Pyramids and the speed of light

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

And of course since a meter is approximately one 40 millionth the circumference of the Earth, that part isn't a problem to begin with.

Actually it is approximately? Can you show anything that would demonstrate that the AE even considered the earth a globe - their religious writing don't. Could you tell me how they would have figured out the measurement of the earth or the speed of light in meters without evoking aliens or advanced technological societies?

Again you have a line going around twice in two different places so any place it passes thru could be said to 'have been built to 'show the speed of light in meters' - not just its passing thru one side of one pyramid.

Why ignore all the other?

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

They used the 10,000 kilometers between the poles and equator, maybe meters were measured running?
Had they used the modern value for the speed of light 299792458 their Pi equation would have yielded 3.14159455.
If you are interested in this kind of stuff check out the "Bent pyramid" sequel puzzle.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
However, I think I have managed to establish that the probability that they used degrees is not very low. It's not 100% certain either. But it's not "lottery jackpot" odds uncertain either. It falls within a range that makes it suitable for use as an ATS fringe hypothesis.

That's all it needs to do here.

And of course since a meter is approximately one 40 millionth the circumference of the Earth, that part isn't a problem to begin with.

Actually, if you look at the tombs of the finest Egyptian astronomers before the age of Cleopatra (when they used Babylonian metrics), you can see that they didn't measure the sky very accurately at all. They had no formal observatory buildings and the star tables they left are so poor in terms of accuracy that we can't determine what a lot of the things that they were looking at were.

A tour of the tomb of Hatshepsut's royal astronomer (chief astronomer)

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
However, I think I have managed to establish that the probability that they used degrees is not very low. It's not 100% certain either. But it's not "lottery jackpot" odds uncertain either. It falls within a range that makes it suitable for use as an ATS fringe hypothesis.

That's all it needs to do here.

And of course since a meter is approximately one 40 millionth the circumference of the Earth, that part isn't a problem to begin with.

Actually, if you look at the tombs of the finest Egyptian astronomers before the age of Cleopatra (when they used Babylonian metrics), you can see that they didn't measure the sky very accurately at all. They had no formal observatory buildings and the star tables they left are so poor in terms of accuracy that we can't determine what a lot of the things that they were looking at were.

A tour of the tomb of Hatshepsut's royal astronomer (chief astronomer)

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
However, I think I have managed to establish that the probability that they used degrees is not very low. It's not 100% certain either. But it's not "lottery jackpot" odds uncertain either. It falls within a range that makes it suitable for use as an ATS fringe hypothesis.

That's all it needs to do here.

And of course since a meter is approximately one 40 millionth the circumference of the Earth, that part isn't a problem to begin with.

Actually, if you look at the tombs of the finest Egyptian astronomers before the age of Cleopatra (when they used Babylonian metrics), you can see that they didn't measure the sky very accurately at all. They had no formal observatory buildings and the star tables they left are so poor in terms of accuracy that we can't determine what a lot of the things that they were looking at were.

A tour of the tomb of Hatshepsut's royal astronomer (chief astronomer)

My your second reply is so much better than you first. If I was a crafty AE overseer and wanted to 'pass on' information that meant absolutely nothing to me. I'd write it down in multiple places, use diagrams and ensure it was so important to the priest hood that they'd repeat it ad nauseum. Not put in a building and hope somebody in the distant future would create measuring systems equal to his own and which was not marked in anyway....

It was also very lucky that the AE ancestors moved into the Nile valley thousands of years earlier or they couldn't have been able to marked out the info....lol.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
But ... also no reason to doubt it...

So, in ALL of recovered Babylonian mathematics writings, not a single mention of any angle measure (other than a right angle,) and no statements about the relationships of the angle measures in any triangle (an extremely simple concept,) but you have "no reason to doubt" that they measured angles?
What would constitute "reason to doubt" for you in this case? The way you're arguing it, there cannot possibly be any fact that could constitute a "reason to doubt."
When you set your argument up like that, it's not an argument.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelousThe argument against 29.9792458 being chosen on purpose for the GP is that the random probability such that the ancients "used meters and degrees" is low.

However, I think I have managed to establish that the probability that they used degrees is not very low. It's not 100% certain either. But it's not "lottery jackpot" odds uncertain either. It falls within a range that makes it suitable for use as an ATS fringe hypothesis.

Given that the Egyptians explicitly explained their angle measuring system, and it didn't include degrees in any form, you've managed to establish only one thing - that you prefer to remain ignorant about the Ancient Egyptians.

Harte

To be honest, I'm really not committed to the idea that the Egyptians chose the site.

I look on this forum because I'm interested in cultures much older. Seeing what the Sumerians understood, and then seeing that most of what the Greeks knew they got from them, it makes me wonder who the Sumerians got it from?


My hypothesis about the GP is and has been for a while, that some structure existed there prior to Kufu building over it, and it wasn't necessarily a pyramid. (Maybe a step pyramid.) Part of this is because the lower parts of the Sphinx show signs of being truly old.

If the Egyptians found an old ruined structure, magnificent, very old, and still standing, with all their superstition they would probably have ascribed magical powers to it. Pharaohs believed that whatever they got buried with would go with them to the afterlife..... so..... maybe a pharaoh gets so ambitious about his afterlife that he decides to build a pyramid over the top of the "magic" structure so he can be a super awesome superhero god in the afterlife.

Then I don't need an explanation for the 80 ton blocks. I know other cultures have moved such blocks (and even the Egyptians moved similarly large obeslisks and stuff.) But I never see them do anything that exceeds the limits of a wooden crane or sideways pulling via ropes in their other achievements.

Also then we don't need all these ad hoc explanations for the shafts, which don't appear to serve any purpose. They could be part of the original structure.

Also no need to explain the lack of hieroglyphics. If the structure they were building over was a revered magic structure of fierce power and holiness, they probably be afraid to deface it.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
I look on this forum because I'm interested in cultures much older.

Me too a search of 45 years so far not to successful. I hope that in time something like GT or Catalhuyuck will be found in the Zagros Mts.

Seeing what the Sumerians understood, and then seeing that most of what the Greeks knew they got from them, it makes me wonder who the Sumerians got it from?

Themselves and the people the Sumerian invaded/conquered/decided to move in with the Ubaid who may have arisen from the Halaf, Samarra and Hassuna cultures. If there was somebody else there they are remarkable invisible. There were earlier culture there (PPNA and PPNB-great names) but no sign of an advanced culture no civ.

My hypothesis about the GP is and has been for a while, that some structure existed there prior to Kufu building over it, and it wasn't necessarily a pyramid. (Maybe a step pyramid.) Part of this is because the lower parts of the Sphinx show signs of being truly old.

I hate to tell ya but you a bit late to the party with that hypothesis. I think you mean you have consensus with the earlier theories about precursor, mother culture, Atlantis, etc, etc. The Sphinx in a minority opinion might be older but the evidence if very iffy. I believe there might have been an earlier use of the head of Sphinx then a rock as some object of veneration - pure speculation.

If there was an earlier culture there (there were a number in the Nile valley) but they didn't build buildings. All evidence for Giza points to the AE by the simple reason there the only guys who left evidence of being there.

snipped a lot of rehash of the 'taking over theory'

Yep other cultures sometimes took over the territory and sometimes the building of older cultures/civilization but in every case the other culture is fairly easy to ID. Not so with the these fellows. Romans took over the Etruscan - hundreds of thousands of artifacts, Mycenaean Greeks from the Minoans - tens of thousands of artifacts, Babylonians from the Sumerians millions of artifacts, Aztec over Olmec and Toltec - yep tons of artifacts, Inca over a slew of earlier cultures all with numerous cultures artifacts found. AE took over from X - not a thing and even more interesting other none stone building cultures were also in the Nile Valley at that time - lots of evidence for them but no sign of Mr. and Mrs. X

Slippery dudes those x folks

29.9792458
has relationship to root 3/2
through angle 30 deg.
Cos 30 deg = 0.866
Cos 29.9792458 = 0.866
The longitude of great pyramid 31.1342 has relationship to Pi
3.1342/3.1415 =0.997
if we do this then we have
0.866 x 31.342 = 27.142
which makes me think they we thinking in terms of the measuring the speed of light relative to a circular path around an axis and its diminishwave length as the longitude approaches pole. Thus equator the wavelength is 31.1342 or if we say geographical mile equal to nautical mile wavelength works out 3459632 metres. and so at longtitude Cos 29.9792458 = 0.866, so 0.866 x 3459632 = 2996041.
and V = f x y so frequncy 299792458/2996041 = 100 hz
at the equator f = 86.6544 hz
using this approach a different frequency can be calculate for every coordinate location on earth.
Frequency portals.
Cern
Interesting GPS coordinates of CERN, Switzerland. Latitude: 46.2338 Longitude: 6.0532.
wavelength at the equator 672631
So cos 46.2338 deg = 0.69171
0.69171 x 672631 = 465266
and V = f x y so frequncy 299792458/465266 = 644hz
ie. therefore creating a earth map of frequencies all will fall in range of musical frequency tones. Druid stones, resonance, frequency.

So frequencies can be mapped on earth or any spherical celestial body that rotates around an axis. matching frequencies locations creating tunnels etc.
The great pyramid was a major portal point.
Like an airport kind of.

a reply to: AthlonSavage

Howdy you might want to go visit this guys website - he finds math 'connections' everywhere too.

donbarone.selfip.net...

originally posted by: Hanslune

My hypothesis about the GP is and has been for a while, that some structure existed there prior to Kufu building over it, and it wasn't necessarily a pyramid. (Maybe a step pyramid.) Part of this is because the lower parts of the Sphinx show signs of being truly old.

I hate to tell ya but you a bit late to the party with that hypothesis. I think you mean you have consensus with the earlier theories about precursor, mother culture, Atlantis, etc, etc. The Sphinx in a minority opinion might be older but the evidence if very iffy. I believe there might have been an earlier use of the head of Sphinx then a rock as some object of veneration - pure speculation.

If there was an earlier culture there (there were a number in the Nile valley) but they didn't build buildings. All evidence for Giza points to the AE by the simple reason there the only guys who left evidence of being there.

snipped a lot of rehash of the 'taking over theory'

Should seriously have a look at the Meidum pyramid, then.

en.wikipedia.org...


So where the story lost me is where it says "Firstly, the outer layer was founded on sand and not on rock, like the inner layers. Secondly, the inner step pyramids had been designed as the final stage. "

So the inner building had a foundation, and was built entirely on that foundation. But the outer part was built further out than the inner building's foundation?

Who would plan construction that way? If the ones who built the outer part didn't know they were exceeding the dimensions of the original foundation, I could see that decision being made. But if they built the inner structure, they would have known how wide the foundation reached to.

So my theory: The inner structure was there a long time before the Egyptians. They found it, and thought it was magical, so a pharaoh decided to bury it with his own corpse (by enclosing it in a pyramid), and thereby claim its magic.

Yep other cultures sometimes took over the territory and sometimes the building of older cultures/civilization but in every case the other culture is fairly easy to ID. Not so with the these fellows. Romans took over the Etruscan - hundreds of thousands of artifacts, Mycenaean Greeks from the Minoans - tens of thousands of artifacts, Babylonians from the Sumerians millions of artifacts, Aztec over Olmec and Toltec - yep tons of artifacts, Inca over a slew of earlier cultures all with numerous cultures artifacts found. AE took over from X - not a thing and even more interesting other none stone building cultures were also in the Nile Valley at that time - lots of evidence for them but no sign of Mr. and Mrs. X

Slippery dudes those x folks

Or the take over culture is the slippery one. "History is told by the winners".

Spain goes into Central and South America, and burns all their books. Is that "amazing bad luck", "too bad it just so happens none of their records survived"?

Xin Xi Huang, unifies China. What does he do right after? (He burns all the books about previous history.)

There are physical ruins in both places, but no reliable way to date their original construction. Carbon dating will tell us when they were last inhabited, at least. (And in rare cases we can carbon date the mortar, or other remaining construction materials, which is more reliable.)

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous


Should seriously have a look at the Meidum pyramid, then.

en.wikipedia.org...


So where the story lost me is where it says "Firstly, the outer layer was founded on sand and not on rock, like the inner layers. Secondly, the inner step pyramids had been designed as the final stage. "

So the inner building had a foundation, and was built entirely on that foundation. But the outer part was built further out than the inner building's foundation?

Sounds like an unsound decision by someone - like the a Pharaoh who just ordered it done

So my theory: The inner structure was there a long time before the Egyptians. They found it, and thought it was magical, so a pharaoh decided to bury it with his own corpse (by enclosing it in a pyramid), and thereby claim its magic.

Great theory now show evidence of said culture being there.

Or the take over culture is the slippery one. "History is told by the winners".

...and archaeology brings them right back into the picture

Spain goes into Central and South America, and burns all their books. Is that "amazing bad luck", "too bad it just so happens none of their records survived"?

Not all were burnt and the cultures are well known with millions of artifacts known - what is your point?

South American had no books and again those preceding cultures are known through archaeology.

There are physical ruins in both places, but no reliable way to date their original construction. Carbon dating will tell us when they were last inhabited, at least. (And in rare cases we can carbon date the mortar, or other remaining construction materials, which is more reliable.)

Stratigraphy shows you which came first there are also ways to date pottery. Large construction site show evidence of the men living nearby and working on them. There deposits can be dated.

The problem for your theory of an earlier precursor civilization is that there is no evidence at all for this earlier stone building culture and at the same time the pyramid locations are covered with AE artifacts and of earlier non-stone building cultures. So you have a problem trying to shoe horn in another set of builders.

So with no sign of the earlier culture and clear evidence of the AE. You tell me what your conclusion will be?

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous


Should seriously have a look at the Meidum pyramid, then.

en.wikipedia.org...


So where the story lost me is where it says "Firstly, the outer layer was founded on sand and not on rock, like the inner layers. Secondly, the inner step pyramids had been designed as the final stage. "

So the inner building had a foundation, and was built entirely on that foundation. But the outer part was built further out than the inner building's foundation?

Sounds like an unsound decision by someone - like the a Pharaoh who just ordered it done

That isn't how imperial rule works. An emperor who didn't take advice from his advisers would weaken the kingdom in other ways, not just his tomb. And it is clear that his successors were even more powerful than him, so he couldn't very likely have been that kind of ruler.

So my theory: The inner structure was there a long time before the Egyptians. They found it, and thought it was magical, so a pharaoh decided to bury it with his own corpse (by enclosing it in a pyramid), and thereby claim its magic.

Great theory now show evidence of said culture being there.

If you want to talk about what seems "convenient", I would say what is odd is that we only seem to find ancient advanced cultures in the desert.

Jungle cultures, once dated, tend to end up being very recent. (Like the Maya.)

Or the take over culture is the slippery one. "History is told by the winners".

...and archaeology brings them right back into the picture

Sure, for a very recent culture like the Maya. And I'm sure it helped that there was still a surviving cultural remnant there, just not as advanced as it had been.

Spain goes into Central and South America, and burns all their books. Is that "amazing bad luck", "too bad it just so happens none of their records survived"?

Not all were burnt and the cultures are well known with millions of artifacts known - what is your point?

Very very very very very very nearly all. There aren't even enough manuscripts left to completely reconstruct their language.

South American had no books and again those preceding cultures are known through archaeology.

Nobody actually knows whether they had written records or "knot".

www.savacations.com...


They're a pretty recent culture for us to knot know, don't you think?

There are physical ruins in both places, but no reliable way to date their original construction. Carbon dating will tell us when they were last inhabited, at least. (And in rare cases we can carbon date the mortar, or other remaining construction materials, which is more reliable.)

Stratigraphy shows you which came first there are also ways to date pottery. Large construction site show evidence of the men living nearby and working on them. There deposits can be dated.

The problem for your theory of an earlier precursor civilization is that there is no evidence at all for this earlier stone building culture and at the same time the pyramid locations are covered with AE artifacts and of earlier non-stone building cultures. So you have a problem trying to shoe horn in another set of builders.

So with no sign of the earlier culture and clear evidence of the AE. You tell me what your conclusion will be?

I think I wouldn't arrive at a conclusion right away. Jumping to conclusions is a serious impediment to future science.

The most ancient artifacts that get found usually are located in places where special conditions prevent decay.

Like the oldest skull found in Mexico. Naia. Found in a cave full of de-oxygenated water.


www.smithsonianmag.com...

That's how much luck it takes to find stuff from 10,000 + years ago. Either that, or it's usually a dry, arid, place,. Which is why some of the best old stuff comes out of Israel, or other parts of the Middle East.

But a precursor civilization to Egypt would have lived there at a time when it wasn't a desert.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

That isn't how imperial rule works. An emperor who didn't take advice from his advisers would weaken the kingdom in other ways, not just his tomb. And it is clear that his successors were even more powerful than him, so he couldn't very likely have been that kind of ruler.

Sure it does he was the God king what he wanted is done. Simply look at historical absolute monarchs and dictators they often ignored 'technical' advice often with disastrous results.

Great theory now show evidence of said culture being there.

If you want to talk about what seems "convenient", I would say what is odd is that we only seem to find ancient advanced cultures in the desert.

You mean other than the folks in the Central America, the Olmecs for instance? So what about the evidence for this other culture that built all this stuff?

No for really old ones like Gobekli Tepe and Catalhuyuck - known only thru archaeology - no written records mention them at all. Located in grasslands or light forest back in their time.

Very very very very very very nearly all. There aren't even enough manuscripts left to completely reconstruct their language.

But we can read it and we know they existed which is the point. You still aren't dealing with the total lack of evidence for the culture you said made x and y. Archaeology ID's unknow cultures. We lost most of the books of the Maya but heck we know they existed due to hundreds of habitation sites

Number of habitation sites for the unknown civilization in Egypt = 0, number of pottery sherds for the AE civilization, hundreds of millions - unknown civilization = 0, AE stone tools = millions, unknown civ = 0, etc., etc.

They're a pretty recent culture for us to knot know, don't you think?

Not a written language and the culture that made them is known. So? The Inca and their earlier precursor cultures are well known archaeologically.

I think I wouldn't arrive at a conclusion right away. Jumping to conclusions is a serious impediment to future science.

It isn't a conclusion its an analysis of what evidence we currently have. As in every scientific theory it awaits new evidence to be found or re-evaluated....the theory would then change. Just like in 1950 the Sumerians were considered the old stone building making social group - that changed with GT was found.

The most ancient artifacts that get found usually are located in places where special conditions prevent decay.

Like the oldest skull found in Mexico. Naia. Found in a cave full of de-oxygenated water.

Stone tools, heaths (burnt carbon), pottery survives pretty much anywhere - and we're talking about Egypt where the conditions are nearly perfect.

That's how much luck it takes to find stuff from 10,000 + years ago. Either that, or it's usually a dry, arid, place,. Which is why some of the best old stuff comes out of Israel, or other parts of the Middle East.

Yep we agree

But a precursor civilization to Egypt would have lived there at a time when it wasn't a desert.

The Nile valley was never a desert, it was always lush and green and outside of the valley was desert or savannah - a great place to conserve archaeological materials....and guess what we find archaeological evidence for cutlures in both the Nile valley and the areas around it, the Eastern desert and the Sahara

So not a thing for that lost civilization huh? That is why theories about people running around making stuff with big rocks and leaving nothing behind don't get accepted. Archaeologists know that nasty secret that real civilizations and cultures leave massive archaeological footprints. Now fringe writers have invented all kinds of reasons why there would be no evidence - comets hitting, coast line sinking, cultures in Antarctic covered with ice. But for Egypt its been there tens of millions of years and nothing bad has happened there.

The lack of evidence is damning.

The graves of the workers that built the outer wall weren't discovered until 1990 by a tourist.

www.theguardian.com...

It should be no surprise if the even more ancient builders haven't been discovered yet, given how much time it took to find the later builders of the outer wall.


------

And this article describing the pyramid builders' village points that at this time the location of the village the workers lived in now lies "beneath the modern town of Nazlet es Samman and is largely inaccessible."

www.bbc.co.uk...



So are the builders of the original structure going to be lucky enough to have left the remains of their village at a location that is not currently located under the nearby sprawling suburbs of Cairo?

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
The graves of the workers that built the outer wall weren't discovered until 1990 by a tourist.

www.theguardian.com...

It should be no surprise if the even more ancient builders haven't been discovered yet, given how much time it took to find the later builders of the outer wall.

The only problem with that idea is that the archaeological evidence for the AE being at Giza began in the 1830's with tens of thousands of items found. Items from the unknown civilization 0.....go forward nearly two hundred years hundreds of thousands of artifacts and writing about the AE and still 0 for the unknown civilization.....odd eh?

And this article describing the pyramid builders' village points that at this time the location of the village the workers lived in now lies "beneath the modern town of Nazlet es Samman and is largely inaccessible."

www.bbc.co.uk...

Yet the looters located in the built over areas haven't found anything either.

www.archaeology.org...

As a matter of fact in 200 years not a single unknown civilization item has ever been found...anywhere.

So are the builders of the original structure going to be lucky enough to have left the remains of their village at a location that is not currently located under the nearby sprawling suburbs of Cairo?

One would hope so and its absolutely amazing that nothing was found in the 1830-1930 before that construction occurred and the looters are still digging beneath those constructions along with excavations done during rebuilding and repairs.

AE = tens of millions of items, unknown civilization = 0