bom shankra, on 18 February 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

I have aimed at elucidating the theory of stecchini in the interest of having a frank discussion, and though 22/7 was an approximation as you say, it has nothing to do with where I personally started out...

I realize you didn't start out with that.

However, I explained to you not only the proportion used by the Ancient Egyptians to build the pyramid, but also their method of measuring angles.

The pyramid next door, Kephren's, was built using the proportion 21:1 (21 fingers "in" to 1 cubit - 28 fingers - up.)

Manipulation of the same measurements used by the fringe on the Great Pyramid yeilds almost exactly 3 on Kephren's pyramid for exactly the same reasons:

21: 28 when manipulated leads to the ratio 84:28. 84/28 = 3.

bom shankra, on 18 February 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

Herodotus supposedly (I have been reading but haven't pin pointed where yet) provides us with the colaboration that the slope of the meidian triangle is in the proportion of phi (apothem divided by half the base), and stecchin develops on this by suggesting a triangle of 480 feet * 377 feet *610 feet gives very accurate values for phi (610/377 = 1.6180371), and also pi (377/480 *4 = 3.14166). note however that it is not possible to make a right angle triangle from these exact numbers, so he goes on to suggest that two possible meridian sections should be considered...1 based on phi, the other pi. However, there is a point to be made here about the pyramidion. Stecchin states that Agatharchides deliberately leaves it out of the equation, so instead of the 610 ft for the apothem we have 600ft, and instead of half the base of 375, we have 371ft (this assumes a side length of the pyramidion of approx 9ft - half of which is 4.5ft), so now we have right angle triangles that are presented as follows:

based on phi, apothem = 600.1ft, base 370.9, and height 471.8 (this gives 1/phi, or 0.618063)

and based on pi = 599.9ft, 370.6, and again 471.8 ( pi = 3.142009)

so in other words what hes suggesting is two faces are calculated by Phi, and the other two by Pi.

You can play with numbers all day long but in the end, the fact is that the GP was constructed with a slope of 22 fingers "in" for each cubit up, with the cubit (again) equal to 28 fingers. And it is this ratio that is manipulated using unexplained methods to arrive at pi and phi.

Exact proportions like these (whole number fingers per cubit) can be found on every pyramid built by the Ancient Egyptians. Every single one.

bom shankra, on 18 February 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

There is alot more to examine regarding stecchini, and since I first read his published theory in Peter Tompkins "secrets of the pyramids" a year ago, I have been hard pressed to find a fatal flaw in his logic, however, it doesn't yield freely to understanding. Should it be ditched in that case? fringe rantings? I'd say harte, that you made your mind up aboout that before I even started the thread.

It's true that I've made up my mind. You have only rehashed some of the things I've looked at in the past. Your posts on this are nothing new to me.

Was I supposed to remain undecided until you decided to post materials I've already considered in making up my mind?

My mind was made up upon examining the actual evidence that we actually have. Not by deciding what could or couldn't have been. I understand what you are trying to imply here and I assure you that in my case, I've thoroughly researched the facts of the matter and found the claims you mentioned here to be baseless.

What is so hard about the 22:28 ratio? It leads to every number you claim, and it does not involve pi

**or** phi at all.

I told you the value the Egyptians used at the time for pi. If they knew what pi was, why would they do this?

bom shankra, on 18 February 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

isn't it possible that the ancients recognizing the equinox and the solstice, could have had the capacity and coherence, the deductive insight, to have created a science based on the heavens and the natural world, and to have known instinctively the mechanics of the cosmos. The ancients brain was exactly the same size as modern mans. Is it not bordering on conciet to deny our for fathers this?

There's no question that pretty much all ancient peoples, and likely Homo Erectus, recognized the equinox and solstices. The Ancient Egyptians absolutely did.

What of it? It takes no real knowledge to do this, nor any real technology to predict these dates.

Speculation that such observations "could have" led to some sort of science, a science that we have not a shred of evidence for, is a parlor game, not a logical discussion. It could be fun, but I'm not interested, given what I already know.

Harte