Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Explain to me 20 years for Khufu


  • Please log in to reply
419 replies to this topic

#166    ShadowSot

ShadowSot

    Stinky Cheese

  • Member
  • 6,874 posts
  • Joined:27 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Oops.

Posted 01 June 2010 - 04:04 AM

The stones are solid, the pyramid is not.
Parts are either in-filled with ruble or hollow.

It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
-Terry Pratchett

#167    OldTimeRadio

OldTimeRadio

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,527 posts
  • Joined:30 Sep 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

Posted 01 June 2010 - 04:33 AM

Is there any way the pyramid stones could have been raised with wind power?

    I don't believe the ancient Egyptians were aware of the concept of the propeller/curved spinning blade, but if they were aware they could have constructed crude windmills or wind turbines which could not only have lifted the blocks but swung them into place.


#168    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,948 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 01 June 2010 - 04:43 AM

View PostOldTimeRadio, on 01 June 2010 - 04:33 AM, said:

Is there any way the pyramid stones could have been raised with wind power?

    I don't believe the ancient Egyptians were aware of the concept of the propeller/curved spinning blade, but if they were aware they could have constructed crude windmills or wind turbines which could not only have lifted the blocks but swung them into place.

Sure.

There are several ways it could have been done with wind.

The most obvious is with a large "sail" in the various boat
pits.  These could capture huge force of the wind and used
to lift stones.  They'd have to have a sail that was easily
taken in.  

I have a lot of doubt this was actually used since there
would be a lot of days without wind and the best days would
be too dusty to work probably.  

There are lots of ways to catch wind but somebody already
decided that ramps were the only technology the ancients were
sophisticated enough to grasp.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#169    Qwasz

Qwasz

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 142 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2010

Posted 01 June 2010 - 07:09 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 01 June 2010 - 02:57 AM, said:

It is solid in the same way a pile of gravel is solid. There is very little binding agent involved. The blocks are held in place by gravity, and gravity is what causes settling.

Brick walls, foundations and other structures will settle and crack. They only crack because they are bonded together, otherwise the individual blocks would move around due to heating and cooling. The pyramids have space between the blocks to allow for the expansion that would otherwise cause it to fall apart, but still each individual block over thousands and thousands of years is going to move a little here and a little there. That is 1.66 Billion sunrises and sunsets. Blazing hot days, and freezing cold nights. I think some settling would occur.

If the blocks were all dumped in a pile, then yes, there would be settling and it would act like a "pile of gravel".  But the pyramid is not a pile of limestone blocks.  The blocks are ordered and stacked.

Just because gravity causes settling does not mean anything acted upon by gravity will settle.  You're violating the most fundamental rule of logic.

Again I refer you to your local structural engineer would should be able to help you understand.

Why do you think none of the mainstream literature suggests settling for the creases?

This is really a pointless debate though, if you want to believe the creases are settling, go ahead.


#170    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,165 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 01 June 2010 - 03:14 PM

View PostQwasz, on 28 May 2010 - 10:50 PM, said:

DMJM as far as I'm concerned is completely debunked.

This is obviously mere uninformed opinion, since you have prented neither your own nor anyone else's information that would debunk DMJM.

View PostQwasz, on 28 May 2010 - 10:50 PM, said:

And yes I'm aware of their 5 year estimate (see my previous posts on the subject), it's based in no real science at all, which is the reason they didn't publish their data or their calculations, only a brief 10 page summary...
It is my understanding that their findings were indeed published.  The article was a summary.  Civil Engineering Magazine, a trade journal, publishes stories of interest to their trade readership, not complete engineering studies.

View PostQwasz, on 28 May 2010 - 10:50 PM, said:

Show me the peer reviewed publications of logistical estimates and we'll talk.  But DMJM, that's just a bunch of idle speculation done (not to sell books like the fringe authors) to help promote their consulting firm and get free press in the civil engineering magazines (not journals).
I thought it was you that was confused because it "didn't add up" to you.

Go find it yourself.  It's not on the internet AFAIK.

Also, DMJM has no need whatsoever to promote themselves in any trade magazine.  Are you under the impression that such a story might result in more business for DMJM?  If so, no wonder you are so confused, exhibiting as you do a complete lack of understanding of the workings of industry in general and engineering consulting in particular.

View PostQwasz, on 28 May 2010 - 10:50 PM, said:

DMJM does the same kind of "science" as the atomic reactor guy.  Both theories are baseless speculation that goes way beyond the bounds of reality.
Given that neither does "science" at all, I don't see your point.

However, it seems to me that there should, in any thinking mind, be a very apparent difference between a claim that the Egyptians built nuclear reactors and a claim that Egyptians dragged large rocks up and stacked them in a pile.

Oh well.  It's certainly not worth my time to try and help you when you make such ridiculous statements as I have quoted here.

Harte

Edited by Harte, 01 June 2010 - 03:33 PM.

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#171    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,948 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 01 June 2010 - 04:05 PM

It's like Harte and I read different reports.  The one I read
in the link he provided said nothing at all.  If you distilled
it down it would be nothing but hot air, wind, and vacuum.  

Here's the most important sentence;

"We determined, however, that some type of
ramp structure was probably used given the
remains of ramps at other sites and our
assessment of available construction methods"

For those who don't speak egyptology this say that the
ancients weren't smart enough to build or operate any-
thing more complicated than a ramp.  It says the authors
of the report weren't smart enough actually investigate
or calculate whether or not a ramp might actually work
and they must be right because the egyptologists who paid
for the work told them there's proof ramps were used on
pyramids made a thousand years later.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#172    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,165 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 01 June 2010 - 05:12 PM

View Postcladking, on 01 June 2010 - 04:05 PM, said:

It's like Harte and I read different reports.  The one I read
in the link he provided said nothing at all.  If you distilled
it down it would be nothing but hot air, wind, and vacuum.  

Here's the most important sentence;

"We determined, however, that some type of
ramp structure was probably used given the
remains of ramps at other sites and our
assessment of available construction methods"

For those who don't speak egyptology this say that the
ancients weren't smart enough to build or operate any-
thing more complicated than a ramp.  It says the authors
of the report weren't smart enough actually investigate
or calculate whether or not a ramp might actually work
and they must be right because the egyptologists who paid
for the work told them there's proof ramps were used on
pyramids made a thousand years later.
Again, Cladking, you demonstrate that you have no knowledge whatsoever of the actual facts that have been established.

Ramp leading to Khufru's pyramid:

Quote

On the South side of the paved road, South of Khufu's pyramid, we excavated down about 2.50 meters and found another part of the ramp. This part is in line with the Eastern and Western wall and is of similar construction. This discovery proves that the ramp led from the quarry to the Southwest comer of the pyramid and was made of stone rubble and Tafla.(see plans 2,3) The ramp rises to about 30 meters above the pyramid's base at its Southwest comer. The ramp would have leaned against the pyramid's faces as they rose. Somewhat like accretion layers wrapped around the pyramid with a roadway on top. The weight of this ramp is borne by the ground around the pyramid. Traffic could move along the top of this structure as both pyramid and ramp rose in tandem. The top of the pyramid could be reached with only one and one quarter turns. The slope would rise with each turn from a reasonable 65 degrees, for the first section, to as much as 18 degrees for the last climb to the apex. 19

PDF including information about a ramp used in construction of Menkaure's mortuary temple.

Menkaure was the successor to Khafre, and another pharoah from the 4th dynasty (just like Khufu.)

Ramp remains found in various places around Egypt:

Quote

Remains of ramps have been discovered at Meidum, Dahshur, Abu Ghurab and Abusir, thus supporting the claims of Siculus. Notable also are the Sinki pyramid at South Abydos and the Sekhemkhet pyramid where ramp remains, and even complete ramps have been discovered. Other ramp remains may have also been discovered at Giza, where excavators from the Cairo University excavated two parallel walls that may have formed the retaining framework of a ramp.

More on remains of ramps:

Quote

The most straightforward method would have been the so-called linear ramp, probably used in the Third-Dynasty pyramid of Sekhemkhet, at Saqqara. Such ramps, however, were probably rarely used, because they would have had to be very wide. An alternative would have been the 'staircase ramp', a steep and narrow set of steps leading up one face of the pyramid, traces of which have been found at the Sinki, Meidum, Giza, Abu Ghurob and Lisht pyramids.

Same link:

Quote

Traces of 'interior ramps' have survived inside the remains of the pyramids of Sahura, Nyuserra and Neferirkara, at Abusir, and of Pepi II, at Saqqara, but some kind of exterior ramp would still have been needed after the interior was filled in.

Sinki pyramid ramps (3rd Dynasty)near Abydos:

Quote

The Sinki Pyramid
This pyramid is located near the village of Naga el-Khalifa, about five miles south of Abydos.  It should be noted that occasionally, all of these small pyramids are referred to as "Sinki Pyramids". This pyramid was first discovered by Charles Wilbour and Gaston Maspero, and a century later investigated by Swelim and Gunther Dreyer. Like the Zawiyet el-Meiyitin pyramid, its four meter high remains are aligned with the Nile river.  Likewise, it is made of rough limestone bound by a mortar of clay and sand. However, we here find the remains of ramps built of mudbrick with a filler of mud, rubble and sand.  These ramps originally led to the second step of the pyramid.  We also find fourteen graves from the Old and New Kingdoms nearby.

Sinki again:

Quote

An aerial view of layer step pyramid Sinki (click to see diagram) at Abydos shows the construction ramps on the 4 sides of the unfinished monument. They were starting from the desert surface over the foundation of the outer facing (layer 3) and leaning on the nucleus (layers 2, 1, and the core). Redrawn by Nabil Swelim 1990.

Same site shows a pic of construction ramps for an unfinished Giza pyramid.

There is plenty more evidence of ramp usage in Ancient Egypt contemporary with the 4th Dynasty or, at the very least, contemporary with the Old Kingdom.

IOW, not "a thousand years later."

Not that you would believe it if I posted it.  That's why I will stop here.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#173    ShadowSot

ShadowSot

    Stinky Cheese

  • Member
  • 6,874 posts
  • Joined:27 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Oops.

Posted 01 June 2010 - 05:22 PM

Quote

Not that you would believe it if I posted it. That's why I will stop here.

Hey, I'm taking notes, keep on.

Edited by ShadowSot, 01 June 2010 - 05:23 PM.

It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
-Terry Pratchett

#174    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,948 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 01 June 2010 - 05:40 PM

Harte;

I appreciate your effort.  

You see these experts saying things like "might have" or "could
have" and see the changes in their thinking over the years and
believe it must add up to a pretty solid theory based on sound
evidence.  If you strip away all the verbiage and the guesses
there just isn't anything underneath.  

We are mostly all aware of the actual facts and have our own un-
derstanding of what they mean.  What it always comes down to for
me is that there is no contemporary evidence that ramps were used
to lift stones onto the pyramids.  Where one would expect massive
evidence there is a void.  Where one would expect untold thousands
of workers and many hundreds of overseers there are few workers and
almost no overseers.  

If they had used ramps as all these experts you quote theorize, I
would expect a lot of evidence including evidence built right into
the structure itself.  Instead all we see are the horizontal and ver-
tical lines indicative of a building process that operated only in
the horizontal and vertical planes. Like all the evidence this is
inconsistent with ramps.  This is not an opinion but a fact.  Yes, these
facts could be irrelevent but opinion underlies the concept of ramps
and fact underlies the concept of straight up pulling.  There is also
the fact that the pyramid is surrounded by a device that DID collect water
and channel it to at least two points on the cliff face.  This is sim-
ply and wholly inexplicable in orthodox terms.  But it's still a fifteen
acre fact that is consistent with pulling stones straight up the pyr-
amid.  It's also consistent with the builders whose words suggest that
the ka of the king was built with ladders (straight up the side) and ropes,
and boats, and cables, and all manner of physical processes which don't
include the word "ramp".  

If you believe professional opinion then your links are as good as they
get but they do not establish ramps as a means of raising stone. If you
read them closely and skeptically you'll see they are all founded on the
premise that the ancients could only have used ramps and that ramps have
been found on and by later pyramids and that ramps have been found near
the great pyramids.

Edited by cladking, 01 June 2010 - 05:44 PM.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#175    Qwasz

Qwasz

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 142 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2010

Posted 01 June 2010 - 05:58 PM

View PostHarte, on 01 June 2010 - 03:14 PM, said:

Are you under the impression that such a story might result in more business for DMJM?  If so, no wonder you are so confused, exhibiting as you do a complete lack of understanding of the workings of industry in general and engineering consulting in particular.

That's funny, since I'm an engineering consultant.  I'm sorry Harte but it is YOU who has not idea about how engineering consulting works.

The truth is, it's not much different than branding in any other capital market.  You create an image of your organization which is as favorable as possible, find ways to get your message, your logo, and your brand burned (branded) into the minds of consumers.

DMJM's Egypt "work" is just a silly stunt used to help them produce a brand.  It probably worked.


Also, just because something calls itself a "journal" does not mean it's a peer-reviewed scientific journal.  Many high-end MAGAZINES call themselves journals.  It doesnt make them such.  The Wall Street Journal is in fact a newspaper (and I guess now an online media outlet).  It is certainly not part of the scientific literature.

Edited by Qwasz, 01 June 2010 - 06:34 PM.


#176    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • 7,781 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 01 June 2010 - 07:04 PM

I can't add much to the subject of settling because I don't have a background in the engineering and physics principles involved. However, the Great Pyramid is constantly subjected to the scouring and damaging forces of the desert, the same forces that have eroded and decimated countless other tombs and monuments in the Nile Valley. The exposed blocks of the Great Pyramid are nothing but limestone, a relatively soft and malleable stone. They are slowly but surely eroding under the dynamics of desert winds. Could this ever-present erosion and reshaping lead to some degree of settling?

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#177    Qwasz

Qwasz

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 142 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2010

Posted 01 June 2010 - 07:40 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 01 June 2010 - 07:04 PM, said:

I can't add much to the subject of settling because I don't have a background in the engineering and physics principles involved. However, the Great Pyramid is constantly subjected to the scouring and damaging forces of the desert, the same forces that have eroded and decimated countless other tombs and monuments in the Nile Valley. The exposed blocks of the Great Pyramid are nothing but limestone, a relatively soft and malleable stone. They are slowly but surely eroding under the dynamics of desert winds. Could this ever-present erosion and reshaping lead to some degree of settling?

The only thing that could cause settling would be blocks being crushed or the foundation settling.  Neither of which would produce the creases.

The creases can only have come from the original design and layout.  One might speculate that they were a "mistake" but I find that unlikely due to the equivalence between all 4 creases (on each side they are identical)


#178    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,625 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 01 June 2010 - 07:40 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 01 June 2010 - 07:04 PM, said:

I can't add much to the subject of settling because I don't have a background in the engineering and physics principles involved. However, the Great Pyramid is constantly subjected to the scouring and damaging forces of the desert, the same forces that have eroded and decimated countless other tombs and monuments in the Nile Valley. The exposed blocks of the Great Pyramid are nothing but limestone, a relatively soft and malleable stone. They are slowly but surely eroding under the dynamics of desert winds. Could this ever-present erosion and reshaping lead to some degree of settling?

Here we have an image that shows all of the above...including the futile attempts of some to vandalize the thing (but then again, they lost interest after a few months...not 20 years)
Posted Image

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#179    Qwasz

Qwasz

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 142 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2010

Posted 01 June 2010 - 07:57 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 01 June 2010 - 07:40 PM, said:

Here we have an image that shows all of the above...including the futile attempts of some to vandalize the thing (but then again, they lost interest after a few months...not 20 years)

another means of proving to yourself that it doesn't settle is to look at the mainstream estimates of original height.  They do not contain settling calculations.


#180    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • 7,781 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 01 June 2010 - 08:55 PM

View PostQwasz, on 01 June 2010 - 07:40 PM, said:

The only thing that could cause settling would be blocks being crushed or the foundation settling.  Neither of which would produce the creases.

The creases can only have come from the original design and layout.  One might speculate that they were a "mistake" but I find that unlikely due to the equivalence between all 4 creases (on each side they are identical)

If you're talking about the apparent grooves that run down the center of each face of the Great Pyramid, I am in agreement. My question about settling has nothing to do with them. They are unarguably a product (or byproduct) of the construction process. I mention byproduct because I believe they result from the concave nature of each face, as can be seen at right (north) in this photo. The concavity meets at the center on each face and produces the groove. The concavity is a deliberate design feature--I've read that it would've helped to make the monument more stable overall--but the grooves served no purpose as to design or structure as far as I'm aware.

View PostQwasz, on 01 June 2010 - 07:57 PM, said:

another means of proving to yourself that it doesn't settle is to look at the mainstream estimates of original height.  They do not contain settling calculations.

Another reason I've personally wondered about settling is how Petrie's meticulous surveys of the late nineteenth century are still used by researchers today. Perhaps this has to do more with erosion than with settling, but surveys conducted in more recent times on the outer areas of the pyramid show it to be a bit denuded as compared to what Petrie's measurements reveal.

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users