self reflecting ©

CROPCIRCLE RESEARCH

Hackpen Hill, August 26th 2012.

Hackpen Hill, 26-8-2012. Picture: Simon Brown.
Thanks to cropcircleconnector.com.

Mind the mind of ascension.

This brilliant formation has stunned people in amazement for its most superb design and quality in the way that it was made. It is what we call the obvious Grand Final for the cropcircle season at the year of years 2012. Precise analysis reveal even much more brilliancy involved then meets the eye at first glance, which, by the way, is characteristic for a lot of cropformations.

I have split this article into two parts. Part 1 concerns a technical reconnoitring of the design. Part 2 is about interpretation.

PART 1.
(Technical aspects)

In main terms we speak of a cube surrounded by a ring. The cube looks like being constructed with the use of multiple little cubes. At the outlines of the major cube we find the little cubes are open, and thus showing their framework. The cube seems to float on a circular background which is beautifully textured by woven bunches of golden crop. Looking at the ring, it seems broad and is cut by a most delicate fine and sharp circle. This fine circle lays just enough out of center to connect the inside with the outside of the broad ring.

Diagram.

As we will see, the Hackpen Hill formation has an abundance of numbers to it. Besides the very basical numbers 6, 8 and 12 that a normal cube delivers, (6 sides, 8 corners and 12 edges) this Hackpenn cube offers us many more numbers due to the use of little cubes while all derived from aswell a two-dimensional perspective as from an imaginairy three-dimensional perspective. The ambivalence between 2-D and 3-D will play a crusial role in this study. Talking about numbers, from the two-dimensional perspective we should, at least to make a start, think in terms of squares or diamonds that can be counted. Ofcourse, counting is also possible while seeing the figure as a three-dimensional object, only than we speak in terms of little cubes or blocks.

Numbers derived from counting units. In 2D the counted units are diamonds or squares,
in 3D they are cubes.

Noteworthy is a difference between opened and closed surfaces. This distinct from each other seems meaningfull and according a certain order. To be concrete; opened surfaces seem to belong to blocks that define the outside edges of the total cube.

Although the overall sight of the large cube perfectly well, a closer inspection will reveal that 13 of the little open cubes are somehow "impossible" in terms of perspective. They seem by the shape of their inner construct, to be misplaced in the greater context of the actual large cube. They seem to be false cubes or impossible cubes. To say it in judgemental words; they are wrong!

   
Left: Diagram as from the original cropformation.
Right: Diagram as would follow expected logic or harmony.

But wait a minute. Would we take the outside cubes away (outside only according 2D perspective), than it becomes possible to look at this picture as if we are looking at a top corner inside a room or box. In other words; we see ourselves confronted with an interior. In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with that. It only turns out there's a conflict between the inside and the outside.

   
Left: Like outside a box. Right: Like inside a room. (the UFO is a light-ornament)

Considering the artwork a masterpiece as seldom seen before, this conflict will most likely be intended. We will soon proof this to be the case indeed, but first I want to continue with exposing some more related numbers.

Numbers derived from counting the outside category in 2D.

Numbers derived from counting the outside category in 3D.
(It means all the visible aswell as the imagined cubes at the backside are counted.)

Why can we say that the conflict between inside and outside is intended? When we compare the outer ring with the strange cube, we find again a twist in the perspective. It seems like the ring is inverted. As if the backside is turned in such way that it is partly showed at front. Just as the little 13 cubes seem to do, it is turned inside out. This "inside out" or "inversion" correspondance is only just a first indication that underlines my thesis of intended impossibilities.

   
Left: Inversed ring showing both sides at the same time.
Right: Inversed ring seems also an invitation for further expansion!

Besides an inversion correspondance, we also find a correspondance in sizes. As the right diagram shows, the ring seems almost like an invitation for expending the cubic construct. At the same time, we notice the small cubical unit as presented for the demonstration, sliced in a particular way. I guess we can say that's all part of dualistic involvement. Still, it leaves us with plenty new directions for contemplation.

For now, I stick with the search for another indication of intented impossibilities. As we might have experienced while looking at the diagrams related to counting, a severe case of short-circuiting in the head is possible when it comes to placing the central little cube. We can not be sure if we are looking at a real cube or an interior or elements of neighbouring blocks. Or even elements of neighbouring blocks of neighbouring blocks!

   
Left: Something hard to wrap the head around.
Right: A subjective correction towards an option.

In an attempt to wrap the head around it anyhow, one of several options will be to compare the single isolated cube with a cluster of 8 little cubes. What becomes evident than, is that our central cube turns out to be a clear impossebility.

   
Compound cubes with rows of an even number of blocks can not contain an central block.
Eight cubes each missing 1/8 part in such way an extra cube would fit.

Would we insist on a central cube in 3-D reality, the cluster of 8 blocks would have to offer some space, making them incomplete cubes. I hope the above diagrams demonstrate clearly enough what I'm trying to tell.
However, it is fact that compound cubes with rows of an even number of blocks can under no circumstance contain a central block.

Having extrapolated on this so-called central cube, we seem to have reached another indication for expressing an intended impossibility. This time the impossebility turns out only impossible in the context of a false premise. There was only the assumption of a little cube at the center!

As we have discovered there's the potential for expension, and also, as we have followed stages or steps of growth, we find that with each growing stage, there appears "a conflict" between the existance and non-existance of a little center unit. I mean to say, that in case of rows made of an úneven number of blocks, a centerstone is possible after all...

Let's continue the thread of related numbers. Now it's gonna get really fascinating!

On the day the formation got reported, that was August 26, I awoke that morning with a subtle voice telling me; "twenty-six". Somehow I knew the Grand Final had arrived and that this number would be a key to it. Intuïtively I felt there would be more to 26 than only just the date of reporting.

The day before, I had been working on a chapter about segments in cropcircles formed by tramlines. Ofcourse, I could not resist counting the segments in this flabbergasting late summer present too. It turned out with staggering results! The outer ring consisted of 26 segments. More precisely, two times 13 segments! In order to find the segments we have to involve the tramlines that cut the various elements of the design. The picture below will show what I mean.

Two times thirteen segments to be found in a special ring.

So, we have an outer ring of 13 segments at the front and another 13 at the backside made visible by the special inversive twist, to be compared with 13 inversed little cubes at the front of the large cube... Does it take much fantasy to imagine that another 13 little cubes can be found at the back of the large cube? No matter how these hidden little cubes at the backside would look like, the 2 times 13 plús 2 times 13 is ways to coïncidential to be called coïncidence here!

Also, this striking find is a clear indication that the inverted cubes are no mistake, but intended.

Another clue concerning 26 in related to the formation is that the number represents the sum of all the basic numbers of a cube. So, 6 sides plus 8 lines plus 12 corners, these taken together make 26.

As we managed to count the segments of the ring, it would be half work not to count the tiles in the actual cube or interior. Doing so, we find a wall of 27 segments. Another wall of 28 segments and funny enough a wall containing 27 ór 28 segments. Although I am not sure about the significance of these numbers, they nevertheless appeal somehow. Is it coïncidence these numbers 27 and 28 are the follow up of 26? Maybe. Or maybe a hint towards a certain expanding?

Total in white; 28 segments, in pink; 27 segments, in yellow; 27 or 28.

Maybe, it is worth mentioning about Red Collies reflection on this formation. He stated that at each side 20 open cubes can be counted. In his vision these little open cubes represent square roots of 2. That means 20 times square root of 2, makes 20 times 1,414 is same as 28,28. That's an intruiging number after having found two times 28. Or have we not found?

An arbitrairy descision to be made?

I remember a huge cropformation at the same Hackpen Field, in 2008 it was, that used only one standing stalk in its center to represent a whole segment!

Whatever is the case, when square rooting is involved, it means that there's something going on with diagonals. Searching in that direction leads us to another fascinating reflection. It was given by Bnktop Mahbko (don't let me pronounce) who demonstrated how the three days earlier formation at Oxleaze Combe would match with each side of our cubic system.

   
Left: Oxleaze Copse, 2012. Right: Interesting projection by Bnktop Mahbko from Russia.

Taking this projection a little further, we would easily recognise that the wider background disk at the Oxleaze Combe formation should in a 3D representation as a cube is, be placed at the very core of the cube. Food for mathematicions I would think. More in particular the ones that are obsessed with squaring the circle. They now might have some tool to cube the ball?

   
The projection a little further. (Two options.)

The ball seems quite small compared to the cube. (B.t.w.; note that the diagram doesn't show the exact size due to the squeezing towards 3-D) Maybe, we should not cube the ball, but square it? Questions, questions and questions as usual... I suppose a profound study of the Oxleaze Combe formation would be of great help. Talking of great help; in line with the suggestion of squaring curved objects, I múst attend you on an insight delivered to us by Bert Janssen.

   
An explanation about the thin mystery circle. © Bert Janssen.

Under the title of "the thin circle mystery", Bert explains; the diagram on the left shows the formation with "squaring the circle" superimposed on it. The diagram on the right shows the circle shifted to the right. Notice how it exactly overlaps the thin circle. The thin circle in the formation is part of a hidden "squaring the circle"!

The axis is slightly turned in relation to highest and lowest point of the thin circle.

Another feature of the thin circle can be considered its diameter. Would we want to connect the most upper point with the lowest point, we find quite a marge in how to do that. The most obvious way to draw that line, is by assuming the closest axis in the cube will get us there. It could indeed be right, but I don't accept it as a certainty just because it seems so. After having inspected the points of cutting, (or meeting) of the thin circle with both the outside as inside edge of the broad ring it turns out that the most upper point and the most lower point are slightly out of position compared to the assumed axis based on the cube. It seems a difference of about 2 degrees. Although it is hard to locate the exact cutting (or meeting) points, I am sure enough that we can speak of a slight turn here. Keep the idea of "a slight turn" in mind...

We have seen the thin circle been cutting the broader ring in numberal segments. It would also provide an inversed perspective from which we could say that it shows frontside and backside resulting in inside and outside at the same time. After that, Bert proofs us, it is a squared circle. Also, we just found a slight turning idea. Would one think it is all the information that can be gained from it, than let me share with you again another way of looking at the thin circle.

Separating the two crescents formed by the thin circle cutting the broad ring, we can easily speak of "moon crescents". Curious enough the formation appeared in a month that had two times a full moon. The second full moon is called a blue moon. That was on friday 31. It is, as the saying "once in a blue moon" indicates, a rare occasion when that happens. Ofcourse this blue moon phenomenon can only occur in our Gregorian calendar. Would we have a much more natural calendar such as the Mayan Tzolkin calendar, no months could have twice a full moon, as there would be 13 months of 28 days.

Talking about the Tzolkin calendar, which is a calendar based on mooncycles, I repeat: "MOONCYCLES", isn't it intruïging to find these numbers 13 and 28 popping up again?

To my estimation, we have contemplated enough over the moony rings now, to return to the cube or interior again. Seeing it in contrast to its pretty woven background, I have to say that somehow it occurs heavy and dark to me. Also, it looks quite closed as only the edges contain little open cubes or whatevers. Almost from the beginning that I saw the pictures, I had a feeling that another phase could be inserted. The cube as a whole could be more open and therefore less solid. It could become even more beautiful than it allready is. I posted a few suggestions in that direction, quietly hoping that maybe a second stage would happen, but it didn't. At least, not anything dramatic.

It was while having found these numbers 27, 28 and a doubtfull 27 or 28, that I thought a change in the night between 27 and 28 of august would be very much possible. As just stated, no real difference was the case. Or was it, after all? A little grapeshot was reported by Andrew Pyrka at the edge of the field at the date of 28! Such a phase was not as spectacular as I hoped, but nevertheless, additions like these can hold important clues.

Grapeshot at August 28. © Andrew Pyrka

   
Left: Grapeshot from distance aligns with one edge of the construct. © Black
Right: The alignment shows two bends. © Black

In this case there is a relation between the formation, the grapeshot and the surrounding landscape. It seems about similarity in bends. One bend (of the road) top hill, the other bend (of the formation) down below. So, with this up and down, another duality is added to inside and outside, or frontside and backside. Also, we can recognise another "slight turn", remember?

The idea of turning the structure, or the ability for turning, adds new perspectives for interpretation ofcourse. Earlier in the 2012 season, I was highly fascinated by a formation close to Liddington, that to my opinion relates a lot to the Hackpen Hill formation. It seems to also speak about cube, perspective and turning.

Liddington, july 1 2012. © Peter March

The Liddington formation presents a construction that will hardly be recognised as cubic, but with closer observation we might discover a little cube around its center. As it seems part of multiple little cubes, we somehow must accept this center has basicly the same construct features as the Hackpenn center. Only here the little cubes fade away in a perspective warp (or stretch if you like).

   
Center of Liddington formation. Left: © Peter March. Right: © Randell.

In case we zoom in deeper on the center of this formation, we find something very subtle. The three paths that come together at the very midpoint demonstrate a play with the thickness of used lines. As I was lucky enough to have visited this formation, I am able to show some detailed pictures of what I mean.

   
Lefthand lines versus righthand lines. © Randell

There is some kind of twist-effect involved by the way these three paths connect. It is done by using the sidelines of the paths. Exactly the edge between the standing and flattened crop can be considered a line in itself. So, each path has two sidelines. When you walk towards the center, you have a (border-)line on your lefthand and one on your righthand. The lefthand lines seem to find eachother closer to an exact midpoint than the righthand lines. Also, the triangle these lefthand lines form, seems flipped or inversed compared to the righthand triangle. This means that we need to imagine extra lines in case we want to find the exact midpoint. These lines should be constructed somewhere at the left half of the paths. Further inspection of the Liddington formation would show that various other and real manifested lines correspond with this subtle flip or twist at the center.

To return to the Hackpen Hill formation; we find also a twist at its very center. I find it hard to judge on whether the same kind of left-side/right-side movement suggestion takes place, but than, there's a beautiful tightly swirled bunch of stalks that does provide a turning feel anyway. So, the swirl representing the midpoint might be telling us that the little misconstructed cubes can get transformed towards harmonious ones, indeed.

   
Center of Hackpen Hill formation. Left: © Simon Brown. Right: © Brigitte Williams.

Sometimes the events that matter jump in while writing... Straight after having supposedly finished this part of the article by having concentrated on the possible dynamics involved at the center, new material reaches me from Brigitte Williams who had just revisited the formation. She had found two extra swirls added to the center!

To me this event is confirming my idea about a "turning point or flip point". It shows a "before" and an "after" the actual turn. This means, the swirls are able to represent the exact corner points of the cubic structure that are in visual line with the center. One new swirl would be the closest corner, the other new swirl the corner that is furthest away. This additional event shows a clear progression towards a "turning" or a "flipping" if you like. It can be considered a duality aspect added to a neutral center. As we see, there's always synchronicity stuff involved in the continuüm.

New swirls found on 9-9-2012 at the center of the Hackpen Hill formation.
Picture; © Brigitte Williams.

PART 2.
(Interpretation)

The main theme of this formation can be thought of as "the cube". At least the main impression of the formation remains a cube, even if, as we have discovered, it turns out an optical illusion.

A cube in general represents a state of perfection. The highest reachable cultivation of "the ball". It can be considered the solid of all solids. A mind-construct or projection about evolutionary completion. The cube could also represent the universe or heaven.

Hackpen Hill, 2012 © Lucy Pringle.

To me, the formation seems a product of the same school that was responsible for the formation that depicted a Penrose Triangle in 2005 at Waden Hill. The Penrose triangle represents "impossebility in its purest form". There are many features in both cropformations that match, although they are under the surface of superficial observation. Also the formation at Sugar Hill has the same excellence as these two and reveals the same problem of impossebility.

   
Left: Waden Hills Penrose triangle formation. © Peter Sorenson.
Right: The excellent Sugar Hill formation. © Steve Alexander.

The way the cube is depicted at the Hackpen formation makes it obvious to talk of a construct, as it seems build up by multiple little cubes. Also, some of these cubes are opened so that frames are visible. It is funny how the cube as a whole adaptes the idea of a framework aswell. "The frame of mind", springs into my frame of mind here.

The cropcircle cube, because it is build up by little cubes, has a lot in common with the famous "Rubic's Cube". It is certainly worthwhile to overthink Rubic's brilliant invention in all its aspects, as it can provide us a better understanding of certain idea's behind the formation, such as "balancing between rolling (or turning) and blocking".

Reaching a better understanding.

Most significant for the interpretation is the idea of multiple little cubes versus one overall cube, being the sum of all the little ones. This idea can easily be transposed onto, for example, the structure of society. In other words; "the system". Many individuals organised together, form a massive overall structure that mirrors, more or less, each individual. Another example could be the living cells of an organism forming an organ, or the organism as a whole.

As far as the little cubes are concerned, I like to stick for a while with the idea of understanding them as mind-concepts or character-structures. Our frameworks or constructs of the mind. The conditioned mind-sets from which we operate through life. It becomes apparent that these individual constructs are made out of influences or experiences from something much bigger than we are. At the same time, we create a much bigger construct on the base of our individual choises. Unfortunatly, we don't always oversee the consequences of our creative force. Maybe, the formation stimulates our ability to view wider skies.

Interpreting the cubes as mind-constructs should in my opinion not get confused with seeing them as human beings. It might be usefull to understand that people can change their minds, or tune in on existing mind-constructs. Therefor, thinking in terms of mind-constructs is one level closer to the scource of things. Cropformations, in my understanding, usually tend to lead us to scource information, automaticly making multiple interpretations possible.

I won't question what it is, that our minds are aiming for. Consequently, I won't preach about the conditions of our poor little minds. So, no answers are available here concerning luck, control, knowledge, love, lust, power or what else is there we can be puzzled with.

Very essential to the design of the formation is the troubling 13 inversed or illusionary cubes. It seems that, if there's a message to be read here, it would be about distorted harmonics.

Very essential to the design of the formation is the troubling 13 inversed cubes. It seems that, if there's a clear message to be read here, it would be about distorted harmonics.

"Disrupted harmony", a monumental painting that I made many years ago.
© Randell

The message would be about the meaning and the influence of the 13 impossible frameworks towards the bigger picture. These mis-constructs or mis-concepts challenge the viewer most probebly on an almost emotional level. They don't fit in our sub-conscious feel for harmony. It could even occur to us, there's the big "Y" or "WHY" question at stake.

Still, we have found out, it is all a matter of perception. The 13 can be viewed as serving the logics of expressing an interior. In that perspective it makes the 30 outside cubes the disharmonic misfits.

So, in other words, unless both directions of perception want to be percieved, one or the other will be considered "negative". Thus, it might aswell be the case that the Hackpen cosmogram communicates about the vital question; "why do we have to deal with disharmony?" It seems to me, a great part of the answer has just been given. We percieve things in the way we want to percieve them. "Positive" and "negative" are just labels we prefer to use for subjective reasons.
Although, things do not seem to fit with eachother, at the same time they co-exist next to eachother in some logical order. We have seen that there are certain functions to the opposing directions. Also, it seems as if the number 13 functions here as the ultimate transformer of the whole problem. (I consider the central cube being the thirteenth of the inverted group.)

Towards the center, it is the "order" of 13 that we see ourselves confronted with. A statement like this can easily remind us to the teachings of Jesus Christ and his 12 apostles. Related to this idea, there's the general accepted association with number 13 as being the number of death. The number that supersticious people prefer to avoid as it stands for serious misfortune. It was Jesus taking in the 13th position enabling him to teach the resurrection.

The last supper of Jesus Christ and his 12 apostles.

Accepting the central little cube as our number 13, it seems as if we are facing the heart of all illusions. It is a non-existing cube looking like an existing one.
In terms of character-building, it calls for self-sacrifice. Let me state that the art of self-sacrifice should not get confused with suïcide in the most direct sense. It is much more appropriate to think in terms of dying multiple deaths during a complete lifetime. Self-reservation is maybe another usefull term here. In this context, the thirteenth speaks of a certain death and also the illusion of death followed by the overcoming of death. (or should I say the overcoming of illusion?)

Concentrating on cube 13, we could even think of an "anti-christ" in case we look at it from an inverted point of view. It could be a massive black hole, a heart of darkness as a cosmic necessarity that needs to oppose the light for the sake of creations diversity. In that case we percieve the little cube as a little liar, while the total formation exposes the center of all conflict.

From the Crowley Tarot deck; number 13, Death.

Whatever it might represent, it is exposed to the light of at least cropcircle enthousiasts and will certainly find its ways to greater amounts of people. Instead of "constructors" we find "obstructors" possessing a center of organisation and this, as pointed out, the other way around aswell, simply depending on what we hope to find or try to realise! Transfer this onto the continuïng conflict between the so-called "believers" and the so-called "debunkers" that the cropcircle community seems so rich of, and maybe one day we might overcome this tragic stupidity...

The 12 zodiac signs.

Another idea that is also deeply installed in the collective subconscious, and that carries a number of 12 grouped around a most important center, is that of the 12 starsigns, the zodiac, spinning around the earth, or the sun. Maybe, the abstact expression of the formation has it to embrase both idea's? I mean, the Christ between his disciples ánd the earth/sun surrounded by the starsigns? In astrology, the 12 zodiac signs represent in essence 12 differend illusions to overcome. I give it a fairly good chance, the idea of 12 apostles is based on exactly the same idea. Teachings to become master over 12 basic illusions. The number 13 has to be the absolute master over these illusions. He or she embodies all 12. It is the transformer for the 12. Also, the twelf edges or outside lines that a cube has, can refer to the same idea.

Untill here, we have associated our cube of crop with a model of a perfect universe. We have associated it with earlier formations, depicting the impossebility in its purest form and the endlesness of a most impressive starfractal (Sugar Hill). We have thought of the cube as a frame of mind. We noted the similarity with the rubic's cube. We mentioned the structure of society and natural organisation. Concentrating on the challenging 13, we associated with the teachings of Christ, with death as an illusion, and with disrupted harmony. Also, we associated with the centerpoint of the 12 zodiac-signs.

Having summed up these, there's one more association I would like to extrapolate on. In fact the "model of the universe" that I started with, can be considered similar or close related to it. I'm talking about the Kaballa.

The mystical tree of life that embodies the tree of knowledge, has many angles and features to look at. Because of that, the Kaballa has many varieties in its schematic representations. Due to this multiple applicability, the following pictogram I found usefull to tell about the basical order of light, dark and everything that's in between these's extremes.

The Kaballa tree projected onto the formation.

On top we find a white sphere, in kabbalistic terms called a "sephira". As white contains all the colours of the lightspectrum, it might aswell represent the light itself. To the left there's a black sephira that can, ofcourse, be associated with darkness. Between the light sphere and the dark sphere there's another stage, the grey sephira. It won't be difficult to understand that many differend greys can be found due to the degree of shading.

It is with the many degrees of shading, something interesting takes place that is about the nature of colour. Colours are all based on the breaking of light. It all has to do with textures that create differend shades. In essence, and as hard as it may be to understand, objectivly spoken, in reality everything has only greytones, due to the breaking of light. It is by the limitation of our senses, more in particular our vision, that we translate all the greyish superfine textures to a lovely illusion of colour. But it in essence it is said to be a psychic phenomenon.

Observation of colour is only just a psychic or psychological attribute. And in the context of this formation; so is observation of three dimensionality...

The limitations involved by the use of basicly ór standing, ór flattened crop, I always found a very interesting aspect of cropformations. Although there have been cases of special treated surfaces, (both in lay as in standing crops) usually there's hardly anything else but the direct contrast between light and dark surface. It expresses the idea of mirroring scource information. As if it is to us, to add colours (colour of interpretation?) or not. It can be us, projecting our subjectiveness to the textures.

The Kabbala system demonstrates more or less the same idea, when the colours are brought in only at the lower planes. Also, it does it in a very orderly way, which can be of great help to understand the laws of harmonics in colour-compositions. First we see the three primary colours red, bleu and yellow. Than, on again a lower plane, we find the basic complementairy colours of the primary ones. These complementary colours are necessarily mixed colours. Concentrating on cubic expression, we can manipulate the idea towards the next diagram.

A cube of colourfull order.

This 2012 cropcircle-season has, according to me, produced quite some hints leaning towards the idea of a colour-spectrum involved. When we turn back to the Liddington formation, it becomes necessary to say it came in two phases. Remarkable to the first stage was the use of light lines and dark lines. The difference simply occured by the use of variety in thickness of its lines. At inspecting its center, we already came to the use of variety in thickness of lines. Only now we understand a little more about it.
The idea of shading was manifest at this first phase.

At the second phase, a clear thirth tone appeared. Or actually fourth tone I should say, as the standing crop needed to be considered as the initual colour-tone Than thin lines looked dark or black. Wider lines or surfaces of flattened crop looked light or white. Now, at the second phase, new surfaces of flattened crop added some sort of layer of transparent light green over the picture. The earlier "white" had died, stomped by many visiters under rainy conditions and later dried out so that it became more yellowish. The new layer of flattend crop seemed more green than at the first layer of flattened crop, because the stalks had grown and became deeper green.

Poppies! Ogbourne Down, july 29 2012.

Another obvious play with colours can be noticed at the "poppies formation" near Four Mile Clumb at Ogbourne Down. Never before in the cropcircle history we have seen a formation in a red poppyfield. Luke Falcon explains to us, on Crop Circle Connector, that a "retinoic acid molecule" together with a lens, is expressed by the formation. Retinoic acid is found in poppies and important to eye- and DNA-health. It has the same chemical structure as vitamine A and vitamine A Aldehyde.

Further investigation has learned me that one of the main qualities of retinoic acid is that it saves visual pigment effects. I'm not sure what that exactly means, but it definitly tickles my imagination, while it supports the "cropcircles speak of colours" theory.

More formations that relate to the shading or use of colours, I present here, but without comments as I already seem to drift away from the actual study of the Hackpen Hill formation. I assure there are more formations than exposed here, very likely related to the theme.

Back to the kaballistic interpretation, one very essential direction in Kaballa is numberology. I believe the numbers 26 and 13 have had enough explanation by now. So, I would like to continue with some other important numbers derived from the Hackpen glyphe, but only after mentioning that traditionally, the 10 sephiroth together with the 22 paths, give us the most direct numbers associated with Kaballa. These two numbers taken together make 32. We have seen that number before in a very outspoken way at another Hackpen Hill formation. That was in 2003.

Besides the hint "26" as it was given to me from the so-called subconscious plane, another number from the subconscious region appeared to me later on at my intensive study. It was "33" as supposedly important to look at.