Jump to content
Unexplained Mysteries uses cookies. By using the site you consent to our use of cookies as per our Cookie Policy.
Close X
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
WVK

Inca Stonemasonry redux

29 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

WVK

Hot off the press:

"If the here proposed silica gel based technology can be further confirmed for Inca masonry this would raise the level of their work from “no secret formula beyond a primitive working technique based on stone tools” (Protzen,1986,1993) to an astonishing chemical-technical engineering standard."

http://www.openaccessjournals.siftdesk.org/articles/pdf/On-the-reddish-glittery-mud-the-Inca-used-for-perfecting-their-stone-masonry20171230103200.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timonthy
9 hours ago, WVK said:

Hot off the press:

"If the here proposed silica gel based technology can be further confirmed for Inca masonry this would raise the level of their work from “no secret formula beyond a primitive working technique based on stone tools” (Protzen,1986,1993) to an astonishing chemical-technical engineering standard."

http://www.openaccessjournals.siftdesk.org/articles/pdf/On-the-reddish-glittery-mud-the-Inca-used-for-perfecting-their-stone-masonry20171230103200.pdf

Is there another source, trying to ready that compressed blurry PDF is painful! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carnoferox

I wouldn't trust this source, as it was published in a known predatory journal.

https://beallslist.weebly.com/

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carnoferox
1 hour ago, WVK said:

That assesses how safe the website is to visit (risk of viruses, suspicious activity, etc.), not the merits of the journal itself. Predatory journals are independent open-access publications where authors pay to submit their papers, but there is an unethical lack of editorial services and peer review (meaning that basically anything can be submitted for the right price). The list of predatory journals compiled by Jeffrey Beall includes Sift Desk, meaning it is a highly dubious source for scientific information.

Edited by Carnoferox
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph

Good thing someone opened up a new thread on this subject instead of bothering to use the search function and find any of the dozens of previous threads on exactly the same subject.

--Jaylemurph

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oniomancer
5 hours ago, jaylemurph said:

Good thing someone opened up a new thread on this subject instead of bothering to use the search function and find any of the dozens of previous threads on exactly the same subject.

--Jaylemurph

I don't recall seeing this particular article discussed before, esp. seeing as how it was only published a little over a month ago. On the face it's more of the same but here they're putting a somewhat new spin on it. Rather than the usual stone melting, the author appears to be  implying the use of so-called acid rock to treat the stone surface after the fact to produce a smooth surface of dissolved and reconstituted mineral, "perfecting the finish" as they put it.

The natural responses to this are,

A, is an acidic pyrite rock solution really capable of dissolving andesite in a short interval?

B. if it's that easy, why are there no accompanying experimental demonstrations?

C.  if this technique was used, why didn't the application co-react between each black, effectively fusing them?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WVK
20 hours ago, Oniomancer said:

I don't recall seeing this particular article discussed before, esp. seeing as how it was only published a little over a month ago. On the face it's more of the same but here they're putting a somewhat new spin on it. Rather than the usual stone melting, the author appears to be  implying the use of so-called acid rock to treat the stone surface after the fact to produce a smooth surface of dissolved and reconstituted mineral, "perfecting the finish" as they put it.

The natural responses to this are,

A, is an acidic pyrite rock solution really capable of dissolving andesite in a short interval?

B. if it's that easy, why are there no accompanying experimental demonstrations?

C.  if this technique was used, why didn't the application co-react between each black, effectively fusing them?

I sent this thread to the author for comment. The reply is as follows:

thank you for your interest. 
Since the  comments on Unexplained-Mysteries.com are quite heterogenous I prefer to give the answer to you.You may pass it on.
Kind regards,
Helmut Tributsch
 
Reliability of the source:
I am retired university professor of physical chemistry, have published approximately 450 papers, some also in Science and Nature. My h-index as scientist is approximately 60, which is quite high and shows that my research has a good standard. I have published many papers on interfacial chemistry and electrochemistry of minerals (www.helmut-tributsch.it), which is relevant for the paper in discussion.
Long ago I have lived for two and a half years in South America, speak quite well Spanish and  know personally most relevant Inca sites in Peru, Bolivia and Chile. I also know numerous mines in these countries and have been involved in biological and chemical mining technology there for international organizations.
 
Choice of journal:
I  was invited by the journal (which I did not know) to contribute a paper and decided to do that a) because the publication fee (which I myself had to pay) was reasonable, and B) because I expected that a young journal is more open for new approaches (many years ago I already tried to publish the same idea-with less supporting evidence-, but referees insisted that the Inca masons were just hammering and polishing)  

Technical questions:

Is acidity sufficient? : low acidity of pyrite mud plus oxalic acid (from added plant material) plus moderate heating may give an enhancement factor of up to one million, compared to humic acid, which slowly does the  disintegration job of such rocks in nature. Experimental research is nevertheless required.

Experimental demonstration?: The corrosive action of acid mine water is well known from mine environments. Additional evidence can be derived from silica gel based stone restoration techniques.  But experimental archaeological studies with Inca stones are required. 

Why did blocks not fuse?:  Maybe the masons slightly moved the upper blocks to verify the quality of silicate redistribution. Experiments are needed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh
On February 5, 2018 at 10:20 PM, Oniomancer said:

I don't recall seeing this particular article discussed before, esp. seeing as how it was only published a little over a month ago. On the face it's more of the same but here they're putting a somewhat new spin on it. Rather than the usual stone melting, the author appears to be  implying the use of so-called acid rock to treat the stone surface after the fact to produce a smooth surface of dissolved and reconstituted mineral, "perfecting the finish" as they put it.

The natural responses to this are,

A, is an acidic pyrite rock solution really capable of dissolving andesite in a short interval?

B. if it's that easy, why are there no accompanying experimental demonstrations?

C.  if this technique was used, why didn't the application co-react between each black, effectively fusing them?

I know where jaylemurph is coming from. When I saw this thread, I immediately remembered an older, similar one:

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carnoferox
4 hours ago, WVK said:

I sent this thread to the author for comment. The reply is as follows:

thank you for your interest. 
Since the  comments on Unexplained-Mysteries.com are quite heterogenous I prefer to give the answer to you.You may pass it on.
Kind regards,
Helmut Tributsch
 
Reliability of the source:
I am retired university professor of physical chemistry, have published approximately 450 papers, some also in Science and Nature. My h-index as scientist is approximately 60, which is quite high and shows that my research has a good standard. I have published many papers on interfacial chemistry and electrochemistry of minerals (www.helmut-tributsch.it), which is relevant for the paper in discussion.
Long ago I have lived for two and a half years in South America, speak quite well Spanish and  know personally most relevant Inca sites in Peru, Bolivia and Chile. I also know numerous mines in these countries and have been involved in biological and chemical mining technology there for international organizations.
 
Choice of journal:
I  was invited by the journal (which I did not know) to contribute a paper and decided to do that a) because the publication fee (which I myself had to pay) was reasonable, and B) because I expected that a young journal is more open for new approaches (many years ago I already tried to publish the same idea-with less supporting evidence-, but referees insisted that the Inca masons were just hammering and polishing)  

Technical questions:

Is acidity sufficient? : low acidity of pyrite mud plus oxalic acid (from added plant material) plus moderate heating may give an enhancement factor of up to one million, compared to humic acid, which slowly does the  disintegration job of such rocks in nature. Experimental research is nevertheless required.

Experimental demonstration?: The corrosive action of acid mine water is well known from mine environments. Additional evidence can be derived from silica gel based stone restoration techniques.  But experimental archaeological studies with Inca stones are required. 

Why did blocks not fuse?:  Maybe the masons slightly moved the upper blocks to verify the quality of silicate redistribution. Experiments are needed.

 

Why doesn't the author come here himself? From his reply it seems that he chose this pseudo-journal because actual journals wouldn't publish this paper. 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

stupid dam editor.  Can't break the quote...

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

I started composing a more detailed reply than this one will be, but this stupid editor just went  crazy and I lost what I'd done, and now won't let me split the dam quote and I can't be bothered to waste more time.  So I shall just briefly point out:

- the first page of Scholarly entries do show Mr Tributsch may have some expertise on the chemistry, but it shows nothing whatsoever on stonemasonry or inca history.  If I was promoting my prowess on those topics, I'd show some existing research I'd done that was more relevant than just geochemistry..

- this is arguable I guess, but imo, and certainly in the circle of scientists I know, NONE of them would stoop to a predatory journal to get something 'published'.  It's the kiss of death, and all you are paying for is not having it reviewed or checked by anyone.  Say Hello to the likes of Rupert Sheldrake and the likes of the fabulous Journal of Scientific Exploration - credibility just oozes out from these 'Journals'..  Being invited by that type of Journal sadly suggests they found out something, like you had lost your job, or were open to 'controversial/tinfoilish' topics...

I particularly loved this part:

Quote

I expected that a young journal is more open for new approaches

Yes, far, far more open to the point that they won't check anything, will 'publish' it on their webpages (just like webhosting really), and take a lot more money off you than a webhosting company would...

And then, hilariously:

Quote

many years ago I already tried to publish the same idea-with less supporting evidence-, but referees insisted that the Inca masons were just hammering and polishing

Golly gosh, Helmut!  Those silly referees, thinking they know more than you..  Well, you showed them!

And then it just gets better!:

Quote

low acidity of pyrite mud plus oxalic acid (from added plant material) plus moderate heating may give an enhancement factor of up to one million

WOWZERS, it MAY give UP TO one million times enhancement???  That's so precise no-one could possibly question it.  I mean, ZERO meets that specification!

Finally:

Quote

Experimental research is nevertheless required

Gee, do ya think?  Perhaps you could have considered doing that before writing your paper, let alone paying to get it slapped on the web.

 

Adding all that up, I would even bother looking at the paper.  Call me shallow, but I call it time-challenged.  And generally my decisions to ignore bad 'research' are 100% correct.

 

BTW, WVK, kudos for getting the page virus-checked and implying that meant it was not predatory.....  You made me chuckle, at least.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WVK
On 2/7/2018 at 12:28 AM, ChrLzs said:

Mr Tributsch

 

On 2/7/2018 at 12:28 AM, ChrLzs said:

 

- the first page of Scholarly entries do show Mr Tributsch may have some expertise on the chemistry, 

http://www.helmut-tributsch.it/person/vita-cv/   

"The problems that Protzen was not able to solve to his satisfaction involved the transportation and handling of the large stones. The fitting process necessitated the repeated lowering and raising of the stone being fitted, with trial-and-error pounding in between. He does not know just how 100-ton stones were manipulated during this stage."

http://www.science-frontiers.com/how-incas-worked-stone.ht  -

Adding all that up, I would even bother looking at the paper.  Call me shallow,

Given the above how about incurious . Perhaps this forum should be subtitled  "Dismissing the mysteries of the ancient world" 

WVK

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph

Well, that enlightening post was def. worth reviving the thread.

--Jaylemurph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

If the Inca could basically mold Stone, how come they’re all different sizes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WVK
On 4/18/2018 at 12:42 PM, jaylemurph said:

Well, that enlightening post was def. worth reviving the thread.

--Jaylemurph

Take two.

Given this:

"The problems that Protzen was not able to solve to his satisfaction involved the transportation and handling of the large stones. The fitting process necessitated the repeated lowering and raising of the stone being fitted, with trial-and-error pounding in between. He does not know just how 100-ton stones were manipulated during this stage."

This response

"Adding all that up, I would even bother looking at the paper. " 

is inappropriate for the stated purpose of this forum

Ancient Mysteries & Alternative History, Discussing the mysteries of the ancient world

 

 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WVK
On 4/18/2018 at 3:25 PM, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

If the Inca could basically mold Stone, how come they’re all different sizes?

I don't believe the paper claims molding of the entire stone:

"The appearance of shiny and glassy Inca stone junctions and interfaces is explained via solidification of in-situ generated or additionally added silica gel"

http://www.openaccessjournals.siftdesk.org/articles/pdf/On-the-reddish-glittery-mud-the-Inca-used-for-perfecting-their-stone-masonry20171230103200.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Roc Koch

From an engineering standpoint I do not see how this is relevant when many feel that the Inca had nothing to do with the advanced stonework found at the bottom of most constructions. I appears that there was indeed a more ancient civilization prior to 13,900 years ago that had access to high advanced technologies that cut and created via computer aided design the lower structures that the Inca later built upon or better yet, layed their stones on top of the underlying great structures. Some do not think the Inca had access to the fine tools necessary to position and move such great works. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats
26 minutes ago, Roc Koch said:

From an engineering standpoint I do not see how this is relevant when many feel that the Inca had nothing to do with the advanced stonework found at the bottom of most constructions. I appears that there was indeed a more ancient civilization prior to 13,900 years ago that had access to high advanced technologies that cut and created via computer aided design the lower structures that the Inca later built upon or better yet, layed their stones on top of the underlying great structures. Some do not think the Inca had access to the fine tools necessary to position and move such great works. 

If they were cut by computer and laser, why were they irregular?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
9 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

If they were cut by computer and laser, why were they irregular?

Because of the ignorance of the poster you replied to.

Harte

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gaden
12 hours ago, Roc Koch said:

From an engineering standpoint I do not see how this is relevant when many feel that the Inca had nothing to do with the advanced stonework found at the bottom of most constructions. I appears that there was indeed a more ancient civilization prior to 13,900 years ago that had access to high advanced technologies that cut and created via computer aided design the lower structures that the Inca later built upon or better yet, layed their stones on top of the underlying great structures. Some do not think the Inca had access to the fine tools necessary to position and move such great works. 

 Whoever wrote the program for that computer was very, very thorough, they even thought to put hammer and chisel marks on the unseen faces of the stone. 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not A Rockstar

We discover effects all the time, so I have no problem with the idea they may have found out that rubbing the surface of stone with x mixture made it really nice and finished in a new and better way. I am of the biased opinion that ancient man was smarter than I was taught they were growing up in very good schools. I am also a fond supporter of earlier civilizations being out there if we knew where to look.

But, I get impatient when alien tech creeps in. It isn't needed. That sort of thing should be entertained only when we find no other possible explanation or on world origin, IMO. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gaden

 I was taught in a rural school, in a very low population, in the late 60's to early 70's. and was never once told that ancient man was not smart.  Quite the opposite, really.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grignr

It's amazing that these aliens came to earth tens of thousands of years ago, and all they could manage to teach the dumb human natives was how to cut and polish stone better than they were already doing it. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.