The Neolithic Ice Age

April 24th, 2016

(This is a substantial revision of an earlier page, april 2016)


Our days are about ‘the global issue’, about ‘climate change’. All temporary human conflicts dwarf in comparison to the disasters we are about to bring upon ourselves and all generations to come. We are about to lose a paradise, because of our greed and folly, our short-term thinking and ignorance, we are creating a ‘paradise-lost’, forever, a living hell for posterity. We may look at human life as a murderous deal or as a great spiritual opportunity, whatever it is, we all agree on the beauty of Nature (without us). Life is a miracle, that is its entrenching beauty; we can’t get enough of it although or because we don’t understand it and we live most of the time as if we will never cease to exist; we haven’t got a clue.

To what extent we actually bother about the future of humankind is hard to say. At least we have no qualms about using all the natural resources within our grasp. We use the rarest materials and turn them into waste, we are prepared to risk immeasurable ecological disasters to squeeze the last drops of oil from the earth’s crust; our time will be loathed and cursed by future humankind, because we have wasted resources we did not even know the real value of. Platinum in exhaust pipes, tungsten in batteries, all rare metals and resources gone in the foreseeable future and no way to stop it.
This whole (economical) attitude of short term goals and reckless exploitation brings us the waste and pollution that will eventually suffocate us probably, as the oxygen production falters when the green lungs of the earth will turn into brown slime and the end of higher life must be nearing.

To what extent the global pollution is the major agent of the present climate change is under debate, which does not mean that it would not be a factor, it means there may be other natural factors that have an influence. For me it is a glimmer of hope that the present climate change may be exacerbated by accidental natural causes like planet alignments that cause gravitational friction within the liquid bodies of planets (tectonics, volcanism) and even the sun itself. I need this hope because otherwise I do not see how long-term effects of the present destruction can be avoided, since the point of no return may well have been reached already in that case.

Although we jolly well knew that there had been changes in climate most notably ‘remembered’ as ‘Ice Ages’, in our everyday life’s experience the climate was quite stable although the weather was a bit unpredictable in the short term but as it was, not much climate change was going on, it seemed and it was no issue. This is remarkable because the Little Ice Age, a recent 500 year long cold spell in Europe lasted well into the 19th century (1850) and was known to geo-scientists and art-historians (winter landscapes). Things are changing now, we are aware of the global climate, but not yet of its status embedded in the solar system, it seems to me.
Although there is still a strong and very powerful contingent of ‘climate change-deniers’ under scientists, politicians and business professionals, the wider public and media get more and more concerned especially so when indeed now extreme circumstances are occurring in many different places and being highlighted by the media. (Even the English now get seriously wet feet).
During my research concerning the recent Little Ice Age (1350-1850),  I came across this graph where a similar glaciation and high wind circulation occurred during a period in the Neolithic. What especially intrigued me were the relative abrupt start and finish, this abruptness was accentuated by great temperature differences, from high to low in a short while, say, less than 50 years and at the end of ‘the age’ a similar sudden change again.
I am still hoping against hope that part of the climate change has to do with an incident of geometrical (gravitational) friction in the solar system orbits which would cause a heating of the Earth core which would result in an imperceptible rise in (infra-red) radiation through the crust, resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. Especially recent alignments of the planets may have caused stress to the Earth’s inner core (unexpected Mt. St Helens eruption), because, if a major alignment of the Moon can trigger as much as a 2% rise in the global high-tides (eclipse), then -given that all is vibration- such major alignments of planets and corresponding gravitational friction will have affected the ‘tides’ of the molten core of the planet as well and may have produced an excess in heat generation from the normal.

Major alignments seem to be quite common, but is this a period we are in now or over the complete cycle of all orbits in the solar system? And have all alignments the same character. We have to deal with different time-cycles then, but still they may have their underlying influences. Cycles of 26,000 and 100,000 years are identified and just now it is confirmed that volcanic activity has a major influence on climate change and correlates with greenhouse-icehouse changes over the longer term (720 million years)
I think it is important to view big issues over long periods of time in their proper perspective, we cannot deal with climate change properly when we have a rigid, short term view on the climate. There is no such thing as ‘a stable climate’, we very well know that, but what the leading causes for the big changes that occur are, we do not know at all, although now some strong indications are present.
Our everyday weather is a result of the inherent instability of the greater climate. There seems to be a theory which links the big climate changes of the past to the Sun’s activity. The so called sun spots, which have a recurrence cycle of about 11 years, would, in a bigger picture, be the causes of the ice ages.
I believe though that the general climate changes so far are expressions not of the activity of the Sun but of the frictions in the solar system’s gravity and inertial fields. Scientists still refuse to understand the one-ness of the totally integrated system.  The so-called Bary-center of the solar system is its real centre of gravity, but this centre moves in and out of the body of the Sun, or maybe better to say: the Sun wobbles around this centre in a perpetual stress, sometimes more, sometimes less.
This measure of stress is depending on the planets and especially on Jupiter with its dominating mass of which the orbit coincides with the Sun spots every 11- something years. So this is my theory of hope, that the sudden warming of the atmosphere is partly due to temporary stresses in the solar system’s inertial deep-field.
[[It should be noted here that Jupiter is only 1/1000 the mass of the Sun, revolves in an orbit far, far away, but is still capable of causing sunspots that would cause changes on the Earth in the shape of ‘cold spells’, which we have named ‘Ice ages’. Jupiters influence is so great probably because it rotates so fast (imagine one rotation in 10 hours only, for such a huge body, as does Saturn btw), a spin which must have extra leverage in the equilibrium of the Sun that is very dependent on Jupiter’s orbital rotation, like the stability of the Earth roation depends predominantly on the orbit of the Moon. Although the stabilizing forces are enormous, they cannot be measured, let alone felt, only calculated.
It are these same hidden stresses that kneed the innards of the planets and the Sun. The inertial potential of a spinning object (gyroscope) is not fully understood by science it seems to me, it is most probably related to the so-called ‘dark matter’ enigma, as I explain elsewhere. It is all a complete misunderstanding of gravity still.]]

The Neolithic Ice Age (NIA; 3800-2900 BCE)

To understand the building activities of Stone Age Atlantic European people we do well to place them against a background of climate change as stated and to learn from them to look to our own future and future generations in that perspective and to build huge communal refuges also in times when there is no immediate need for them yet.
The megalithic chamber is seen as initially a communal refuge place, or bad weather hide-out (fishermen on small islands, Brittany!), later evolving into multipurpose spaces (cosmological, clinical, healing), where very seldom burials took place; this is the cornerstone of my theory.
Burial in a megalithic chamber has as little to do with its original function as burial in a church has with the function of the church. Besides that it is maintained here that the bones of people in the chambers are usually of those who died there and did not survive the cold spell they took refuge from. It is a totally different perspective from the archaeological paradigm of a Neolithic death-cult and it is probably with its wealth of better arguments closer to the truth.

The year 3800BC is on the record as the period that severe storms started to batter the Atlantic coast of Scotland. This date coincides with the start of a glaciation that is similar in character to the one that accompanied the recent cold spell in Europe from the 14th to 19th century, known as the Little Ice Age (LIA). The here proposed cold spell towards the end of the Neolithic I have coined the ‘Neolithic Ice Age’ (NIA), lasting from about 3800-2900BC. Like in the Little Ice Age this must have meant a severe worsening of weather conditions.
For what I gathered (over the years by now) I’ve become convinced that it were the harsh conditions along the Atlantic littoral, from Portugal to Sweden, that made people decide to build huge refuge places insulated by massive amounts of stone, the origination of the megalithic chamber, the shelter of rock over-ground, like a cave in the rock under-ground. With their sometimes long narrow entrance tunnels they resemble animal dens and with their corbelled domes they resemble igloos. There is at present no archaeologist who agrees with me, but that is mainly because it would be too embarrassing to have to admit a totally wrong interpretation on their behalf of these chambers as iconic buildings of the New Stone Age; archaeologists have never questioned the megalithic chambers had a primarily funeral function, whereas that ‘use’ was in fact an outflow of the tragic circumstances that would develop when people could not survive a cold spell one winter and died collectively in a chamber. It could very well also have been custom to leave the dead where they were when their remains were found by others during a next forced use of the chamber, this could be a generation later and by people who were no relatives at all. The treatment of bones in chambers is very diverse, from ordered to absolutely chaotic, and seldom interred.

Like in the Mesolithic people were probably used to keeping bones of the dead near them in their dwelling places or even take the dead into the house, as is still done in Guadeloupe today (for instance), and also very evidently happened at Skarabrae in Orkney at the time, where two graves were found under house-walls. Death and burial was probably much more a domestic issue than is suggested by the ‘cult of the dead’-paradigm that holds sway over archaeology today.

When we come to understand that the chambers were refuges then things seemingly ‘inexplicable’ become a ‘matter of course’. This is so convincingly the case with the long narrow tunnel-like entrances of many ‘passage’-chambers which provide a means to keep the cold out of the perfectly insulated chambers and cells (why insulate for the dead?). The mass of stone preserves the body heat generated by the people packed together in small cells for 6-12 people connected to a high hall. (HolmPapay, 14 cells, in 20m hall, over 3m high, narrow low entrance passage some 10m long)
The long uncomfortable entrance tunnel has no conceivable use in any funeral setting, this seems to me rather clear, but archaeologists won’t give in, I know, although they won’t come with a better explanation.
This whole idea of cold weather that I have argued, does not fit the received wisdom under archaeologists that it was warmer than today in that period and it’s just not true as we will see.

Below a graph of the ice core accentuated in colours by me

memory stick sony 1 181A

Greenland Ice Core Graph, Neolithic Ice Age (central dark blue block)

What particularly interests us here is the blue period of high circulation in the middle of the graph which is evidently related to a massive increase in glaciation shown in the grey and blue blocks below the peak period, this occurred roughly between 4000 – 3000 BCE, the fourth millennium. This then is the Neolithic Ice Age. This name is chosen because this period is similar (in glaciation!) to the recent Little Ice Age (1350-1850) in dark red on the graph (extreme left). And that is really not long ago.

memory stick sony 1 258A


‘Little’- and ‘Neolithic’- Ice Ages

The Neolithic warm?

The picture usually drawn of the late Stone Age is one of rather benign weather several degrees warmer than today even (mind you). This remarkable consensus seems to be based on some occasional finds of the bones of fish found in Orkney (Quanterness) that cannot survive in present day water temperatures ……. , they say. The sub-tropical species, corkwing wrasse,


though, is known to stray into the North Sea today and is remarkable for its tropical colours, so a precious and easy catch! This means its (rare) occurrence on the Orkney record is no argument at all for, overall, warmer weather.

The graph also shows that the climate is a changeable phenomenon and that the idea of a stable climate is a fiction, but this does not mean that human action has no influence for good or for bad. The point is we have to learn to live with sudden climate change as a real possibility. (One thing I’ve learned from my study of the megalithic stone age is that going  underground is a perfect option). The graphs show that both starts of the recent Little Ice Age and of the Neolithic Ice Age were preceded by a sudden rise in temperature and then an extreme fall in a very short term.

This deterioration is comparable with, if not worse than, the Little Ice Age that ravaged Europe recently between 1350 and 1850 AD, (see the red block) of which especially the sudden extreme change at the beginning in the Middle Ages had a devastating effect on the resistance of the European people and hunger and epidemic plagues, Black Death, were rampant, decimating the population.
The graph shows clearly a new world wide advance of glaciation 6000-5000 years ago which cannot be explained other than in a drop of temperature, at least in those areas, as Orkney, closest to the major glaciations.
In the Little Ice Age, two centuries ago, the Greenland Inuit travelled to Orkney on icebergs, that is how cold it was.
The overall temperature seems not to drop as low as around 6200 BC, a notoriously cold snap in archaeology, but local conditions can differ considerably from the overall picture.
Around 2900 BC the weather was already above average again, which in fact meant the end of the use of the chambers as refuges and also the end of the megalithic Funnelbeaker culture in northern continental Europe, which may be causally connected.
It got eventually so hot in the Middle East that the Akkadian Empire collapsed, due to the drought around 2200 BC. You don’t see that in the graph. Local conditions and periods can be extreme for good and for bad.

It seems already around 4800 BC the weather deteriorated according to other graphs, then improved again, but around 3800 BC it is an established fact that the Atlantic Scottish coast got battered by severe storms; so how about Orkney?
This would not have been different for Orkney of course, close as it is to the Scottish coast ( some 20 Miles away in the south), but the Highlands had woods and sheltered valleys, whereas Orkney had only smooth hills, broad loughs and pioneer tree vegetation; by 3000 BC though, the end of the Neolithic Ice Age, Orkney had only some scrub left, all birch, hazel and willow that had dominated the landscape of the southern isles, before the high winds came, had gone, used for housing and for fuel most probably, or just perished in the salt winds, as still today hardly any trees grow in Orkney because of the high winds. Thus, Orkney was certainly no paradise for a substantial period in the Neolithic, although it probably would have been warmer than Scottish northern Caithness where some similar chambers were built.
A telling quote from the Orcadian, Orkney’s weekly newspaper of sept’14, in a story about Orcadian women, gives a grimm picture of the circumstances in Orkney during the Little Ice Age, in this case of around 1800 CE:

They used to guarantee snow, then… recalled a senior citizen: ‘From what old folk often said in my boyhood, it would appear that the winters of 120 or 130 years ago were infinitely more severe than they are now’ (1930).
Oral anecdote and discussion gave rise to a tradition which was maintained for generations.
Since the houses of c.1810 were much lower than those of his time, they presented more threats to stock and families.
For several weeks on end drifts as high as the roofs remained; it was not uncommon for sheep stumbling through and over them in search of food, to fall through the two feet square lum, ‘only a few inches above the ridges of the roof’, into the dwelling below.
There were occasions too on which occupants were snowbound, reliant on better placed neighbours to dig them out.
Nearer modern times (1870) ‘six weeks of continuous deep snow’ was the expectation and generally, experience of folk ‘some time before the New Year and always three or four weeks in March’ with obvious problems for those with animals to feed, for lying snow made attempts to get at the ground below almost invariably unsuccessful, at the same time as burns and lades were choked with snow, denying water access to the threshing mills it had to drive.
[Compare this with today, where hardly any snow falls on Orkney, except sometimes on the higher hills. Orkney bathes in the warm waters of the Atlantic Gulfstream, neither does the temperature ever fall much below zero in winter.]

A similar severe climatic period in the Neolithic brought about the challenge to improve living conditions to survive, which paid off in numerous innovations.
The Neolithic Ice Age conditions would have caused the widespread building of survival chambers where the coastal peoples of Europe could weather the gales from the Atlantic and North Sea when these ravaged their homes and the conditions became life-threatening especially for children, the elderly and pregnant women. The average age was about thirty; at that age the ratio of men to women was 3:1, at the age of twenty, it was already 2:1. The survival of the whole population may have been at stake for considerable periods, the demographic situation was alarming.

It is these demographic and climatic conditions that initiated the communal effort to building the sometimes huge chambers, not some kind of, by archaeologists invented, all pervading ‘cult of the dead’. The chambers were a symbol of survival, of intense communal experience and hardship, also of loss, and naturally of growing reverence for the ancestry who built them, and sometimes perished in them, they revered the chambers the older they got, no doubt.
Imbued with the auspicious spirit of the ancestry some people brought bones of their dead to the chambers, which they may usually have kept at home. It was very rare for a person to be interred in the floor of a chamber, may be even done ‘clandestinely’, but the chambers were in no way built for that purpose; churchyards and churches are the most obvious expression of the wish to be buried near or in an auspicious and ancestral place, where relatives and other dead people are gathered, as a preferred gateway to the other world.

Maeshowe, one of the most sophisticated megalithic chambers ever built, was probably not primarily built as a place of communal shelter and storage of food as earlier chambers, although it kept the possibility of serving as such, no, Maeshowe was built for scientific, clinical and healing purposes and for the ‘storage and immortalization’ of knowledge. Maeshowe may have been earlier than or contemporary with the Egyptian pyramids, it is anyhow a conceptual blueprint in terms of embodying the state of the cosmological/scientific knowledge of the culture of its day, solidified in stone, to be preserved for posterity. Most curious of all is that its mathematics and dimensions show striking similarities with Giza in Egypt. A full blown enigma. (see pages: On Maeshowe, the Measure of Maeshowe and Maeshowe as Science-friction).

This website is a continuing assemblage of evidence and arguments for the view that a sophisticated cosmological and scientific culture developed on the British Isles, moving its centre of gravity from the Boyne Valley in Ireland to the north via the Hebrides to Caithness and Orkney and to the south via Anglesey and the Preselis in Wales to Avebury and Stonehenge in Wessex as the apex of the Atlantic Megalithicum that may have started in southern Portugal (Evora).


Stonehenge, floating the sarsen megaliths

May 7th, 2013

The transport route of the sarsen stones

Devil’s Den, Stukeley

Below you will find the first ever analysis and argumentation for the transport route of the sarsen  megaliths to Stonehenge,  by water over the river Avon instead of overland…..


For over half a century the route of the transport of the sarsen stones (sarsen, specific gravity: 2.5) from the Marlborough Downs to Stonehenge as laid out by Atkinson has not been under discussion or seriously challenged by any archaeologists as far as I know, until a recent find of  sarsen at Marden henge put this topic in the spotlight. This is remarkable because this route would have gone through marshes and over the extremely steep Redhorn Hill, but this is archaeology, a science, which is most of the time in sleep-mode when it comes to important theory it seems and only progresses by chance finds.

Stukeley, self portrait

Fyfield Downs and Clatford Bottom
For three centuries British archaeology is in the invaluable possession of the works of William Stukeley, an antiquarian and close friend of Isaac Newton, about whom he wrote a biography relating the famous ‘apple falling from the tree’- story. To be valued as a friend by Newton you probably had to have a bright mind yourself I suppose, so this is how I treat Stukeley and his work. He believed Druids were the builders of the megalithic monuments and conjectured they built them around 500BC, much earlier then his contemporaries thought. Regarding the Druids it is not altogether fanciful or weird to think that the megalithic architects and scientists were their precursers. Anyway he calculated what he called the Druid’s Cubit as being 52.83cm (20.8 inch), which is less than 5mm longer than the Megalithic Ell (52.36cm) that I propose and use in my work . He probably found this value by dividing the inner diameter of Stonehenge by the number 56 of the Aubrey holes. 56 x .528 = 29. 57m! (Burl’s measure= 29.60m) and got it confirmed in other measures, 208 (16×13) x .528= 109.82m! (Burl’s diameter of the overall perimeter = 110m), 164 x .528 = 86.59m (Burl’s diameter of the Aubrey-hole circle = 86.6m). (164 = 2 x 82, a supposed total number of the Bluestones, 3 sidereal months 3 x 27.3=82!) These are all crucial lengths and numbers at Stonehenge, 300 years ago as they are today. Although every standing stone circle expressed a number, archaeologists are not very interested in their numbers, they have no use for them. (Brodgar? Avebury? numbers not known, only conjectured, as of many other important circles, never excavated for that purpose; where a ‘superficial’ dig suffices).

These numbers and the ratios in the design of their buildings are the only intellectual data Stone Age man has left us, but archaeologists are not interested. Even the highly significant recently found Blue-stone circle near Stonehenge is not further excavated for the purpose of finding a clear number, ‘some 25’ is enough for archaeologists, not ‘some 23’, for instance, as ever there stood in the centre of Stonehenge.
Now it may seem that the apparent accuracy of Stukeley’s Cubit undermines my claims for my own Megalithic Ell, which is 5mm shorter, but I don’t see it that way, because my numbers as there are 210ME= 109.96m (Burl 110m) and 165ME (B: 86.6m) are also meaningful  (165= 5 x 33 year sun-cycle, MacKie, Heath). Besides that I have always stressed my system is foremost a calculator, I don’t claim the precision, for instance Alexander Thom claimed for his Yard, which actually became his undoing, whereas still my measures stand up to any thorough scrutiny and remain more meaningful in mathematical and cosmological context than most others. So Stukeley’s cubit actually strengthens my case because I have found in him an undisputed early authority backing one of my principle lengths, that is, the Megalithic Ell, though with a 5mm difference, like with Thom’s Yard (6mm), differences which, given the inherent uncertainties about the exact measures, if ever there were, and the technical circumstances of the Stone Age itself, are not essential. My measures still make perfect mathematical sense, it’s up to others to further apply Stukeley’s Cubit and even if it turns out to be more precise in other places, which I doubt, it doesn’t touch the peculiar enigma of my calculating system which encompasses the most important measuring units of antiquity in clear whole number ratios.
Once people start to appreciate the practicality, spirituality and beauty of this system, it will be used widely, I’m sure (although it may take a new generation of archaeologists to change their ways).

Aubrey Burl, doyen of the British stone circles
There is obvious logic in Stukeley’s reasoning and measure and I must confess I am not able to get a whole number for the inner diameter length of Stonehenge in Megalithic Ell, but I do get it in Megalithic Yards, Remen and Feet, whereas Alexander Thom did not succeed with his Yard, nor with his Rod.
Aubrey Burl, the doyen of the British stone circles, dismisses Stukeley’s cubit unit measure as erroneous and comes with his own (why not), but had he checked the merit of Stukely’s unit he would have found that indeed his own crucial measurements would have got him the significant whole numbers I give above and moreover his own sarsen circle diameter of 29.6m divided by Stukeley’s ‘cubit’ of .528m would have got him the number 56, being the number of the Aubrey holes, that bear his very name.
I am not a man of ‘statues’ but if one person deserves to be remembered in a bust in every English archaeological institute it is William Stukeley. Here we have someone with, unwittingly, a rare intuition for Stone Age archaeology and architecture, an independent mind and a remarkable talent for drawing. He conjectured and described the Beckhampton Avenue at Avebury, which was done away with as a phantasy by the professionals (left, on the picture below), until he turned out to be right as they found out only recently (by chance): there was a Beckhampton Avenue. (below left ‘tentacle’)

When Stukeley says the cursus near Stonehenge was probably a race-course, to which conclusion I came independently in an ‘aborted novel’, in which it was a ‘dog-race course’, then according to Burl it was something else: it is ‘funerary’ he says! Where have we heard that before? Funerary. They all say it: ‘funerary’; it’s never really substantiated, it’s just a paradigm. Would then the whole megalithic culture be one all consuming laborious dance with the dead? I very much doubt it. (below Stukeley’s ‘Cursus’ as race-course)


The above picture of Stukeley depicts the huge sarsens he found at Clatford near the Kennet river close to the Marlborough Downs. Sarsen A (centre) is described on the picture as some 5 yards long and 4 feet high (thick) (4.60m x 1.20m), this is the right measure of a sarsen for the Stonehenge main circle, as he stated himself. I quote: ‘they are all very large, being about the size and shape of the stones of the outer circle of Stonehenge’ (see extensive quote below). The same stones were even mentioned and pictured by John Aubrey, another giant in early archaeology, nearly half a century earlier. Note the sharp edges and the text ‘rudely hewn’, which makes them definitely different from Avebury’s stones and akin to Stonehenge’s. Aubrey draws a circle whereas Stukeley does not clearly, but mentions a circle as well and draws some stones which seem broken up and moved.

Stonehenge unfinished
Stukeley’s picture may be pivotal in quelling the debate about whether Stonehenge was ever finished or not; it was most probably not! The main circle at Stonehenge counts 17 or 18 sarsen stones that made it all the way, may be a few more, here we find the rest, some 8 -12 stones. That they found indication of more dug stone holes at Stonehenge recently (by chance, because of drought and a too short hose pipe!) does not necessarily mean stones were actually ever placed in them (see the Aubrey holes). Would our Stone Age forbears arduously hew these stones to more regular proportions (it was a hell of a lot of work, the sarsen is extremely hard) at Clatford Bottom to keep such an amount in reserve, if need be, or for setting up a mini-Stonehenge? It seems highly unlikely. Look how regular most are pictured by Stukeley and Aubrey (‘rudely hewn’), compared to Avebury’s irregular sarsens, which seem not hewn at all. These early pictures also tell us that the route of the sarsens was down the Downs, past Devil’s Den, along Clatford Bottom, not up to Avebury as Atkinson argued fifty years ago; mind you: to get blessed by a priest; ‘spiritual benison’, he called it. Megalithic archaeologists seem convinced that they deal with a pristine religion here, priests and all, but it seems though their own self-conjured up religion they believe in, for which some like to act as the high priests themselves one wonders at times.

‘A’ lane
So, no hauling of huge stones up to Avebury for ‘priestly benediction’ but just down the valley on the shortest and straightest way to Stonehenge  from Clatford up the side valley to Oare, Pewsey and the river Avon, that is the better story, as I will show. Like all of nature also humans usually prefer the way of least effort and resistance and that is downwards if possible and over the shortest feasible distance. When one goes down the ‘Sarsen-valley’

fyfield downs sarsen field

one reaches the Kennet river either west of Fyfield or east at Clatford Bottom, the place where John Aubrey and William Stukeley found the huge stones; again, both resounding names in early archaeology, reporting on huge handled sarsens first hand, but completely out of the picture until only recently, as mentioned and still the stones that are known to lie there are ignored. Incomprehensible.
Here are quotes from English Heritage some known for over 300 years:

The earliest reference is a description (late 17th century) by John Aubrey of “eight huge stones in a circle”, all of which “doe lie fall’n down”. In 1723 William Stukeley referred to “twelve stones flat upon the ground in the middle of the road which seems to widen on purpose for it… Eight of them seem to lie in a circle…”.(see picture above,YG) The precise location of the stone circle is unclear; based on Stukeley’s description, place names and other documentary sources it has been suggested to lie south east of Clatford cross roads at ‘Broken Crosses’, or at ‘Broadstones’ where a widening of the road is suggested by the 1792 Inclosure Award.

The Aubrey and Stukeley pictures, with text, clearly indicate where it was: “In a lane between Preshute and Clatford” (Stukeley) or “a lane between Kennet and Marlborough” (Aubrey) This is not necessarily on the Roman Road, as the Romans with their cohorts would not be ‘slalom-ing’ between Stone Age megaliths, you bet, they would move them aside or go around them. The next quote wrongly suggests again it is on the Roman Road itself; this is where all the trouble starts, when you don’t do your close reading, as I will show presently. Here is the next quote:

“In 1723 Stukeley noted that in the lane, or rather Roman Road between Marlborough and Devizes (wrong inference!!!,YG), over against Clatford and on the edge of the meadow just by the side of the Kennet, close to Clatford Bottom “lie twelve stones flat upon the ground in the middle of the road which seems to widen on purpose for it and takes a little turn, too, upon that account. Eight of them seem to lie in a circle (see plan (2)) and the other four may possibly have been the entrance or beginning of an Avenue; they are all very large, being about the size and shape of the stones of the outer circle of Stonehenge. I measured one, 16 1/2ft long, 2yds broad (5.03 x 1.83)…. There are two barrows within sight of it …. a little further westward you turn on the right into the fields which leads (leaving a barrow on the left hand) into the Clatford Bottom”. With close reading we find that it is obvious here that Stukeley is coming from the direction of Marlborough going westward, where you first get Preshute (before modern day Manton, see picture below far right), a very old parish (priest-hut), and then Clatford (far left), so we are here on the south side of the river in a lane, not on the Roman Road on the north side of the river. (Also John Aubrey again speaks of ‘a lane between Kennet and Marlborough’, not the well-known and 2 millennia old and used London-Bath road and he mentions (East-)Kennet (a village), older than West-Kennet (a hamlet), which is south of the river, again). Then Stukeley says ‘a little further westward you turn on the right into the fields’ to get to Clatford Bottom (the bottom part of the Marlborough Downs near Clatford), leaving a barrow on the left hand’, (on the picture) so the site of the stones was before the barrow, which is pictured on the other (north) side of the river with even a windmill in the distance which would have stood on top of the Downs. It even seems Stukely pictures the ‘bend of the river’, since trees get smaller in the middle of the picture and grow larger at the sides, the road then leads to the island in the bend of the river towards Clatford Bottom. So there can be little question about our lane being south of the river, as there is no question about the Roman Road (A4) being definitely north of it.

The white curving line through the length of the picture is the Kennet river, the ‘flexure’ is to the left clearly visible, where there is even a small (manmade?) island in the river and after the bend downstream eastwards is a small creek, with trees today, this would have been the ford probably, somewhat further down there is a real ford today (see Google Earth), so fording the Kennet in that area was and is no problem, that is clear enough. Fording places are usually natural and used since time immemorial by humans. Somewhere in the triangle of land in the bend are big stones close to the river today, just as Stukeley describes. All rather straightforward one would say, but not for archaeologists, they dig somewhere else as we shall see. The trees in Stukeley’s picture suggest this is indeed the bend in the Kennet river, which Stukeley mentions in Burl’s quote: “over against Clatford at a flexure in the river we met with several great stones” (note Stukeley has given different descriptions, some more precise than others) so the picture is in the bend, because ‘against Clatford’, where moreover it is known sarsens are still lying till this day, the Broadstones, completely grown over and forgotten by archaeologists, no interest, but vital clues in ‘the route of the sarsens’, of course.
It is true that Stukeley speaks elsewhere of ‘in the Roman Road’ but one letter change to ‘on the Roman road’ makes it equivalent to saying that ‘West Kennet Longbarrow and Silbury Hill are on the road from Marlborough to Devizes’, this does not mean they are physically on the road, but close by. Since Stukeley does write ‘in’ (at least it is transcribed as such) this is the only weakness in my argument, but he did make mistakes sometimes and there are different versions of the description, besides that ‘in’ may have been a way of saying it in those days, or it was actually written as ‘on’, but wrongly transcribed. Again the overriding argument is that it is hard to believe that  the Romans would be negotiating these stones on their main road to London and Bath, it is rather unthinkable. Moreover there is no reason for another lane next to the Roman Road, since people from old were living on the south side of the river where there is ample space for fields and lanes, not on the north side.

 Parker Pierson dig

As soon as it became clear Marden Henge was involved in the dressing of sarsens, Mike Parker Pearson has launched a new theory on the trajectory for the sarsens: from the Downs over West-Overton, along Knap Hill to Marden Henge. Obviously MPP and a couple of colleagues have thought it might be time to have another look at the Stukeley records, after 300 years, as the website makes clear and they dug twice at the wrong place to see if they could find traces of the stones Stukeley depicted. Mind you, we know big stones are lying in the field in exactly the area Stukeley describes, the Broadstones, very near by. So would it not be a better idea to define the type of these stones and if ‘sarsen’ start digging there to probably find layers and layers of sarsen chips, broken mauls, pottery, you name it, and get radio-carbon dates at sufficient depth and take it from there? It could have been the assembling place of the sarsens, where they got there first dressing to make them as light as possible for further transport. The whole Broadstones area full of chips and broken mauls, imagine!

 From Clatford to Pewsey, the alternative route
My alternative trajectory of the sarsens is simple, straightforward and shortest of all, since it leads from the Downs to the crossroads between Preshute and Clatford and then on southwards through the gently upwards sloping valley, a local road to Pewsey. This natural valley road splits several times to the right, once at the present beginning of Westwood, famous for its blue bells, where a road forks off to a car park a few hundred yards up the road. The track I particularly remember though is probably the next and is a rather straight and broad, definitely man-made, hollow road with flat surface, expressly made for the transport of the sarsens, I claim. Towards the end of it there is a longbarrow in the forest on the right (if I remember well) and coming out of the forest there is a big, rather deep pit, possibly material for the barrow (it is over 15 years ago I was there). When you continue south you will at some point come to the ridge of the chalk escarpment, the physical boundary of the Vale of Pewsey which is down below. At certain places at this point in the ridge there are more than a yard deep grooves several yards apart, which in my view would be testimony of the controlled lowering of the sarsens by grating ropes down the rather steep slope into the Vale from where they would be transported onwards towards the river Avon. (Below Atkinson’s overland route – dotted line-, with mine in red at beginning, sarsen valley, and end, Bluestone-henge to Stonehenge, the rest of the transport by the river Avon in my analysis)

This scenario leaves us at least two routes at the beginning so as to prevent stagnation of transport, once, for whatever reason, a stone got stuck and would block the road for another transport. The other route would be the natural valley road, with several hairpins going down in the Vale to get to the Avon river. They knew how to use water for the transport of the Blue stones, now incontrovertibly proven by Bluestone-henge, so here I argue for the short-cut route from Clatford to the Avon and on to Stonehenge, the route I surmised now 15 years ago.

Transport by water
Once down in the Vale the stones would be dragged past present day Oare and Huish to Pewsey where the river Avon finds a confluence of several of its springs, they may even have canalised it partly. As I claimed elsewhere the sarsens, like the bluestones were transported by water most of the way, which would also have been feasible from Marden henge onwards. Remember this, reader, there is nowhere any suggestion from anyone of using the rivers for the transport of the sarsen stones to this day, because the river is deemed too shallow, not?
Since Marden Henge has forthwith to be taken into account as regards the dressing and transport of the sarsen stones it is necessary to also account for transport over water to that place. So in my account (some) stones could have been transported over the Avon river from Pewsey to Marden henge, which is right at the riverside, specifically for further dressing probably (the lintels!) since they were only ‘rudely hewn’ at Clatford Bottom, and would then from Marden be taken down to Stonehenge by river again. So let me now explain how I see the water transport.

Summer bed, winter bed
A lot can change in nature especially when humans interfere and that is what happened progressively over the last 5,000 years in Western Europe with the advance of agriculture and all that came with it. Europe was mostly one big dense forest some 7000 years ago, today forests are sparse in Western Europe. Enormous amounts of soil have been carried away by the rivers and filled their original beds. Holland, the Netherlands, where I come from is the delta of the Rhine, the largest river of Western Europe. In my country we are aware that a river has a summer and a winter bed, and the mighty Rhine is kept within bounds with long stretches of high winter dams. In Britain they seem to have long since forgotten about winter beds and started building houses on the floodplains; that’s why they get wet feet in places where rivers get swollen in times of heavy rain recently, which is during the winter usually.  In a recent winter the river Avon, the subject of our study here, swelled to ten (!) times its ‘normal’ width in places with a volume of water not on the record yet.

A quick-witted reader now already gets the point: there must have been times that there was enough water and depth in the river to transport the sarsen stones since they knew how to go about it, given the now, since finding Bluestone-henge, established transport of the Bluestones from Wales over the sea up the Avon river. (There simply is no better rationale for the Bluestone-henge being just in the place that it is). This practical knowledge may even have been the very reason they thought hauling the much larger sarsens from the Downs to the Stonehenge area was a feasible project. All they had to do is cut the trees along the summer beds, possibly slightly canalize the beds in places and wait for enough water to do the job, aided by building barrages to raise the water levels locally, all during the winter of course. This was the reason people came to Durrington Walls in winter time and brought their own food in the form of cattle and pigs, not to feast as Stone Age people are perennially deemed to do according to archaeologists, no, just to feed themselves as everyone else does and certainly does when engaging in big exhausting communal efforts and enterprises, like hauling stones over land and water or quarrying moats like  for instance Brodgar and build from the huge quantities of quarried stones (where have they gone? well, to the Ness of Brodgar, of course!) communal halls and kitchens, surrounding them by huge walls against the high and cold winds of Orkney for one thing. It is all practical and useful in my approach, nothing ceremonial per se.
Important always is to wonder what people really need; what you would need in their circumstances, not ceremony and ritual, but shelter and knowledge of the seasons.
So winter was the time to move the (big) stones (no work on the land) and the Grooved Ware people from all over the place descended on Clatford Bottom and on Marden and Durrington Walls henges to participate in the communal effort to build their ‘clockworks for the heavens’. It was this participation with many in something big, which was their spiritual high point and caused their ‘enthusiasm’, it became the hallmark of the agricultural revolution, the communal spirit, as we see it also in the graffiti of the Pyramid workers and as we see it in the ‘Rausch’ or ‘euforia’ of crowds to this day; it is not so much the celebration of the winter-solstice at Stonehenge, as the coming together of a unique and sophisticated culture which was possibly the first to use flat tables, benches and flat bottomed pottery in Western Europe. It was probably the Grooved Ware culture which set itself apart from others in its scientific and innovative approach to daily life as we see it in the insulated houses of Skarabrae built in a refuse heap! with its peculiar dressers, which were probably coolers and storage places for meat and vegetables, built high and deep to keep dogs and goats from stealing the food. All useful, practical and innovative; no showcases, let alone altars.

The engineering
So how did they go about ‘floating the sarsens’, the key question? We have to keep in mind that the sizes of the stones differ considerably. By far the biggest stones are to be found in the horseshoe setting inside the circle of sarsens, the biggest two are estimated at about 50 tons each, but also the circle contains massive stones of up to 30 tons, only the lintels are of relatively ‘reasonable’ size being over 3m long, a metre wide and 75cm thick on average, but still some 6 tons each (3.2x1x.75= 2.4 m^3, times 2.5 specific gravity= 6,000 kg); so for about 33 lintels that is 200 tons lintel weight alone.  I hope the reader agrees that when I can make the case for floating the biggest stones it implies the others were feasible as well, so we go for the 50 ton upright (in weight similar to an army tank).
‘Specific gravity’ is crucial to our calculations so it must be explained first. All specific gravities of materials are ratios gauged against the weight of pure water, which is by definition 1. This means that 1 litre of water weighs 1 kg, sarsen stone has specific weight 2.5, thus 1 litre or better 1 cubic decimetre of sarsen rock weighs 2.5 kg. So our sarsen of 50,000 kg has a volume of 50,000 / 2.5 = 20,000 litre or 20 cubic metre.
All materials with a specific gravity smaller than 1 float in water, like most types of wood, which range from about 0.4 (aspen, willow, poplar) to 0.65 (oak), some tropical types though sink. Let’s make it easy and suppose our wood has s.g. 0.5, this means that a volume of 20 cubic metres of wood weighs 10,000kg  or 10 tons and can carry about another 10 ton of material before it definitely sinks, the principle of the raft, well known in those days. The Stonehenge builders had already found out with the Bluestones that when you submerge the stones in water they become much lighter because of buoyancy, you don’t have to be an Archimedes for that, it’s just experience, so you need less wood to make them float. This is the first trick they knew from past experience: submerge your stone and it becomes (40%) lighter, that is 20 tons in our case, that’s not nothing. So effectively for the 50 ton stone submerged we need 30 ton buoyancy which means 60 cubic metres of wood of 0.5 s.g. The crucial question is then how many tree trunks from what length deliver that volume of 60 m^3. We think of straight poplar trees (s.g. o.45) and then that we need a trunk section of an average of 1m diameter, this gives us a volume of  0.5×0.5×3.14=0.785m^3 of wood in 1 metre trunk, this times 13 metres = appr. 10m^3 wood, so we need about 6 of those average 1m diameter trunks of 13 metres long to get our 50 ton 9 m long sarsen stone just afloat, that’s all.

The pictures show two different ways of doing it of which the right one seems the best because it uses the depth of the summer bed. It all depends on how deep and wide the Avon was in its summer bed, but it is obvious this is all feasible with between 1.5 to 2 metres of water depth and, as said, this could be achieved by building barrages, to begin with south of Upavon downstream of the major confluence of the Avon, where the initially two arms of the river, one from Pewsey, the other from Marden, join. This barrage would make sarsen transport from Pewsey to Marden an option and in the meantime they could start building barrages down river, with the last one downstream of the natural ford in the bend of the river at the end of the Stonehenge Avenue, near todays Amesbury.
The picture below shows the summer and winter bed of the Avon in dark ands light blue. As far as I remember the river drops only 20 metres over 20 km or thereabouts, so 1 metre per km, which is very, very little and makes for a gentle stream, easy to manipulate and even to go against, firmly embedded as it is between river banks. (Remember they transported the Blue stones upstream from the sea)

The lower picture shows the final route of the sarsen transport from the new-found ‘Bluestone circle’ and the ford in the river, not over the Avenue but along the easiest and most gradually climbing route through the valley nearby and then to Stonehenge, which is the black trajectory. This route presents itself in the middle black relief in the upper picture. QED. Mystery of transport solved!

Again climate change

When I take this argument further it could very well be that the sarsens that Aubrey and Stukeley found at Clatford Bottom are indeed the proof sarsen-Stonehenge never got finished and that the reason for this could very well be another minor climate change, that is, that the rivers for a considerable period of time did not carry or never again carried enough water to move the stones and that this became the loss of momentum in the building process which eventually halted the whole enterprise. The amount of water could also be decisive in the movement of the biggest stones ahead of smaller ones, so that they took every opportunity to move the big ones, which could also imply that most of the biggest stones were already at hand and ready before they started moving any stones whatsoever. (You see this at Banks chamber in Orkney where the form of the available big roof-stones decided the form of the individual side-cells, they had their most important material at hand before they started building)

This first assembling and dressing could have taken place at Clatford Bottom. This all ended when there was just not enough water anymore to move anything. Then when people would come year after year from far in vain, they would eventually stop coming.
For half a century everything went well it seems from evidence at Durrington Walls and then the weather-gods turned against the Grooved Ware people again as this may have happened in Orkney where the land started to sink into the sea after the millennium long Neolithic Ice Age, with rising sea levels heralding the end of the flourishing Maeshowe Grooved Ware culture.
Maybe others outside the Grooved Ware culture began to perceive it as an Evil culture with its cosmological knowledge interfering with Heaven, causing climate change and therefor sought to expel its people from the islands and eradicate all traces of it, as the Ness of Brodgar may be testimony of, buried as it got, as if it never existed and that even, with a warmer climate, their now obsolete refuge places with remains of some of their dead were completely sealed so their ‘evil’ spirits would no longer roam the land.
Skarabrae, Ness of Brodgar, Durrington Walls and Stonehenge, all seem to have come to a sudden end. Will we ever know why?

The Shaman and the Standing Stone

April 24th, 2012

The Shamans


In the three years I have been running this website the truly innovative ideas I have launched here as regards archaeology are several. The concept of a climate change between 4000-3000 BC, coined the Neolithic Ice Age (NIA), is one such idea which then is seen as the primary reason for the profuse building of artificial caves as refuge places on the windy sea coasts of Atlantic Europe, this being a new approach to the well-known megalithic chambers, deemed burial places by all archaeologists.
Then I have argued that subsequently some of these chambers were explicitly built as maternal clinics, like Newgrange and Maeshowe or single delivery rooms like Knowth, Dowth and Cairn L, Loughcrew and that only after the Ice Age was truly over, say 2900BC, the chambers, which had lost their primary functions, became used as burial chambers (like a church can contain burials from long after its erection, however it was never built for that purpose).
So I place the megalithic chambers initially in the context of bare survival, as refuge under forbidding weather circumstances, a fortiori survival of women and new-borns, which would subsequently evolve into centres of cosmology (observers staying over at night), medicine and mathematics (Loughcrew, Maeshowe, NessBrodgar), in short, centres of learning. The alarming demographic under-representation of women (1:3 at thirty) must have had a profound impact on society with a substantial amount of ‘idle’ men with a lot of time on their hands. This is the group which must have formed the core of the work forces which brought these giant megalithic works about.
In continental Europe the end of the Neolithic Ice Age also meant the end of the megalithic culture (Trichterbecher,TRB) with its communal outlook and burial practices around 2900 BC. The individualistic, fully agrarian, axe wielding and alcohol drinking Beaker culture became dominant, the ego had triumphed and the erstwhile spiritual ‘Rausch’ got degraded into a ‘recreational Rausch’ and began conquering Neolithic Europe bringing to an end a spiritual era which would never return again.
Last but not least I claim the standing stones, be they single, aligned or in circles, were found to be lightning conductors and, placed in circles, became instrumental in triggering downpours from a thunderstorm, that is, it was a technological innovation in the long standing tradition of shamanic ‘rain-making’. The shaman is the ‘master of fire’ and impervious to it, some do even aspire to be struck by lightning, so the shaman is the perfect conductor to orchestrate a stone circle with drums, you bet, create a thunderstorm and ‘let it rain’.
On top of that I have, I think convincingly, shown that many megalithic designs are intricately geometrical and symbolize a mathematical truth which is found in the ratio of the double rainbow, 14 over 11. (Maeshowe, Brodgar, Stonehenge)
Although I had mentioned ‘rainmaking’ as relating to shamanism earlier, it is only since I have been reading more extensively about shamans that I realized that also ‘lightning’ as symbol of fire, the ‘rainbow’ as the ladder by which the shaman climbs to heaven and not to forget the ‘circle’ itself, as ring of people, are key symbols of shamanism, so I came to the conclusion that unawares I had been describing the shamanic horizon underlying the design of the megalithic buildings and that therefor shamanism is likely to be the key to the spirit of the Stone Age and its final scientific apotheosis in the Atlantic Megalithicum of the British Isles.
I once attended a ‘shamanisation’ by an Hungarian shaman, the late Joska Soos, in Oibibio, Amsterdam, and I found recently in an ‘autobiography’ of him and in his paintings an explicit confirmation of the link between mathematics and shamanism (see below). Since Soos explicitly denies that shamanism is a religion – which I sensed about the Stone Age all the way – he nevertheless sees shamanism as ‘the source of all religion’. Let us take that authoritative insight as the theme by which we can try to weave a ‘spirit of the Stone Age’ out of the above mentioned cultural threads.


30,000 year old West-European cave painting of a shaman

There can be no doubt that the shaman has come down to us from deep in the Stone Age, that the shaman, in an important sense, is the spirit of the Stone Age, all over the world. Although the shaman was of the highest authority in the community, they usually were a ‘primus inter pares’, a ‘first among equals’ in daily life and up until this day, in those rare communities in Siberia, where the ‘original’ shaman still exists, this is the case. The spirit of equality and compassion is very strong in the shamanic society and symbolizes the egalitarian character of the Stone Age, since both men and women were shaman.
The shaman is in a sense the Ur-typ, the arche-type, of the enlightened personality, the truly ‘inspired’ teacher, the accomplished human being, and whatever their many baffling skills, it is the healing of body and mind, the restoring of harmony to the soul, be it individual or communal, which is their essential function, their ‘raison d’etre’ (reason of being). The shaman is there to help and cure others, that is what they are chosen and educated for, he or she is originally a ‘chosen-one’. Their spiritual training of seclusion, celibacy and meditative practices, lies at the root of yoga and meditation, their spiritual flight is at the heart of our dreams, their ‘Rausch’ (trance) has produced visions, medicines, arts and sciences, they are the masters and magicians of the mind, the sufferers of every human illness, the seers of future and truth; in their extra-ordinary practices they need the help from the spirits of animals, the spirits of trees and of rocks and sometimes they engage with the dead, indeed. This extra-ordinary personality was the spiritual refuge for Stone Age society; it’s a world where the Mind rules supreme.

A heavy way

Only few are called upon to become shaman, it is a heavy way and only few possess the personal integrity to deal with the power they can wield over others; if a shaman makes a (moral) mistake it can mean their own death. The essence of the shaman, and this is their deep humanity, is that her or his life itself is a sacrifice to the community, because to become a healer they have to go through great ordeals of body and mind themselves, so as to be thoroughly purified and free from ego and selfish motives to serve the ‘world’; they must be prepared to face death for the well-being of others without harming others. Where do you find that today? Only in the highest teachings on selflessness in our religions.
We see that this highest ideal of self-sacrifice for the ‘benefit of the whole’ comes straight from the shamanic ethics, that is, from the Stone Age.

No doubt there have been evil shamans as there are evil thinkers, but the essence of the general occurrence of both these types of teachers is that they use the gifts of their extraordinary or superior insights for the good of all, not for the greater glory, power and advantage of themselves and their kin. The profound compassion embodied in the shaman is the most solid proof of the sincere humanity of Stone Age society, thus all the prejudice in talk of ‘barbarian practices’ is obviously blown out of all proportion when set against the essentially ego-less altruism of the shaman, as a moral role model of his age. It is in the ‘outstanding otherness’ of the shaman, that we can understand the basic equality of the Stone Age society, its natural caring for the fellow human, its purity of intentions, its purgations by psychotropic substances, processes in which there are no spectators only participants, where the family or the community as a whole become the healing agent guided by the shaman, be it man or woman, as the medium, as the messenger of the Beyond. This can only function when all barriers between people fall away and this can only happen where egos dissolve and equality arises as the source of healing harmony in humanity.


When we do not grasp the profoundly egalitarian spirit of the Stone Age, the personal sacrifice of the shaman and the highly communal emotional cohesion, which during deteriorating weather conditions was further fostered in the long spells of hardship when they were sometimes packed together in the refuge spaces, collectively surviving forbidding circumstances, with a lot of patience and forbearance, (communal chambers became huge in Orkney, several of them 20m inside), if we do not see the spiritual purity and humanity of their society, then all our imaginations about life in those ‘halcyon’ days start from a biased ‘primitive’ perspective, a misunderstanding, if not a caricature of ancient human beings, the very people we descend from.
The equality of the Stone Age, as evidenced in the communal burials of people of all ages, is best gauged in the equality between male and female shaman, this is the root of the egalitarian society and why shamanism cannot be called a religion. Religions are institutions based on collections of moral stories and prescriptions, ‘received and passed on’ by enlightened male teachers, usually put down in scriptures, guarded and ruled by men, inside male bastions also known as monasteries. Women have traditionally no role of substance in religion, this is so all over the world; a priestess occurs only in a shamanic setting.
It is this hierarchical social inequality between male and female which justifies all inequality in society. ‘Inequality’ is a state of mind, it is the ego, which is urged to stand out and triumph (hero), but on the other hand also ‘equality’ is a state of mind, it is without ego, it is the union with the One as the source of compassion and ‘enlightenment’, which is a female aspect. Shamanism has all the characteristics of the female, religion has none.
So where did women lose equality along the way, one may wonder?

Agriculture, a female revolution

In my analysis the whole Neolithic agricultural revolution is female in character, because it springs from the female side of the hunter-gatherer society, that is, from the gatherers, the women. To this day it are usually women who have and tend herb-gardens and we know that all early medicine is based on herbs and plants. Our Ur-typ of this female preoccupancy with herbal concoctions is, of course, the witch. She even flies like the shaman on her broom. Hunting and gathering is initially a state of ‘pursuing and taking’ from nature (male), whereas nurturing herb-gardens and nourishing animals (ducks, geese, goats) is a state of ‘giving, caring’ (female), so in effect it was a deep cultural revolution which took place and at first this gave women the upper-hand, they became the masters of the house and its direct environment, while the men ‘worked’ for them and their offspring in a secure and comfortable setting. Instead of ‘killers’ men became ‘carers’, instead of free-roaming, he had to manage a schedule, he started to manage time; many men psychologically never really took to the change, they have always remained hunters.
Hunting is not ‘working’, of course, otherwise it wouldn’t be a sport of the elite. Hunting and fishing is the male in his erstwhile free and pristine independent natural state, which he lost since the Stone Age and is still desperately trying to revive in the few ‘free’ hours that are left to him.

It has often been wondered why, for heaven’s sake, the hunter-gatherer lifestyle which was so much less labour intensive and cumbersome than agriculture was ever given up for the sedentary agricultural lifestyle. The answer in my view is clear, it was: the women. The women brought this about, they wanted a husband-man (husbandry) with a farm and a permanent shelter (house) for their children, no longer the exhausting life with a hunter without a home, than a feeble hut and sometimes even nowhere to go. So it was the preference of women which made young men go out into the woods with their axe and clear the land, build a firm wooden house, wait for local women to appear and start a family. And so it spread and came about (There seems to be genetic evidence for this scenario)

Master of the house

So agriculture was a female revolution and brought unwittingly a take-over of domestic power, the woman became the master of the house(hold) and had under most circumstances her man nearby; it became a success as we see today. In the Stone Age women languished in an alarming minority of 1 to 3 males at about 30 years of age, on average the end of their short lived lives. They lost their infants and own lives at an abominable rate under exhausting circumstances and with insufficient comfort to recover. Today though nearly everywhere women get older than men and are in the majority. Taken that it is a bare 10.000 years on the hundreds of thousands preceding, that is a resounding success for women.
Losing his dominance in the family life and the control of his transient ‘hut’, seeing women taking over on the domestic front, the male ‘conspired’ successfully to regain his dominance outside the house in the communty and did it by building himself the bigger house, where he and his ‘brethren’ were the boss again, he built himself the ultimate house, he built himself a ‘temple’, and he convinced woman that this was not for himself and his dominance, but for the ‘gods’ (his gods) and their dominance.
This gender inequality is the root of all social inequality and the bastion of male superiority in society. This is the paramount reason why religion is different from Shamanism, why the priest is just a shadow of the shaman, why women are banished from spiritual authority, why mysticism and morals are no longer at the heart but at the periphery of society. Religion is a male message, an urge to convert, a conviction of being right, of embodying the ultimate truth etc., shamanism has none of it, because it is from the heart not from the head, because it is rooted in compassion with fellow humans, whereas religion usually does not practice the compassion it preaches.

What I want to stress is that shamanism can be seen as the genealogy and evolution of the human mind, but also of its compassion, breaking free in susceptible individuals, where it manifests itself as, indeed, the ‘soul’ of the human condition, be it male or female. Undergoing and managing the hidden powers of the mind, that is the extraordinary importance of shamanism and the cause of its resilience and resurgeance in our age. It is an endangered wisdom which should not go lost.


‘Information’, ‘getting information’, are terms often used with respect to the ‘spiritual flight’ of the shaman which gives it an unexpectedly modern flavour. We read the shaman moves into ‘the other world’ to retrieve ‘information’, on how to heal a sickness, help a community, or do fortune-telling, or any other ‘incredible’ thing these shamans do in the eyes of an ‘ordinary mortal’. By encountering the spirit of a medicinal plant, for instance, the shaman, during the ‘Rausch’ (trance), gets ‘information’ by its spirit on how to use the healing qualities of the plant, this way they gain knowledge by, what seem to us, ‘supernatural’ means.
But then, if scientists, artists, composers find creative solutions given them in their dreams for free without the ‘supernatural’, would then not the shaman, the tireless worker and expert on dreams, be the most well-placed to retrieve even more knowledge at will, just by being ‘extremely natural’ about it all? This is more than likely precisely the way the most precious of knowledge has originally been gained by mankind, through mind-altering plants and fungi, producing extraordinary insights and revelations on plants, animals, the cosmos and themselves. A prodigy is born, not made, a prodigy is a shaman, a shaman is a chosen-one, a genius, answering a fateful call, without much choice. If it were common there would be more genius in humankind.

Shaman and the standing stone (part 2)

Apart from the fact that the Atlantic Megalithicum culture put so much energy in big stones, megaliths, they appear to have been actually very fond of stones in general as is again and again shown in the ‘uselessly’ small neatly polished stone axes found at the Ness of Brodgar and several mace-heads as well, sometimes small stones seem to have no practical function at all and are just extremely smooth and nice in the hand, the ‘nature and feel’ of the stone is the essence of its specific ‘healing influence’, you’d say. A lot of people today still believe in the healing influence of stones, a very old belief, no doubt.

The megalith

Putting the stone upright was honouring it and making it enter the world of man, who go upright. Everyone who ‘encounters’ a big standing stone knows it has an enormous ‘presence’, which is its ‘uprightness’, it has been singled out, been chosen to stand in the world of man, but it could not get there on its own, that is its mystery. Where do you come from, what are you doing here? In Holland the megalithic boulders come from the glaciers of Scandinavia, a thousand miles away carried by the glaciers of ice-ages. The more foreign a stone is to its environment (no living rock in the whole of Holland), the more magic and enigma it is bound to exude. Where do you come from? It could be, and this holds especially for the single standing stones, that it was raised where a shaman had been hit by lightning, or lightning had hit the ground, marking an auspicious place in the subtle power grid covering the upper surface of the earth. It could be. Nobody believes standing stones were placed at random and nearly everyone who knows sufficient places and gives it a thought will conclude that it usually enhances the power of an already special place by singling it out, giving it focus; a spot to experience the whole environment. I am pretty convinced that the triad lightning-shaman-standing stone is a valid one, that the standing stone through its ‘sun-spirit’ can be seen as a bridge between Us, the Underworld and the Beyond. The standing stone is associated with the energy of the Sun as well as of the Earth, but also with the spirit of male and female reflected in its shape.

Cult of the dead?

In Japan, where shamanic Shinto animism has reigned from time immemorial, spirits reside in the house preferably in the upper corners of a room. So the buttresses with their standing stones in Maeshowe, when pictured flat-topped and level at 10 Megalithic Feet height (2.96m), would provide an abode for the ‘cardinal spirits’ at the cardinal points of the central space of the building, North, East, South, West……, which figure prominently in shamanic invocations.
In the shamanic animistic worldview every block of stone in a building has a spirit (animus), how much more when these are upright stones like the buttresses in Maeshowe and all the other standing stones, aligned in line or in circle at given points in the landscape. The spirit of the stone though is not the spirit of the dead, it is the spirit of the stone. But since spirits are essentially equal (because all is One -which also explains the natural enlightenment and equality of the shamanic society) and since spirits are interchangeable, no doubt the spirit of the dead can enter the stone and find a temporary abode there. When you touch the stone and hold it for a while it may tell you its wisdom, like trees do. So that stone circles were places where shamans could convene the spirits of the dead, is plausible, but is it a cult of the dead? No, it is shamanism, and in shamanism everything is ‘alive’ and ‘spirited’, so how could it be a cult of the dead? The shaman communicates, as we say, with the spirits of the dead and many other spirits, that are very much ‘alive’ and no one with any knowledge of shamanism will judge that it is a cult of the dead, although the dead can play an important role in it, like they can in our own lives. We see the same ‘entering the sphere of the dead and of spirits’ in Tibetan Buddhism with a different emphasis, but in many of its cultural manifestations close to the shamanic tradition; but no one can seriously call Tibetan Buddhism a cult of the dead.

Listening to trees

We know it is not given to just anyone to listen to a tree (let alone talk to it), but this does not mean that we have some kind of superior rational understanding, when we think it is nonsense. That attitude of ‘rationalist science’ and the prevailing general ‘common sense’ in its wake, that attitude of ‘knowing’ something about the profound mystery of life is just preposterous, if not really stupid, and certainly one of the biggest spiritual deficiencies of modern day ‘scientific’ Western culture. It stems from the all-pervading materialistic scientific interpretation of reality, of which of course the Big Bang is the ultimate symbol. That ‘superior’ rational interpretation though always immediately breaks down as soon as it cannot explain phenomena outside its own reference frame, the mystical, the magical. Scientists ignore these facts or simply don’t believe them or, worse, ridicule them, as if they know something about the mystery of life. (I hope this site will provide a start for a vocabulary and logical framework which is able to translate also the ‘inexplicable’ in a consistent ‘logical’ description, because in my view all and everything that can be talked about can descriptively be brought back to a common ground.)
We know the druids revered the oak and its mistletoe and no doubt listened to the holy trees in their sacred groves, but we know also from Caesar that they were of the opinion that writing ruins the memory of man, so all knowledge should be memorized, not written down. Unfortunately there is great wisdom in those words, on the one hand their knowledge is lost, because not recorded, on the other it seems indeed the power of the human mind has deteriorated and that that is the reason why educated Stone Age people have the edge over most of us and our scientists today. Like druidic pupils also the shamans went through a long schooling and of course this was all memorization and direct experience, no reading and writing.


After having Socrates denounce ‘writing’ in his dialogue with Phaedrus, Plato wrote: ‘The first prophesies were the words of an oak” and he goes on to state about ‘the people of old’ that they thought it rewarding ”to listen to an oak or a rock, so long as it was telling the truth.” Socrates even lectured Phaedrus for not heeding the words of an oak, as if it were not the content of the words which mattered, but who they were related by.
You would never have thought this would come from Socrates or Plato, would you, and where do these oaks and rocks come from you may wonder, maybe Wales or Brittany? Or is Plato talking of the people of old in general as: all the Shamans, the innumerable enlightened-ones preceding the Buddha, the Immortals absorbed in the eternal Tao?

The state of knowledge that I attribute to the Stone Age is based on the assumption that they discovered the cycles of Sun and Moon, had to make calculations and records to do this, mastered prediction of eclipses, found the ratios between square and circle and derived the double rainbow proportion.
Patience is the key to this knowledge and to all the countless lost crafts of the past, it was after all a different state of mind, where time did not count and perfection was the norm. Already the audacity to dare start charting the night sky, given the tools they had, is awe-inspiring by itself. (Did you ever look up at the stars and imagined you had decided to understand and make sense of what you are seeing?) Night after night making observations, or waiting for the sky to clear in the North, generation upon generation memorizing the assembled knowledge.
Discovering after hundreds of years the intricate cycle of the moon must have been a momentous event, for which there was every reason to cast such knowledge into stone so as to never ever let it go lost. To this spirit we owe the great scientific megalithic works, also those of Giza, where the spirit of the great healer and architect Imhotep would hover over the work force.

European shamans

In the late eighties I attended a ‘shamanisation’ by the Hungarian Joska Soos in Oibibio in Amsterdam. He used Tibetan singing bowls in his performances. Soos tells us in an auto-biography how he was ‘born with the caul’, auspicious, and coming from a shamanic family background. He was educated by the shaman Tamas Bacsi who indeed listened to the rustling birch for predictions and exposed himself to lightning (to no avail). Lightning is the symbol of the power of the shaman: they control fire and are impervious to it.
In the context of this website Soos has some interesting experiences to share in that he tells how he as a kid had a profound vision on the nature of reality which he describes as follows in ‘I don’t heal, I restore the harmony’ p.39: ‘Then I did experience the mathematical structure of the micro- and macro cosmos and it were mathematical structures and fabrics of power-lines like you’ve never seen. This was not Euclidean mathematics, this was something completely different and they moved, they were alive. The one changed into the other and the differing mathematical figures were space and time at once. I felt space, time and light, the white light”.

I feel very much at home with such a description because it so closely describes the mathematics and ontology I propose in these pages. It was ‘alive’, it ‘moved’, it was ‘complementary’ as one moves into the other and there was the ‘white light’; so then we are ‘at home’.

In Soos’s adagium on healing we recognize the shamanic humbleness as: ‘it is not me who is doing the healing, I just put things back in the right place, the healing happens from the restored harmony of the soul itself”.

When we see Soos’s pictures it is obvious this deep early ‘revelation’ stayed with him all his life and evolved into light-beings and singing bowls.

The use of circles, half circles, straight and parallel lines remains part of Soos’s way of expressing the ‘Beyond’ and what he ‘sees’.

What I want to argue is that just as the shamans were capable of retrieving ‘information’ from a plant or tree they would have been able to ‘supernaturally’ retrieve information about mathematical rules and physical laws by producing circles and making geometric connections between the standing stones in the circle. This way they could not only physically enter the geometry of the circle, but in their ‘Rausch’ connect to the cosmic (mathematical) spirit of the design, which was revealed in ‘eternal’ ratios of numbers, held in patterns.
According to Soos the polar star is object of a cult in shamanism, because as central star, circled by all the others, it is ‘the great door to the Divine’. But also the Great Bear is singled out and revered. Do we call this religion? Or better shamanic cosmology? (I have argued elsewhere that the engravings in Newgrange and Orkney recumbent stones depict the Polar star and the Great Bear, see Skara Brae and Science)
Even more striking in my view are the descriptions of space by this old shaman Tamas Bacsi. The universe is full of tiny holes, he said, the cow, your hand, full of tiny holes. “You look at the sky and then you will see the little coloured holes which you can go into and enter a different space, a different existence”.
It certainly combines well with my concepts of space-pixall, zero-point, zero-dimension and pure light. As Soos relates his actual experience of the holes 30 years later, he describes something which I experienced myself several times long ago, that space is an aggregate of coloured sparks, that it is indeed granular and full of light. This experience is the basis of my certainty that my concepts are sound, I’ve ‘seen’ it, so to speak. Also Tibetan ontology has ‘sparks’ and ‘space-particles’ as fundamental concepts.

It may be clear that I have been inspired again by ‘the people of old’ where it comes to their piercing insights and intimate feeling for ‘reality’. I always come away wiser when I let them be wiser than me, that is also the best way to let them come close. The silence of the Stone Age has still a lot to tell us.



Gravity = the Cooling of the Cosmos

November 11th, 2011
 Gravity = the Cooling of the Cosmos

Introduction ‘Gravity’

In previous pieces I have advocated the idea that ‘gravity’ is the result of cosmic field pressure, emerging because of a depression in the counter-pressure of the cosmic deep-field around a body, caused by shielding and absorption. Although I was sitting in the bath, like Archimedes, when the idea came to me, unlike Archimedes, I stayed in the bath, not yet sure of my second ‘Eureka’ on gravity. I found just recently that Newton and Lorentz and several others had played with similar ideas a (long) time ago (see Wiki, history gravitation, paraphrased here), but although they all eventually dismissed it, I want to give it another try, from a different perspective. After all, gravity is still a mystery.

Similar theories
Here are some points of similarity with those earlier theories:
1)Lorentz used electromagnetic radiation, like I do with Poynting vectors of EM-fields. 2) Newton and Riemann argued that aether streams carry all bodies to each other, similar to my principle of ‘source streams to sink’. 3) Newton and Euler (1760) proposed a model, in which the aether loses density near the masses, leading to a net force directing to the bodies, which amounts to the same as my insight of ‘depressions’, or ‘lee-fields’. The ‘depression’, loss of pressure density, is what Einstein calls ‘curvature’, but that is too much a 2-D description of a 3-D reality and is only mathematical; in my picture it is a loss of cosmic field-pressure (loss of density) in the spherical ‘lee’ of the object (shielding) which is mathematical but has mechanical components, as deepfield-density and cosmic field-pressure.

It is indeed the deep-field which reacts to the presence of the object, in this it is in full agreement with Einstein, but the object is on the deepest level part of the deep-field through which it passes, it moulds the deep-field in its passing. Gravity and electromagnetism are not separate distinct fields, as Einstein maintains, they are both emerging aspects of the one deep-field, but since electromagnetism is the deep-field of all ‘matter’ the whole concept of gravity becomes obsolete. The  EM-field is  probably the main push of the pressure-gravity.

When you light a candle, you light the deep-field, the candle is not the source of the light, but the trigger of the deep-field. This is why the speed of light is independent of the motion of the so-called source, which is no source. The field is already there only has to be triggered to emerge. When you push the candle it will fall, the pressure-gravity field was already there, gravity ’emerges’ because of imbalance. When the candle falls, does its light fall? Can light fall? Newton thought the Earth was attracting the falling candle, Einstein claimed that as far as the candle was concerned the whole universe made a somersault, but I think it is safer to speculate it is space  itself that pushes you down when you lose equilibrium.
Space wants everything in a steady place. At the same time there is a kind of vortex, a sink in the deep-field, which induces rotation, like all orbiting in ‘free’ space. So the change in pressure of the deep-field is caused by the density and geometry of the deep-field. The energy absorption by all bodies from space is a kind of ‘sucking-in’ which is the aspect of the vortex which then
in extremis becomes the Black Hole. It is also some kind of contraction and by all means the concavity of the torus surface is the best example of the mathematical contraction of space. It is this contracted state which induces the acceleration, but it is as with expansion it is the state of local space which induces a dynamic. The local state of space defines the rate of transformation (local time). This is why the universe is in a steady state, but its convexity is perceived as expanding, redshift, but space in our model is just as steady as the surface of a torus, with local contraction (concave) and local expansion (convex).

So my present description combines these insights and gives, I think, a much better picture of what really happens on all levels than Einstein’s abstract mathematical explanation of Minkowski space-time curvature’.

 An authority on what I try to say all the way with my ‘deep-field’, is the physicist John Bell in Wiki at ‘Aether theories’, who actually uses the same kind of reasoning I do about Lorentz, superluminal speeds and quantum behaviour, elsewhere he said that the ‘ether’-concept should be chosen if only because it is so much more adequate in making things easier to explain. But nobody listens. The concept of ‘aether’ has become completely out of the question in physics, eradicated, and see what damage is done. I think the concept of the cosmic deep-field opens complete new vistas, if only you get the (zero-)point.

Let me insert here an appropriate quote from another authority on the matter. ( I am really pleasantly surprised by uncovering such unequivocal support for my own findings by several unquestioned authorities recently).

Robert B. Laughlin: Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University, had this to say about ether in contemporary theoretical physics:

It is ironic that   Einstein’s most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil   down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in   special relativity] was that no such medium existed . . .The word ‘ether’ has   extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past   association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because,   stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most   physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says   nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe,   only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. It turns out that   such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies   of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had   spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and   fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us   to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal   Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with ‘stuff’ that is normally transparent   but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part.   The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment,   is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo.”[3]

One circle rotating around an axis gives us the sphere, two circles rotating around perpendicular axes give us the (horn-)torus. The one is how energy manifests in absorption (contraction, spherical compression), that is: spherical stars, the other how energy translates in emission (toroidal expansion, radiation, momentum), that is: toroidal waves.
What I do here reader is constructing in my own language a scientific ontology which is based on natural number logic, geometry and harmonics. It is completely based on logical reasoning on the basis of what the numbers my model generates mean in the reality of everyday life and in that of physics in possibly a big way. This is how simple and understandable my model is. This model’s ‘simple’ mathematics though breaks the present mould of science.

Permanent Creation
It should be borne in mind that my view of the cosmos is that of an integrated cyclical system, permanent creation, in which heating and cooling are two complementary phenomena. The heating is caused by radiation, which very much sustains the fabric of space by feeding into the space-pixalls. This absorption is excessively so when ‘matter’ (condensed space-pixalls) is involved as a concentration of energy in the (general) cosmic deep-field. This absorption creates the ‘lee-field’ around an object, it shields the general counter-pressure from the direction of the object, resulting in net-pressure towards the object = ‘gravity’. (some call this approach ‘push-gravity’ but this involves pushing particles , also see Newton, Euler, above, I would prefer ‘pressure-gravity’, if ‘gravity’ is to remain as term).

So the cosmic radiation and pressure is transformed by inducing spin, that is, into mechanical motion and momentum in a reflection wave-field. All spin creates waves. This is the object’s inertial field. (And this is why Lorentz’s thermo-dynamic objection of ‘over-heating through absorption’ is void, the energy is transformed into momentum and field).
It are these inertial fields which give the final rigidity and high pressure in the deep-field (Dark Matter) so in that sense Mach was right in claiming that inertial space was caused by the totality of the matter in space, but he and science in general forgot about the inertia of the spin of all these bodies (gyroscopes), this is the missing dark matter of course. It are the reflection fields of the large heavenly bodies which feed into the high pressure of the deep-field at quantum level
This draining of energy from the deep-field can be seen as cooling the deep-field to sustain mechanical motion, that is: ‘cooling the cosmos’

So this is why the principle runs:

“Gravity is the cooling of the cosmos”

In the following I will set out how this relates to my present, much further developed, view of the cosmos. I now understand much better what I intuited at the time 14 years ago, but I would not have used those terms today probably and I actually had forgotten about it, I must confess, because it is so long ago I found it, but it remains a powerful comprehensive statement in its own right. And a complementary principle, added today, can run :

“Radiation is the warming of the cosmos”. (It could mean Dark Energy)

My cosmology revolves around principles, like rotation, cooling, contraction, least resistance, continuity, equilibrium, harmonics, not the usual rigid physical laws which are derived from mathematics and usually poorly understood by scientists themselves because the mathematics is clear, but what it signifies isn’t; because the laws are not properly understood they do not interrelate which makes for a lack of a comprehensive picture. All laws are presented as independent entities like in the case of the concept of Entropy. The notorious Second Law of Thermo-Dynamics is almost sacred to physicists, unfortunately it is a dead end street. In my model there is no disintegration other than as part of regeneration, but the Bigbang cosmology is a one-way alley, from the Bang to….. where no one knows for a long time now, but it seems to be dark and cold there. Wouldn’t it?
My description of the space-pixalls ‘aligning’, ‘contracting’ and ‘expanding’ is really describing the quantumlevel of the deep-field. The more so when this deep-field is the ‘screen’ on which ‘geometrical forms’ materialize. This sounds like holography. The object is a concentration of excited pixalls in a form which influences the geometry of its environment by its reflection-field. This ‘organisation’ of space around the object results in a ‘lee-field’, which functions as a ‘sink’ through pressure-differential. The general pressure of the cosmic deep-field accelerates all objects towards each other up to the point where there is an equilibrium in the pressure of the reflection fields, that is when they are in resonance and stable orbit.

As a metaphor the deep-field reaches to the deep of the ocean, motionless and under high pressure, but the deep-field is also the currents, major and shallow, it is the waves of the ocean and, eventually, between these huge forces Life emerges as the foam on the waves, sometimes abundant but always fragile in every bubble.

Canonical Pi is an Euclidean number

The most obvious fallacy of science is that, with much talk of ‘curvature of space-time’, expansion, acceleration etc. nobody seems ever to wonder what happens to Pi (as a Euclidean number), in a non-Euclidean setting like curved space. (True, Einstein mentions it, but his π’s are smaller than canonical Pi because he measures a convex space, they should be bigger than Pi to express the contraction of the radius relative to the circumference in most cases, a concave space, this is the ‘pull of gravity’). Except for the rings of the giant planets which are their gyroscopic razor-thin inertial fields, which help to stabilize the planet in its rotation, as the moons do. (Without the stabilizing effect of the Moon, higher life would not be possible on Earth, it would wobble like ‘hell’) Except for these stabilising inertial fields there is nothing Euclidean in space and certainly not at the quantum level, whatever scientists say about ‘flat’ space.

In my system the differing value of Pi could actually be the measure of space curvature, which will show in the specific place a measured value takes between two or more mathematically fixed standard values.

Pi=sphere, Pi^2=torus

My system is built on two different incompatible approximate values for Pi and Pi-squared (²), all rational numbers, which both are based on contraction of the radius as we would expect in a vortex. Pi is for the sphere (axial rotation circle), Pi-squared for the (horn-)torus (tangential rotation circle). So because of the contraction of space they are slightly bigger than Pi, but only in the thousandths, as always in this system. (Canonical Pi = 3.14159265… squared = 9.86960440..):

Pi- Sphere (7) = 22/7 = 3.142857 142.. squared=9.8775510..

Pi- Sphere(11) = 2800/891 = 3.14253647.. squared=9.8755355..

Pi- Torus = 800/81 = (3.1426968.. squared) = 9.87654321.

We remenber that the circle formula is 2..r

the formula for the surface of a sphere is 4..r²

the formula for the surface of a horn-torus is 4.².r²

(note this is the square of the circle 2..r )

the formula for the volume of a horn-torus is 2.².r³

(note that the last formula is identical to Einstein’s formula for Riemann’s spherical space (4th dimension) which, thus, turns out to be a horn-torus volume).

These formulas are the core of my geometries and in my system the ‘horn-torus’ is named ‘corus‘, as a contraction of ‘core’ (point), ‘compact’ and ‘torus’. This is what it is all about, the versatility of the torus.

The torus

The torus is among my most valued tools and in relation to the sphere it is the heart of the cosmological model I present in these pages. The torus (ring) incorporates the important ratio 10:9, in my system, which is the crucial ratio in the natural number logic on which the ‘geometry of resonance’ is based and which, as I have shown, pervades the solar system (see Solar system resonances).

As Huygens laid down the patterns of light waves, I lay down the patterns of the ‘inertial’ waves of the reflection fields which we find in the ring-systems. It are essentially these emission wave-fields of the giant bodies which form the pressure of the deep-field. All the visible and invisible heavenly bodies produce in resonance this all pervading pressure-field, which increases with ever smaller dimensions. The shorter the wavelength, the more momentum it carries, the higher the pressure. That we don’t feel that pressure is the same as that we don’t feel the atmospheric pressure around us which is dramatically shown in the famous Magdeburger Hemispheres, where two span of 8 horses could not pull apart two vacuous hemispheres of 50 cm diameter. That is the pressure we live in without feeling it, believe me, there are higher pressures we don’t feel.


Two span of 8 horses cannot pull the vacuum spheres apart

That an electromagnetic field carries momentum and thus has considerable inertia seems overlooked (Dark Matter) by scientists, because of the ‘Nothingness’ of ’empty space’, and the wave without a medium. (In Wikipedia on relativity ‘ether’ is now equal to ‘nothingness’, all thanks to ‘special relativity theory’ and its parlance)


The essence of a wave is its ‘momentum’, that is: ‘velocity times mass’, but this can only be carried by a medium, but since Einstein decreed that the wave stands on its own and the field as well (whatever that means), it cannot carry anything, how could it without wearing out. But in fact electromagnetic fields carry momentum, are momentum. Waves are momentum, because they move a medium, stir other things. [The Poynting vector (linear pressure, light!) of electromagnetism is completely neglected because it does not fit the relativity-picture of ’empty space’, the Void]

The wave has no self-substance

Just imagine a wave rolling to the beach, its momentum is just as big as the volume of water it is able to move, this hangs initially together with the force of the wind, but even when the wind is gone the waves still carry its momentum, it is kind of conserved in the volume of moving water. But now be attentive, because this is the crucial thing: the wave moves the sea only up and down, it does not take the water with it, neither does it take you when you are in there as you know (except in the breaker, the collapse of the wave), the wave uses the water, and you in there, to carry its momentum, but it has no ‘eigen-substance’ (self-substance), the wave is the momentum carried by the medium, it is the wind over the water, because there must be a medium to carry momentum, the medium materializes the wave, by carrying it as momentum. If we understand this thoroughly we can also see that any ‘object’ is just a bundle of waves carried by the deep-field and that no object has an ‘Eigen-substance’, which is the centre of my argument. We are only waves, we have no ‘own’ substance, our substance is ‘space’. What is ‘material’ about our ‘feeling’? Are we material? If we are, why don’t we know what matter is, then?

Energy sustains space

All the energy which is radiated out in space is needed for the very sustenance of space, because the space-pixalls need to be fed to keep their wave fields intact, otherwise space itself collapses as in the black hole, a border point of space, which eventually absorbs an old star or galaxy, as it ‘dies’. Space is internally bordered by the essence of matter, a vortex obscuring the pure light, the zero-dimension. Every object is, after all, a border point of free space, it occupies space and gives it an ‘inside’, but where is ‘your inside’, all that ‘matter’ of you, where is it located; without looking around you would have no idea.
You can see our 3-D world is the inside of a horn-torus (below) and we walk on the contracted inside surface of that torus, thinking we walk on the surface of a solid sphere below us. Whatever we see before us is always the surface of something deeper, like we meet the soul of a person through the black holes of their eyes. Every point in our space is like the border point of the zero-dimension which pervades everything but has no dimension. The pure light sparkles in every point of space, we are made of light, if only we would see.

‘Corus’ (Horn-torus), one border point of surface in centre

Geometry of universe and space pixall

The best way to visualise this border point of our space is by imagining the volume of a ‘corus’ (horn-torus, 2.².r³, Einstein’s 4th dimension !) as our universe, this universe is bordered by one point in the centre and it is this one point, in every point of space, which keeps us unaware of the ‘dimensionless void’ which surrounds us and connects us because it is One in every point of space. The space-pixall is hiding the ‘pure light’ in its heart, the pure light is all pervading emptiness itself, the zero-dimension, like the white of the page around the pictured torus and the blackness of the centre zero-point.(above)

I will use the model of the torus surface to explain the contraction and expansion of space in a steady state model of the universe. In my model the whole universe is a torus, but not necessarily like the one below.

Universe as primordial cosmic wheel

The surface of the torus is the answer to the question of the expansion of space. Three quarters of the ‘corus’ surface is convex , means: in a state of expansion and one quarter is concave means: in a state of contraction; but nothing moves, it is just a state of space in which the geodesics contract and expand, which, when wrongly interpreted, gives the idea of expanding space, where only the fabric of space is changing, the deep-field, and the speeds of the field (red shifts).

Concept gravity wrong

My analysis of the solar system (see: Solar system resonance) shows the prevailing concept of gravity must be wrong because it cannot explain that the number 9 dominates the orbital resonances of the system, but crucially that the ratios of the masses of the planets themselves are also in that 9-number resonance. This whole concept of resonance is alien to science at the moment when it comes to gravity, because gravity is, notwithstanding Einstein’s geometry, still seen as a ‘force’, whereas in fact it emerges as the lack of something, that is, lack of counter-pressure.

In my approach gravity is the effect of the ‘lee-field’ of an object and this ‘lee-field’ of any massive object creates a ‘depression’ and ‘contraction’ respectively in the pressure and the density of the cosmic deep-field. The lee-field of an object is thus a depression in the general field, because each object absorbs pressure by rotation and so shields its vicinity from general cosmic field-pressure, at the same time it structures this spherical lee-field geometrically by a partly toroidal ‘reflection-field’ with high resonance, which results in an equatorial standing wave-field, as we see it in the ring-fields around, especially, Saturn, but also other planets and of course the Solar System centred on the Sun itself.


Since the deep-field pressure ‘hits’ every object spherically the object transforms this impact through rotation by creating a toroidal transverse reflection field. It is not so difficult to associate the outward-rolling torus as the essence of the momentum of the wave. When energies collide in a point, they create a border-point of space from which energy bounces back, this energy is the torus geometry, sphere and torus are the essence of the transformation of space. The torus just does not play a fundamental part in science’s picture, most scientists don’t know the formula for a torus by heart (try it!, they’ll tell you they can derive it) whereas in my picture it is the essence of the spindle-torus as geometry of rotation as we see it in the equatorial bulge of a rotating body, like stars and planets (Saturn!).

A nuclear explosion is in fact local destruction of the deep-field, the gigantic pressure in every point of space is unleashed by the destruction of the space-pixalls constituting the nuclei taking part in the fission. So the space-pixall turns inside out and dissolves in a gigantic release of pressure. This explosion has a toroidal shape.

The most dramatic natural example of a giant explosion showing toroidal vacuum pressure at the very centre is the meteorite that exploded in 1908 over Tunguska in Siberia. At the epicentre of the blast all trees were still standing, stripped, but upright, no side-ward pressure, but in a ring around it the damage is still visible today, a hundred years on, the red ring shows the torus of destruction. (Scientists have no explanation for this torus-phenomenon, though also at the epicentre of the Hiroshima bomb the memorial building is still standing)


Tunguska, 1908-2009


The geometry of the reflection field, the transformation of spherical wave-fields into transverse wave-fields is the most fundamental mechanism in nature and determines the reflection-field of the object and its emerging inertial field.

We have to appreciate that every object is extended in the deep-field far beyond its appearance (with a sharp enough lens you are visible from space) this is its (your) reflection field, the beginning of which may show in the aura. It is a standing wave field, which is at the same time an inertial field and its ‘con-firmation’ of the deep-field, it adds to the stability (inertia) of the whole. So every aspect of the transformation sustains the whole as an organic process and this is also reflected in the energy equilibrium like the cosmic micro wave background radiation (CMBR) at 2.73 degrees Kelvin, 1/100 of melting ice at 273 degrees K (1 + 99), all coincidence, of course).

In my approach we see the cosmos as a self-contained integrated whole in which every aspect has, or reflects, a function. In the BigBang cosmology though everything runs in separate categories from a contingent beginning to a fading end, like an old fashioned alarm-clock unwinding its spring and ‘freezing in silence’. Instead my perceived cosmos is preferably cyclical, continuous and only locally entropic whereas the Big-Bang universe is blind and contingent, our universe ‘sees’ and has ‘purpose’, even if only it were to preserve ‘continuity’, but most of all our cosmos is ‘intelligent’ and ‘formative’. We see logic everywhere in nature, a logic of harmony and of beauty, a logic of economy, of how everything is recycled, nothing is wasted.

How nothing gets lost, until completed. (Law of Karma).

Cosmic Deep-field

The rest of the deep-field is the basis of uniform motion, which is manifest in the electromagnetic fields which all have the same local speed depending on the condition (curvature) of local space. The uniform inertial motion of any object is the objects natural resonance with the deep-field, it is embedded in the motion of the field, because it is made of it. As soon as outside pressure is applied, the deep-field resists change by slowness, inertia. Inertia is in that sense the ‘stretching of time’, it is ‘slowing-motion’. But it is also the transfer of energy by increasing momentum of the object through increase of excited pixalls involved in the movement at any one moment. The higher the speed of an object, the stronger the inertial field by increasing numbers of space pixalls being involved at the same time, the higher the wind the bigger the waves, thus increasing the ‘substance’ and thus the momentum.

Momentum is stored in the deep-field as the momentum of an ocean wave is stored in its movement, the more volume the wave has, the bigger its momentum and still the water (the medium) does not move but up and down, the wave has no eigen-substance, is only momentum.


This is why momentum can be transferred in ‘entrainment’ (Huygens), (transfer of momentum and phase through space) because there is a medium; how could it be transferred through ’empty space’, this is a crucial argument for an ether and denying it is the real ‘blunder’ of Einstein in my view. (Mach’s principle)

Lorentz commenting on Einsteins ‘absolute relativity’ wrote: “I cannot but regard the ether, which can be the seat of an electromagnetic field with its energy and its vibrations, as endowed with a certain degree of substantiality, however different it may be from all ordinary matter.” (Lorentz, 1906)

This is the Cartesian view, which was held by most scientists, who nearly all presupposed an ether to explain the fact that space can transmit a force. Newton even stated that no one in his right mind could entertain the idea that force could be transmitted through empty space, but Einstein convinced the whole scientific community that you can, through curvature of space, that is of ‘Nothingness’.

Here it is important to see that in our approach matter is an ‘excitation’ of the deep-field and that we have always to consider the paradox of the moving form through the ‘unmoving’ medium. The substance of the form is anchored, at rest, in the deep-field, this is its inertia, this is why the electro-magnetic field speed (light) is always constant relative to the object. Its substance does not move relative to the waves of the field, how could it, it is made of these waves. This is the puzzling paradox of a body’s substance at rest in the same frame of reference as in which its shape is moving, just like the moving shapes on an immobile pixel-screen.

No Space-time

This is a completely different approach from the Minkowski-Einstein explanation with curvature of space-time, but it confirms that in a profound sense we are at rest in the deep-field, because it is the stuff we are made of; this is quite different from Einstein’s insistence on an inertial frame for every individual thing. The ‘separate thing’ does not exist in the deep-field, it is like the volume of a wave, the momentum, it has no eigen-substance.

All objects will move in the direction of least resistance in the deep-field, because of the omnipresent cosmic pressure-front, generated by the energy fields of the galaxies, neutron stars etc, so bodies will move in the direction of each others ‘lee-field’. The push of the cosmic pressure field, which secures uniform motion in the neutral deep-field, causes the acceleration in the lee-field of the object, the closer to the object the less the resistance of the counter-pressure from that direction, which falls off with the square (surface: r^2) of the distance (radius: r), and the higher the acceleration, even though the pressure of the general deep-field does not change. (It is G and very weak).
So ‘gravity’ (heaviness) is more caused by a lack of force rather than an act of force, but it is in fact an imbalance in the cosmic pressure field. Riemann, one of the ‘fathers of space-curvature’, called it a ‘sink’. This imbalance shows in the ‘curvatures’ of the ‘elastic’ deep-field, but is better expressed as local contraction or expansion of space, where the strength of the inertia in the deep-field, the permittivity of the medium, decides over the speed of a process. So with a proper use of the term inertia as the cause of a time-frame, we can probably make the concept of time in physics obsolete and have a definition of inertial space.(QED) (The ‘proof of relativity in GPS’ is due to the difference in ‘gravity’ on earth and in outer space, that is: the intensity of the lee-field, the state of the deep-field; nothing ‘time’-dilation, it is deep-field-dilation)

Cosmological models

The major and decisive difference between my model and the Bigbang is, that mine shows cyclical (rhythmic) and continuous order (‘permanent creation’), whereas the BigBang is a sudden origin out of nowhere, with no mention of order, no explanation of what is now, but winding down eventually into disorder (entropy, linear time). So they know everything of the beginning and the end, but cannot connect it to the world we live in. It is rather misplaced to call that ‘cosmology’.

Whereas scientists are again and again baffled by the subtle order of the processes in Nature, this bewilderment originates in their ignorance of the cyclical and objectively ‘intelligent’ character of the Universe and Nature as a whole, because of harmonics. Cosmos means order, Chaos means disorder.

Stone Age people knew this already and saw the deep harmony of the cosmos which they sought to express in the mathematically harmonic design of their ‘megalithic works’, their ‘cosmic architecture’, which appear to hold the principles of resonance.


Holographic principle
Again, the holographic principle is highly abstract and I hope I am able to do it right in the way I explain it here. It stems from Hawking-radiation, that is that a black hole loses energy and eventually evaporates. The black hole is seen as a sphere which absorbs all energy and matter from its vicinity and this sphere has a certain volume and because matter is falling in, its volume and its entropy increases. Entropy is the tendency to disorder of organized matter, but, strangely, it is also a measure of total information in physics. ( I don’t understand this reasoning because something organized seems to hold more information than something disorderly, but I have problems with the whole predominance of the Second Law of Thermo-dynamics (Entropy) in physics, it completely disregards the intelligence and organizing power of Nature, entropy in my view is more a local phenomenon, a form of local decay, no universal one way alley, it is nevertheless as concept of information an interesting concept (with its ‘its and bits’), but it also relates to the Law of Karma, which is the epitome of conservation of information beyond time.
The ‘entropy-view’ is that the black hole volume holds this huge amount of information and it was tHooft who suggested this 3-dimensional information must be present in 2 dimensions on the surface of the black hole, just like you see 3-dimensions in the 2-D hologram of your credit card. The question which brought all this about was whether information went forever lost in an evaporating black hole as Hawking maintained or that information could be retained as tHooft argued. Hawking has acknowledged defeat in this one, as I understand it.

The cooling of the cosmos

My ‘personal revelation’ on gravity came 14 years ago, as said, compacted in a short sentence: “gravity is the cooling of the cosmos”. My ‘Eureka’ took place on board my Tjalk-barge moored in Vlieland-Haven. The uncanny thing about that was that 21 years earlier, right at the same spot, in the same harbour, the same season, on board the same ship, I had had a ‘kensho’ (peak-experience) reading Schopenhauer, my first encounter with the ‘Mind’ (Idealism).

Stars and Black Holes.

What is interesting about the mathematical approach is that ‘mass’ is ignored and everything centers on what happens to points in space and their connections. This makes it immediately related to my model of space-pixalls and the mathematical foundation of reality. Riemann used the term ‘Stoff’ (dust, stuff) for the (liquid) aether which he presupposed [the liquidity of dust, the vortex of the hourglass, this is the mechanics of space (-pixalls), stretched in time, the black hole as the vortex of a galaxy].

My vision of the ‘black hole’ was this ‘Sink’, this vortex, which also showed a contraction and loss of energy into the sink, this meant: ‘cooling’. The black hole cools the cosmos as the star heats it up, it is equilibrium in a process. There is no conservation of energy, it is a constant stream of renewal in equilibrium with decay. The Second Law is just an aspect of local decay, not a deterministic overall law. We see in this black hole geometry the vortex, which has the dynamics of a torus, perpendicular circling creating the abyss, the cyclone.

Cyclone is like galaxy

It is similar to magnetic field lines towards a negative pole. The black hole is a 4-D monopole. It is interesting in this respect that the amount of entropy which is supposed to be in the spherical black hole is 1/4 of its surface area. Nobody mentions that this means a reduction of 1 dimension since the spherical surface as border of 3-D space gets as ‘information’ compressed into a flat 2-D circle area, .r², since the spherical surface is 4 times the great circle area = 4..r²

In my view this implies the black hole is not spherical but a one-sided flat disc, so to speak, a monopole, the border-point of 3-D space, opening to the zero-dimension. It seems to me this 1/4 reduction is rather important but nobody seems to notice it. It could also signify the 1/4 concave surface of the horn-torus
Space is limited on the inside by the zero-dimension, so a sphere becomes a one-sided circle with respect to the zero-dimension. The earth has no centre, no signals can penetrate it, they all bounce off because there is no other side in the centre, it is outside 3-D space, it is the zero-point as border-point of space.(Look at the ‘corus’ again)

Horn-torus or Corus

Here the importance of the torus-geometry and especially the horn-torus becomes apparent. What makes the horn-torus unique as mathematical form is that its surface area is bounded by one single center-point and is also expressed in a square. These two unique properties give it a special relation to the sphere which properly speaking is also a unique moment in the torus-geometry and transformation of space.
In my conception of the geometry and dynamics of space the torus is pivotal, because it is the geometry of rotation. Although stars and planets look spherical they are due to their rotation flattened and consequently in my system spindle-tori. This rotation is also the origin of the waves it causes in its surroundings which are then carried by the deep-field and form a reflection field which is at the same time the ‘lee-field’ of an object. It is the ‘pressure-gravity’ emerging in the depression of the deep-field, the ‘lee’ around an object, which keeps everything rotating. The rotation absorbs the pressure and emits this energy as waves by which it shapes the geometry of the deep-field in its vicinity. So the objection of (over-)heating (Lorentz himself abandoned his own idea for this), which is held against this model is not valid, the absorbed energy is transformed into reflection wave-fields, which indeed affect the geometry of inertial space.

The crucial difference between my model and that of science is that science tells you it is a one way ticket (Second Law), whereas mysticism tells you it is not. Mystics ‘know’, scientists don’t.

So how do we go from here?

The momentous question which is posed by this seemingly academical abstract question of whether the cosmos is dying out or persists is obviously a matter of taste, nobody will ever find any proof of any of it, so don’t get to obsessed with it, it’s certainly not around the corner. This is why our attitude to advocates of the Big-bang is that they really try to convince you of their beliefs like ‘sectarian believers’, because eventually their whole logic is based on quicksand.


More on this subject you will find in the chapters under the heading ‘Cosmology’