- Hi ab

Exactly what I said. The design for the court was

extracted from an ancient text. In fact, it is an

archetypal design and occurs in the 3:4:5 triangle

when treated in a particular way. Are you asking me

to name the text? We will have to know more about

each other before we can discuss that. Good that you

are interested. Don't take it that I am being

difficult. I have reasons. Ask more questions and I

will try to answer them.

Regards

Les Greenhill

--- a b <ath98xyz@...> wrote:

>

P.O. Box 314

>

> --- leslie greenhill <neoplatonist2000@...>

> wrote:

>

> >I can show that

> > the

> > original design occurs in a well known but seldom

> > used

> > book that is some two thousand years old.

> >

>

> Hi les,

>

> To what exactly are you refering ?

>

> Regards,

>

> George

>

> __________________________________________________

> Do You Yahoo!?

> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam

> protection around

> http://mail.yahoo.com

>

>

>

>

Mentone, Victoria 3194 Australia

Email: neoplatonist2000@...

__________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

http://mail.yahoo.com - Hi Michael

Let's get back to the 3:4:5 triangle. It has 3

angles. Put the right angle aside and examine the

other two. Subtract the smaller from the greater.

The remainder leads to another Pythagorean triple.

Let me know what you find.

Les

--- michael michael <michael3992002@...>

wrote:

> Yes, Les.

> The ratio (doubled) is that between 525,000 and

> 504,000; and is the ratio between the egyptian royal

> cubit and the english rod.

> The stadion of 625 roman feet measures equally the

> greek stadion of 600 artabic or greek feet.

> As you say, the ratio of the greek (artabic) foot

> and

> the roman foot is the same: 0.308276458m :

> 0.2959454m

> = 1.041666...

> The ratio, as a fraction, is 100 : 96 or 25 : 24,

> which is how many ancient measures are related.

> I accept that the ancient measures are indeed all

> related; and they stand together in simple numerical

> relationships. But...?

> The ratio relates equally to the measures 525 and

> 504

> through the numeric of "the name of god" or 21.

> The triple with pythagorean significance? are you

> suggesting the relationship 21 - 24 - 25 as the 3 -

> 4

> - 5 triangle in multiples of 7 - 6 - 5 ?

> But... I am on my way to where?

>

> 2. On the Winchester foot; I accept your

> reservations, without, however, agreeing with them;

> so

> I will not push the point. I will simply emphasize

> that when discussing the 504 or 252 x 2 numbers, one

> is tying the discourse to the Winchester foot and to

> the anglo-saxon gyrd of 16.5 such feet. Also, the

> Winchester foot is necessary for the elucidation of

> ancient egyptian issues (such as the number of the

> 'souls of the dead'; issues which, in fact, underlie

> Eratosthenes calculation of Earth dimensions.

>

> 3. When Strabo notes that Eratosthenes, with

> Hipparchus, calculated Earth dimensions as 252,000

> stadia, he is noting that the calculation is made by

> degrees where each degree of Earth's round measures

> 700 stadia.

> The interesting thing is that 252,000 times 700 such

> stadia are exactly equivalent to 252,000 stadia of

> 600

> feet.

> It might be observed that 96 of the stadia that

> comprise the degree in Eratosthenes calculation

> extend

> 100 Winchester feet; illustrating the

> 96 : 100 or 24 : 25 ratio yet again.

> Moreover, the ratio of the egyptian royal cubit and

> that stadion is 1.65.

>

> 4. I would like to know more about the trick.

>

> Michael.