If they could get all the lines of the Great Pyramid virtually perfect
and its orientation to within a tiny error then why are the layers wedge
shaped? Am I to believe that they had no problem correcting errors
but they couldn't cut stone to within 3" with any regularity?

As long as we're talking about facts that are normally brushed aside
why would some layers at the top be thicker than layers at the bottom,
such as the 188th and the 24th? If it was so hard to drag stones up the
ramp for the 187th layer wouldn't it be even harder for the 188th? If
they wanted large stones on the bottom than why would some layers
at the bottom be thin?

what was the necessity to ask seperate questions?? one on the wedges and one on the grooves?

They are two distinct sets of questions. They most probably have two distinct answers as well.

These are not addressed by traditional theorists to any real degree so far as I know. They are very important features yet tend to be ignored. Despite the massive blocks high up in the structure many people talk about how small the stones are at the top. Even if it took twice as much work to lift a stone that was twice as big it wouldn't matter since it takes up twice the volume.

If you poke around at Touregypt, you'll see that these questions have been addressed.

Concerning your layers question, the AE's only leveled their work every tenth or so layer of stone. I'd guess that near the top they didn't pause to level the layers as often, so the layers you see are thicker.

Also, the stones in the upper two-thirds of the G.P. are decidedly smaller than those further down, and they get even smaller the higher you go.

The layers of stone, however, vary in thickness.

Harte

Da Verminator,

There is nothing wrong with the OP. Please do not abuse the report system.

Thanks for your cooperation

I am not abusing the reprt question.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with the OP, He is in his full faculties.

If he had leant technical writing he would have asked both the questions in the same thread.

I report what i feel is not so correct.period.

Could we stick to the actual topic being discussed please as oppose to arguing with the moderators and complaining about the way in which the OP has chosen to pose his questions.

Thank you.

From near the Pyramids are not as perfect as some Pyramidiologists want to make us believe. The nearer you've been to them the more it is obvious that they have been build by bronze age people with bronze age means.

I couldn't find anything related to this on a search of touregypt.

I've also lost my bookmark of the variations in pyramid layers. I thought it was in Petrie's
work but apparently not. I'll grant you that the most wedged shaped layers fell at somewhat
regular intervals but then so do the thick layers.

It could mean that these wedges were to compensate for accululated errors but even were
this shown to be the case, the question would still remain how so much error would accumulate.
Most of these errors would cancel each other out from one layer to the next if the only factor
causing it were poor cutting or poor measuring.

In other words we're still left to wonder how a structure built to such tight standards would have
such sloppy work in these thicknesses. Sure they wouldn't show and didn't matter, but surely it
would have been far easier to maintain true lines if each layer were the same thickness from
side to side.

Here's a great work-up on the layers posted on the "why grooves" thread;

http://www22.ocn.ne.jp/~p-inpaku/pyramid/courses.htm

Unfortunately it doesn't explore the variability within layers.

very simple: a building build by bronze age people with bronze age means...why is that so difficult to understand?

There seems no evidence that both of your assumptions aren't true. The former
is being explored by geneticists and various other disciplines.

The latter is what concerns us here; what were these means? Anyone who has
seen the structures or a good photograph has had to wonder how they were built
with bronze age means.

There is a lot more data, technology, and science than when the proposed solu-
tions were first profferred. There is more knowledge about the people and their
tools. There is more knowledge in all branches of science and this question is
most probably solvable now.

The fact that the layers are so wedgeshaped might be a clue. Perhaps not, perhaps
they are merely the result of accumulated errors as has been suggested.






edited to correct misstatement.

Bronze age means, if you don't mind...

I would wager the variability shown by pretty regular spikes that then dwindle just to spike again has something to do with restrictions of their counstruction techniques. The bottom of each spike (the largest stones) might represent where a semi permanent structure such as a ramp or platform was, on which a series of lever cranes were based. The size of the blocks might dwindle due to the effort, or inability, of the cranes to lift the largest stones that high. Once they reached their limit perhaps they had to move the semi-permanent platform upwards, hence starting the spike again. The overall stone size may have dwindled do to the logistics of getting them up to each new, and thus higher, platform or ramp.

A good, reasonable and logical theory. I liked it, it has a good beat, you can dance to it, I give it an 8.

I wonder if it's true.

Harte

Dances to Capeo's theory... all the way home!

It works for me, too. It just sortta trips off the tongue.

There's some possibility it's related to changes in the way the stone originally laid down as well, or that they represent fundamental changes in the construction technique.

Well, heck. I don't know how I lost this but it's an addendum to "The Pyramids and Temples of Giza";

http://www.ronaldbirdsall.com/gizeh/errata/levels.html

Look at the variability in thicknesses especially at the bottom. There appears no rhyme nor reason if you suscribe to conventional explanations for construction. Are we really to believe that the ancients could make something so perfect as the Great Pyramid but they couldn't cut stone within 4' of the same thickness to complete layers? Does this mean that each of these wedge shaped layers is perfectly wedge shaped with no deviations in the middle? If there's no deviation in the middle then what possible explanation can exist for why it's easier to make wedges than even layers?

This is almost certainly a major clue about the whole process yet I've seen almost no comment on it except to mention it exists. It's the same with the grooves on the sides and the bifurcation. How can anyone address the question of how it was made without also addressing this? Then there are the myriad other physical facts that get no mention; how about the foreign sand behind the queens chamber. Is anyone really going to find it plausible that builders in a desert would import sand to fill cracks? It's simple absurdity.

This question is not insoluble. We should be able to figure this out using known facts and not the ponderings of scientists from as much as hundreds of years ago who lacked centuries of technology and testing on these structures. Maybe they've been wrong about the pyramids almost since the day they were built.

So why are these wedge shaped? I'll entertain even the most crackpot idea but I'd wager there are none consistent with traditional explanations that have any ring of truth about them.

It's also interesting that the closer a layer is to 26" the less the error. There are only a few outliers here.

It still has a nice ring but is inconsistent with the facts. The second layer has a
huge difference in thickness across. The base of the pyramid is almost perfectly
level (except for the hill and cavern in the middle) but the second level is sharply
slanted.

This must have had something to do with quarrying techniques and since we know
they knew how to read a ruler then it must have been related to the way the stone
came up out of the ground. ie- the way the stone was initially laid down. It was sim-
ply easier to break the stone away in huge wedge shapes which were then transported
to the pyramid.

Normal limestone lays down flat with natural planes of weakness or deviation at very
long intervals. Such intervals might be shorter in shallower water.

Answers to these questions may not exist and may never exist
but it seems important to keep all the data and facts in mind.

I do appreciate all the feedback in this thread and recognize it
was largely my error that caused it to fall away.

ttt