Monday, 21 May 2012

The Ultimate Civilisation?

By Robert John Langdon

Dawn of the Lost Civilisation takes you on a journey into the 'Ascent of Man'.  From our humble beginnings in Africa to the ultimate civilisation located in the Garden of Eden that our mythology remembers as  Atlantis, Avalon, Shangri-la and Utopia.



The philosophical 'overture' of the book takes a critical look at our own society with its materialistic values in comparison to how we used to live in harmony with our environment and planet.  This 'primitive' concept is examined and questioned, the conclusions of the book are quite 'profound', but to help readers consider how these academically ancient 'primitives' did live for a period five times longer than our own civilisation, without destroying the fabric of this fragile planet.

Therefore, I have introduced a few video's as an alternative blog, I hope the format is constructive.  These videos have been created by a growing number of 'non academics' who understand the complexities of natural living, some call it 'experimental archaeology', I call it a common sense approach to how our ancestors lived.

The first video looks at how a basic bow is produced with natural stone tools, Dr Jacob Bronowski would ask you to try and understand the motivation in producing the bow, when the stone tools had been adequate for nearly two million years.


Ray Mears make it look so simple, but to our civilisation is a 'lost art' beyond the average persons ability (hence the TV programme) but to our ancestors this was 'common knowledge' and even children/adolescence's would have needed to understand these techniques and use them on a day-to -day basis to survive.  This is 'basic bow technique' is shown by the two experts producing a bow that could fire an arrow about 20 - 30m, the bows found in the Mesolithic were made of two-woods and could shoot over 200m, with 'microliths an even more complicated structure allowing the 'instant kill' of the hunted animal.

On this video Ray discovers a binding that I have been told has lasted over 10 years before deteriorating.


The next video give s an indication of how the Mesolithic Environment would have looked like some 10,000 years ago after the Ice Age, the Reindeer moved north from central Europe and the people followed them into the 'tundra', which you might be quite surprised by just how green and forestry the landscape would have looked.  For those archaeologist, notice how they farm the animals with fences, it calls into question the 'banjo enclosures' traditional archaeologists believe to be animal enclosures - why bother cutting a ditch??  Also notice how they use the reindeer like mules for travelling.


Another great mystery of the Mesolithic is the lack of 'houses' , where they were and how they looked.  Traditional archaeologists who were influenced with the African tribesmen create a 'round mud hut' that oue ancestors lived in, if you ever visit a 'reconstructed prehistoric settlement.  These ideas are based on the remains of round stones and central post holes in settlements.  But if our Victorian archaeologists had travelled east instead of south then these site would have looked a lot different as these are the Eastern Ancient Round houses using the same shape and post holes of conventional sites.


And if you wondered what was the fabric placed on top of the house because they don't have reed in abundance like in Britain, here is a prehistoric way to make a felt blanket without weaving.


So what else can we build with natural material - my favourite subject - THE BOAT





Much too complicated for the average Cro-Magnon/Palaeolithic man to build?  It was a evolutionary step up from the first boats used, made from just reeds.


And I know what your thinking, it will never float................... let alone take passengers.


And if you think this is impressive, look what you can do if the whole village joins in.... a FLOATING village, no wonder we cant find their houses.


Here is a video of RA II that crossed the Atlantic - so long ago that no video available only this scale model.



Archaeologist would have your believe that we had the technology and skills to build Stonehenge, but couldn't make boats or floating islands - makes perfect sense to me.

But did they wear cloths and have bags or even hats?  We found woven cloth imprints in caves of Cro-Magnon's in 17,000BC - so what is available rather than the 'traditional' caveman fur-skin?




Now finally, how did they move those stones to Stonehenge?  Sadly all those machines, all those hundreds of slaves pulling ropes and more importantly, all those Archaeologist were WRONG!

The solution............ they simply just picked up the stones on poles and walked....     don't believe me?



These works also utilize a force multiplier that was previously unknown (see Cunningham "Techniques of Pyramid Building in Egypt" Nature Vol. 332 3 March 1988) with an ideal mechanical advantage of 24. Equivalent to 24 pulleys, this system needs no point of attachment and has negligible friction. (The fastest way to work the force multiplier, high gear with a mechanical advantage of 1, is to lift all the pole ends at once as was done in "Walk Like an Egyptian. "Force Multiplier Obelisk I" and "Force Multiplier Obelisk II Horizontal" work on the same principle.) A lecture on the basic theory can be found on http://vimeo.com/20348674.

What you also should bare in mind is that a Cro-Magnon is twice the size of a 'modern man' as seen here - they would only needed 1 person per side a total of just 8 people travelling 6 mph.


****************   STOP PRESS    ***************

The good news is that our first shop selling our books, models, maps and other collectables as stone tools all connected to the Trilogy 'Prehistoric Britain' is about to be launched.  This is the first of a franchise of shops to be open in the next five years, and is due to be open in Rottendean, just outside Brighton in Southern Britain on 1st July 2012.

The bad news is because of the launch date for the shop, we have had to put the publication date of 'Dawn of the Lost Civilisation' back a year until June 2013.  But because of the excessive material we have produced for the second book, we have decided to bring forward the second Edition of 'The Stonehenge Enigma' and place this new material such as the diagrams of how the Stonehenge temple looked and the connection to the 'Golden Ratio' we have found within the foundation structure.  And this book will be launched in September 2012.


RJL

(by Robert John Langdon)






53 comments:

  1. Robert

    Like the video format.

    You need to get yourself off to lake titicaca and do your own documentary.

    Dr Stuart Love

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Stuart!

    Yes - the quality of some of the video's are quite 'limited'. I just proves that we have overlooked the historic possibilities of the past.

    RJL

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great post. Cunningham's theory is new to me - so simple. I wonder why it has been ignored?

    I always enjoy ray mears work. Thanks for putting it all together.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Chris

      The simplest ideas are always the best!!

      The principle of mechanical advantage is the central reason a bow works so efficiently and as they were around thousands of years before Stonehenge or Avebury were constructed they would have understood the relationship.

      NB. I did enjoy reading Julius again and was interested that on his first landing the Britain's did not wipe him out form above by bow, when his ships were split by weather. I guess the art of the bowman from the Neolithic was lost.

      RJL

      Delete
    2. I think the Brits in SE England were too busy beating their chests, eager to engage in individual hand-to-hand combat. Using bows and arrows for warfare was not cricket.

      Delete
  4. Robert,

    This is too old New Age for me! Sorry … wishing for a better tomorrow is hard enough. But what you are asking is wishing for an even better distant past! It's what in other contexts is called Ancestor Worship!

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kostas

      You can now see how this civilisation was advanced - not by machines or writing, but more importantly by being in harmony with nature - as it was meant to be, not like today.

      We are parasites living on a living body called earth - and like a dog with fleas, let hope that our host doesn't decide to have a good scratch!!

      RJL

      Delete
  5. Robert,

    I am all for "being in harmony with nature" and spiritual development! But we are talking about moving huge megaliths! Being in harmony with nature will leave no stone turned. While no power of spirit or human will alone will move any of these megaliths an inch!

    An advanced civilization with such technical knowledge and skills to move megaliths will have left behind ample evidence of their existence and knowledge. None exists, Robert. No matter how badly you and others wish it and fantasize about it.

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kostas

      Did you not look at the last video which Chris has commented upon??

      4 tonne of weight just picked up on poles - empirical evidence - you need to open your eyes to see the world.

      RJL

      Delete
    2. Robert,

      If that was a Neolithic video I would accept it as evidence of Neolithic know how! If Neolithic know how was so advanced, it will leave behind other irrefutable evidence of its existence. Non exist, Robert!

      Kostas

      Delete
    3. Kostas

      You think that taking a pole and placing under a rock is too advanced for Cro-Magnon's?

      If so clearly, the bows found are someone elses??

      Are you related to Geo???

      RJL

      Delete
    4. Robert,

      No!!! But I am related to my ancestors! Whom I greatly esteem, but do not Worship!

      Kostas

      Delete
  6. Some problems with scale .

    “how did they move those stones to Stonehenge? “
    “they simply just picked up the stones on poles and walked..”

    Sarsens weigh up to 50 tons , the weight , unmentioned in the video would be a fraction that a fraction of that .

    “Cro-Magnon is twice the size of a 'modern man' as seen here “

    The lifters and audience looked like average sized Americans i.e. 5 foot 10 and 180 lbs , about 3 – 5 inches taller than the average Cro magnon Even if Cro magnons came in at 6 feet then these lifters are not likely to be 3 foot tall .
    For Cro magnon stature see .
    See http://dienekes.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/stature-of-prehistoric-europeans.html
    http://archaeology.about.com/od/earlymansites/a/cro_magnon.htm

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Geo

      I believe the professors exercise was to see if the Bluestones could be carried or were the archaeologists right and hundreds of slaves pulled on ropes and rolling logs.

      Clearly, they just carried them.

      Fifty tonnes Sarsens is just a question of scale. As the process uses a mechanical device (at a ratio of 26:1 if I remember correctly) I'm sure your rusty slide rule can work out how many men needed (if its more than 30 you got it wrong again!)to pick up and walk a 50 tonne stone.

      As for your reference I explained (in detail) on a previous blog why they are wrong on average size of a Cro-Magnon - in a nutshell as you may find reading hard at your age - they are AVERAGES - take the average of a man today and you will find it useless, if your comparing it with WWF wrestlers or basketball players.

      RJL

      Delete
  7. Anon, I took a look at Cunningham's speech about his theory and he explains how it could be used to move very big megaliths and even stand them upright. He convinced me but then I am a bit gullible - I'm surprised that this idea is not picked up in the mainstream although it has been around a long time.

    Kostas, lots of evidence for neolithic societies all over Europe. I don't know what point you are trying to make.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris , All he had to do was to move something closer to the weight of even a smaller sarsen and we might have heard more of the idea . You might like this . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRRDzFROMx0

      Delete
    2. Chris,

      “Kostas, lots of evidence for neolithic societies all over Europe. I don't know what point you are trying to make.”


      For instance? What is the evidence for the existence of an advanced prehistoric Civilization that purportedly built Stonehenge?

      As to the point … we shouldn't be making up prehistory to suit our aspirations.

      Kostas

      Delete
    3. I agree that we should not make up prehistory to suit our aspirations. Still this is something you do regularly with your latest idea of the auroch's fart blasting methane circles in a mythical ice sheet and miraculously dropping glacial erratics into perfect circles.

      The evidence of neolithic culture is all around us - at least here in Europe.

      Whether it meets your criteria for "advanced civilization" I neither know nor care. Civilization is the way people live in cities - and there were no cities in the British Neolithic I say with 99% certainly. "Advanced" means progress versus the past - whether you think farming is better than hunter-gathering is a cultural judgement. Please stop with your sophistry and take an interest in the subject.

      Delete
    4. Chris you write,

      “... your latest idea of the auroch's fart blasting methane circles in a mythical ice sheet and miraculously dropping glacial erratics into perfect circles.”

      Intellectual honesty compels me to correct you! The credit for this post in Brian's blog goes to Brian! I had nothing to do with this latest evidence of naturally formed circular melt holes in an ice cover. This was reported by BBC. But it does show such circular melt holes to be natural. The most recently reported are just one kind formed by nature. There are others as well. And Brian has posted some such examples in his blog in the past.

      Are you suggesting the BBC and Brian are conspiring along with me to deceive the World? Is the Prehistory as written by archeologists the Gospel Truth for you? Not for me! I see in their myth making their professional aspirations only?

      “The evidence of neolithic culture is all around us”
      is no evidence!

      Kostas

      Delete
    5. More specious nonsense. As an ex-teacher you should be ashamed of yourself.

      Delete
    6. My conscious is clear. The mud is in your hands!

      Kostas

      Delete
    7. What can be more natural than an auroch's fart?

      Mud in my hands? Just making a pot and dreaming about civilization and the joy of paying taxes ....

      No seriously, but sorry, I forget, you don't do serious.

      Sophistry and rhetoric destroyed Athenian civilization, refute me if you can!

      Delete
    8. Chris,

      Your 'No seriously' makes your comments even more offensive!

      As for Athenian civilization, it lives through me and you and everyone that lives and thinks and speaks English or any other form of Greek.

      Kostas

      Delete
  8. The problems were with your application of scale . The actual problems would be one of limits .
    Let us know when they start moving even half the weight of the biggest sarsens .
    “Cro-Magnon is twice the size of a 'modern man' as seen here “

    Let us know when you find Cro Magnon twice the size of the lifters . If you have a reasonable response to the links why not post a link to it ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Geo

      Actually the best source is my new book which contains academic references - but as you think you know more than me I have no doubt, the months it took to find these references you could find 'overnight'.

      In the meantime this one reflects your manner.

      http://www.goldenageproject.org.uk/336cromagnon.phpe

      OK one academic reference to stop silly replies:

      Verneau, Dr. René (1900). The men of the Barma-grande. BAOUSSE-ROUSSE near Mentone: F. Abbo. pp. 107–119. ISBN 978-1-116-94246-0.

      RJL

      Delete
  9. Rather than resort to dodgy web sites and data from 1900 have a look at a contemporary expert
    http://www.tulane.edu/~twhollid/webthing.html Then read what his study shows by

    Googling "The Late Upper Paleolithic skeleton Villabruna 1 (Italy): a source of data on biology and behavior of a 14.000 year-old hunter . Scroll through to find Trent Holliday's data which includes data derived from a far greater number of examples than Verneau .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Geo

      Sorry can't give too much away prior to the publication of the book - will debate in full once published - or you can buy a copy and get an education!!

      But The Cro-magnon's are sub-divided as the blog has already stated - go back and read it if your guessing!!

      http://robertjohnlangdon.blogspot.co.uk/2012_01_01_archive.html

      The 'megalithic builders' were from the Basque region and Northern France not Italy. Your comparing Chinese with Aboriginals.

      RJL

      Delete
    2. Anon, thanks for the links. It seems there is some evidence for Early Upper Paleolithic Europeans being slightly taller but still within the range for modern peoples from other regions. Still, I agree with Robert that it is risky to draw hard conclusions from the evidence as the number of people in the samples is too few - probably this is why professional scientists are being careful to avoid dogmatic statements and continue to gather evidence.

      I note that diet and lifestyle can have a big effect on average height over relatively short periods. A Dutchman from the 19th century was likely to have been one of the shortest of people, while today they are among the tallest - an average difference of some 7-8 inches over a century....

      Delete
  10. The discussion was about the stature of Cro Magnons .The links I provided to Trent Holliday's credentials and study indicates that Cro magnons were little different in stature to contemporary Europeans, not as you suggest "twice the size of modern man " . A typically wild exaggeration ,another is the China to Australia analogy ,two continents a minimum of 2,500 miles apart whilst Villabruna to the original Cro Magnon site is a fifth of the distance in the same land mass .Regardless Cro-Magnons are found Europe wide .

    ReplyDelete
  11. Geo

    I'm trying to show you the diversity of species.

    You are a 'modern man' - look around at the differences in the species - from dwalfs to basketball players to WWF wrestlers.

    Our society started about 4000BC with the neolithic farming revolution - about 6000 years ago. The Cro-magnon's lived for over 24,000 years - four times longer and logically MORE diverse than us. Terry Holliday doesn't recognise this fact so why should I recognise this study in comparison to Dr Verneau, who did accept this fact??

    As in the past you have failed to understand the analogy - it was not distance based but cultural differences, as can be seen by the statue as the better feed and watered were taller than others - there is more to archaeology than finds!!

    If you wish to have a demographic analogy the Pygmy people and Ethiopians of Africa - next door neighbours and a metre difference.

    RJL

    ReplyDelete
  12. Chris , yes the numbers of Cro Magnon skeletons is so small it is very difficult to make asumptions we can only judge what we have . The most recent assumptions with the latest evidence conducted by the the most eminent scientits in the ield suggest that Cro magnon was likely to have been a similar height or shorter to the average modern European .We have an incredible amount of data on modern Europeans and are perfectly aware of how diet affects stature ,nevertheless we can still suggest an average height .Quite simply where are the Cro magnons that are "twice the size of modern man " .http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/11/1081621836499.html . Much of this was promoted by sword and sorcery writer Robert E. Howard’in the 1920’s , we ahve a slightly better idea about the stature of Cro magnon today . .Look familiar http://www.thecimmerian.com/cro-magnon-atlanteans-robert-e-howard-and-the-works-of-lewis-spence/ .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Geo

      The very first one found was 6' tall with a larger skull than those how found them who (Louis Lartet) was only 5' 2" tall - they also live to a minimum (as skeletons are judged against modern man to estimate age) of 50 years old - which louis would find ironic as he died at the age of 49 - the average age then!!

      So are we surprised they called them a separate species as wiki tells you: "Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful. The body was generally heavy and solid with a strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges and a tall forehead. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cubic centimetres (98 cu in), larger than the average for modern humans."

      Everyone was happy with this, believing like Neanderthals that they just disappeared in time. Then modern Genetics revealed that in Northern Europeans had the same haplogroup - then come the big rethink - lets call them 'modern man' as we are getting taller now and they no longer look too different (a part from the larger brain) and we will not have to explain were they come from or were they went as this could become 'political sensitive' to the race lobby!!

      So numpties like you suck it up without asking the obvious questions...baah!

      RJL

      Delete
    2. Geo

      As for your link to Prof Henneberg he seems as reliable as you:

      " Professor Henneberg is either extremely inexperienced with the way teeth wear in hunter-gatherers and earlier hominins, has taken the advice of someone similarly poorly informed, or did not examine the teeth in adequate detail."

      http://www-personal.une.edu.au/~pbrown3/Henneberg%20hobbit%20claim.htm

      RJL

      Delete
  13. Dear Anon, you are quite correct. I did not check your links yet but I assume they support your opinion.

    The Atlantis theorists have proposed a difference in europe between eastern early man and western early man. They have been doing this for the best part of a century based not only on bone size but also on tool culture and supposed living arrangements. They are not all cranks - some are Harvard academics (Coon). They would argue that western "co-magnon" culture in both western europe and north africa suggest a different species coming from outside (Atlantis?), whereas the eastern people seem to have come from east africa with a different toolset and spread over europe like nomads, including the west.

    Modern scientists are taking averages of both eastern and western; perhaps because the sample sizes are so small. I guess Robert would argue that this might obscure some essential truths and, statistically speaking, he might be right. I don't blame the scientists because they have a need to be cautious and talking about a paleolithic atlantis culture without bullet proof evidence will put you in the academic nut-house without grants, tenure, or salary. Still they look for differences - mostly via DNA.

    Why Atlantis? The evidence such as it is does not show a gradual evolution, it is more likely to have been successive waves of emigrants with a living system that was already developed. It contrasts with the eastern peoples where you can see a line back into the middle paleolithic.

    The statement that Cro-Magnon of the western variety were 11 feet tall I see supported nowhere. Not sure where this comes from. Robert is saying 6 foot 7 inches, I think. Not sure where this comes from either. I look forward to seeing the quality of his evidence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris

      The book is full of not only Skeletons of Cro-Magnon's over six foot tall, but also story of the Cro-magnon's who stayed in Northern Europe and ancestors can be found throughout history.

      The reverend has 'Goliath' from his theology studies and for you my Roman friend we have Maximus.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximinus_Thrax

      The Roman Emperor from Gaul, who had a red headed Welsh Bride and Strong hold. He was a mere 8' 6", but I'm sure Geo will ignore his Celtic background and red hair and call him a 'modern man'.

      RJL

      Delete
  14. Robert/Geo

    Civilizations built great works. Not supersized people!

    For all your discussions about the torso size of cro-magnons and how big their(your!) heads were(are), where is the evidence for that great prehistoric civilization that did not leave any evidence behind?

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
  15. Why didn't you also mention from the same the Wiki "

    "Cro-Magnon are thought to have been 166 to 171 centimeters (about 5' 5" to 5' 7") tall[27], though large males may have stood as tall as 195 cm (6' 5") and taller "
    How does this square with “Cro-Magnon is twice the size of a 'modern man' " .even taking the tallest example of a Cro magnon very few modern men are just over 3 foot tall .
    Could you clarify "Then modern Genetics revealed that in Northern Europeans had the same haplogroup " ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Geo

      http://goughweb.net/DNA/R1B%20Wikipedia%20Description.pdf

      or National Geographic site

      /genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html?card=my050

      RJL

      Delete
  16. Geo

    You have a problem with "Cro magnons that are twice the size of modern man". Hence you pathetic quote "very few modern men are just over 3 foot tall ."

    This is because you do not understand the definition of SIZE: "the spatial dimensions, proportions, magnitude, or bulk of anything"

    NOT HEIGHT NUMPTY!!

    "Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful. The body was generally heavy and solid with a strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges and a tall forehead. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cubic centimetres (98 cu in), larger than the average for modern humans."

    Twice the size of a average Homo Sapien.

    Get a life!!

    RJL

    ReplyDelete
  17. If you look at previous posts I was referring to stature . Cro magnons were about the same size as modern Europeans they were less gracile and had a slightly larger cranial capacity than moderns . Male moderns have a larger cranial capacity than female moderns .Slightly larger is not the same as double for any measure relating to Cro Magnons and moderns , and it cetainly does not equate with intelligence , as the male /female ratios show .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "What you also should bare in mind is that a Cro-Magnon is twice the size of a 'modern man' as seen here - they would only needed 1 person per side a total of just 8 people travelling 6 mph."

      From the blog!!

      The word is SIZE for a very good reason, as we are talking about 'dead lifting' - tall people are not necessarily the best dead lifters. Homo sapiens can dead lift just under half a tonne (460Kg) - so that video only needed eight of the best homo sapiens to move it, even without the mechanical advantage - so I estimate just FOUR cro-magnons were needed, but I chose eight to be on the conservative side - clearly something wasted on you!

      Your knowledge (or lack of) about Cro-magnon's shows how naive and obnoxious you are about learning the truth, stick to what you know best - nothing.

      RJL

      Delete
  18. So , what you meant by “Cro-Magnon is twice the size of a 'modern man' " is that they may have been twice as efficient at dead lifting compared with some college students .

    “stick to what you know best - nothing.” Very Zen .

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anon is looking at the modern opinion and reflecting what it says. The modern scientist is troubled by the lack of data and puts it all together to make better averages, starting from the premise that there was a single type. Apologies to those concerned for my quick judgement. The Cro-Magnon/Atlantean theory argues for more than one type of man in Europe in the late Paleolithic - so not all early Europeans are Cro-Magnon. At least this is how I understand it but Robert will no doubt improve me.

    It is a shame the publication of Robert's book is delayed because I was looking forward to a re-evaluation of the evidence from a non-establishment perspective. Still, I fear for his case when it relies on tales about Maximinus Thrax.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Chris

    Can't do two things at once - I'm not a woman unfortunately ;-)

    The tales of mythological giants such as Goliath and real life giants such as Maximinus shows that the truth is closer to mythology than archaeologists and historians would allow you to believe. As a philosopher the works of Claude Lévi-Strauss in particular 'myth and meaning' shows a strong correlation.

    If you require absolute proof like Geo, then you many be disappointed as the scientists who study Quantum Physics are also disappointed that their reality based on traditional physics, can not be applied to the quantum world as it is based on speculation NOT empirical evidence.

    This is where we are with prehistory, lots of finds that can be interpreted in different ways, so we need an anthropological/society approach to these finds to give them meaning and context.

    Einstein hated Quantum Mechanics 'god does not play dice', but in recent years has been proven wrong. This will happen with archaeology in the future, the old school will resist, but as more evidence comes to light they will be proven wrong.

    RJL

    ReplyDelete
  21. Robert, for a long time I thought life was different on the quantum level. Now I think that physics has expanded to include quantum effects, marvelous as they are. Quantum effects are now empirical in that they can be measured and utilized. It is noteworthy that we recently saw confirmation that Einstein seems to be correct in predicting that we cannot travel faster than light - much as we would love to. I think Einstein would be comfortable with modern quantum physics. In my daily work with scientists I no longer see this view of quantum worlds being different.

    Pre-history is fascinating, not least because we have inadequate data to formulate theories As a marketing guy I find this intriguing - I am regularly asked to formulate theories on the basis of insufficient evidence to justify big investments.

    In prehistory studies the theoreticians point to where to look for evidence. I am more confident than you that "old school" is open to new ideas and new facts. You are connecting a lot of dots and hopefully those with budgets for exploration will follow the signposts - but these are evidence based people and much depends on the quality of your facts and the plausible connections you can make.

    Anyway, I enjoy your blog and the thoughts you share. Still hoping that more serious people engage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris

      I would have too disagree with you on the quantum points. Yes most scientists do accept QM, but most do not understand it. In my course at UCL was have ex-research physicists who claim to understand QM as you describe, but closer scrutiny of how the original two split experiment or the recent success on transportation works using 'traditional physics' - soon shows that rather understanding the process they rely on parallel worlds for an answer as it fits their limitations rather than give a explanation.

      Its the scientific equivalent of God, if you not sure how it works - god knows!! is easy or in the physicist case 'parallel universe' - without being able to qualify how a parallel universe exists or is created using traditional physics.

      Neil Borh is the father of QM and he was a philosopher before a physicist which allow him an insight to QM as its the metaphysical world of reality - or better put, the perception of reality.

      As for prehistory, don't you love the 'who done it'?

      RJL

      Delete
  22. A deja view moment. I recognize what you say but I DO think scientists now - at least on the cutting edge - embrace quantum effects. Those who don't are in a similar position to archaeologists who conceive of a rush to farming because it is more efficient or conceive of our ancestors dressed in furs and glad to find a handy cave.

    Quantum phenomena such as wave/particle correspondence is penetrating main stream thinking. Physics has moved beyond electrons and neutrons, or rather is finding ways to embrace this old-style perception in the new knowledge. We know now that nano particles behave differently and are finding ways to use this in diverse fields from paints to medicines. Not that I want to equate nano effects with quantum, simply to say that everything discovered to date fits with physics theories as they evolve. No parallel tracks so far.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Robert,

    Suffice it to say modern physics has failed to provide us with a physical view that makes physical sense.

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kostas

      Don't believe there is one available.

      "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" Sherlock

      RJL

      Delete
    2. Robert,

      If you can invent Prehistory, physicists can invent physics that makes sense! Since all truth lies in our senses.

      Kostas

      Delete
    3. Kostas

      Couldn't disagree more, although 'perceived' truth is quite rightly in the senses.

      BUT history can not be invented - as it has happened. Lessons from QM can be learnt to interpret our history as the basis of current history is based on JUST archaeological artefacts.

      There are huge warehouses of artefacts in Britain, with finds that can not be put into context, the only artefacts that are publicised are the ones that there history is 'perceived' to be known. We therefore have a very 'strange' view of history as unknown artefacts are disregarded.

      QM can help archaeologists as it looks at the 'complementarity' of the relationships that create QM rather than just the empirical evidence.

      As an example - we know that a magnet has a N and S but its the magnetic field (complementarity element) that makes the N/S poles relevant and useful, without it N/S poles are just points on a magnet.

      RJL

      Delete
  24. Conan Doyle had a slim grasp of logic , the most obvious is the oft quoted deduction of Holmes , it’s true there are examples of deduction but they are rare , it is mostly inference and induction . The “when you have eliminated the impossible ..... “quote which is obviously wrong on more than count has even produced a logical term the “Holmesian fallacy “ . Ironic that Doyle fell for the cold readings of "psychics " , another Holmesian skill and his belief in the photographs of fairies didn’t quite eliminate the impossibilities .

    ReplyDelete
  25. Robert,

    I agree with your disagreement that History should not be invented! Thus my biggest disagreement with your invented Prehistory.

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete