[Rockhounds] Stonehenge rebuilt-maybe off topic?

[J Bryan Kramer]

Actually the stones may have been a lot flatter 4000 years ago, they've had
4000 years of weather after all and maybe some exfoliation.

The real problem with this sort of thing is that it proves exactly what the
Kon-Tiki proved. Not one thing. Just because some fellow with 4000 years of
technology in his head can come up with some clever solution doesn't lead
one to conclude that some blue painted, pre-math natives came up with the
same solution.

BK

On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 9:10 PM, Kreigh Tomaszewski <Kreigh at tomaszewski.net>
wrote:

> Axel,
>
> I don't really see a problem.
>
> The first key is balancing the block (square or rounded) on one or two
> small stones so it can be rotated. Flat or rounded faces should not make
> a significant difference with that small a contact point.
>
> The second key is tipping back and forth on the length to be able to
> raise the block. Again, flat or rounded faces have no effect on this.
>
> The third key was the wave shaped rail used to roll the square blocks.
> With rounded blocks the rail is probably not necessary because they
> would roll by themselves.
>
> Large blocks of stone would tend to be quarried with flat faces. Wear in
> transporting them by rolling would be concentrated on the corners,
> rounding the block faces. I suspect weathering of these thousands of
> years old blocks would also be concentrated at the edges, rounding them
> over time. The blocks of Stonehenge may originally have had flat faces
> when the construction occurred.
>
> The only real issue I see is that rounded faces might make it harder to
> affix levers for rotating the blocks, but the contour could also be an
> advantage as the curve makes it easier to grip the stone. A lever with
> curved jaws
>
>                _____________________
>                      [_(   )_]
>
> would not pop off and would make it easier to rock the stone block to
> place pebbles under it.
>
> The only unanswered question I had was how to you get a fulcrum under a
> large block sitting on the ground to get the process started. I assummed
> a long first class lever. This step is probably the limiting factor in
> how big a block could be and still be moveable.
>
> As Kermit the Frog said, "Time's fun when you're having flies".
>
> Kreigh
>
>
>
> Axel Emmermann wrote:
> >
> > Hi Stu and Kreigh,
> >
> > After careful consideration I think I just may have found a musca
> domestica
> > linnaeus in the ointment.
> > The concrete beams are rectangular in circumference. That means that the
> > weight of the beam is evenly distributed over the contact zone with the
> > wooden beams or rollers.
> > A object that is less "flat" in circumference would seriously reduce the
> > surface of the pressure point. I looked at some photos of Stonehenge and
> I
> > found that the erected stones are quite rounded, almost oval.
> > Wouldn't they rather crush the wooden rollers or beam upon which they
> rest?
> >
> > Hate to be the party-p... but this needs some thinking...
> >
> > Cheers
> > Axel
> >
> >
> > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > > Van: rockhounds-bounces at lists.drizzle.com
> > > [mailto:rockhounds-bounces at lists.drizzle.com] Namens Kreigh
> > > Tomaszewski
> > > Verzonden: donderdag 6 maart 2008 3:41
> > > Aan: Rockhounds at drizzle.com: A mailing list for rock and gem
> > > collectors
> > > Onderwerp: Re: [Rockhounds] Stonehenge rebuilt-maybe off topic?
> > >
> > > Stu,
> > >
> > > Truely amazing!
> > >
> > > Very on topic; I'm sure we've all tried to move big rocks at
> > > one time or another.
> > >
> > > Thank you very much for sharing this.
> > >
> > > Kreigh
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Stu Schmitt wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It's amazing that this guy could figure out something which
> > > has confounded scholars for centuries. Not only did he figure
> > > it out but he demonstrates it.  This guy could build a
> > > replica of Stonehenge single handedly while a committee of
> > > Civil Engineering professors from leading universities were
> > > debating how it might be done.
> > > >
> > > > http://j-walkblog.com/index.php?/weblog/posts/moving_big_rocks/
> > > >
> > > > With appreciation & gratitude,
> > > > Stuart Schmitt
> > > > Clear Creek Crystal Mine
> > > > www.arcrystalmine.com
> > > > 60 Mary's Eagle Trail
> > > > Mount Ida, AR 71957
> > > > (870) 867-2443
> > > >
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Rockhounds at drizzle Mailing List
> Subscription Services:
> http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/rockhounds
> List Home Page, with a link to the List Usage Policy:
> http://www.eclecticlapidary.com/Rockhounds/index.html
>



-- 
"Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an illusion of
reality with which we create our own private world."
Arnold Newman


J Bryan Kramer
North Florida, USA
photos at:
http://pbase.com/photoburner


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---