Earlier this year, I viewed a lecture by Nassim Haramein on YouTube, in which he briefly discussed the Arecibo Reply and the 2000 Chilbolton formation. I would soon learn that there were a total of 3 formations spread out over 3 years. But mostly I was fascinated with the 2000 circle. I started to work trying to decipher the message. Most of my efforts have been focused on the 2000 glyph (which seemed to be at the heart of the entire series), and that is what I will, mostly, be covering here. Unfortunately, all I have is a very close approximation, because the material needed to produce an exact replica, does not exist.

I'm offering this info for anyone who might want to render this on their own. I accept the risk of being super boring.   While working out the geometry I decided to use a diameter of 2789.52px, as this was the diameter communicated in the Arecibo Response of 2001. This may have been a mistake, which I will explain a bit later in the analysis. Computing the diameters of the overlapping circles, is not too difficult, but there are some differences. It helps to further break down the glyph into 3 systems.

The center element is unique. Think of it as a guide for computing the rest of the formation. Starting from the outer-most circle, the diameter here is 2789.52, which we'll call X. Then there is circle A, which is slightly smaller than X and can be approximated as 2789.52 * 25/26 (2682.23). When you subtract A from X you get approximately 107. This is important because all other circles with borders, the diameter of the border circle is always calculated by adding 107 to the diameter of the circle being bordered (I hope that's clear). Circles I,II are computed using sin of 48 degrees. Which also, is important, because with the exception of the center element, all circles are tilted approximately 48 degrees. The diameter of III is simply the square of the cubic root of X. And finally, there are two B circles that are 180 degrees from each other, and their diameters can be approximated as A/1.732 (or the square root of 3). Now, the B circles are bordered, and those diameters are 107 + A/1.732.

The sprites are clearly not part of the overall geometry, they are their own thing. Each sprite is always composed of 3 circles decreasing in size as they move outward. Also, the first and largest circle, is always centered with respect to a local element of the main glyph. When mapping them, I noticed there were two sets on either side of the crop circle that were different from the others. While all other groups generally point to the opposite side, these two pointed out and away from the crop circle. Around the time I was analyzing the sprites, I had already began to wonder if a "literal" message was being encoded. But, I had no idea yet how to read. However, outing these two groups of sprites as possible "delimiters" was the start to deciphering that message.

When I had just started working on this, I could not help but notice the fractal-like appearance of the main glyph. Attempting to describe it in an equation, I first formulated x^2 - 3x + 4 initially. But I have found that it more closely matches what is called a Tribonacci Sequence (1,1,2,4,7,13,24...), of which there are 4 processes (the 4 lobes of the main glyph).
 

Back to the sprites. So at some point, I noticed that if I drew lines from the "eyes" present in circle types B & D, I could draw through a sprite set. In fact, I could draw a line through 3 sprite sets, and the lines drawn would be equally spaced (nice and neat) AH-HA! I could see the sprites as a base-3 code, where each set encoded 1 digit between 0 and 2. If you start from the delimiters and read away from it, you can generate a string of these digits. The first one I did was the lower left quadrant which was 0112222 (actually at the time, it was something else, there were a number of errors when I first attempted this, but I think they're fixed now), and in base-10 that number is 404. Now you'll notice that not all sprites are the same, there are three different sizes for the first and largest circle. The way I have interpreted this, is that number or series of numbers are not "whole". So with this, ultimately, the numbers pulled out, in base-10 were:

2.26
724.2
0.149
404

 
I later found that if the numbers were seen on a scale of nanometers, they could be describing physical properties. 404nm and 724.2nm are wavelengths in the visible spectrum, and represent violet and red, respectively. On a hunch I went looking for atomic diameters around 0.149nm (or radii of about 0.075nm) and found it to be between the elements Carbon and Nitrogen.

So now, it appears an atomic element is being described here. And that element is something like Carbon or Nitrogen. I would Love to know what the lower and upper spectral lines of say Carbon-14 is, but I have not been able to find that information anywhere. I think that other clues here like 48 is referring to the 6 protons and 8 neutrons of C14. In addition, the 2789.52", supposed, diameter of the alien communication device, happens to be almost exactly half of the C14 half-life (5580years). Although that half-life has been revised since the 2000 crop circle appeared.

But then the question was, how could this be anything to do with an atom, aren't atoms spherical?  The atomic nucleus: Fissile liquid or molecule of life? -- ScienceDaily  In 2012, a French team proposed a theoretical nucleus for Neon-20. They also produced an image, that showed it's shape, along with a color function to indicate proton distribution (+ charge) and it looked like this:

And wouldn't you know it, it's a beautiful fit for our suspected Carbon-14!



Now, there is still a problem with that 2.26 number up there. I can't find a home for it. My best guess is that it's a reference to electron sub shell capacities.. but for that to be correct the sequence should be more like 2,2,6, and it's not. So, maybe someone can come along and clarify that one.

If we can conclude that the 2000 Chilbolton formation is communicating an advanced understanding of the Carbon-14 nucleus, it would be difficult to credit it's construction to pranksters. The fact that research, 12 years after the fact, seems to agree with the layout of the main glyph, is compelling. But too many questions remain to conclude whether or not this is alien in origin.

All I have left to say to you now is, I hope that this was informative.
And
Live Long and Prosper ;)

Michael F. Gray of Las Vegas, NV.