The one you can see is the Sun, but the Moon precedes it into the top window on the same date. I will load a better view of this at some point, purely an interesting accident/trick of the light, nothing implied though...
Mmnn, explain how the light drips down the altar stone exactly if the altar stone was recumbent originally, which it is believed it was? Even if it were upright, it wouldn't really do that. It's clear the main effect was to frame the sun in the "box" and for the sun to sit on top of the altar as it does to this day. Shadows may have had some relevance but your CGI image is just too dark to see what is going on effectively. At sunset it wouldn't be that dark yet.
There is little evidence either way on the stone being prostrate or upright (though the box would be out ot place if prostrate for the sun). The video is better in higher quality and full screen but didn't come out well on here, this video is positing both the box and a possible light effect as two reasons for the upright position.
This is also dark/new moon and the darkest night of the 18.6 year cycle.
The light effect is apparent in the CGI but would need to be tested in real life, however the mica flecked greenish tint to the stone would only have increased this if it can be shown to be present. The stones are well sized so as no apparent gaos can be seen (even in the CGI), but as the sun dips below there is an apparent trickle effect dripping down the sides of the stone, just thought it was intersting enough to post (though wish it had come out better).
please reply asap!!! is the light a moon or a sun?? i need to know... im doing a report on stonehenge.
spidermonkeyrock 5 months ago
@spidermonkeyrock
The one you can see is the Sun, but the Moon precedes it into the top window on the same date. I will load a better view of this at some point, purely an interesting accident/trick of the light, nothing implied though...
johnnumoon 4 months ago
Mmnn, explain how the light drips down the altar stone exactly if the altar stone was recumbent originally, which it is believed it was? Even if it were upright, it wouldn't really do that. It's clear the main effect was to frame the sun in the "box" and for the sun to sit on top of the altar as it does to this day. Shadows may have had some relevance but your CGI image is just too dark to see what is going on effectively. At sunset it wouldn't be that dark yet.
sonofherne 2 years ago
Hi there,
There is little evidence either way on the stone being prostrate or upright (though the box would be out ot place if prostrate for the sun). The video is better in higher quality and full screen but didn't come out well on here, this video is positing both the box and a possible light effect as two reasons for the upright position.
This is also dark/new moon and the darkest night of the 18.6 year cycle.
johnnumoon 2 years ago
not enough space..
The light effect is apparent in the CGI but would need to be tested in real life, however the mica flecked greenish tint to the stone would only have increased this if it can be shown to be present. The stones are well sized so as no apparent gaos can be seen (even in the CGI), but as the sun dips below there is an apparent trickle effect dripping down the sides of the stone, just thought it was intersting enough to post (though wish it had come out better).
Best
John
johnnumoon 2 years ago