From: Ian Campbell Date: 21-nov-99 Reply to: "O" That's Why 33 and 19.5 degrees. http://www.section4.com/genisis0.html genisis@section4.com
Hi there E. Lee,
Thanks for the diatribe and quotations. Good to see that someone with a mind is alive and well out there.
Clip from "O" That's Why 33 and 19.5 degrees, e-mail.
> What I am about to tell you is not provable to you
: by words alone, to fully understand you need to see
: with your own eyes using a protractor to measure
: the "Geometry" (angles and degrees of lines) of the
: Temple of Rennes-le-Chateau and how it is connected
: with the Paris meridian. It is my personal > "opinion" after having carefully analyzing
: the incline of
: Solomon's
: Temple in relationship to the Paris meridian, that it
: is
: at an angle of between (19 and 19.5 degrees). I have
: carefully measured the angles of the pictures found > in
: David Wood's book Genisis: The First Book of
: Revelations. I understand that an accurate analysis
: of angles cannot always be made from a picture in a
: book, especially when dealing with the meridian line.
: Due to the fact that some of the (meridian) angles
: appear to be rounded to a whole number, I believe > that
: Solomon's Temple "May" be inclined at between 19 and
: 19.5 degrees and "May" not be the 18 degrees which
: David Wood's believes it to be according to page 67
: of his book Genisis: The First Book of Revelations.
: According to the geometry of the pictures in the book
: it is between 19 and 19.5, there does appear to be a
: 1 degree + or - of some of the angles. I am "Not"
: saying David Wood's incline of Solomon's Temple
: of 18 degrees is wrong I am only saying it "Could"
: be wrong.
(Reply from Ian Campbell)
The offset angle of the temple is 18.43494882° not 18° or 19.5° How can we be so sure ? When we decided to try to put the 'geometry' of Rennes-le-Chateau on the computer using a CAD system, we first stipulated an 'a priori' case that it would have to fulfil. The conditions were as follows:-
That the geometry would be designed incorporating :-
i) a universal constant ii) that it would include its own scale iii) it would have inbuilt in it its own 'language' iv) it would display the value of the base number
with which it was pieced together.
We discovered after much experimentation that the geometry can be reproduced if:-
i) the universal constant is Golden Section
or Phi = 1.618033989.... ii) the scale is 100,000 (try multiplying/dividing the geometry by factors of 10 and you will
discover that the 100,000 scale
gives a large enough size as to be noticeable from aviation type
altitudes. Any smaller and it disappears. Any larger and the altitude you have to attain to
see the design is far too high. iii the language we 'discovered' is a variation of spherical trig, whereby an angle is converted
to a distance using what we call 'sine language'. iv) the base number is a peach. With the geometry set up on the CAD system, we could measure the
offset by calculating it and found
it to be 18.43494882°. We could easily have
fudged it and said that it was in fact 18° and
few people would have known the difference.
It would have been the number of the working principle of Isis which would have satisfied the Egyptian connotations upon which you have remarked. However, it would also have been wrong.
The angle 18.43494882° is unique and signifies the base number of 10. We put this derivation in Geneset. anti-sine (1śroot 10) = 18.43494882° . This is the only integer number with which you can perform this 'trick' and the fact that we had put this in the 'a priori' case and found it in the CAD analysis confirms its authenticity of being the right value. What is truly remarkable is that when the 'temple' is off-set by precisely this amount, the other parts (values) of the geometry fall into place and lock the whole together. What we are regarding is a work of genius. Dave Wood and myself only 'tripped' over it.
I hope that clears things up a little,
Sincerely,
Ian Campbell http://www.section4.com/genisis0.html genisis@section4.com
************** Note From: E Lee ***************** Mr Ian Campbell asks: Due to his heavy work load he does not have much time to answer e-mails that are sent to him. He asks that if you send him an e-mail, try and make it short and to the point. He also is not able to answer all e-mails he receives. Thank You, E Lee.
