5000 year old technology re-discovered

Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:38 pm

PostTue Jul 12, 2011 1:00 am » by Clockdryve

Only 1 man did this 9T though.....

Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 5:47 pm

PostTue Jul 12, 2011 1:38 am » by The999plan

How about "Wolly World"!!!! (for those Chevy Chase fans out there ...)

Now the problem I still have with all this is the overall weight ... the fulcrum points need to be strong enough without buckling to sustain the load, whether that is through some type of tieter-totter distribution approach or by rotation over a stone on a virtual point without crushing it. It is true that wood laid cross grain to each subsequent layer can be made to produce an incredibly strong structure ... i.e., this structure is called a composite. Modern materials and processing improve our determination of grain direction, but I could still see this being done effectively with various sizes of tree branches ... if you ever piled something heavy on top of a firewood stack you can better understand how this is possible. But again, everything comes down to the fulcrum material's ability to sustain the weight without buckling, or buckling throughout the entire stackup ... perhaps that's the key. The builders of these ancient structures understood much more about stress, strain, and buckling than we give them credit for!!!


User avatar
Posts: 3574
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:50 pm
Location: 2 Thirds Down The Bottle

PostWed Jul 13, 2011 2:29 am » by Toxic32

clockdryve wrote:Only 1 man did this 9T though.....

Yes fantastic wasn't it.
Invictus maneo

User avatar
Posts: 165
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 11:48 pm

PostWed Jul 13, 2011 4:28 pm » by Skiponline

yup indeed,all my respect to the man.
still we should try next to use multiple persons to do bigger weights and succeed (stacking 40to300tons at certain heights,pulling 1000tons),that should be the next challenge,using only the tools they had then...thats where they aparently fail today,while we now have supposedly more knowledge on techniques etc..

User avatar
Posts: 3574
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:50 pm
Location: 2 Thirds Down The Bottle

PostSat Jul 16, 2011 12:12 pm » by Toxic32

cognoscenti wrote:Yeah, all they would have needed to move the Stonehenge monoliths would have been a very hard concrete highway to move them across!

Check this out here is your highway a movable road?
Invictus maneo


  • Related topics
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook