=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Stonehenge and its Environs »
The bluestone debate
Log In to post a reply
390 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Steve Gray
Steve Gray
931 posts

Re: The bluestone debate
Nov 18, 2008, 14:28
nigelswift wrote:
"You igore the fact that dragging a 12 ton stone is expotentially much simpler than dragging a 30 or 45 tonner."

I'm not ignoring it I'm saying it's essentially not true.


The use of the term "exponentially" certainly has no mathematical basis. The frictional forces are linearly proportional to the weight, so the force required to move the stone is similarly linear.

I suspect that Gordon is applying a subjective judgment, based on a reluctance to accept what was clearly evident to the rest of us at Foamhenge and this is that dragging was hugely more effective than stone-rowing.

My recollection of the accident at the Foamhenge project was that when Simon got stuck under the stone it was because he was feeding rollers under the front of the stone when he fell. The pullers continued to drag the stone along the grass for about 70% of its length before they were alerted to the problem.

A further thought, if you have enough "bods" you can use relay teams to give periodic rests.
In reply to:
Re: The bluestone debate (nigelswift)
Topic Outline:
The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index