- Phoenix

[edit on 6-7-2010 by phoenix_zephyr]



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by phoenix_zephyr
 


Well it could be a mistake.

But it does seem doubtful.




posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 

Interesting but the makers sure did make a few mistakes.

8 bit ASCII includes a PI symbol (227). Even without that it would have been better written as e^(i.pi)+1=0. Then he could have made do with 7 bits and made the circle a little bit easier to make.

The Planck constant would be a bit of a mix and match in this equation as it is a physics symbol and Eulers Identity is mathematical. If you know what I mean


Has anyone else tried decoding the circle in other ways? The close match to EI could be an intentional red herring. When I saw the circle my first instinct would be to decode on each concentric circle like a code wheel. 12 bits isn't so good though...



[edit on 8/7/2010 by LightFantastic]



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
You can prove 1 is man made, but it doesn't mean all hundreds of thousands were.
You can prove 1000 are man made, but it doesn't mean they all are.

Nothing wrong with this thread except the blanket generalization that this study concludes all studies, which is heavily biased and not acceptable research.

by the way, I still gave a star because i don't disagree which the rest of it.


[edit on 8-7-2010 by bananasam]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   
I thought the same too dude. I overlooked it so as not to derail the topic.





new topics
top topics
 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join