OOPArts: Out Of Place Artefacts & Archaeological Erratics

[Mungoman]

An errant thought...When faceting gems - diamonds and those of the corundum family, they use an interface or 'lap' of softer material - these can range from steel, through copper and down to leather - the most important aspect of this process is the cutting powder, which is inevitably diamond dust, so, The Ancients, could they have used a straight edged material, like a taut rope or string, combined with diamond grit and mastic to cut such stone.

On watching the video above, the narrator stated that basalt is the type of rock that was chosen to be the raw material for the building blocks. Basalt has a hardness of 7 (Moh scale of hardness) - it also, if you know your rock, can be predictable in it's fracture - looking at the dressed stone in the walls - they seem to have a not exactly smooth facing, which could have been dressed with cobbles of rock that are a degree tougher on the Moh scale.


The issue here is the beautiful mating of the joints, which is where the diamond dust might have come into it's own as the highly angular block which was pointed out, has a common width, but a convoluted depth.


The convoluted varying depths of that one specific building block looks as if they have been dressed with a harder stone (peigning) after being roughed out in the quarry, while the mating surfaces could have been produced by the action and abrasiveness of diamond dust impregnated rope, held together with mastic - as I originally said, just an errant thought on an early Sunday afternoon.

 

[oldrover]

Personally I don't entertain the idea of the plants or any other solvent being used. I just love explorer's tales.

I think that people will naturally try and express their talents through whatever medium they have. As long as there's a need and willingness for them to be supported by the economy they live in.

And hydrofluoric acid is really nasty carcinogenic stuff. A friend of mine worked in, now runs, a chemical plant. He always dreaded the stuff.

 

[Mythopoeika]

An errant thought...When faceting gems - diamonds and those of the corundum family, they use an interface or 'lap' of softer material - these can range from steel, through copper and down to leather - the most important aspect of this process is the cutting powder, which is inevitably diamond dust, so, The Ancients, could they have used a straight edged material, like a taut rope or string, combined with diamond grit and mastic to cut such stone.

Even better would be to use iron wire with diamond dust on it. It would have better wear and tensile properties than the string.
Or, come to that - leather cording with diamond dust.

 

[Ermintruder]

And hydrofluoric acid is really nasty carcinogenic stuff.

Absolutely. I've had to use it in the past, and it scares me rigid

while the mating surfaces could have been produced by the action and abrasiveness of diamond dust impregnated rope,

I can see what you're thinking of, @MungomanII but, if this was a fabricated 'string saw' (similar conceptually to the survival/backwoods saws) the diamond fragments would be required to adhere to the laminar substrate with a localised bond-strength that exceeded the face-off kinetic transaction of cutting the stone.

But it is an intriguing possible solution, in principle.

I'm also trying to remember something I saw partially explained years ago, where large stone semi-blocks were floated in a still side-bay on a river, and marked on their edge-facings with a plimsole/rule-mark. Additional weights were then added atop them, so as to sink them deeper into the water to a required block-making depth. Another large rock (partially controlled via the use of vines and wooden formwork) was floated-in, and then whacked into the side of the workpiece, creating a perfect complete cleave-cut at the flat interface between the water surface and the stone.

Unless what I'm recounting above is either a dream, gestalt/genetic herd memory, or an unconscious reverse-engineered design solution.

EDIT- missed your suggestion @Mythopoeika ....seems logical

 

[Mythopoeika]

I'm also trying to remember something I saw partially explained years ago, where large stone semi-blocks were floated in a still side-bay on a river, and marked on their edge-facings with a plimsole/rule-mark. Additional weights were then added atop them, so as to sink them deeper into the water to a required block-making depth. Another large rock (partially controlled via the use of vines and wooden formwork) was floated-in, and then whacked into the side of the workpiece, creating a perfect complete cleave-cut at the flat interface between the water surface and the stone.

I've never heard of that.
Wouldn't that require a massive speed to achieve a cleave-cut?
Also, there's no guarantee of a nice flat cut.

 

[Ermintruder]

I'm wondering if it was possibly a tv programme that attempted to do a Stonehenge rebuild. Or it might be a totally false memory. But clearly the key point within it is/was that the block being cut is surrounded by water at a perfect line-plane, imparting the eternally/primally-flat surface shape of water...into stone.

EDIT - this approach was/is predicated upon the (mis?) understanding that surrounding water pressure bearing upon the buoyed block would act like a vice/collet ...and in my recollection (fantasy?) the floated workpiece was restrained, or against banking on one side.

 

[Mythopoeika]

I'm wondering if it was possibly a tv programme that attempted to do a Stonehenge rebuild. Or it might be a totally false memory. But clearly the key point within it is/was that the block being cut is surrounded by water at a perfect line-plane, imparting the eternally/primally-flat surface shape of water...into stone.

I guess they could probably do it if they heated up the rock above the water line, then did a perfectly parallel impaction with a heavy rock. The heat differential would cause a fracture to start, then the impact would finish it off.

 

[Coal]

I wonder if it's just a manpower thing. Labour was cheap and maybe the best way to get two rocks to fit perfectly together, might just be to rough them out and then rub them against each other with some wet sand in the middle until they're exactly flush.

 

[Mythopoeika]

I wonder if it's just a manpower thing. Labour was cheap and maybe the best way to get two rocks to fit perfectly together, might just be to rough them out and then rub them against each other with some wet sand in the middle until they're exactly flush.

That went through my mind too, but then I realised that these are some flippin' heavy rocks.

 

[Mungoman]

Personally I don't entertain the idea of the plants or any other solvent being used. I just love explorer's tales.

I think that people will naturally try and express their talents through whatever medium they have. As long as there's a need and willingness for them to be supported by the economy they live in.

And hydrofluoric acid is really nasty carcinogenic stuff. A friend of mine worked in, now runs, a chemical plant. He always dreaded the stuff.

I use it to eat the quartz on some of my gold bearing 'Speci's' - it does the job.

 

[Ermintruder]

I use it to eat the quartz on some of my gold bearing 'Speci's' - it does the job.

Like this @MungomanII ?

 

[Mungoman]

Like this @MungomanII ?

Yep Ermintrude, it takes, depending on the amount of quartz involved, up to a couple of months to remove all traces of quartz from the veins of gold. Nasty stuff, especially the long term events, and yet it's part of aluminium cleaning solutions.

Apropos the rope impregnated with diamond dust - I've just googled the hardest woods in the world, and there, second on the top of the list is a South American wood, lignum vitae, (Guaiacum officianale) that could surely be a contender for the vehicle to apply diamond dust to basalt stone to leave a beautifully straight edged cut in it.

There is also another wood that is even harder, that is also found in South America, Quebracho, (Schinopsis spp.)which needs a force of 4570 pound foot to imbed a .444 steel ball into the wood to half the ball’s diameter.


It's finding items and information like these that really get my curiosity piqued.

 

[Krepostnoi]

Apropos the hard woods, is that not simply moving down to the next level of turtles? I'm no handyman - how easy would it be to work wood as hard as that into the tools required to then work the stone?

 

[Naughty_Felid]

That went through my mind too, but then I realised that these are some flippin' heavy rocks.

Yeah but all you need is around 20 of those big giants that lived in North America to do it.

 

[Ermintruder]

Apropos the hard woods, is that not simply moving down to the next level of turtles?

Pratchett and I would both see the point being made there. Surely the physical effort in pound-foot exertion, to accrete diamonds into high-mho hardwoods, would equally-exceed the conventional capabilities of the artisans?

But so saying: would the relative hardness of Schinopsis spp wood actually exceed that of basalt rock? Fascinating to consider if this were shown to be a possibility. For blocks of, say, sandstone, I could nearly imagine wood winning the war over stone. But basalt? Hmm...surely it must be harder than a teak-like wood?

I've worked iroko teak, and that does feel like ebony....but I'd still expect that to be worn-away by every stroke on a stone, not vice-versa.

This is of course all wonderfully abstract, whereas it could be truly empirical....the stone, unquarried, lies there ready, today. Will Foerster try to directly emulate the ancients? I do hope so....

(ps @MungomanII ...in respect of your hydrofluric acid, leeching-out all that silicon....what on earth does it become, chemically? My mind is boggled by the thought of what is a non-aqueous solution of quartz, almost liquid diamond. Does it saturate, following multiple uses? What is the resultant precipitate? Amazing stuff, thanks for the golden insights (incidently, could these 'quartz nuggets' not be heated, so as to melt-out the Au??)

 

[Mungoman]

Apropos the hard woods, is that not simply moving down to the next level of turtles? I'm no handyman - how easy would it be to work wood as hard as that into the tools required to then work the stone?

That's a good question K. The use of abrasion to fashion implements is a common part of earlier life on this planet, and I reckon that, on the grand scale of things, abrading wood would be a doddle compared to stone.

 

[Mungoman]

Pratchett and I would both see the point being made there. Surely the physical effort in pound-foot exertion, to accrete diamonds into high-mho hardwoods, would equally-exceed the conventional capabilities of the artisans?

But so saying: would the relative hardness of Schinopsis spp wood actually exceed that of basalt rock? Fascinating to consider if this were shown to be a possibility. For blocks of, say, sandstone, I could nearly imagine wood winning the war over stone. But basalt? Hmm...surely it must be harder than a teak-like wood?

I've worked iroko teak, and that does feel like ebony....but I'd still expect that to be worn-away by every stroke on a stone, not vice-versa.

This is of course all wonderfully abstract, whereas it could be truly empirical....the stone, unquarried, lies there ready, today. Will Foerster try to directly emulate the ancients? I do hope so....

(ps @MungomanII ...in respect of your hydrofluric acid, leeching-out all that silicon....what on earth does it become, chemically? My mind is boggled by the thought of what is a non-aqueous solution of quartz, almost liquid diamond. Does it saturate, following multiple uses? What is the resultant precipitate? Amazing stuff, thanks for the golden insights (incidently, could these 'quartz nuggets' not be heated, so as to melt-out the Au??)

basalt is a relatively soft rock, but in saying that, there are varying degrees of basalt hardness, due to its density and the inherent mineral compounds of the lava and magma, so, I suppose in some cases there could be wood with a hardness greater than that resident rock.

The other aspect of faceting gems of varying hardness is that the diamond dust isn't impregnated into the 'lap', rather, it is the loose intermediary between the stone being faceted and the lap - similar possibly with a straight edged length of Schinopsis spp. being the 'lap', the basalt being the gem, and the abrasive powder, being corundum or diamond, which does the abrasive work.

I am extremly careful of what hydroflouric acid can and will do - also the disposition of the stuff - and so, being country, our councils have regular clean up areas where we can surrender toxic chemicals often used within a farmers perimeter fence that otherwise shouldn't be seen outside of a farmers fence.


On thinking what a solution of one litre of hydroflouric acid is, after it's been used to dissolve 200 grams of quartz, the only answer that comes to my mind is that it would be a saturated solution of varying compounds, having silica as a predominant element - and after the removal of harmfull compounds...Hmm...a super saturated solution of silica...bearings, or cylinder liners, then there is the computer industry - also photovoltaic cell manufacturers, glass fabrication, surgical implements...

The mind does boggle - a liquid form of one of the hardest minerals on Earth.

 

[Ermintruder]

The next part of Brien Foerster's seach for the solution to the pre-Inca building riddle that is Cuzco and Sachsayhuaman. The source quarry is searched-for.

Uploaded by him just after mid-day 1200 GMT, today 29 Jan 2016

Fascinating stuff, beatifully filmed, calmly and disarmingly presented. And I would love to go on one of Brien's Inca Tour organised trips.

 

[Mungoman]

I think we all have our own 'take' on these megalithic structures that can be found in various places around the world - and we have come to these hypotheses because it feels right in our own perception.

My take is that at one time - or maybe more than one - we had communities of people who saw the world 'largely', and designed a way of life that suited them accordingly. This viewpoint is evidenced, to me, by their megalithic capabilities that far exceed what we can do today, which, using an occamic base to my questioning delivers me an answer that those people and their times were on a par, or were superior to us and what we have now.


Many of our legends and myths have wondrous people and places who, and where they have been reputed to posses powers and capabilities that place us as mere mortals in comparison. One of these is the myth of Atlantis, that was destroyed by deluge.

My take is that there is a confluence of at least two obscure truths within this myth; firstly, not atlantis, but an atlastean building capability that has been prevalent in the past, and in various parts of the world, as evidenced on just about all continents of our world, with a diluvian end to this level of living and its sciences, architecture and methods of communication - not necesarily by water, but a flooding of destruction that overwhelmed what once was.


There are odd things that turn up - fortean is the appropriate word - from areas and circumstances that beggar belief - finely wrought aluminium in ancient Chinese tombs, gold chains found in sedimentary rock and other such things that indicate a requirement of technology that we assume they couldn't have had, in places and times that our brains do not allow us to contemplate because to think so is forbidden.


This forbiddeness allows me to accept that no civilisation is firewalled off from senesence, and it also allows me to realise that when this present civilisation has ended, we will have the tenacity and hubris to attempt the impossible once again.

 

[Ermintruder]

@MungomanII this is an excellent summary of the situation.

In fact, your 'atlasean artefacts' key point forces another conclusion. Any technologies they had in terms of tools or techniques were lost, pretty much in their entirety, leaving only the biggest and strongest products of their labours.

It's infinitely intriguing to wonder about where they peaked, developmentally. If the whole technocopea of invention and discovery were previously writ (or, at some discontinuous post-apocalyptic future, to be rewritten).

In so many respects, our current era of developmental progress (and I suppose every other era's, too) is a cross-braced interdependancy of discovered and developed technologies.

Perhaps it would be constructive, within this highly-suppositional postulation, to not presume that long-departed ancient technologies were so high-tech that they equated with, or vastly-exceeded, those present today (but, that could be reconsidered). So, no 'lasers in the jungle' (to echo Mr Simon's song), but, perhaps, some form of steampunkean circular saws in the quarries? Or perhaps petrol-engined chainsaws?

Let's presume an emergence of minitechnologies, so, potential mechanical tooling, with gearing/dip-plating/casting/turning....but making a deliberate assumption that there was no electrical (and certainly no electronic) peak of discovery. Others may disagree with my minimalistic perspective, but, again this could be revisited.

A proto-steampower world, effectively a paleo-Victorian era globally, with perhaps steam-ships, steam dirigibles, steam cranes. Gunpowder, reciprocal saws, conduit pipes...but no preemptives to the crowns of Galvani/Edison/Volta.

Clockwork click-clunk capability, with massive manpower resources, perhaps even with hydraulic/pneumatic systems (as long as these had no electromechanical aspect).

And no 'alien gods', just humanity's own efforts at that distant unevidenced 'edifice era'.

Might this somehow seem plausible? And oxidisation has rusted away every single nut/bolt/pipe/flange/blade of their inventories, from hundreds of thousnds of years ago???

Perhaps it truly is not impossible ....

 

[Mungoman]

Yes Ermintrude, so many times yes...a worldly civilisation of memory, rather than databanks or books, a world where to write anything on paper was considered heresy/sacred because only pure sciences must needs be recorded while the student learned and memorised to their own benefit and where education didn't end.


Where transport was for the common good and was based on the simplicity of compression and non-compression - a noble aspiration being the credo of all - a sanctified socialism where all saw the importance of 'paying it forward'...where sustained health and physical effort were accepted as the norm, rather than ego driven...


Ahem...I've just realised that I was getting a little over the top, but yes Ermintrude, definitely something like that.

 

[kamalktk]

Even if all their metals had rusted away, for a large scale civilization there should be evidence of their terraforming that remote sensing should turn up. The sites such as the Incan ones were not under ice during the Ice Age so far as I am aware of. It would seem to require a civilization that was capable of such work but located in a location where glaciation erased evidence of them. They would be building these structures far outside of their civilization.

 

[Mythopoeika]

It would seem to require a civilization that was capable of such work but located in a location where glaciation erased evidence of them.

Antarctica?
Would that be Atlantis?

 

[kamalktk]

Antarctica?
Would that be Atlantis?

Any location that the increased glaciation of the Ice Age would have erased evidence of. Hypothetically somewhere like Canada or northern Europe could have been livable during a pre-Ice Age period. I would rule out Antarctica as a location for such a hypothetical civilization, as it's been unlivable for far too long.

 

[Frideswide]

I'm wondering if it was possibly a tv programme that attempted to do a Stonehenge rebuild. Or it might be a totally false memory. But clearly the key point within it is/was that the block being cut is surrounded by water at a perfect line-plane, imparting the eternally/primally-flat surface shape of water...into stone.

EDIT - this approach was/is predicated upon the (mis?) understanding that surrounding water pressure bearing upon the buoyed block would act like a vice/collet ...and in my recollection (fantasy?) the floated workpiece was restrained, or against banking on one side.

we ought to be able to find traces of the rejects and the site where this was done If it was done I mean. Obviously not if it wasn't. Sorry, I'll be quiet now

 

[Ermintruder]

Exactly, almost like the Sarcen source site for Stonehenge, but on a much-bigger (and older) scale, for Cuzco and other pre-Inca megablock masterpieces. Which Foerster tantalisingly seeks, and fails to nearly find. Any further thoughts on this @kamalktk? I wondered if ground geophys (not normal resistivity) checks could give a definitive source and direction (preserved compressions under base stones, low-level broken stone trails)

@MungomanII do you also agree that 'fludic' capability (steam, hydraulic linkages, hydrocarbon motors) could have been the proto-paleoanthrpotechnological previous peak?? No silicon tech or even volt-generative developments, or am I just being a typical western imperial reductionist?

@Mythopoeika another problem with Anarctica's Atlantean candidacy is it's apparent vastness, but I follow your logic

 

[kamalktk]

Exactly, almost like the Sarcen source site for Stonehenge, but on a much-bigger (and older) scale, for Cuzco and other pre-Inca megablock masterpieces. Which Foerster tantalisingly seeks, and fails to nearly find. Any further thoughts on this @kamalktk? I wondered if ground geophys (not normal resistivity) checks could give a definitive source and direction (preserved compressions under base stones, low-level broken stone trails)

Terrain density differences are apparently detectable with remote sensing, so in theory you could look for that.

If we take the hypothesis of these structures being evidence of a much older civilization, we would have to ask where the other evidence of this civilization is? It's very doubtful such a structure was built by hunter/gathers. We have these megalithic structures that we've hypothesized are (for example only and not referring to any actual structure) 15,000 years old. In this example traditional archaeology has not found anything else nearby that we can date to this time frame and is indicative of the technological level capable of constructing the structures, at least not by the usual method of looking around on the ground and digging stuff up.

If we maintain our hypothesis of the age of the structures, but can find no evidence of a supporting civilization in that time frame by traditional archaeology, then we would want to examine the area via remote sensing tools, to see if we can find any evidence of anything buried by time. Remote sensing has proven to be a good archaeological tool for doing just that, as well as finding things that are apparent on the surface but not readily noticeable (for example crop height differences due to subsurface conditions). We can find Roman roads via remote sensing for instance.

What happens if remote sensing turns up nothing new in the area? Presumably our theoretical civilization has built this structure inside it's boundaries, and probably near a population center. So if we find nothing via remote sensing and we still think the structure is (the example only) 15,000 years old, we would have to conclude that the civilization that built the structure was not located near the structure itself. The why of building far away from themselves being another matter for another time.

Since the base idea is the structure is 15,000 years old, we have reached the point where we've concluded the civilization must have been located away from the structure in order for this to be possible. Where could this civilization have been? The archaeological field has done a pretty good job of finding things around the globe via traditional methods. We could try remote sensing all over the place. That would be something that could be done, it might cost a lot but it could be done.

If that were to turn up nothing, and we still believed that the structure is 15,000 years old, we would have to look at areas that remote sensing could not provide evidence from the 15,000 year old timeframe. One major candidate area would be areas that were covered with glaciers during the ice ages. Glaciers could have theoretically wiped out evidence of this civilization as they often scoured the land down to the bedrock, and thus left no evidence for remote sensing to find.

The glaciers covered a very large amount of territory, and our theoretical civilization would probably cover a large amount of territory if it had the capability to build the structure, and still have been wiped from history by the glaciers. So I've dragged up two maps of estimates of glacial ice:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/05/16/article-2630738-1DEB3B0900000578-710_470x305.jpg or http://water.usgs.gov/edu/graphics/wciceiceage.jpg

The maps show the believed extent of glacial ice. Based on those maps, and knowing what's habitable now, we have the following areas: Canada, northern Europe/Asia, the Tibetan plateau, and the west coast of South America. We can rule out Antartica as not having been habitable by a civilization of any size at any point in the past 15,000 years.

So that would be what we had left, a hypothetical civilization located in one of the areas that had been covered by glacial ice but is now habitable. Why such a civilization would build such a large structure so far from their civilization, and why the civilization didn't move in the face of advancing glaciation, would be other issues, but not directly relevant to the idea of where our hypothetical structure's builders lived.

The other alternatives would seem to be equally if not more far-fetched, construction by aliens/gods/magic, etc.

 

[Mungoman]

I do know that the Old Ones, before knapping, would heat the stone that they wanted to knapp, and then allow it to cool of its own order and in doing so, would attain a better fracture when struck. So with that in mind, and also the apparent vice grip of the mud commented on earlier by Ermintrude, and the swinging 'lump hammer' - why couldn't it be feasible


Like stone masons, brickies and lithic citizens the world over, the practice of being able to 'see' where a stone or brick would fracture, with the least amount of effort, could be applied to these massive boulders


The accurate aging or dating of rock can be done quite simply by method of Rim Hydration - a process that starts with any silica rich rock being dressed by the Mason - the rock in question has a known water content - obsidian has a water content of 0.2%.


The rock, dependant on its type, then absorbs a predictable amount until saturation prevents it absorbing any more - obsidian has a maximum absorbption of 3.5% - producing a 'rind' of saturated rock. Over time, this 'rind' gets thicker and can be measured, giving us a reasonably predictable origin of when it was originally dressed.


Ermintrude, the application of a non compressable substance (water), with a compressable substance (air) to achieve movement without any mechanical means is known and used in our present age, to wit, the hydraulic ram pump. A lovely bit of kit that requires no internally lubricated parts, except for two flaps - it's a stationary pump and the energy harvested is dependent on the initial fall of water to produce the initial wave of energy, but, this could be used as a source of energy, wherever there was water, and was similar to the original tractor which was also a stationary engine, which drew the plow by cable across the paddock.


Just allowing the brain to 'tickover' on this brings up all sorts of add-ons that a practical mind could invent


As for previous evidence of humanity, like Doggerland, I would look in the oceans and seas at a depth of about 140 metres and upwards which would be the antideluvial seaside - in those times, living near water would have had to be warmer, plus water is a reliable method of transport.

 

[Frideswide]

I do know that the Old Ones, before knapping, would heat the stone that they wanted to knapp, and then allow it to cool of its own order and in doing so, would attain a better fracture when struck.

tempering is often seen as an early stage down the metallurgy/metal working route. Can I find a reference? of course I flippin can't.....

 

[Coal]

tempering is often seen as an early stage down the metallurgy/metal working route. Can I find a reference? of course I flippin can't.....

With flint, this heating made the material more homogeneous, so more predictable for knapping.