The Egyptian Pyramids Creation Solved

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


You guys are still head banging on this one.

According to the Summerian Seals, which is about as believable a record of ancient times there is, people were living for a 1,000 years plus back then. Other ancient records also report technology far beyond the capabilities of monkeys.

This is a good theory, if we did in fact originate from monkeys.

It is not possible to theorize about that age, till we understand more about those times. The records are limited, with skeptics clambering upon eachother, trying to make light of what is available.

I still maintain human's did it, with the technology available at the time of construction. The whole thing was planned, right down to the time zones we still use today.

Originally posted by troubleshooter
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

6 million stones
Average of 3.5 tonnes each
100 years to build (lifetime of three kings)

One stone would have to be cut transported and set every 8.5 minutes...
...day and night without allowing for weather and other factors...
...for 100 years.

You are dreaming!

Couldn't you make up any other numbers that would make it even more unbelieveable?

Current stone count estimates put it less than 2 million stones in the GP

Nobody but you has ever estimated any average weight greater than 2.5 tons.

20 years is over 10.5 million minutes.

100 years is (of course) 5 times that (or 52.5 million minutes)
52.5 million divided by 6 million is 8.75 minutes
10.5 million divided by 2 million is 5.25 minutes.

There are some estimates that say there are fewer than 1 million stones.

There is no obstacle to setting stone at one every ten seconds, if you have enough people and enough stone.

It is a pyramid. 75 % of the stone is in the bottom one-third of the structure.

Civil Engineers have estimated that the G.P. was built (with ramps) over a 15 year period with (at peak employment) around 15,000 workers.

A summary (called "Project Management B.C.) was published in the trade mag for civil engineers. The entire project was done by a fairly prestigious civil engineering firm (DMJM.)

You an engineer?

Harte

Originally posted by Mad Simian
...The biggest assumption that most people seem to make is: once it was decided to construct the Pyramids that the Egyptians began the WHOLE project immediately. What I mean to say is that they cut a stone, transported it and set it into place all in one go. Why? Wouldn't it have been easier to cut all or most of the stones needed beforehand and then transport/store them first before construction actually began? After all, one would think that even beforehand the Egyptians knew this would take several generations of labor to accomplish so why overcomplicate things? ...

Or, perhaps with a workforce of 15,000 laborers, they could have had:

- 1000 laborers cuttings stones (that could be 50 teams of 20 men -- how quickly can 50 teams create a stone ready for transport? If each team did one stone every 7 hours, that would be 1 stone every 8.4 minutes.

- 4000 laborers moving stones -- for most of the normal-sized stones, I think a 75-man team may have been able to move one. 50+ teams of 75 men would be able to move a lot.

-10,000 laborers placing the stones. Again, 1000 work-teams with 100 men per team could probably work very efficiently.

The idea that they needed to do "X" amount of work in "X" amount of time is meaningless unless you know the workforce. With a large enough workforce, a lot can get done in a relatively short time.


[edit on 12/8/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by win 52
...Other ancient records also report technology far beyond the capabilities of monkeys.

This is a good theory, if we did in fact originate from monkeys.

I suppose you were just making a joke here, but what does the human evolution from earlier primates have anything to do with it?

The Egyptians are from only 5000 years ago (a very short time ago, evolutionarily-speaking), so basically they were physiologically the same as we are -- i.e. they were "Modern Humans" like us, with basically the same brains we have and the same capacity for understanding and problem-solving that we have. They may have not had our technology, but they were just as smart as us.

If Leonardo da Vinci could use only his imagination to develop designs for primitive-yet-ingenious machines that could do great things, then so could the Egyptians. And with the manpower and other resources the Egyptians had, they could have built those primitive-yet-ingenious machines and used them to build the pyramids.

where is teh cultural evidence that ties the giza complex to egyptians? where is the infrastucture that supports this technology? could they build pyramids but not frisbees? they understood fluid and acoustic dynamics but they just couldn't scrape together enough brains to use morse code?

this is all very interesting but you people are all grasping at straws. no one knows how they were built.

and which came first, teh causeways or the pyramids.

reply to post by Moodle

They had 1000 years of stone-working and stone-building experience before building their first pyramid. Then they had a few hundred years of pyramid construction before they attempted to build the great pyramids. Because they possesed the same brains that we have, they had the brain capacity to use that stone-working experience to develop short-cuts and methods for stone construction that has perhaps been lost ever since.

If we modern humans lost all of our power machinery and modern technology, and went back to stone construction using only manpower and simple machines, and did it for 1000 years (that would be until the year 3000), we would probably gain enough experience to figure out a method for constructing the great pyramid.



[edit on 12/8/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


if you're equating stoneworking as the cultural basis for this technology then why not say the greeks or romans or persians or anyone else that did stoneworking did the pyramids? for that matter why doesn't each civilization have their own pyramid?

gotta love that false confidence.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Oh, I'm not disagreeing on any of your points. It just seems to me that going that route would result in everyone 'tripping over each other'. However, if the majority of the stones were going to all be the same size and dimensions then they could have used a kind of 'assembly line' and mass produced and moved most of those stones close-by before actual construction even began. Then when it HAD begun, they could concentrate most of their work force on placement and put a smaller group on cutting/transporting the more complex stones. Then again, you'd either have to keep them stored on the transport barges or have a large enough area to store them(which is a whole other can of worms).

Like you said though, it all depends on the size of the workforce. More workers would mean less of a need to maximize their efficiency. And in the end, what I'm suggesting isn't backed by any archaeological evidence. Its just me throwing ideas out.

I would like to apologize(to everyone in general)for my lack of familiarity with ancient Egyptian culture as its not my favorite subject when it comes to archaeology; I'm more into the Minoan and New World societies. I'll be refreshing myself on it within the next month or so and will be able to better contribute to upcoming discussions.

Originally posted by Moodle
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

if you're equating stoneworking as the cultural basis for this technology then why not say the greeks or romans or persians or anyone else that did stoneworking did the pyramids? for that matter why doesn't each civilization have their own pyramid?

gotta love that false confidence.

Because the Egyptians were better, and their civilization had more time (which is probably why they were better).

The Romans built aquaducts that are still around today -- such as the Pont du Gard. The Greeks had the colossus of Rhodes and the statue of Zeus, which were amazing feats in their own time, but those were not as good as the Egyptian's creation, which has withstood time. That's simply because the Egyptians did a better job than the Greeks.

Plus, the fertile Nile River valley could produce food in such abundance for many generations that the Egyptians had a huge population -- and the huge population meant a huge potential workforce (i.e., the Pyramids were a government-run public works project that gave people jobs).

The Romans had a large workforce, too, and that's how they could build the aquaducts.

BUT THE MAIN REASON: the Egyptian civilization was stable much longer than the Greeks or Romans. From the beginning of the Nile civilization to the construction of the Great Pyramids was over 2000 years. That's a LONG TIME to have a (mostly) stable government and continuity of civilization. In comparison, the height of ancient Greek civilization lasted a little less than 1000 years, and the Roman Empire lasted about 400 to 500 years. Our current civilization only goes back to the end of the "dark ages" (about 800 years ago). Our culture basically "started over" in the 1300s after 9 centuries of stagnation following the fall of Rome. There were some writings leftover from the Greeks and Romans to give us a bit of a "jump start" -- so that helped us.

The continuity and prosperity that the Egyptian people enjoyed for over 2000 years allowed them to do great things.

I don't understand why people find it so hard to believe that the Egyptians could build the pyramids all by themselves. They weren't dumb -- they were exactly like us.

I wish people would stop selling the Egyptians and their civilization short.
They were smart people who had the ability to do great things.

[edit on 12/8/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by Harte

There is no obstacle to setting stone at one every ten seconds, if you have enough people and enough stone.

At such precision? Just imagine all the calculations that had to have been made and continually checked throughout the building process. From all the estimates I've read, 2 minutes per block is as far as I'm letting my mind stray. The science and logistics involved in the construction management would not allow for a 2.5 tonne block ever 10 seconds. But then again, I am no engineer, so my opinion means squat.

Don't forget that there was work done ONLY during the annual 3-4 month agricultural lay off period, so that drastically increases the construction time.

Back to the timing, imagine a block being placed 100 feet, into the air, at precise alignments. 10 seconds? I would fear saying 10 minutes.

Originally posted by serbsta

Originally posted by Harte

There is no obstacle to setting stone at one every ten seconds, if you have enough people and enough stone.

At such precision? Just imagine all the calculations that had to have been made and continually checked throughout the building process. From all the estimates I've read, 2 minutes per block is as far as I'm letting my mind stray. The science and logistics involved in the construction management would not allow for a 2.5 tonne block ever 10 seconds. But then again, I am no engineer, so my opinion means squat.

Don't forget that there was work done ONLY during the annual 3-4 month agricultural lay off period, so that drastically increases the construction time.

Back to the timing, imagine a block being placed 100 feet, into the air, at precise alignments. 10 seconds? I would fear saying 10 minutes.

I believe you missed the point of the post you are replying too.

They dont have 10 seconds to cut, move and place a stone and then they had to move to the next stone.

Depending on the workforce a stone could take like A WHOLE DAY to get into proper position (nevermind cutting and transporting). Its when you have hundreds of teams placing hundreds of stones that you get the work done in the allocated time.

The biggest mistake pyramid nay-sayers make is that they completely ignore the workforce aspect of the pyramid construction. Imagine if the same percentage of population in a modern country would undertake a construction on the same scale as the pyramids? We would be talking about MILLIONS of people.

Originally posted by merka

The biggest mistake pyramid nay-sayers make is that they completely ignore the workforce aspect of the pyramid construction. Imagine if the same percentage of population in a modern country would undertake a construction on the same scale as the pyramids? We would be talking about MILLIONS of people.

Aha i see, i misunderstood his post.

I am not a pyramid nay-sayer, I believe that the Pyramids were constructed by a large workforce of men. We just have not figured out the issues with logistics yet to make complete sense of it yet. Of course it could have been done with a work force which, form all the various opinions, I believe to have been around 140,000 men who built the Great Pyramid of Cheops.

Whether the whole thing was built by Egyptians, including the "sarcophagus" inside the King's Chamber, is a different issue all together.

reply to post by Doc Velocity


regarding the limestone,

Carl Munck has a theory regarding resonance & standing waves for healing applications, transition to the afterlife & birthing chambers. The limestone walls in some of the pyramids react oddly to sound.

google the code of carl munck, I've not finished reading it, the ancient technology stuff is just one aspect to my general research on sound energy & resonance, but I'm convinced the egyptians knew how to manipulate sound waves for applications we may have yet to rediscover.

-B.M

P.S) the kings chamber comes into carl's research also, strange results from his experiments in there...

[edit on 10/12/09 by B.Morrison]

So, if they took 100 years to build than how could they have been intended as tombs for the pharaoh who commissioned their construction?

I know that biblical records indicate people lived much longer back in the ancient times, most likely due to more natural ingredients in food, constant exercise , and no contaminants in the air and water. Even that is up for debate as their dating methods could have been flawed or improperly translated.

So many mysteries surround our past...

Originally posted by burnowt
So, if they took 100 years to build than how could they have been intended as tombs for the pharaoh who commissioned their construction?

100 years for the ENTIRE Giza complex perhaps, but not one pyramid.

Plus it wouldnt surprise me that if someone died long before their pyramid was completed, the stones at the least would be reused for the next Pharaoh thus cutting construction time.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


Yeah, they do look just like Egyptian pyramids. because... they're pyramids.

(Actually they look very little alike, but the jibe was just too good to pass up)

Wow so many people repeating the comments of their gradeschool teachers about the pyramids. Just as the teachers once told us the world was flat.

Anybody who does a wee bit of homework.. maybe take a look at ancient technologies.. like

www.youtube.com...

cannot be denied any longer. We are not in the day of libraries anymore, and the internet can provide visuals on these facts instantly.

I dare you to watch the above link if you believe the pyramids were complete manual labor.

(double dare)

And if you want to see the REAL solution to the Pyramids then you will need to see the ONLY PYRAMID solution that has ever made a lick of sense, and that is Christopher Dunn.

www.youtube.com...

Now I know I will get the gradeschool responses, because people would rather comment without watching the above videos, however please if you want to discuss the Pyramids keep up to recent discoveries.

As far as the comments about the average weight being 2.5 tons, that is true, however ancients are credited with moving precise cut rocks weighing 70-100 metric tons for up to 5 miles. We CANNOT replicate this today.

The very first civilization to leave records were the Sumerians. They claimed to be MORE ADVANCED THAN US, and left over 22000 tablets detailing their works. They invented math, a 400 letter alphabet and writing, laws, a rare precedent based legal system, and they have tales that equate to all the religions of the world including Christianities Noah, and Genesis.

Scientists (who read), have vastly altered their opinions on Egyptology over the last ten years. It is a very exciting time.

Okay I asked for it.. I contradicted your 6th grade teacher; bring it on.

Just watch those videos first please if you want to see truth.

Originally posted by friendlyprogrammer
Wow so many people repeating the comments of their gradeschool teachers about the pyramids. Just as the teachers once told us the world was flat.

Strawman much?

As far as the comments about the average weight being 2.5 tons, that is true, however ancients are credited with moving precise cut rocks weighing 70-100 metric tons for up to 5 miles. We CANNOT replicate this today.

Except, of course, for the several times a day this "feat" is accomplished in today's world.

The very first civilization to leave records were the Sumerians. They claimed to be MORE ADVANCED THAN US, and left over 22000 tablets detailing their works.

On the other hand, since the Sumerians made no such claim, we need not worry about it.

I probably should add that, of the "...over 22,000 tablets detailing their work...," the vast majority of them are IOUs, receipts and ownership tags. IOW, the minutiae of accounting.

They invented math, a 400 letter alphabet and writing, laws, a rare precedent based legal system, and they have tales that equate to all the religions of the world including Christianities Noah, and Genesis.

They invented their own math, as did the Hindus, the Greeks, the Egyptians, the Maya and any other number of cultures.

Scientists (who read), have vastly altered their opinions on Egyptology over the last ten years.

As opposed to... what? Scientists that don't read?

Harte

reply to post by friendlyprogrammer

As opposed to people who do not read new information. /\ /\

Thanks for the links and a star for you.

reply to post by B.Morrison

Looking up Dr Royal Rife's life work might give you some clues. Taking into account what Science has uncovered about how viruses spread and the new ideas about controlling viruses in the body by going after the tails of those virus strains in order to stop the spread, we have a whole area of new theory which is quite old according to Rife's work.

Dr Rife claimed he could destroy those parasite looking viruses by using wave resonance, back in the 50's. His work was also crushed by the US Medical Association.