The 12.345679 Geodetic Baseline

Ancient Sites Point to Atlantis:
Giza, Teotihuacan and Nazca

Charles William Johnson

Introduction

The monumental ancient sites around the world appear to have been laid out according to an Earth matrix. The grid system of the matrix appears to obey the general laws of mathematics and geometry as we have come to know them today. Not everyone, however, concedes such ability in the construction of the pyramidal sites of Giza and Teotihuacan, Mexico, nor to the giant drawings of the Nazca-Palpa region in Peru. Many aspects of these sites are still debated as to their meaning and the manner in which they were constructed. At best, the prowess shown in these ancient sites is granted in terms of engineering skills, but many scholars offer little recognition of the intellectual level of the peoples who constructed these sites.

Those of us who have been searching the artwork of ancient societies in an effort to discern possible messaging and communications in the artwork are generally ignored by academia. Obviously, it is much safer to simply measure the amount of dust covering a potsherd, then to consider the level of theoretical abstraction behind its creation. Generally, the very concept of theoretical abstraction is not examined for the peoples of the ancient past. Most mental capability is reserved for the peoples of today of a much more recent heritage.

By ignoring the ancient past, and by considering the ancients as having had little theoretical abstraction or communicative purpose in their artwork, scholars tend to overlook the more basic aspects of ancient artwork. The shear immensity and quantity of monumental artwork of the ancient past should communicate to us immediately that such works had a communicative purpose. The shear immensity of the pyramidal structures, especially those of Giza and Teotihuacan, tells this author that those monumental structures were built to last; to last for generations that were to follow. In a word, they were built for us, and for our children's children, and so on. It is difficult, if not unwise, to think that the ancient pyramidal structures were built simply for immediate consumption by those ancient peoples.

One way in which we have examined these ancient sites is to consider their placement around the globe. The work of Carl P. Munck, who has identified a pyramid matrix that covers the Earth, is an inspiration in this regard. Our idea has been simple enough to expound on: if there exists a relationship of math and geometry among the ancient sites, then there may exist a communicativepurpose behind those numbers and forms. In our studies in the Earth/matriX series of essays, we have been showing how the math and geometry of the ancient artwork appear to convey specific theses and postulates. In fact, some of the math and the geometry may be employed to discern images encoded into the ancient artwork.

With the ancient artwork, we are not viewing simply 'pretty pictures', but possibly images that tell a story or convey specific ideas, ideas that may be relevant to our own existence today. However, if we approach the ancient artwork from the general perspective that it is merely a spontaneous product from ancient society, with no communicative purpose, then we shall see very little. In fact, possibly, we shall ignore the obvious. In other words, if you believe that the ancients were not attempting to communicate with generations to come, then you shall probably not be looking for any encoded messages. And, other than by accident, you shall probably not find any communicative purposes in their artwork.

But, if you concede the possibility that the ancients had a purpose in building such monumental structures and immense bodies of work, then with diligence you might just discover some of the images that were encoded into the artwork and the pyramidal structures.

In this essay, we shall examine some of the math and geometry that flows from the ancient sites of Giza, Teotihuacan and Nazca-Palpa. These three sites are situated in such a manner on the globe as to raise suspicions that they were constructed with one another in mind. In other words that they form an integral part of the Earth's matrix. Each of these ancient sites occupies a specific coordinate point on the Earth's grid system. Carl P. Munck has analyzed these three sites in detail, we urge the reader to consult the work of Carl P. Munck. We have also analyzed these sites in a previous essay entitled, The Geometry of Ancient Sites (see our web-site www.earthmatrix.com).

The artistic expression in each one of these sites is unique and distinctive. The pyramids of the Giza Complex employed immense stonework with a tonnage unsurpassed in any other site around the world, as far as we know. The pyramidal structures and grid system of Teotihuacan, Mexico is of such detail and complexity that no other sites appear to convey a similar mathematical and geometric design in terms of the shear vastness of its architectural layout. And, the giant drawings of Nazca-Palpa, as they are generally referenced, portray an even greater expanse of land and present stone-work etchings on the top soil of Nazca no where repeated on Earth.

Yet, the three different sites, supposedly representing three (if not more) different cultures appear to share a common heritage, a common design. They form part of a grid system that relates to our very own system of terrestrial geometry. But, before we begin to explain our perspective of these three ancient sites, we must first offer a preliminary analysis of the math and geometry of the geodetic baseline, 12.345679 kilometers which exists within our own system for identifying longitudes and latitudes on the face of the Earth.

The Earth's Matrix

Today, we employ the circle divided into 360 degrees in almost every facet of math and geometry. In my generation, by the time we finished high school, everyone just knew that a circle has 360 degrees in it. That is how a circle exists. It was difficult to imagine any other option, since such a proposition would simply be wrong. Ask any child of school age, how many degrees are there in a circle, and the answer is invariably three-hundred-and-sixty.

When we wrote our essays about the possibility that the ancients may have employed circles of 260 degrees, 378 degrees, and even the strange-looking 374.4 unit circles, some of our friends thought that we were just poking fun at the 360-degree circle. A circle may be divided into any number of divisional spaces. But, somehow, the 360- degree answer offers us much comfort. The problem with perceiving a circle in this restricted manner is that we ignore other possibilities; analytical possibilities that the ancients may have already contemplated far beyond our wildest imagination.

In other to make our measuring endeavors easier, we have happened upon the metric system, which supposedly holds that the circumference of the Earth consists of 40,000 kilometers. The metric system comes from a theoretical measurement of a linear quadrant based on the Earth, but to a certain extent. The Earth is an oblate sphere, flattened at the poles, with a mid-range equatorial bulge due to the tug-of-war of gravity among the Earth, the Sun and the Moon. Therefore, the figure often given for the circumference of the Earth is distinct for its polar measurement and its equatorial measurement. The former is greater than the 40000 figure and the latter is generally less than that same figure.

Now, given the fact that these differences exist, measurements of distance on the face of the Earth are distinct and follow a fractional expression for the length of one degree on the face of the Earth. Generally, the figure is given as 111.119+ kilometers for computing the measurement of distance on the Earth. The figure is derived from simply dividing the 40000 number by the 360 degrees in a circle.

40000 kilometers divided by 360 degrees equals 111.11111111 kilometers
If one were to use the circle as simply unit 1.0, then the figures would so change:

Now, let us suppose that the ancients were accurately measuring the circumference of the Earth. In our mind, they knew the Earth was neither flat nor round. They obviously knew that it was a sphere, and in fact, that it was an oblate sphere. An aside: when we read many physics book, we get the visible impression that the writers believe the Earth to be round; they have difficulty conceiving of a sphere (something round in all directions with volume. No matter how hard they try to conceive of spacetime, this becomes especially so when they speak about space and time and movement.

Now, let us suppose that the circle has 324 units instead of 360 degrees. The number 324 comes from ancient reckoning:

324, 648, 1296, 2592, etc.

The 1296000 day-count is to be found among the ancient Maya and other Mesoamerican cultures; as well as among the ancient Egyptian culture. The precession's Great Cycle of 25920 years, often called the Platonic Cycle, is found among various cultures as well. Now, consider what happens when we divide the 40000 kilometers of the circumference of the Earth by the 324c ancient count.

40000 / 324 = 123.4567901 kilometers

One unit on a 324c division of a circle represents 123.45679 kilometers, as against the 111.111111111 kilometers shown on the 360c degree circle above. It is difficult to think that we would change our usage of a 360-degree circle for a 324-degree circle; this is simply not going to happen. But, possibly we may conceive of the numbers in a distinct manner. As we have been reviewing throughout the Earth/matriX series, the numbers appear to be related in ways in which we may least expect them to relate.

The fractal number 1.2345679 represents, in fact, a baseline on the 360-degree circle as well. If the ancients employed a 1.2345679 baseline for their measurements of the Earth, we could easily employ just such a number, although for some reason, scientists have not done so. We know not why. Consider the following computation of the 360-degree circle.

We have seen that one degree on a 360-degree circle represents 111.11111111 kilometers. Now, divide that figure by the number nine (9).

111.11111111 / 9 = 12.34567901

The same baseline appears as in relation to the 360c as well as to the ancient 324c figure. In other words, within a 360-degree circle, there are 3240 divisions of 12.345679 kilometers. That is, one-ninth of one degree on a 360-degree circle equals 12.345679 kilometers.

3240 x 12.34567901 = ca. 40000 kilometers [circumference of the Earth]

Everyone knows how the ancients may have employed pi to obtain the measurements in the relationships of the baseline, height and inclination of the Great Pyramid. The Great Pyramid is said to have nearly a 756c feet side measurement at its base on all four sides (the measurements actually appear to be a fraction less that this). The projected height of the Great Pyramid is said to have been originally 481.5 feet.

But, the ancients may have obtained said measurements in a distinct manner as of the 1.2345679 baseline.

As illustrated above, the use of the 1.2345679 suffices for generating an approximation to the relational numbers of the Great Pyramid.

Giza, Teotihuacan and Nazca and Their Distances

The Giza Complex is approximately 12345.0 kilometers from the Nazca-Palpa region.

The Giza Complex is approximately 12345.0 kilometers from the site of Teotihuacan.

The Nazca-Palpa region is approximately 4646.0 kilometers from the site of Teotihuacan.

In this manner, both Nazca and Teotihuacan represent approximately 1000 units of measurements (12.345670901) from the Giza Complex.

Now, consider the remainder in terms of the circumference of the Earth. Let us suppose that both the Nazca site and the Teotihuacan site were constructed to represent the symbolic and exact baseline of 1.234567901.

40000 minus 12345.679 equal 27654.321
27654.321 / 12.345679 = 2240.00000324

One cannot but recognize the approximate Venus sidereal count (224.7c) in the 2240c figure. Nor can one but help notice the reciprocal of seven underlying this number:

Boiling Point of Water on Kelvin Scale (373.16 K):

Great Cycle 25920 Years:

Unadjusted Precession Count 26000c

Mesoamerican Four Worlds 676 Years ( 2028 years ):

The Nineveh Number [ 19595520 ]

Now, instead of using the 37c figure, let us consider half the baseline measure of the Great Pyramid (378c).

The Axial Inclination of the Earth and the Aztec Calendar

In considering the axial inclination of the Earth, the placement of the Giza Complex and the other two ancient sites becomes extremely relevant. On a 360-degree circle, representing the Earth, one must note how the 12345.0 kilometers is thus divided. These would encompass an entire quadrant of 10000 kilometers, plus an additional 2345 kilometers. Interestingly enough, the 2345c figure reflects the axial inclination of the Earth, which is cited today as being 23.45 degrees.

810 plus 190	=	1000 units
1000 x 12.345679	=	12345.679 kilometers

The previous illustration is based on the 3240 units of division within the 360- degree circle. The 1000 units between Giza and Nazca are thus illustrated, along with the 2240 units that would represent the remainder of the circle, or the measurement on the longer route between these two ancient sites (given that 1000 + 2240 = 3240).

The relationships among the different cut-off coordinate points produce variations on the numerical series of the 1.2345679 baseline, such as the cited .234567901 and the 3456.79012 figures. Other variations exist, but for this stage of the analysis these examples suffice to show how the variations in proportion occur throughout the matrix.

Observations on Atlantis

In other words, the square of one degree of longitude on Earth (111.11111111 kilometer) equals the distance (12345.0 kilometers) between the Giza Complex and Nazca-Palpa.

Further, the square of one degree of longitude on Earth (111.11111111 kilometers) equals the distance (12345.0 kilometers) between the Great Pyramid and the pyramids of Teotihuacan, Mexico.

The symmetry of these sites continues with the measurement given for the distance (4646.0 kilometers) between Teotihuacan and Nazca. And, the fact that 4646 halves to 2323 is suggestive of the 23.45 measure for the axial inclination of the Earth as illustrated above.

Further, the equidistant lines within the given isosceles triangle suggests the possibility that these three ancient sites may have had specific coordinate point within the middle of the Atlantic as their center-point. Our initial appreciation of the center-point for this triangle is suggestive of one of the sources that speak about Atlantis being in this area, just to the Southwest of the Azores, as one gazes out over the Atlantic looking through the Straits of Gibraltar. One may consider the possibility that the symmetry in the layout of these three apparently unrelated sites may have had a common heritage. And, they may be marking off a purpose in communication. They may, in fact, be markers for identifying the center-point, which is Atlantis.

However, there may be other interpretations that become available. These interpretations shall explore new terrain. Given the fact that the ancient sites appear to be communicating something in relation to the axial inclination of the Earth, this may be the purpose of their existence. It just may be that the ancient sites occupy points on the Earth's matrix as compensation points for the wobble of the Earth. Consider the thought. What if the ancient sites serve not only as markers, but also as counter-balancing weights to compensate for the Earth's wobble. In other words, what if they are of a structural purpose, an engineering purpose, where they have kept the Earth from moving further out of kilt, much like the balancing weights placed on the rims of the automobile wheels that we know so well today.

In order to explore this line of thought, however, we need to explore other aspects of the ancient matrix and grid system of different cultures and monumental sites. Plus, we require further investigation into the geography of the land. In up-coming essays, we shall explore the Earth's matrix and the geometry of the ancient sites.

©2003-2008 Copyrighted by Charles William Johnson. All rights reserved. Earth/matriX:
Science in Ancient Artwork. P.O. Box 231126, New Orleans, Louisiana, 70183-1126. www.earthmatrix.com and www.theschemata.com ISBN 1-58616-346-9