Indeed, I agree with Orion, very much on topic here! I too look forward to
further developments along these lines, or holes.
On 20 Dec 2014 01:11, "Orion" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks and welcome.
> It's difficult to imagine anything to do with Gerald Hawkins as being off
> topic on britarch.
> Your article helps to clarify the theory, whether or not it was the intent
> of the Stonehenge builder.
> Looking forward to you future posts here,
> At 06:41 PM 12/19/2014 +0000, you wrote:
> >Dear list,
> >Hawkins and, later, Hoyle both suggested mechanisms by which the 56
> >Aubrey Hole circle at Stonehenge could be employed as an eclipse
> >prediction device.
> >In attempting to explain the simpler of the two methods (Hoyle's) in
> >the past, I've found it awkward to explain to non-astronomers how it
> >could be operated. It has been my ambition for a number of years to
> >create a visual representation that demonstrates the principle.
> >The forthcoming pair of eclipses in March/April 2015 (solar then
> >lunar) offered me an opportunity to create a short animation of the
> >basic moves of the various marker stones suggested by Hoyle.
> >For your consideration, here is the result of my labours:
> >The intermeshing of three gears, representing the solar, lunar and
> >nodal cycles can indeed be approximated using the Aubrey Holes
> >although the debate as to whether neolithic people intended this
> >usage will continue to be a lively one.
> >If you view the animation, please do pay attention to the text
> >written below it which points out some of the more obvious criticisms
> >that can be levelled at the method.
> >This is my first post to the list, so I hope it won't be judged as