Pyramids at Giza were there BEFORE the Egyptians got there.

1. They made cement, poured it into forms onsite or insitu. This requires only the transport of containers with the amalgam powder and containers with the water - passed along a line like a fire brigade.

www.touregypt.net...
In order to quarry this stone, the blocks were marked out with just enough space in between each to allow for a small passageway for the workers to cut the blocks. The workmen would use a number of different tools to cut the blocks, including copper pickaxes and chisels, granite hammers, dolerite and other hard stone tools.

and some of the blocks have micro fossils in them
some of the fossils viewable from the edge of the blocks are neatly cut through as if by a sharp tool do you think they pured the blocks and when they were half set pushed half cut fossils back into them
besides which analysis of the sandstone shows no bonding agent whatsoever
you cant just crush sandstone and then mix it with water and expect it to set hard as stone again
as soon as it dries it would fall apart
the process of crushing so many blocks and then reforming them would require more actual labour than just dragging them there on sledges and the route that the stone blocks took from the quarry was along a river
ever heard of boats Beth
they make moving blocks with an average weight of just two tonnes very easy indeed

and Lasers huh
they didn't have that sort of technology
if they did they wouldn't have been using primitive materials to build pyramids from
we are far more advanced than them and we don't



as has been proved modern technology could easily have built ancient pyramids
but ancient technology couldn't even replicate some of our more primitive structures
and theres no evidence whatsoever that they had anything more advanced than copper tools anyway so you are offering up an answer for something that has no question

Originally posted by undo
Which documents tell of levitation? The pyramid texts?

Ummm errr Rosicrucian documents

I am hunting down some more items


BTW Beth Nice find on those links.. I have a PDF on the moving of Abu Simbel, where they used traditional and modern hand saws to cut the temple to move it before it was flooded... those cuts are not nearly as smooth and they are only in soft sandstone. [sandstone being just that compressed sand usually cemented by calcite , hardness 2-3] Basalt is a volcanic dense rock with a hardness of 5 to 6. Those cuts are amazingly straight and smooth... Even my diamond blade shows a little wobble as it cuts rock..

[edit on 25-8-2006 by zorgon]

Originally posted by Marduk
as far as i know Beth the levitation claim came from the lips of Edgar Cayce and was then backed up as confirmed true by a vision by self professed psychic Michael Scallion who claimed to have seen a vision of the blocks being levitated using electrostatic repulsion while he watched. this was of course after hed seen them cut from the aswan quarry using lasers and transported to the construction site on airships so thats the credibility for that done with

Tsk Tsk... for an Ancient Babylonian Deity who obviously accepts who and what the Sumerians etc. were, I am surprised you dismiss that levitation theory so easily.

Many people are willing to accept alien tech in our past, including anti gravity UFO's yet cannot accept the small step forward that this very same tech was used for other purposes.. the energy involved is the same... we are just now on the edge of re-discovering that...

And no I am not saying the Egyptians had that tech... the small pyramids WERE build conventional means in a effort to mimic the original ones... [if one is going to believe the Giza Pyramids really are 10,000 years old, the rest goes with it! ]

It is a shame that Edgar Cayce always get into it, because that name immediately makes a reader ignore anythging after that as nuts...

But Edgar didn't dream it up, he got his info from earlier works. I had those works in books over 30 years ago, but now have to refind all the references.

their is another claim from south america for levitated blocks which comes from an account that says "the blocks were moved to the sound of whistling"
which certain pseudoscientists claim means they were moved by means of an audio transportation device
but it actually means that the workers whistled while they worked, something that even Walt Disney got right

Actually no, its not whistle while they work... there are several theories out about the accousting energy... and a lot of that research is directly tied in to Nikola Tesla's work. Here is one site that explains the thinking... call them psuedoscientists if you will, but a lot of this same stuff is being researched seriously by NASA and the AFRL [Air Force Research Lab]

GIZA POWER

As to the power of sound these were carved with ultrasonics in Idar Oberstein in Germany SEE HERE

[edit on 25-8-2006 by zorgon]

Tsk Tsk... for an Ancient Babylonian Deity who obviously accepts who and what the Sumerians etc. were, I am surprised you dismiss that levitation theory so easily.

I dismiss it so easily because its laughable
im still waiting to see these ancient texts you mentioned that detail it
any time this week would be good
and so what if N.A.S.A is experiementing with acoustics
the ancient egyptians didn't have N.A.S.A on the payroll
they didn't have Tesla either for that matter
you are the one making the silly claims here
so you are the one who has to prove it

fyi
the Babylonian God you referenced is not called Marduk
Marduk is simply a name with a babylonian origin
in the same way that everyone who is called Jesus is not the messiah
you are missing the term "Bel" from the equation

i really can't believe you posted Christopher Dunn as a refernce either
thats like shane claiming answersingenesis is an authority



you're right about Edgar though
he got all his stuff from the books on theosophy that he read when he worked in a series of bookstores from 1893 to 1908 during the height of the Theosophist movement. The popular books of Ignatius Donnelly, Helena Blavatsky, Gerald Massey, Rudolf Steiner and Piazzi Smythe were widely available and Cayce undoubtedly had access to them with so long a tenure in the book trade.

it was the theosophists who made it all up and the pseudoscientists who have been claiming it as hard evidence ever since

fyi
the sumerians , the akkadians and the babylonians never claimed to have levitated anything either and they were far more advanced than their poor country cousins in egypt

Marduk,

Au contrare. Enki's E.ABZU floated above the Abzu. He presumably floated it to its spot where it "landed", and then floated on the "water". It was also connected (yes connected) to the "Field Constellation." These words are in the ancient sumerian text called "Enki and the World Order," as translated by the Oxford University, Oriental Institute and Samuel Noah Kramer's translation (he was the one who did the first translations of the ancient sumerian cuneiforms)

excerpt from Enki and the World Order:

285-298. The lord established a shrine, a holy shrine, whose interior is elaborately constructed. He established a shrine in the sea, a holy shrine, whose interior is elaborately constructed. The shrine, whose interior is a tangled thread, is beyond understanding. The shrine's emplacement is situated by the constellation the Field, the holy upper shrine's emplacement faces towards the Chariot constellation.


Quoted from Samuel Noah Kramer's "ENKI BUILDS THE E-ENGURRA":

The lord of the abyss, the king Enki, Enki the Lord who decrees the fates, Built his house of silver and lapis lazuli; Its silver and lapis lazuli, like sparkling light, The father fashioned fittingly in the abyss.

[...]

The creatures of bright countenances and wise, coming forth from the abyss

[...]

Then Enki raises the city of Eridu from the abyss and makes it float over the water like a lofty mountain.

[...]

The abyss, the shrine of the goodness of Enki, befitting the divine decrees, Eridu, the pure house having been built, O Enki, praise!"

www.earth-history.com...

[edit on 26-8-2006 by undo]

285-298. The lord established a shrine, a holy shrine, whose interior is elaborately constructed. He established a shrine in the sea, a holy shrine, whose interior is elaborately constructed. The shrine, whose interior is a tangled thread, is beyond understanding. The shrine's emplacement is situated by the constellation the Field, the holy upper shrine's emplacement faces towards the Chariot constellation.

maybe im missing it
where does it say anything about anything levitating in that quote ?
are you unaware that sumerian buildings are all built facing favoured constellations ?
none of them float in the sky
rofl

Then Enki raises the city of Eridu from the abyss and makes it float over the water like a lofty mountain.

and the next line reads

Its green fruit-bearing gardens he fills with birds; fishes, too, be makes abundant. Enki is now ready to proceed by boat to Nippur to obtain Enlil's blessing for his newly-built city and temple. He therefore rises from the abyss

so this levitating sky palace has birds and fishes in its gardens does it
and you can reach Nippur by boat from it as well
did Samuel Kramer mention it was floating in the sky at any point
cherry picking again. you don't learn do you

clearly Beth you still are obsessed with Stargate SG1
have you seen Col O' Neil in your fantasies lately

Marduk,

Now don't change the subject. You said it didn't mention levitation in the sumerian texts, and I've just proven this is not exactly true.

I mentioned the constellation text because that's what it says in the text. I know they made a grid of the stars on the earth. As you can tell, I have actually read something other than Cayce. Actually, I haven't read much Cayce. Come to think of it, I've never read Cayce. lol

Anyway, yes, after he levitated it, he landed it on TOP of the Abzu, which is the Abyss. Which isn't the ocean.

Beth
nowhere in the texts you provided can i see the word "levitate"
which isn't very surprising because the sumerians didn't have the word "levitate" in their language
for instances when they were describing things that were airborne they always use the word "flight"
aren't you wondering when in this case as you say they are describing a flying object they don't say that

heres a contemporary text for you to ponder

The Seattle City Council voted unanimously to raise building heights in much of downtown Seattle Monday, ushering in a new wave of development that will dramatically reshape the city's skyline over the next few decades.

do you think there are flying buildings in Seattle ?

Originally posted by Marduk
clearly Beth you still are obsessed with Stargate SG1
have you seen Col O' Neil in your fantasies lately

Alright, that's enough.

I feel almost as strongly about O'Neil as I do about Curly.

You better quit messin with O'Neil. He has the Ancient gene, you know. He might just have to go Ancient on your butt!

And don't you start on Dr. Daniel Jackson, either!

Harte

ok ok but teook has eyebrows like a girl
i suspect he moonlights as a drag entertainer

Originally posted by Marduk
ok ok but teook has eyebrows like a girl
i suspect he moonlights as a drag entertainer

He shore has a purty mouth!

H

This is my simple but humble theory about the pyramids of Egypt: The Jews built the pyramids while in slavery to Egypt. That is what they were doing when Moses walked up and said "Let my people go".

Originally posted by Marduk
Beth
nowhere in the texts you provided can i see the word "levitate"
which isn't very surprising because the sumerians didn't have the word "levitate" in their language
for instances when they were describing things that were airborne they always use the word "flight"
aren't you wondering when in this case as you say they are describing a flying object they don't say that

heres a contemporary text for you to ponder

The Seattle City Council voted unanimously to raise building heights in much of downtown Seattle Monday, ushering in a new wave of development that will dramatically reshape the city's skyline over the next few decades.

do you think there are flying buildings in Seattle ?

It's an exercise in "can you tell the difference between a floating city and constructing a building." It doesn't say "raise" it says "float". Now that could be "fly" but it says "float." I translate that to mean, float or levitate. Any of those will suffice. Fly will also work for this demonstration but I'm trying to be precise. The point being that in 5000-ish BC, Enki constructed a city in the abyss and then floated it up where it hovered "floated" over the abyss. And in another text it says it floated on the Abzu. Now if he did that, all those millenia ago, what's to stop the ancient egyptians, several hundred years later from levitating rocks? Do you know what Eridu (Enki's city) was? We are supposed to believe a huge "ziggurat" type construction, composed entirely of metals, floated on and hovered over water, but the ancient egyptians couldn't levitate a stone? Did you know Enki also had a boat that departed and moved down the river of its own accord (without the need for oarsmen or poles)?

Do you still remember the ingenious block tilting platform, a completely wooden system I posted a picture of, in one of my first posts in this thread?
The one with a block loading platform attached, and a few levers on both sides which lifted the whole platform up one pyramid level.

That is one form of minimizing the multiple small forces/weights involved, to lift one bigger load up a certain traject.
It is however too spacious to use on relatively small pyramid steps, in my opinion, and too much prone to rope breaking.

Then imagine a f.ex. 4/5th and 1/5th OFF-BALANCE hardwooden crane-balance system, which has one big advantage : less weight can be used on the 4/5th side, to lift a lot of weight, 2600 kg, on the 1/5th side.
Another main advantage against a seesaw :
These crane's contra-weight platforms hang higher above the pyramid steps, thus bigger platforms can be used, hovering above the width of 2 pyramid steps, and can hold more small stones, men or water.
These platforms can be 2 x 53 cm = 106 cm wide, big enough to hold one limestone pyramid building block on its 1/5th balance-arm-side platform, the block laying on one of its 117 x 117 cm sides. The block is then 73 cm high, laying on that to be lifted up load-platform.

Whereby each axel of the crane is made of a thin basalt or equally hard stone-cylinder, each axel fitts in three drilled out holes.
One big hole in the crane's arm, drilled through that arm, inbetween 4/5th and 1/5th of its length, making it a strongly off-balance system.
Two identical big holes in the two wooden arm rests of the balance-base, these arm rests are left over when a gap was hacked in the top of this balance-base (which is a short, fat and bulky Libanon Cedar tree trunk stump, with a big flat base, to stand with, on the pyramid steps).
Or they simply made the balance-arm resting-block from massive stone. And hacked 2 slidges in it, with a round bottom end, where the 2 ends of the stone axel rested in, fitting in the round hole of the thinner cedar tree-made balance-arm.
Around that axel, the whole crane's arm (a long thinner cedar tree trunk) could rotate, and move up and down.

8b. The multiple off-balance-cranes on all slopes, Screws of Archimedes, and a lot of water, system
Basicly the same system as in my last post, except the seesaws are replaced by small crane structures, with short load arms, with wooden platforms hanging off them attached by multiple ropes and a square box of hardwood planks circa 1 meter above the platform, so the blocks could be pushed in place on the platforms, while the planks-box kept all the 4 or more ropes strictly vertical.
The longer contra arm held another platform, where a water vessel stood on, which could be moved on and off the long-arm platform, when empty. The longer the contraweight arm, the less weight in water is needed to be filled in the vessel to force the 2600 kg limestone block to move the height of one step up (73 cm). You can calculate, using simple basic school rules, how long the contraweight arm has to be, to save as much water as reasonably possible. You will reach quickly a point where the (still same diameter) balance-arm will break, when calculated too long. And you can't fill in increasingly thicker tree trunks to use as balance arm, you are limited to the fact that you have to let the whole system fit on the 53 cm wide steps of the pyramid. And a new one must be easily lifted up all the steps to the top level, when that level was completed, and a new crane had to be placed on the newest highest pyramid-step constructed by completing a whole new level.

8c. The multiple 1/5th-4/5th off-balance-cranes on all slopes, + 10 humans per crane, system
Why all the fuzz with those water screws. Forget that water, far too complicated.
An abundancy of Egyptians were available, so let's use them.
Let me be clear, we are discussing Pharaohs here, plain old dictators, the rest of the Egyptians thought of them as gods.
And ofcourse they had a lot of armed personnel to avoid unwelcome, contradictionairy opinions spread around.
Not much has changed at present, by the way.

Basicly the same system as in my last post, except the off-balanced seesaws are replaced by small off-balanced crane structures, with on one balance-arm side (1/5th) a short load arm (part of the whole crane-balance, which was made of a solid 30 cm diameter hardwood tree trunk from the far south jungles, or better, the far north, the cedars of Libanon. I would certainly take the shorter sea route, thus the cedars, roll them on barks in a Phenicean harbour, and sail and row them over the Mediteranean up the Nile to Giza).

A wooden platform is hanging off this 1/5th arm, attached by multiple ropes and a square box of 4 hardwood planks circa 1.30 meter above the platform to keep the ropes perpendicular, so the limestone building blocks could easily be pushed in place on the platforms, while the 4-planks-box kept all the 4, or many more ropes, strictly vertical.

A good architect could even construct this short-arm, block loading platform totally out of hardwood, no ropes involved, with a connector block on top and a stone-cylinder axel on top through 2 holes in the connector block , to connect to the crane's short arm's end hole.
This loading platform is only 73 cm wide. Or a bit less, perhaps 50 centimeters wide, since a limestone block was an average 73 cm high, (and 117cm wide x 117 cm long). The block can be loaded also in fact on a 50 cm wide platform, if well balanced and overhanging 11.5 cm on both sides of the platform, and standing up 117 cm on it.
Then the contra-weight platform on the other, LONGER arm, could be made more spacious, hanging off shorter ropes, so it could hold 10 really fat ancient Egyptians, weighting an average 100 kg, providing the 1000 kg contraweight, to lift the SHORT load arm plus limestone block.

Thus an even better solution will be, to construct this contraweight platform also totally out of hardwood, with a flexible connector block to attach it to the hole in the contra-arm's end. And keep the platform as near to the arm as possible. The shorter that distance, the longer arc traject can be travelled down during every lifting operation of 10 Egyptians who were simply stepping up that platform.

If both platforms are made totally of hardwood, then NO (lifting) ROPES at all are needed (only short pulling ropes perhaps, but better use rollers, to roll the blocks on and off the platforms). And the balance arm also. Only the 3 axels, 2 platform ones and the bigger arm axel, can be made from stone cylinders, but also from hardwood again.
What we did now, is in fact place the seesaw balance-"planks" from last post's system 8a on a much higher "tower", so the platforms hoover 1 meter, or some cm more, above the pyramid step level.

The longer the arm, the less people ( = weights) are needed to move the short load-arm up to the next level.
Remember, as I said before, the longer arm platform ends up higher when empty, and will travel a longer arc trajectory down when loaded with people or water, but the longer and the shorter arm will both come to rest at the same pyramid-step level, if the whole crane arm will be lined up parallel along one step of the pyramid.

However, when the crane is placed under an angle to the line of pyramid steps, both the load arm and the contra arm can come up higher and end up lower, in case there were no steps at all. Since there are steps, it would be possible, theoretically, to move a block up two steps at once, but then a foot-bridge made of a wider plank must be used to let the fat Egyptians enter the contraweight platform. Why not. The faster a block is moved up the total heigth of a pyramid slope, the better. It also helps, when the
If you made the base of the crane a pivot-joint construction, you could load the limestone 2 steps down of the crane, let 9 people weighting a total of 900 kg step on the longer arm platform parked 2 steps higher as the crane, and let the last, 10th Egyptian move the crane around its pivot by pushing the contra platform away, and then climbing on the platform, so a longer traject down could be achieved by the contraweight-platform. The longer that traject, the higher the load-platform ends up. Two steps lifting up, which is 2 x 73 cm = 146 cm, for one limestone block of 2600 kg , could be done this way.
The whole crane construction could be made of separate pieces, which could be easily dismantled and put together again.

I like this method 8c the most now. It's the most simple one, easily achievable with ancient egyptian techniques.

Imagine one big wooden log.
Put a stone square pillar under it at the 1/5th position.
The pillar has a axe formed top with a rounded edge, where the log is laying on.
The log has an axe formed cut with a small rounded bottom, at the 1/5th position, and the pillar is about 1 meter high.
The pillar can be easily turned by a few men when both ends of the log resting on it are empty.
Both ends of the log have a small platform on top.

The rest can be deducted from my above post.

I translate that to mean, float or levitate

then you are in a minority of one
in addition to the fact that you started with a theory and then looked for the details to match it
thats not clever Beth
when called you have no evidence
ergo you have no case
there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that Enkis Ekur was some kind of floating sky city
and tonnes of evidence that says it was not
but you chose to ignore that didn't you
this places your belief system alongside young earth creationists
as such it is not only highly improbable it is actually laughable
roflmao
you can hear me laughing right ?

Source : Lift, carry and pull
Lets come to the last point: How much force can be asserted to a rope by a worker? Some workers can carry 50 kg (500 N) for some meters, but I don't think that this is possible the whole day long. On the other hand it is totally easy to pull with a force of 500 N for a long time - try it out in a sport studio!
The reason: The force comes not from the weaker arms, but from the stronger legs. And from the GRAVITY! To pull a block you can use the same force which tries to pull the block down the ramp to pull it up, by bending your body forwards.
The effect: it is possible to pull even with 1000 N for a longer time, if we take half of it, 500 N, we need about (8400 N / 500 N) = 16.8 worker for a 2.5 t stone up a ramp.

The ramp Frank Dörnenburg means, is a man made ramp from stones, gravel, sand and dirt, and has a incline/decline/angle of 10°.

The ramp I mean, is a wooden planks ramp, or a stone made ramp up the sides of the pyramid. Under a maximum slope-angle of circa 53°.
And using my proposed system 6a. With long ropes pulling stones on a sledge at one side, up a slope, and pulleyed over a ridge, then pulling parallel to the highest level laid, and down the opposite slope to another sledge holding the contraweights.
A somewhat laboureous method, when taking in account my now proposed last methods 8a,b and c .

I just had read these interesting pages from Chris Dunn online :
Main page of Chris Dunn.
Advanced machining in ancient Egypt.
Petrie's Infamous Core #7.
and saw a small picture in the last page, out of the book of W.M.F. Petrie, and the link to Ronald Birdsall pages about Petrie's work :

www.ronaldbirdsall.com...
It's the online book of Sir W.M.Flinders Petrie, published in 1883 as a first print (123 years old now!), which was sold out in a few month, and never reprinted in this meticulous form, only as a second print which was much shorter and "popular-scienced" for the not so scientificly schooled reader. It is put online by 2 nice fellows, read about them in the opening page.
I am very obliged to them, for the fine work from both, one to html it, the other to put it online.
This is a fine piece of work, which needs a much broader attention, and it will get that irrevocably, on the internet.
Sir Petrie meticulously measured the Giza Pyramids, and his work was a solid base for most scientific egyptology research following in the next 123 years.

In particular, my first interest ( I expect a few more to follow) was awakened by :
Overall drawings of a few seemingly machined stone parts.



Enlarged drawings of a few of the former drawings.



Note they were drawn already in 1883! No real new insights since then!
The nagging question bothering great minds for one and a quart century now, is and was, how did they cut out these hard stone materials?
Let's first have a closer look at this overall picture and especially the fig. 7G and 8G drawings in this picture.

Anybody ever thought about strong acids, or even strong bases used as etching fluids, to dissolve the hard stone material?
They could be found in vulcanic regions. Notice the Natron Lakes in Egypt and Palestine, and the strongly acidic vulcanic crater lakes in Africa, filled with Nitric acid (HNO3) and Sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and mixes of those, and a lot of other trace acids formed by constant bubbling of vulcanic gases through rain water filled, vulcano peak lakes, or simple water holes, at ground level, bubbled through by vulcanic gasses.
These acids could have been transported in glas or baked clay vessels which were on the inside glazed , to the upper regions of Egypt, where they could have been used to etch out certain artifacts found in present days by sir Petrie.

The ancient etcher will have used only small amounts of acid when he opted for one thin ring to etch out, per etch.
Because the acid will be replaced by the formed salts during the reaction of the stone material with the acid, and thus the acid will be used up in a relatively short time, and what remains must be washed out of the etched ring by water.
He will have made a double containing ring of acid resistant material, piled up so high as to hold just enough acid to dissolve the stone (alabaster,basalt, diorite, granite, limestone) for about a few milimeters. And washed the acid out, refilled the groove with fresh acid, etc.
That will probably show in the end, a pile of repeating thin rings etched out in the granite core nr 7, and also in the opposite wall of the granite moldblock nr 8.

Petrie's Infamous Core #7 with a lot of pictures of it.
Chris Dunn visited the Petrie museum in London, and concluded that the thin grooves on the outside of the famous granite core nr 7 were spirals instead of horizontal rings.

That undermines my proposed acidic theory. Which will leave behind only horizontal rings.

However, there are some remarks from Chris Dunn on that page 6, which strongly indicate the use of an etching agent, like an acid :

The crystalline structure of the core under microscope was beyond my ability to evaluate. I could not determine as surely as Petrie did that the groove ran deeper through the quartz than the felspar. I did notice that there were some regions, very few, where the biotite (black mica) appeared to be ripped from the felspar in a way that is similar to other artifacts found in Egypt. However, the groove passed through other areas quite cleanly without any such ripping effect. Though again, I support Brownlee's assertions that a cutting force against the material could rip the crystals from the felspar substrate.
-snip-
The depths of the grooves were .002 and .005 inch. (Actually, because there were clearly discontinuities in the groove at some locations around the core, the actual measurement would be between .000 and .005 inch).

This "running deeper through the quartz" can be caused by the fact that quartz is "weaker" against acids than felspar (I suppose he means feldspat or feldspar). The other observations also can be an indication of the effect from acid.



His white cotton thread showing the helical nature of the groove looks to me as a very rough measuring method, which is not easily underwritten by observing his posted photographs on that page. To me the grooves seem to run in parallel circles above each other.
I can only be sure when I have that core in my own hands.

The only logical reason I can bring up to still adhere to my theory, if I subscribe to the conclusion of a helical groove on that core by Chris Dunn, is some sort of later "machining" of an etched out granite core. The reason for that is beyond my grasp however.
Directly after breaking out of the core from its seat in the granite block by the ancient egyptian stone worker, this "machining" then used some sort of slow "lathing" method to smoothen up the surface of the core.

I know that when you lead a modern steel cutting tool too fast along a piece of clamped in, fast spinning steel pipe, on a present day lathe, you will end up with a rough carved out spiral on the surface of that pipe. You have to lead the tool very slow along the spinning pipe, to get a smooth surface.

Next question, what kind of ancient method of carving can we imagine, which copies a modern lathe, without electro motors and steel tools etc.
That means at least in one option, that the granite core must have been rotated, while the used tool must have been lead along the rotating granite core.
There's only one farfetched method I can imagine momentarily :

The core is clamped in a hole by means of one or more wooden or stone wedges.
Imagine a massive stone with a rough diamond or other precious stone embedded in it.
They can be found in multiple places near Egypt, I found a handfull of rough alluvial diamonds in Kenya, Niger, Benin, Togo, and stone embedded ones in Eritrea, Somalia and Ethiopia, which I sold in Antwerpen. Yes, I am lucky to be still alive. The last 3 places were no fun at all to hang around.
Hang that stone on a rope, and circle it around the clamped-in rough etched-out granite core, while keeping the rough diamond pressed against the core. Crazy idea. Because the rope must also go down fast while circling, and I don't know how to achieve that with ancient techniques.
I saw the way the diamond cutters and grinders in Antwerp worked. They glue their work piece, a rough diamond, on a wooden stick, and push it then against a fast revolving round steel plate with diamond dust glued on it. I don't think this technique was possible in ancient Egypt. No strong enough glue?
Perhaps a rough diamond was clamped in some sort of other wooden or stone object?
I don't think the ancient egyptians had any kind of lathes. I can imagine a small stone disk with a groove around it, and a leather band around it in that groove, and another much bigger stone disk with a groove around it, and that same leather band around that disk also, and some strong egyptian guy spinning the big disk with a stick attached. That would let the small disk spin a lot faster.
And the famous granite core glued or clamped in the center hole which also holds the axel.
Then I have a fast spinning core. And then? Your guess as good as mine.
Last gamble : stick with diamond glued on top, press it with all your might against the fast spinning core, while also hanging with all your weight on the stick, causing your hands to go fast down the core. That would give a spiral along the core.

But why go that complicated route, when you can use special sand, or dust from crushed precious stones and a lot of patience, to smoothen the surface of that core, simply by hand?
You would never end up with spirals on that core, however.

If Chris Dunn is right in his observations of that core, then we have a damn difficult task to find a viable way for an ancient egyptian stone worker, to obtain the observed effect on that granite core.

Originally posted by Marduk

I translate that to mean, float or levitate

then you are in a minority of one
in addition to the fact that you started with a theory and then looked for the details to match it
thats not clever Beth
when called you have no evidence
ergo you have no case
there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that Enkis Ekur was some kind of floating sky city
and tonnes of evidence that says it was not
but you chose to ignore that didn't you
this places your belief system alongside young earth creationists
as such it is not only highly improbable it is actually laughable
roflmao
you can hear me laughing right ?

Samuel Noah Kramer in Enki Builds the E-Engurra:
"Then Enki raises the city of Eridu from the abyss and makes it float over the water like a lofty mountain. "

Guess I'm not a party of one.

Originally posted by LaBTop
The rest can be deducted from my above post.

There is a huge unfinished stone in a quarry over there...

When I see a team of however many you want with ropes and levers and sled move THAT stone 50 miles I will believe your theory


To Marduck...

LEVITATE:

Etymology: levity
intransitive verb : to rise or float in or as if in the air especially in seeming defiance of gravitation
transitive verb : to cause to levitate

Levitate... float in air... anti gravity all the same thing

Most people on this board believe in UFO's and are pretty sure they are "flying" using some sort of electromagnetic field that negates gravity, ergo they are effectively levitating


If the effect works on UFO's, trust me its a lot easier to lift a small stone. Any good buddhist monk can do that

Here's a start... considering we were discussing sound waves....

Tibetan Sound Levitation Of Large Stones Witnessed By Scientist

I am sure both Harte and Marrduck will attack this article... as soon as they are finished swooning over the boys in SG-1


[edit on 26-8-2006 by zorgon]