It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
How can we judge the level of a cultures technology when artifacts from said culture are disregarded as anomalous and therefore not worth further study?
In the Dendera hieroglyphs we can see an old glyph under the end of the bulb that consists of three horizontal lines crossing one larger vertical line that resembles a modern day electric insulator. Do these glyphs appear anywhere else in all of the Egyptian hieroglyphs?
What is the English translation of the afore described glyph?
1. The "cable" is described in the text beside the depiction as a symbolic sun barge moving across the sky (in a form which is by no means unique to these carvings).
2. It seems to be a bit of a stretch to describe this as a cable, although I suppose you could argue that the movement of the sun mirrored the movement of electricity.
3. However, the "cable" is attached to what proponents describe as a "socket", but is in fact a lotus flower.
4 .This flower appears in this form all over Egypt, and is always a lotus flower. Furthermore, the text beside the depiction confirms that it is a lotus flower.
5. Unfortunately, it seems that modern eyes have seen what they want to see in an ancient scene without considering the text provided by the ancient people to explain exactly what they were doing.
6. In the carvings, Harsamtawy (a form of Horus known as Horus who joins the two lands), son of Hathor, takes the form of a serpent (although he also appears as a hawk).
7. According to one myth, Horus sprung into existence out of a lotus flower which blossomed in the watery abyss of Nun at dawn at the beginning of every year.
8. The "light-bulbs" are in fact lotus flower bulbs, mythologically giving birth to the snake.
9. Another panel shows the bulb opening into a lotus blossom and the snake standing erect in the centre as a representation of the god Horus.
10. On the southern wall of the last room, a falcon, preceded by a snake emerges from a lotus blossom within a boat.
Such problems might include the construction and wall writings in the many confined tombs of Egypt. With limited air supply a torch would be both impractical and dangerous to construction crews and wall writers. Whats more, the lack of soot on the majority of the tomb walls infers that no matter what the method of illumination was, fire was not used to light the Egyptians work areas.
if the Djed is actually representing an insulator for the electrical current on the right side – then why is there a completely different image supporting the “light bulb” on the left side? Wouldnt both need an insulator to work properly?
The arms may symbolize something being given. The Djed with arms outstretched may mean a Djed turned on and giving the electricity needed for the light. The Djed without arms may symbolize a bulb that is not turned on but still present.
When the Temple of Hathor was first discovered was any evidence of candle wax, ash, soot, or any other by-product of fire found anywhere with in the complex?
Well, I have been in Egypt several times now, and I never had a problem to detect soot in pyramids and tombs. As an example here the soot covered burial chamber walls of the Red Pyramid of Dahschur
Around the area of the hieroglyphs are there any spots to place a torch?
The Kings Chamber of the Great Pyramid is constructed like a Djed. Can it create Piezoelectricity? I mean is it a possibility?
In the actual Dendera carvings seen in this external image link
We are able to see the carving in question. My question is – if the Djed is actually representing an insulator for the electrical current on the right side – then why is there a completely different image supporting the “light bulb” on the left side? Wouldn’t both need an insulator to work properly?
The arms may symbolize something being given. The Djed with arms outstretched may mean a Djed turned on and giving the electricity needed for the light. The Djed without arms may symbolize a bulb that is not turned on but still present.
The short answer is no. because the glass is already an insulator I believe.
Are the Dendera carvings, located beneath the Temple of Hathor, the only visual, or written, clues left behind from the Ancient Egyptians which would support the idea of the Ancient Egyptians possessing a light bulb.
The answer is No. I found a number references pointing to the ahnk on top of the Djed providing what looked to be light... this type of stylized glyph appears in a few places and peaked my interest quite a bit.
In your last post you had talked about the credibility of the sources I provided. I am curious as to what credibility the sources you provide bring to the table? What evidence to they use to support their claim of a light bulbs existence in Ancient Egypt?
Curiosity is great! You will need it to find the answer as to the validity of the sources I cited because as far as I know they are mostly solid sources.
In reference to the text provided with the Dendera Carvings (Sources here… Source 3: Reference 1) what explanations are by the people who support the theory that the light bulbs could have existed in ancient Egypt, to explain the translations of the text provided to us by the original artists?
Again I apologize but for the sake of berivity I must say "shrug" Exellent question, Forgive me for ignoring it.
If the writings that accompany the Dendera Carvings are telling us the truth – then could it not be that the appearance of the Djed is actually depicting that Osiris is helping give birth to the snake God through the Lotus blossom (as Ancient Egyptian mythology suggests)
I have no idea. After reading the translation you provided for the previous question I am not sure how you get that interpretation... but again I did not have time to read all of that so the explination maybe in further reading....
Why would the Ancient Egyptians choose to leave any possible traces of soot behind to potentially desecrate the tombs of their sacred rulers?
Short answer is, If you use fire regularly you can not hide the soot/ carbon evidence. Fire creates carbon which no mater what, leaves its evidence when burned over long periods of time in a variety of ways. Soot on steps then yes fire was there. No soot, carbon, proof of regularly washed alls nothing inside near the glyphs with no means of hanging torches... that kinda raises more questions and is not a short answer.
Answer to Question 1:
How can we judge the level of a cultures technology when artifacts from said culture are disregarded as anomalous and therefore not worth further study?
Simply put – you cannot. It is impossible to gauge the fullest extent of technology of any civilization if you disregard findings from that civilization as anomalous. To be truly unbiased, you have to take into consideration all findings especially when its from an ancient civilization.
Can you show us what proponents for your side of the argument offer as a translation of the written information provided with the same images?
No...
Other than the Dendera carvings – can you show us other evidence that proves that the electric light bulb existed in Ancient Egypt?
Perhaps. As I mentioned before I had seen some other interesting things but I would recommend a Google search. My apologies for not being able to show you myself.
Andrew E. Wiggins is the winner.
Titorite and Andrew both had concise arguments, and fairly valid explanations for their viewpoints.
Andrew took the lead with his documentation showing that these "light bulbs" are actually representations of the birth of a god (literally the formation and birth of 'stability' in a religious based society). Not only did he provide significant evidence for this, he also explained his point logically, and equivocally.
Titorite presented a strong argument for their viewpoints, and a good first debate for a debater. They fell into the same hole I (no body knows me...) fall into on occasion. Titorite argued with their opinion as opposed to the facts available to them. I felt they believed what they were saying, but that wasn't enough for me to believe as well.
A great effort on a first debate for Titorite, and a well rounded argument for Andrew E. Wiggins.
Also kudos to both on an intriguing debate topic.
Keep up the activity, titorite. you will be an asset to the ATS Debate forums...
I'd first like to thank both titorite and Andrew E. Wiggin for participating in this challenge match. Also, I'd like to thank Memoryshock for pointing me onto this debate to judge. You guys debated a hard topic that is difficult to fight in either direction.
titorite,
You gave a great introduction, and even kicked it off with some really good supporting evidence. The glyphs look to me too to be those of a light bulb, upon first inspection.
You asked pertinent questions of Andrew, and you answered the ones given to you in the beginning very well, and even had some links to lend credence to your argument.
However, starting at your 3rd reply, you began to have issues with keeping up with the debate. While I can totally understand the problems experienced by real-life events, and their impacts on the debate, when you make a reply, it would be best to provide sources for your evidence. If you had time to look up the answers to these questions, then there shouldn't have been a problem with providing the links to your supporting evidence, now should there?
In my opinion, this hurt you significantly.
Andrew,
You started off strong, and you quickly established what you were aiming to accomplish. You answered titorite's questions with sourced materials, and then went about calling into question the credibility of his sources. While this is a commonly-used tactic, it proved to hurt you as much as it helped you.
You asked great questions, and made it clear what you were aiming to accomplish by asking them. One point that I found especially important was the point you made about the snake in the tube, and it's relation with the other snake.
I'm surprised that titorite didn't pick up on this subtle difference, and utilize it to his advantage, but I'll ask the pertinent question here:
Why in the Dendera glyphs do we see the snake in the tube, and yet in the other one, we don't see a tube? In the Dendera glyph as well, we see the snake at an angle, while in the other one, we see the snake standing vertical. What is the significance of their respective positions, and the presence of the "tube" around the Dendera snake?
In hieroglyphics, position and portrayal determine intent. How do we overcome this seeming lack of clarity?
In the end though, it is my opinion that Andrew E. Wiggin put up the better of the arguments. He used the sources he had strongly, and his opponent couldn't refute the claims that he made, due to real-life issues, as well as a lack of supporting evidence.
A brave fight by both members, but Andrew, Congratulations!!!
titorite,
Keep up the good work man!! You're going to be a major player in the next round of debates I feel. If you can devote the time and gather the proper sources, and cite them, you'll be nearly unstoppable. You had me until the middle when you had extenuating circumstances.
Quite a good fight though, for all that was going on man. Next time, do what I do. Have a list of sources available before you even begin. That way, there's no problem linking to them mid-post.
All in all, I loved this!! Kudos to both members for one heck of a fight!!!