The geoglyphs of the Nazca plateau, known to the whole world, no longer arouse public interest, including scientific, practically no interest. This is mainly due to the fact that official science, in the person of many researchers and directors of popular science films on this topic, made a lot of efforts to convince everyone that the drawings and drawings of this plateau are nothing more than the work of stoned shamans … At the same time, however, it does not explain in any way how practically illiterate people in all areas of knowledge were able to create something that requires a serious technical and, above all, a scientific approach to creating such images on a surface with relief and of such dimensions.
The few attempts to explain these geoglyphs logically and sensibly, which were undertaken, are automatically relegated to the realm of fantastic assumptions, relegated to the background when discussing the topic.
In this article I will try to conduct a preliminary analysis of one drawing on the Nazca Palpa plateau. The image is well known, but not very common in photographic form.
Before starting the description, I want to express my gratitude to the Laboratory of Alternative History and personally to A. Sklyarov for the materials and data provided for the study. I am also extremely grateful to A. Zhukov, who in April this year conducted a very interesting research trip to Peru, thanks to which I was lucky to get acquainted with this drawing.
So, the image is located on the "Nazca Palpa" plateau, which is somewhat away from the world famous "Nazca" plateau. The drawing, and this is exactly what it is in fact, is made on an uneven surface in an unknown way over an area of about a kilometer.
There is no doubt that in fact this image has long been the subject of close research by certain scientists, which they themselves will never just tell about. There are several reasons for this.
1. Ideal geometric proportions, the creation of which is absolutely impossible without a developed correct coordinate system and knowledge of the laws of geometry.
2. A unique technique of performance, which has become simply theoretically possible for us only in the last fifty years; but you know for sure that the drawing is at least 1000 years old!
Promotional video:
3. A completely understandable conclusion that the local aborigines were not able to create such a thing under any, even theoretical, conditions.
It is also very likely that there is encrypted information in the drawing, the key to opening which lies in the lengths, values and other relationships of this drawing.
The purpose of my research was to prove the impossibility of accidental coincidence of some details and patterns of this image, which automatically proves its inhuman origin, since we have already, and rightly, excluded the natives from the list of applicants for the creation of such a masterpiece. And a modern man 1000 years ago could not draw such a thing.
So, who created this and what is it?
Based on the available data, we will not get an answer to the first question, I think. Is that a generalized statement that this is the work of intelligent beings.
But to the second question, the answer is very interesting. You can make at least several equally correct assumptions about the purpose of this drawing.
I tried superficially, as far as my personal knowledge in this area allows, to investigate this drawing. First of all, I tried to draw it on a regular sheet in order to recreate the correct plane. The photo was taken with some tilt, at an angle.
Imagine my surprise when I realized that I would not be able to draw it just like that. In order for the drawing to begin to turn out geometrically measured and correct, it is necessary to start it exclusively from the center. Maybe someone more sophisticated in professional drawing will be able, using some cunning techniques, to do this, but I, as a modern ordinary aborigine, could not.
But I found a clue. It was for people like me that they were made, so as not to violate the harmony of the drawing conceived by someone.
Having drawn a regular square with equal sides and, having easily found the center in it, I drew the first eight squares around. Naturally, I immediately crossed them with lines, finding their center. And then I realized why in the figure there are four points located inside the first circle. They absolutely accurately indicate the places where the squares meet (if you draw them or mentally place them there). And they help to ideally begin to draw the corner three squares in relation to the central composition.
By resorting to this technique, you will draw the entire diagram very quickly and without errors. Then draw two circles, placing them at about the same distance from each other as on the original.
Now comes the stage of fitting the drawing to the ideal geometry. There are also a number of tips for the inexperienced draftsman at this stage. There are many clear points around the outer circle. They definitely mean something. What exactly, you understand when you begin, wanting to know all the intersections of the drawing, draw lines using the centers of the squares as reference points.
In general, the entire drawing is created without a pre-drawn surface. Its points and parts are self-sufficient in creating the perfect geometric pattern on a parallel surface with landmarks. I hope you understand what I said.
Moving away from the original in advance and placing points (four) in each square in the center of the triangle that makes up each small square, we get guidelines for drawing lines. Moreover, the lines drawn in four planes (straight at the cross and at an angle) are ideally parallel to each other - both those that are oriented to the centers of the squares and those that are oriented to the points in the centers of the triangles. From them, the outer square is made up with its own lines passing along the centers of the outer triangles of the large inner square.
Isn't that interesting results for an ancient geoglyph ?!
Now we clearly notice that, despite the apparent number of points along the outer circle, then ten, then six, in the areas between the outer groups of corner three squares, there are actually nine of them. It is this number of intersections that comes out at the circle with lines oriented to the correct geometric ratio. The central "star" is also oriented (but only with some of its lines) to the parallels already created by us on the basis of the mutual relationship and the rules of outline, geometry.
The circle next to the "star" to the left most likely has an auxiliary meaning and indicates something like a correction angle, etc. from something basic, for example, a coordinate system.
So, having created, I ask you to pay attention, on the basis of mutual relations without a pre-drawn surface, the first version of the drawing, we notice the first conclusion.
Everything in it harmoniously points to each other and helps not only draw the picture perfectly and according to the rules, but also creates a certain coordinate system for any ideal drawing. That is, if we erase our drawing from the created system, then a correctly lined system will remain for creating any other drawing according to the rules of geometry.
We immediately notice that if, for example, you draw all this on the ground with a certain laser, then you need to hover in the air above the center point of the drawing a hundred meters above the surface, or even higher, and, having imposed a coordinate grid, proceed to drawing, either by the creation of points, then connected on the ground, or just all at once, this is already who is much for what. The task is now quite feasible, but I ask you to take into account in advance the cost of this self-indulgence and, based on this, its meaning.
Second conclusion. Perhaps this is a tutorial on creating a geometric coordinate system.
Based on the rules of geometry and ideality of the outline, we get nine points of intersection in four places on the outer circle, a total of 36 points. Eighty points inside the squares and five points four times at the places where the outer circle intersects with the corner groups of squares = 20 points. Total 56 points on the outer circle and 80 inside the squares = 136 points in total.
But these are the main points! If we need to reduce the system grid, then we can draw more lines at equal distances between parallel lines and the number of points will be almost astronomical.
Third conclusion. Based on this, we can confidently conclude that the visible points are nothing more than landmarks for a correct drawing, but not as something else carrying, for example, hidden data in numbers. Especially in this proof, the presence of four points that stand apart from all at the intersection of "invisible" squares between the groups of outer corner and inner squares helps.
But let's not forget that we have artificially changed the drawing, adjusting it to the rules of ideal geometry. We did this, firstly, because we know these rules in advance, and in the form of a small experiment. And now let's try to do the same, but leave the drawing as it is. The changes will affect primarily the points within the groups of squares. In the inner group, the points are located almost on the side line, and on the outer groups of squares, they are shifted almost to the intersection point, to the center of the square.
What will come of us if we try to redraw all this according to this scheme, that is, according to what we see on the Palpa plateau.
Drawing parallel lines oriented to points inside small squares, we will notice that now the parallel lines are not at equal distances from each other; we will also note that, passing through the central "star", these straight lines intersect it without taking into account the parallelism of any lines of the drawing. Based on the lines drawn along these points, it is impossible to build a correct drawing and draw a second large square. Yes, in general, nothing really can be done based on these lines. And if you superimpose the correct drawing and the one that actually exists with all the lines that we drew along the points, then you get just a chaotic intersection of the lines. The question is, why are they needed then ?!
But remember that we built a geometrically correct drawing only by changing the real drawing, so to speak, correcting it. So what: the initial drawing is a manual? But then it is wrong. It is necessary to teach consistently, not immediately asking tasks with incorrect conditions. It is impossible to deduce the only correct solution from them.
It is theoretically possible to imagine that the one who did all this simply made a mistake himself, or did not have sufficient means for accurate execution, hinting at the rules of geometry (everywhere and always the same). There is knowledge, there are no precise instruments, and so he did it, but not perfect, but to guess, he left hints. Then it doesn't matter what it is? Just greetings from the past, saying that, they say, it is wrong you guys know your story; there were a very long time already those who comprehended all sorts of rules, think about it, they say. Too easy. Encrypted information? Maybe, but to catch the meaning in these ratios is like counting all the stars in the sky. There are so many numbers, and most importantly, they can change depending on how you draw what, and these are no longer exact instructions.
But the assumptions that this may be a certain coordinate system are quite tenacious.
Then we see a certain hint at our system, built on ideal geometry, and a system unfamiliar to us, built on those reference points that are drawn. Overlapping on each other, these "grids", quite possibly, give some kind of ratio, designed to tell us something. The line with the circles aside also, for sure, suggests something additional about the same.
The whole question is whether these coordinate systems are applicable, on the surface or in the sky.
If on the surface, then on whose? One on ours, the other on the one where the creators of the picture come from? Then this is the necessary, friendly information. Only where to look for this surface is not clear, the cosmos is large, and the Earth is still not small for us.
In general, there is a place here for the adherents of the Atlantic theory and for the supporters of aliens.
The wrong "grid" could be both the surface of Atlantis and a pointer in the starry sky, just another coordinate system, incorrectly executed by the correct version, especially confusing option for those who do not use the correct geometry. There are so many options and they are all viable.
Personally, I like the option most of all that this is a kind of landmark on the road, and of course, it is possible and necessary to try to decipher it, but there is little chance. Road sign. It indicates course corrections for further following, and at the same time he himself testifies that this location is something like this, and no other. Flying by, the expedition corrects the trajectory or makes sure that it is correct so.
Honestly, maybe it should be erased and out of harm's way. Whoever flew according to these signs, God knows. They will arrive later (for light speeds, for example, their minutes are our centuries), they will make sure that the course is correct. Bah, and here some ants have multiplied during this time, and let's poison and study them. Psychology is different, for sure: what is dear and sacred to us, they are - ugh, just nonsense, some kind of. For example, do you grieve for a long time for the cockroach you killed? Do you think, instinctively and without the slightest regret, killing him? And on what basis did we all decide that this cockroach has no right to run on the floor? Based on the right of the strongest, and do not deny that this is not so. If you do not agree, it means that you are not even able to give yourself an account of the correct one in your own actions. What can we say about the correct conclusions and actions.
So, study, sketch, measure and erase quickly, to hell. There is nothing to admire, we will share, it will be too late.
DMITRY NECHAY
