Just another WordPress.com site

Ricky goes to Mars

A Brief Review of the Hoagland "Star Alignment Model" The Hoagland "star alignment model" angle selections are based on tetrahedral geometry; specifically, a tetrahedron inscribed inside of a sphere. The circumscribed tetrahedron is descriptive of a kind of "hyperdimensional physics," which is simply a physics that takes higher (thus unseen!) spatial dimensions into account. I will not get into detail about the theory here, but rather summarize it briefly so that the reader will understand the basis of the related Hoagland/Bara star alignment work. Hoagland’s original "hyperdimensional physics" theory states that "rotation," such as that of a planet on its own axis, creates higher-dimensional dynamic forces inside a planet, which ultimately conform to a specific 3-D geometry; as a result, phenomena appear on the planets’ surfaces in accordance with the geometric contact points of that geometry — two interlaced 3-D tetrahedra inscribed inside a sphere. The lowest order touch points of these circumscribed tetrahedra (beside the poles of rotation) are at approximately 19.5 degrees, North and South latitude. Refer to Figure 1, below. Figure 1: Two tetrahedra inscribed inside a sphere. Copyright (c) 1998 by the Enterprise Mission, used with permission. The actual "touch points" of these tetrahedra are at 19.47 degrees N or S latitude on any particular planetary body, rounded to "19.5 degrees." This is the source of the number 19.5. Next, when one takes the Sine of the tetrahedral angle, the following number results: Sine (19.4712) = 0.33333… This turns out to be the vertical "height" of the 19.5 angle within a unit sphere. Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara utilize the "shortened" version of this, which is the angle 33. However, note how many "3’s" there are in the above. Since the source of the Hoagland/Bara "angle 33" and angle "3 deg 30 min" is this "repeating 3’s" in the Sine of the tetrahedral angle, that will be a key thing to look for in the data. The source of the "horizon" and "meridian" alignment emphasis is Egyptian ritual practice; specifically, Egyptian star lore. Stars, to the ancient Egyptians and Sumerians, were quite important and their position in the skies were an integral part of temple layout and design and well as ceremonial applications (sources: Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning by Richard Hinckley Allen, Astrological Origins by Cyril Fagan, and historical texts on ancient Egypt and Sumer). The horizon and meridian had important symbolic values. Stars that rose were considered to be "born," stars at the meridian had reached their "peak," and stars that were setting were considered to be "dying," or about to go into the underworld. This is common knowledge to scholars of these ancient belief systems. The horizon and meridian are, of course, the basic dividing lines for the celestial sphere as well as for terrestrial geography. Additionally, according to Egyptian belief and mythology, the stars were actually the "abode of the gods," and in many cases, were identified with the gods themselves. The constellation of Orion and Osiris were actually identified with one another, such that the constellation was considered to be Osiris. Also, Sirius was identified with "Isis." The Hoagland/Bara hypothesis is, then, that these star alignments are symbolic of ancient star lore and hyperdimensional physics geometry. Why such an unlikely combination? No one knows for sure at this point, but if the reader wishes to embark on further explorations of these possible connections (that have been discovered and published by Richard Hoagland, as well as others), I direct them to read the other articles on the Enterprise Mission website. A RESTRICTED VERSION OF THE HOAGLAND/BARA STAR ALIGNMENT MODEL Now that I have ascertained the source of the angles in question, I will define a restricted version of the above Hoagland/Bara model, which I will be using in my analysis. This model is not complete because I do not use all the "temple" locations that Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara have used in their work, nor do I use all the celestial objects they do. For example, the Hoagland/Bara temples which I do not use consist of the Mars temples — the Viking I and II sites, and Cydonia — as well as the Earth "temple" locations, Phoenix, JPL (Pasadena, California) and Houston. I do use Houston at one point when I am analyzing the Apollo mission events data, but not as a general rule in this analysis. There are a total of ten "temple" sites. However, it was necessary to simplify this model for ease of numeric analysis, and to get a feel for the situation, so I only used four in this restricted model. Because this is a restricted model, I do not "catch" all the alignments (nor would I expect to) that Hoagland and Bara do; nevertheless, I did expect that this "limited" approach would at least determine whether or not the "Egyptologically-important" stars I chose to examine (in the constellations of Canis Major, Orion, and Leo — Sirius, Mintaka, Alnilam, Alnitak, and Regulus) do appear more times than random chance would allow. In order for a "ritual" star alignment to occur in my restricted version of the Hoagland/Bara model, the limited criteria listed below must be met. Celestial Object must be at these Angles: Zero degrees (either horizon) 19.5 degrees (above or below either horizon) 33.0 degrees (above or below either horizon) Meridian (highest or lowest point a star can reach in the sky) Other angles (such as 3 deg 30 min) which are symbolic of the numbers "33" or "19.5" The Enterprise Mission lists many celestial bodies and stars that are used in its model, but for the purposes of this analysis, and to keep it simple, I restricted myself to specific celestial objects. Stars used in this simplified model: Sirius (brightest star in Canis Major) Alnitak (Orion belt star) Alnilam (Orion belt star) Mintaka (Orion belt star) Regulus (brightest star in Leo) Locations from which stars are observed: Earth: Giza, Egypt Moon: Planned Apollo 11 landing site Planned Apollo 12 landing site Planned Apollo 13/14 landing site As previously noted, the above locations represent only four (not all ten) of the Hoagland/Bara "temple" sites, from which these alignments are observed. Below (Figures 2 – 5) are some examples of what these configurations look like in the sky over the Earth or Moon. All of these pictures were obtained from the program RedShift, and represent the sky at the particular "temple" of interest, at the date and time I specify. http://www.enterprisemission.com/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s