Why are the pyramids built with the sized stones that they are?

reply to post by FreeMason


its a show of power.
takes effort to move and you cant exactly steel it.
think when they were made they would have been a sight!

This is awesome!

I never thought about the zeppelin theory. It sure does seem to raise more questions than answers though. Such as if the ancients had that capability, why build their stuff in odd places? You could take materials anywhere. You could move people anywhere. Er, what is the blimp made of? Heck I see an RPG in the making: Stone Age Blimp Wars.

Ah well, add this one to the pile of theories maybe at the deep end.

purplemer
I thought it established that the stones where not cut but a form on concrete. If I recollect this has been verified by scienitsts.

No, scientists dismissed the idea of "poured stone" used in the pyramids. For one thing, you can see the distinct bedding grains of the limestone (which wouldn't appear in poured stone.) For another, the blocks have all sorts of inclusions in them (like seashells) which came from quarrying. Additionally, the blocks are of a thousand different shapes (not a set of standard shapes) and would require thousands of molds to make them on top of the problem of creating millions of tons of the concrete slurry (which requires them to pound down the limestone into dust.)

reply to post by Byrd


To add to all that you just brought up, not only do you have to grind up all that limestone to make cement, you have to transport an almost equal amount of water, to make the cement, and transport it before it sets up. Not to mention the tremendous amount of labor and wood required to make and emplace forms. Add to that the fact that time factor involved in the curing of a run of molds,. To cast them inplace , you have to wait till the prevIous block sets up before you can remove, reset the forms for the next block.
The whole notion shows that the people who champion such a method have no experience in pouring large amounts of concrete.

punkinworks10
reply to post by Byrd

 

To add to all that you just brought up, not only do you have to grind up all that limestone to make cement, you have to transport an almost equal amount of water, to make the cement, and transport it before it sets up. Not to mention the tremendous amount of labor and wood required to make and emplace forms. Add to that the fact that time factor involved in the curing of a run of molds,. To cast them inplace , you have to wait till the prevIous block sets up before you can remove, reset the forms for the next block.
The whole notion shows that the people who champion such a method have no experience in pouring large amounts of concrete.

Yes, they would have to pour a new block every 2.5 minutes. Now, why have blocks at all if you are pouring? It would be easier to simply set one huge "block" as a row.

While the pyramids are incredible fascination, I don't think there is a mystery regarding its CONSTRUCTION.

There are countless plausible theories how it was done (w/ ramps etc.) and estimates exists that it took from 10 to 20 years to construct them with approximately 10.000 - 40.000 people.

All it really takes is LOTS of dedicated people - or enslaved people, depending.

Some scientists estimate it only took 10 years to build the great pyramid which is astonishingly short, some medieval structures in Europe took longer.

The MUCH GREATER mystery is in my opinion the actual purpose of the pyramids, not so much how they were built. Were they really "TOMBS"? This is what Egyptology "believes" but there is really no evidence whatsoever that they were built to serve as tombs. (The big "sarcophagus" was empty...the chambers are bare of decoration etc)...

The concept is that they did not use a single line to a peg but tied up firmly to an Obelisk, with more than just a rope. Indeed, my presumption requires the use of bald copper cable... could a bronze one have been forged?

reply to post by WeRpeons

According to that Greek dude, the pyramids took just under 22 years to build and using two 1-mile long Zeppelins, the numbers dropped out at about 21.8 years.

reply to post by WeRpeons

Makes no difference what you think. Empirical proof is what's needed to resolve the issue.

Empirical proof shows it can be done and was done.

Astyanax
reply to post by WeRpeons

 

If, in spite of this, you have evidence that demonstrates it was impossible to build an Egyptian pyramid using pre-Industrial-Age technology, please post it.

Consider Teotihuacan.

Teotihuacan Avenue of the Dead is a ludicrous 40 metres wide and runs for 3 miles dead straight.
- A Zeppelin factory would need a dead straight solid floor of over 1 mile and over 30 metres wide.

Teotihuacan has temples arching on either side and plinths at either end.
- A Zeppelin factory would need stone supports either side and plinths at either side for construction of the noose and tail.

Teotihuacan sits at over 7000 feet for no apparent reason.
- A Zepplin construction yard would be best at a high altitude.

Teotihuacan is in the middle of dense jungle a stupid place to put a city.
- A Zeppelin factory would require limitless supply of timber.

Teotihuacan has had a long traditon of a locals having pigs.
- Zeppelins would need a limitless supply of pigs bladders.

"nobody can tell me those pyramids were built by humans back in 3000 BC. To move those mammoth stones which weighed an average of 2.5 tons and lifting them just 2 stories would be a feat at today's technological standards!"He went on to say that it boggled his mind seeing how tight the joints were and how over 2 million stones were cut and lifted to such heights.

CORRECT. By TODAYS technology it would be a feat, but to 1895 PRUSSIAN TECHNOLOGY, it would have been a piss in the park, a piece of cake...just call for Count Ferdinand Zeppelin and Bob's your uncle.

ABNARTY
This is awesome!

why build their stuff in odd places? You could take materials anywhere.

Actually NO. Zeppelins could only be built....

1. Where the trade winds blow
2. Where there is a limitless supply of HARDWOOD LUMBER.
3. WHere hydrogen could be produced either with the help of horses or with the right chemicals locally available.
4. Preferably high up for launching.

This already shrinks it to little more than Central America, post Ice Age Egypt and a few places in SE Asia EXACTLY where the pyramids are.

NoRulesAllowed

The MUCH GREATER mystery is in my opinion the actual purpose of the pyramids, not so much how they were built. Were they really "TOMBS"? This is what Egyptology "believes" but there is really no evidence whatsoever that they were built to serve as tombs. (The big "sarcophagus" was empty...the chambers are bare of decoration etc)...

The Zeppelin Theory also answers this.

These Zeppelins would have needed...

- Guidance systems that allow navigation by Zeppelins from a distance.
- New supplies of hydrogen to keep them aloft.

Chemical residue in the Queens Chamber of the Great Pyramid indicates that it was used for the generation of hydrogen and its alignment would have been great for any Zeppelin, high up trying to find its way across the desert, the jungle of post Ice Age Egypt or across the Mediterranean.

FreeMason
If we were pyramid builders why would we choose to have such a stone of such a size? What is the reasoning for this? Is it integrity, do smaller stones break and collapse under immense weight? Is it something more? Is there a special number of stones used? Etc?

Uniformity. The tools of the trade in that era were "sized" to that measurement. The ancient egyptians where no spring chickens to such engineering. You don't give them enough credit. Look into how the Parthenon in Greece was built upon human dimensions. It will open your mind.....

Kratos...

Astyanax
reply to post by WeRpeons

 

Makes no difference what you think. Empirical proof is what's needed to resolve the issue.

Empirical proof shows it can be done and was done.

WHAT ABOUT WITNESS STATEMENTS?

Just how did these Ancient peoples claim that these structures we built?

STONEHENGE - The stones were FLOWN IN from South Wales by Merlin according to Ancient British Legend.

MOAI STONES - The giant heads were FLOWN IN according to Ancient Polynesian Legend.

There are numerous other accounts around the world where ancient civilizations claim the stones for their temples were "flown in"

reply to post by abacus10


I wasn't asking for proof of your silly zeppelin hypothesis. I was asking for evidence that the Pyramids couldn't have been built using pre-industrial techniques. Do you have any?

reply to post by abacus10


Yes, well, the Ramayana states that the god Hanuman uprooted an entire mountain from the Himalayan range and FLEW it to Sri Lanka to deliver some medicinal herbs that grew on the mountainside to where they were needed in a hurry.

I suppose that was zeppelins too, eh?

reply to post by punkinworks10


I'll also add that the AE back filled the quarries with rubble....why would you have rubble if you are grinding up the limestone to make concrete?

Oh, and the stones get smaller as the tiers go up.

reply to post by NoRulesAllowed


Except that the ancients and the AE considered them tombs and if you understand their culture and religion it makes perfect sense.

abacus10

Astyanax
reply to post by WeRpeons

 

Makes no difference what you think. Empirical proof is what's needed to resolve the issue.

Empirical proof shows it can be done and was done.

WHAT ABOUT WITNESS STATEMENTS?

Just how did these Ancient peoples claim that these structures we built?

STONEHENGE - The stones were FLOWN IN from South Wales by Merlin according to Ancient British Legend.

Didnt say he flew them there you assumed thats what the legend meant.But mind you this legend was created by a welsh cleric in 1135 by the name of Geoffrey of Monmouth before that no mention in any arthur legend so this really isnt helping your point.

MOAI STONES - The giant heads were FLOWN IN according to Ancient Polynesian Legend.

There are numerous other accounts around the world where ancient civilizations claim the stones for their temples were "flown in"

Again no according to there legends the statues walk to the coast because they have the spirit of there ancestors and are trying to protect the island. My advice if your going to try to use myths to prove your point at least get them right.