PACL Image Analysis from (http://isaaccaret.fortunecity.com/)

This report will provide some technical analysis of the PACL image shown with precise marks from AutoSketch. The technical more in depth details of the solution will be made available on a CD at some small shipping and handling cost in the future. After months of analysis of thousands of measurements, it is concluded this image represents an attempt to convey massive amounts of technical information. Below right is a portion of the original image showing the three triangles text marked in the color that they are overdrawn on the left detail AutoSketch drawing. The red triangle on the left is created first using simple algebraic relationships in multiple equations solved collectively in MathCAD solve mode. Similarly, the blue and green triangles are solved using other relationships. Once all precisely drawn and “grouped” in AutoSketch, the dark blue triangle was solved connecting the three triangle center to center distances and defining them precisely in the image. The dark green triangle at the bottom was solved with just angles and then revised when the sides were found precisely enough to establish them as the defining mathematical relationship.

The algebraic and trigonometric relationships are generally quite simple as shown for the red and blue triangle in colored blocks. The solution requires only high school algebra but is much easier using computer software. Once a solution is found, it generally has redundant features confirming that it is the intended solution. Of course, it is one thing for us to “discover these features from measurements” and quite something else for an intelligence to plan them ahead and make the triangles nest up with each other and define the precise location of 9 of the circles which grows the precision in subsequent measures. In most modern engineering operations, very little time is spent on anything other than the most cost-effective way of designing the project. Some times in projects like buildings, there is ample emphasis on the appearance of the building. In those considerations, a dimensionless ratio like phi might come into play because it is thought Mother Nature sometimes uses phi to make things have better appearance to humans. To my knowledge, there rarely is time spent making certain the sums of the dimensionless ratios sum to another number. It simply is not cost effective to take time for what is considered frivolous activities. However, if an advanced intelligence wants to build in some type of “self-deciphering mechanism”, using dimensionless ratios is the best way to introduce it.. On the bottom of the Pacl Image there are some very strange lines we are calling extensions with circles drawn along the length. One can by observation see that the three organizations are very similar, yet are specifically different in lengths and spacing. The comparison below copies the top group in blue and pastes it on the middle and lower groups to show the differences other than the radial length. The multi-circle green group is used as the common pasting point.

Below, arcs from the intersection were drawn to mark the 19 circular events on the upper extension only and provide data that could be copied and pasted in a spreadsheet to follow. It is the data in that spreadsheet that provides some interesting and complex analysis.

These three groups with 19 circular objects on each have a complete mathematical system of their own and are similar to each other but distinctively different. The chart below provides both the accumulated radial distance from the intersection and then the differences which are the increments from one circular event to another. The circular events are numbered from 1 to 19 and only the middle extension is shown complete in this summary report. Note that the blue charts are all very similar, but the values differ. The design had to be done very carefully to make these charts appear so similar. The key items are marked in red. The average of the first incremental length on the middle extension and the last incremental length is shown in the far right as 62.7055. It is very statistically significant that the average of these two middle numbers is almost exactly the same as the 57 overall total sums of all three dimensionless ratios of the three sets of data shown in orange as 62.70577. This is not the only significant comparison event, but is the most conclusive regarding the level of difficulty to make it happen. The dimensionless log ratio of Venus data is (1.4999336 * 4)^(1/2) x 256 /10 = 62.70555 and one has to wonder if that type of communication is intended or accidental.

The charts above right clearly indicate that the design is not a random design as it would be if thrown together artistically just to make the image look enticing. These charts are the plots of the dimensionless ratios that are summed into the orange cells. One can see the patterns are the same but the values are different. Working with the data mathematically did not produce a simple relationship. One can see in the graphical analysis below, however, that there appears to be multiple separate relationships which would greatly add to the complexity of the design. One can see the “system nature” to multiple lines of gradually increasing slope. To be able to make each graph so similar and yet have different values seems very complex and well thought out in advance of making the image. A very elaborate coordinate system would be required to place the objects on the image and allow this type of analysis to be successful while still allowing everything else found to be compatible.

The above analysis provides good basis for “not finding a simple solution”…yet. There can be no doubt that there is a design solution, however. The charts below clearly demonstrate that there is an underlying design and that it must be very complex to accomplish all the different appearances of order that have been observed so far. The sum of the three extension lengths divided by the cube root of the product of the same lengths is a dimensionless ratio. Below is both the “overall radial length from the intersection” and followed by the “incremental lengths”. The charts are very similar and very near a solution equation.

The above analysis appears to confirm that the image was very carefully designed and executed. The image was introduced to the public in 2007 and although claimed to have been developed in the early 1980 era, one must assume it could have been done much later. It is entirely possible that the image was produced with very advanced technology and not scanned and copied as speculated. The latter could be misinformation to discourage the effort taken herein.

In 1979 I was in charge of a 35 person engineering department which we thought was at least state of the art. The department had six staff engineers, about 10 senior engineers and the balance were either senior draftsmen or new engineers. We had a fairly experienced printing department with camera capability for enlarging and the making of reproducible drawings. I was also familiar with the Kaiser Corporate capabilities at headquarters in Oakland, California.

During the next 5 ears substantial progress was made in computer aided drafting and some of the large firms like Boeing had mainframes that did serious computer aided design. However, the experience level of the operators was naturally not that in-depth because of the moving level of the design capabilities. It wasn’t really until about 1990 that there was widespread computer designing being done on PCs at ordinary engineering companies. If the Pacl Image was made in the early 1980s, then it is truly of extra-ordinary precision and repeatability for the capabilities of that era.

On the other hand, there was substantial progress in computer aided design made in the early 2000 era. Further, if the image was created by advanced intelligence above the human level it could also have been done with advanced imaging equipment which perhaps allows it to be so precise and the introductory story is misinformation.

Procedure

The procedure used herein was to download the full size image into MS Paint and then copy and paste it into AutoSketch as an object. Many larger distances are precise to 5 digits and smaller circles are probably repeatable above 3 digits. Image lines can be magnified to individual pixels and the 3 point circle function used to find a circle that fits quite precisely. Certain averaging techniques such as the geometric mean of three dimensions are found by taking the cube root of the triple product. This procedure can add another digit or two of implied precision and frequently functions have been found to six digits.

The image can be “grown to precision” by making an assumption that say the radius of a circle is exactly 5 / pi and then subsequent measures from that circle can be more precise. If the system continues to fit and does not outgrow the graphical fit, then extreme precision can result. That methodology appears to be what the designer had in mind.

Various AutoSketch functions have been used to draw circles, lines, angles and elliptic figures to match up with apparent functions on the image. These drawn lines are then known with much more precision than can be measured repeatedly. These data points are then copied and pasted into Excel spreadsheets and MathCAD data arrays. Fairly complex analysis can then be done in those separate software packages.

It was postulated that something like frequency could have been used as a design basis and using the doubling technique to find octaves of frequency, measurements were doubled a few times to search for a trial and error fitting. If one assumes that a given distance was introduced as a simple function of Pi in one location, then other measurements should reflect other numbers in other locations. If the system repeats enough times, then it is fairly safe to assume that this system was intentional. Of course, just because the numbers fit to something like Pi, we would still not know what the actual units of measure might have been, and don’t really care at this point. The task is to find a design basis, if one exists.

Another way to find design criteria is to examine dimensionless ratios. Any intelligent design that was “purposefully trying to be self-deciphering” would use key objects in dimensionless ratios so they could be found by anybody from any system of units of measure. Finding a working scale seriously increases the information we can glean from the image and certainly assists in finding mathematical relationships.

The first attack, but not the most significant of discoveries, was on the three most dominant group of circles which I have dubbed “dials” as two of them seem to look like dials on some type of control system. These three are the top most dial, top right dial and the top left dial. These dimensions were labeled left2top, top2right and left2right.

The first dimensionless ratio was left2top / top2right = 1.25976 and I noted from previous work that number was fairly close to the cube root of 2 at 1.25992 and that the comparison was 1.0001278 for about 5 digits of precision. The twelfth root of 2 is the foundation of our music system and the cube root of 2 is a pleasing harmonic.

This caused an increased interest and other dimensionless ratios were found such as 1.71824 and 1.21565 which are within almost six digits of 1.71828 and 1.215666. The use of 1.215666 is a simple function of natural log base E and also of Pi. The number 1.215668 is the most abundant wavelength of hydrogen. If intelligence is trying to communicate something, they would not necessarily maintain a rigid accounting of units.

Given the fairly intense use of dimensionless ratios, it seemed that the design very likely used these dial to dial distances as a self-deciphering methodology for the image. This created an intense interest in digging further. The data was entered into MathCAD and some analysis pursued with rigor.

About that same time, a few repeatable measurements indicated a scale factor of 255.561514 for the image in AutoSketch (on my computer only) and the dimensions began to be real numbers of some significance.

After trying many different ratios that didn’t lead anywhere, the use of the geometric mean was tried. This is the cube root of the product of the three dimensions and has the advantage of error averaging. The decision was made to pursue a dimensionless ratio in which the denominator would be the geometric mean. This requires the numerator to be a single unit of length. The obvious trials would be any of the three distances alone.

As it turned out, the first trial used the dimensionless ratio of the left2right divided by the geometric mean and it equaled 1.3038401 and from other work I knew this to be the square root of 1.7 = 1.3038405 which involved amazing precision, aided by using the geometric mean and a lot of luck. This potentially, however, indicates superior precision to what the Isaac introductory story indicates. The rest of the solution was a little mathematically intense and only a cursory discussion is in this report. It will be made available in a more detailed report to follow on a CD mentioned previously. You will have data that you can use in your analysis platforms.

The equation X^(X) = E = 2.71828182845904 solves to the second equation number. This is not a number most people would even recognize but is a system used in solving multiple differential equations. Could the image be pointing to

information that is obviously true but unnoticed to our current level of understanding? The relationship below is about as precise as we know the Jupiter dimensionless ratio of 5.20259xxx..

Note that the “resulting equal-like number” is also close to the 1.2156xxx used in other areas of the image design solution. This may be trying to signal us to look more closely at astronomical data for the solar system and perhaps suggests more complex relationships exist in the solar system data.

The third equation in the triangle model was found simply by repeatedly dividing the denominator from the other two equations by 2 after dividing by pi. The number remaining 37/9 = 4.11111111 is easily noticed and could have been designed to be noticed. We shall see a major usage of 10/9 = 1.11111111 to follow far below.

Just because there are three equations and three unknowns, it is not a guarantee that there is in fact a precise symbolic solution. The reader is invited to use whatever software is available and search for other equations and potential solutions. It would not be surprising if there are other solutions if the design was intended to be found.

The remaining question then is whether an average human would attempt to design this solution into an already highly complex image. If these particular numbers have to interact with other complex relationships, and we will see that they do, then it could get super complex quickly. The quest then continues to find what other hints might be built into the design to make the system self-deciphering.

Continuing on with the rest of the information presented in the triangle image, the largest “image drawn circle” on the top most dial (shown above as the outer red circle) has a radius of 173.574 using the scale developed for the model. Left one can note this number is a 2/3 power of the common number developed from three separate data sources in the triangle area, perimeter and dimensionless ratio involving the sum of two distances. This indicates an interlocking system that is sufficient suggestion of design intention.

The number 2.2868 shown repeatedly above appears to be the glue that ties the whole triangle design together. The bottom equation uses the same format with the geometric mean in the denominator and the sum of the two remaining sides not previously used together. One can see in the perimeter and area equations that the same result is generated. Then to find the most significant circle on the top dial has this same radius taken to the 2/3 power and multiplied by 100 seems to fit overall design criteria quite well. It appears that this image was designed to be solved in this manner. It may be possible to resolve it in other methods and the reader is invited to take it on. One should further note the precision of the measured distances are not as precise as implied by the digits. It is easier to simply copy the number and paste it. The model shows that the measured precision is about 5 digits in the right column when compared to the model.

The Elaborate Bar-Coding on Dials

The dark bars around the outer perimeter of the left top dial have a very noticeable pattern to them with some highly complex ramifications. The discovery process was to draw a precise line at an azimuth of 20 degrees and accidentally the number 200 was drawn. Noting it was quite precisely along the edge of one bar, a few more radial lines were drawn in blue and the system was discovered.

On the right side of the image above one can note that continuing the system downward in green just didn’t work within the precision of the drawing. Then it was noted that the system did in fact work incrementally further down and that there was only one discontinuity between 200 and 200.888888888. Since an increment of 0.888888888 compared to 1.111111111 still fits into a system nature, the lines were drawn with good precision on the left portion in dark blue. One might wonder why any intelligence would use such fractions, but if you start thinking in “seconds of arc” instead of degrees, then the gaps are 4000 secs / 3600 = 1.11111111 degrees. Obviously, the intended precision in this area is in seconds of arc. However, the use of the repeating digits is a highly effective way of capturing attention. This analysis provided sufficient incentive to dig deeper and systems were found in many areas of the 221 major bars. A complete layout is well within reach but only a few more key discoveries will be covered in this initial report.

The precision of the bar azimuths is such that the other side of the bar is a totally different azimuth. But the “hidden or puzzle-like” nature suggests that maybe the precise average of the two sides of the bar may point to a center-line azimuth that might contain the allusive “unknown information”. It is that “puzzle mentality” that shows up all over.

The image above has some striking precision. The 270 azimuth pointing straight down just grazes a faint and tiny bar suggesting 270 is not important in of itself. Measuring clockwise back to the leading edge of the biggest bar on the dial we find the angle 50/pi = 15.915xxx. It seems appropriate that the largest bar should contain something special. But when the other side of the bar didn’t seem to be anything spectacular, the average of the two was noted at 16.605 and clearly that “could be” an indication of usage of the basic atomic mass number 1.66053873 w/o decimals. If that is the case, then some other relationship must show up to confirm it.

As it turns out, there is a bar that has on the downward side an azimuth of 166.66666666 degrees and after averaging the top side, the center line could be 166.053873 degrees which appears to be a secondary use of the atomic mass number. The angle between the azimuth 166.053873 and the differential azimuth (270 – 16.6053873) appears to write a formula which then involves the

(270-x166 / 10 – x166) x 128 /1000 = (3.3435832)^(2)

X166 = 166.0543

mass of the deuteron, the so-called heavy hydrogen nucleus in heavy water. The numbers are a little off the modern Codata numbers but match up fairly nicely with the pre-1986 Codata numbers of 3.34358xx for the deuteron and 1.660543 for the atomic mass number.. This might be an indication that the image was in fact designed to be explored prior to 1986.

One can see that 128 is equivalent to doubling seven times (2^7 = 128) and 1000 balances up the decimals. It would seem fairly remote that this could be accidental and involve mass numbers so precisely. This might be the type of scenario needed to prove the existence of advanced intelligence in the design. If that is the case, then there should be many other similar events, and there are.

Amazing Equation

In the portion of the dial near the top or 90 degree area, there are 15 bars (14 spaces) and a system was sought. By the time that area was approached, many other areas had already been discovered and a general approach established. Draw in the lines as carefully as possible and then look for a starting point. In this area, the starting point is the right most radial at an azimuth of 86.66666666. The next step would be to measure the overall angle and divide it evenly between the 14 spaces between the left sides of the 15 bars. Then one must search for some type of system.

In this case the overall angle was about 14.528 degrees and that divided by 14 spaces gave 1.037714 degrees and it has become routine to double values to look for meaning. The first double is 2.07543 and from other work that number was known to be the number when the speed of light number is subtracted from 3000. (3000 – 2.07543 = 299.792457) Certainly this catches one’s attention such that the incremental angles of the exact number can be drawn and it checks graphically, though that area of the image is lower resolution. Being doubled, it suggests that the number 14 / 2 = 7 might be important.

Now if one wonders what else might be significant about the 14.528 group angle, certainly one would square it as one trial option. 14.528 squared equals 211.063 and that is remarkably close to the hydrogen neutral frequency wavelength of 211.06114 (299.792458 / 1.42040572). It doesn’t take much curiosity to put together the equation in the top of the graphic above. Basically, it says if you take the square root of 211.06114 and divide it by 7000, that number subtracted from 3 yields the speed of light number on the right side again. Replacing the hydrogen wavelength with light speed / hydrogen frequency yields the speed of light on both sides. This equation provides the means to solve for both the speed of light and the hydrogen neutral frequency by trial and error if nothing else.

In the image left the hfsp = 1.4204057516846 was used to solve for the speed of light number and there were two solutions. Strangely, the ratio of the two solutions is very near the neutron mass to proton mass ratio used prior to 1986. One can see that just using that level of precision in the hfsp provides the complete precision to the speed of light number. Note the use of seven squared repeatedly in the solution.

If this equation eventually proves to yield new relationships for the construction of matter, then the Pacl Image has truly produced previously unknown knowledge. This situation is similar to the Swiss school teacher Balmer finding the relationships with hydrogen wavelengths that required Einstein to ultimately explain why it was meaningful.

The scientific community has spent a great deal of time trying to find a Rydberg number that works for all matter but so far it only really works somewhat precisely on a small portion of hydrogen. In the bottom right of the Exact Relationship image above, one can see how the hydrogen wavelengths actually relate to a common standard number which also includes the use of the number 3 in the value 300. Note the purple and green spreadsheet box which shows the Lyman Series abundant wavelengths can be easily calculated using the standard factorial portion of the natural log base E -1 = 1.718281828. This should not happen if the meter evolved randomly.

Graphical Check

The image below uses a graphical methodology to provide proof that the image is very precise and intentional. The magenta dashed line connects 9 different events such as circle centers, tangents and intersections. The right side of the image is just magnified portions for easier viewing. The azimuth is also intentionally slightly off 270 degrees and has a length 2 times the conversion from metrics to English. It seems that this almost certainly indicates some type of “intentional communications”.

There are thousands of similar graphical events. Three point circles that actually go thru 4 or 5 events. There are graphical systems that interlock with each other redundantly. This image was not casually thrown together.

Database Comparison

The following two graphics are from the Excel Database for the dial to dial distances starting at the top and working down so that the distance from the top most dial down to the top right dial, formerly used in the model as Top2Right. Those model dimensions are highlighted in blue.

You can see the column K is summed to 32310.xxx and below that a formula squaring the sum and then dividing by 2 and by a= 1.71828 yields the average number for the two most abundant wavelengths of helium.

In the second chart, using the same formula the first 5 digits of Planck / pi is attained and the similar numbers are highlighted in green.

Then at the bottom there is a comparison of the two chart sums which remarkably hits a prime number 1777 x 100 quite precisely.

There are far too numerous other types of connections to list in this summary but the entire database will be available soon.

Calculating the vertical and horizontal distances from dial center to center data.

Sum Verticals Sum of horizontals

29790.78948 9535.908813

0.3037865 3.1241

1.42041126

The square root of the sum of verticals (29790.78948)^(1/2) divided by 1.42041 and 400 yields the second most abundant helium wavelength of .303786. The ratio of the sum of verticals and horizontals is 3.1241 which is close to the fundamental structural ratio of 3.125 or 100/32 where 32 is 2 doubled 5 times.

Finally, the product of the sum of verticals (29890.7xxx ) and horizontals (9535.9xxx) divided by 2,000,000,000 is 1.42041126. All these events seem far from random and quite unlikely by any intelligence except one that is trying to communicate something. Further, it is exactly what one should expect if the image is a communication device.

Conclusion The reader should decide whether a typical person would or could go to this extreme to create design criteria. The important point from this analysis is to focus on the level of examination one might have to go to for a successful new discovery. A major deciphering of this image might lead to new discoveries far beyond our current technologies. Please watch this site for a coming CD with a more complete database and explanation of findings.

I offer my sincere thanks to Onthefence at the Drone Research Team website for hand holding and image finding and technical ideas.