Juno

[dmizer]

this guy has it all figured out.  seriously.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRRDzFROMx0

here's his website:
http://www.theforgottentechnology.com/

[knight_zombie]

Nice!  I watched it, but man, you have too much free time.

[humble scuba]

I saw a TV special either on Discovery or TLC once that discussed a similar theory, only it involved substantially more men.  The documentary was also heavily focused on how the stones were transported several hundred miles from the quarry from which they were hewn.  It was pretty neat stuff, and actually made sense when you thought about it.

[Miles_2397]

Good grief.. that's disturbingly simple when you think about it. And makes sense for how to place it.

I rekon that we should test this and build a small, random pyramid with this bloke's theory

[sjw8800]

I love that.


Something so simple that it stumped humanity for centuries. All of a sudden so bored old man solved the puzzle when hundreds of scientists couldn't. I bet those guys sure feel stupid because of that.

[heyIMmike]

This is certainly a very interesting idea, and the evidence that he provides is very compelling.  However, I thought I would offer a counter point which I think would indicate that while certainly compelling, this is not the technique used for constructing Stonehenge.

Rocks and in this case concrete are amazing materials, but they have limitations.  While they excel at compression, they suck in tension.  To illustrate this, I will give you two examples.  The first is the Parthenon.  The Greeks knew that if a stone/rock spanned to great a distance, it would break.  Hence the narrow spacing of the columns supporting the roof.  The second is the modern interstate bridge using precast, prestress concrete beams.  In order for concrete, or even stone to span greater distances, it needs reinforcement (steel in todays world).  If you look at this picture of a modern beam (which can span over 120 feet) you'll notice a lot of steel cables coming out of the bottom of the beam.  Without them, the beam would be unable to withstand the tension created by spanning the large distance and it would fall apart.

How does this prove my point?  Take a look at this picture from the Forgotten Technology web site, and you will see that they use steel to keep their beam in one piece.  Without the steel, it is highly likely that it would break in half during the spin maneuver due to the fact it was balanced on a single point.

I am not saying that you can't move things using this technique because its obvious that you can based on his videos.  However, to move the Stonehenge rocks in this manner, which are most likely not as strong as a concrete slab of similar dimensions, is highly unlikely.