Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
RayGday

The Pyramid and the Yard

150 posts in this topic

If you'll notice, in quoting your post cladking switched gears from your mention of the perimeter of the GP to the diameter of the Earth. The latter of which he was calling "impressive" but which has neither anything to do with the GP's perimeter nor the Earth's circumference.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THAT'S what I can't understand cormac, how to go from a 2000 cubit measurement to a 25,000mile one?? guess i'm not drunk enough yet to figure out the leap.....

:-S

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THAT'S what I can't understand cormac, how to go from a 2000 cubit measurement to a 25,000mile one?? guess i'm not drunk enough yet to figure out the leap.....

:-S

He was trying to be relevant to either discussion and failed miserably IMO on both counts.

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 5% error in circumferance is pretty close to the proper diameter. If the OP is

correct then it appears to be a good approximation based on their available knowledge.

A believe there was a 3% error even in the 17th century.

In real life nothing ever works out correct to five or ten decimal points. Remember,

they lacked access to computers and modern technology and knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17.68 inches or just a little over 17 5/8'ths of an inch. That you wish it to be rounded off to 18 inches (1/2 yard) is irrelevant.

The perimeter of the Great Pyramid in Royal Cubits is 1758.37 cubits (2051.78 short cubits) or 1007.64 yards. Which means that you've overshot the mark by 241.62 Royal Cubits; undershot the mark by 51.78 short cubits and undershot the yardage by 7.64 yards.

cormac

Would it be mischievous to mention the height of the Great Pyramid is about 280 Royal Cubits?

:devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

A 5% error in circumferance is pretty close to the proper diameter. If the OP is

correct then it appears to be a good approximation based on their available knowledge.

A believe there was a 3% error even in the 17th century.

In real life nothing ever works out correct to five or ten decimal points. Remember,

they lacked access to computers and modern technology and knowledge.

I think you need to go back and recheck your math CK. A 5% error in an equatorial radius of 40,075.02 kilometers is 2003.75 kilometers for a revised size of 38,071.27 kilometers. The equatorial diameter of Earth is 12,756.2 kilometers. There's nothing "pretty close" about the two.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be mischievous to mention the height of the Great Pyramid is about 280 Royal Cubits?

:devil:

Or 326.47 short cubits. But let's not confuse him any more than he already is. :whistle:

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or 326.47 short cubits. But let's not confuse him any more than he already is. :whistle:

cormac

This is the room for an argument, isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add these up to get 36275.2 inches which equates to 1007.64 yards.

In 1925, J. H. Cole measured 1007.71 yards

The Yard that the pyramid builders used and the British Yard that Petrie used are the same yard.

Over time the British Yard changed but it's still very, very close to the original.

Ancient Egyptians did not know or use the yard. They used cubits. No modern form of measurement was used in the pharaonic period. The fact that certain lengths measured by the cubit come close to equivalent measurements used by us is, well, nothing more than coincidence.

Like I said, strain and stress and stare hard enough and long enough, and you can make pretty much any mathematical principle seem to apply to the Great Pyramid. Many have done so. That doesn't mean it's meaningful or realistic, however. All that matters is what the ancient engineers knew and how they approached building projects. There are several mathematical papyri which have survived from pharaonic times which tell us how the Egyptians approached mathematics for construction purposes. The yard is not among them.

But I ought to do the reasonable thing and turn this back to you, RayGday. Please share with us the vetted, peer-reviewed, empirical evidence that would support your claims.

OK, I'll bite. What did the Egyptians divide their hour into?

They did not divide their hours. In ancient Egypt the shortest unit of time is what they called at, which we can translate as "moment." It did not represent a fixed measure of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the room for an argument, isn't it?

Always!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THAT'S what I can't understand cormac, how to go from a 2000 cubit measurement to a 25,000mile one?? guess i'm not drunk enough yet to figure out the leap.....

:-S

You should have seen his calculation why 30 goons can't slide a pyramid block....

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

86,400 seconds in a modern day. 24 hours x 60 x 60.

The ancient 360° sky was divided yearly by 12 Moons, Months or Zodiacs and daily by 12 hours.

43,200 secs in the ancient day. 12 hours x 60 x 60.

Hope that helps.

I'm still seking some internal confirmation from the PT but it appears the ancient day

was indeed 43,200 s but the ancient night was equally 43,200 s, just as it is today. Their

perspective on things was alien to the way we see things today because they learned

everything from scratch starting as cavemen who were identical to animals except for the

ability to pass complex knowledge down from generation to generation. Their situation was

very well known to them as was their history and metaphysics. They were a force of nature

like a lion or a storm and their power consisted of the accumulation of knowledge and abil-

ity to focus that knowledge rather than fast speeds or strong winds. Modern people have

lost sight of all this and speculate on whether there is a cat or a box or a cat in the hat. We

also don't realize that ancients "spoke the same language". There were numerous "dialects"

but they were mutually intelligible because meaning was expressed in context and grammar

and vocabularies were very short.

The ancients tuned the movement of the planet to reflect human conditions because this is

how they understood everything; in human terms. They noted that the sun rose later each day

at Giza during the summer by almost exactly 60 heartbeats so this lenght of time became the

minute and the heartbeat became the second. This was all set to the rythmm of the year which

was set by the "center of the sky".

1496b. while thou dawnest on the east of the sky, "give thy hand . to N.;

1496c. take him with thee to the eastern side of the sky."

1497a. "O Re," say men, when they stand by the side of N. on the earth,

1497b. while thou dawnest on the southern side of the sky, "give thy hand to N.;

1497c. take him with thee to the southern side of the sky."

1498a. "O Rē‘," say men, when they stand by the side of N. on the earth,

1498b. while thou dawnest at the centre of the sky, "give thy hand to N.,

1498c. take him with thee to the centre of the sky."

The sun rises in the east on the equinox and in the south on the winter solstice. This

defines the center of the sky as the summer solstice at noon when the sun is highest

overhead and the number of imperishable stars reaches its maximum. It was absolutely

necessary to have a defined lenght of time of 1s because without it they couldn't under-

stand basic things around them like the delay between an action or lightning strike and

the sound it made. They couldn't even name things properly without such knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to go back and recheck your math CK. A 5% error in an equatorial radius of 40,075.02 kilometers is 2003.75 kilometers for a revised size of 38,071.27 kilometers. The equatorial diameter of Earth is 12,756.2 kilometers. There's nothing "pretty close" about the two.

cormac

So the first gives a diameter of 12762 km and the second gives 12124.

This doesn't seem to be so bad for people who are ascribed the knowledge base that the Egyptians normally are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ancient Egyptians did not know or use the yard. They used cubits. No modern form of measurement was used in the pharaonic period. The fact that certain lengths measured by the cubit come close to equivalent measurements used by us is, well, nothing more than coincidence.

Like I said, strain and stress and stare hard enough and long enough, and you can make pretty much any mathematical principle seem to apply to the Great Pyramid. Many have done so. That doesn't mean it's meaningful or realistic, however. All that matters is what the ancient engineers knew and how they approached building projects. There are several mathematical papyri which have survived from pharaonic times which tell us how the Egyptians approached mathematics for construction purposes. The yard is not among them.

In all fairness it should be noted that there is nothing new under the sun. There's no

reason to suppose that many modern weights and measures might not have come down

to us either directly or indirectly from the most ancient times (even from caveman era).

Of course you're right that there's no evidence that the yard was known to the Egyptians

by any name but the OP is talking about ratios more than measures.

They did not divide their hours.

I don't believe it's even vaguely possible for men to work together or to have a functioning

society without a unit of time shorter than an hour. How do you describe simple events to

others without shorter units of time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think you need to go back and recheck your math CK. A 5% error in an equatorial radius* (should have been circumference) of 40,075.02 kilometers is 2003.75 kilometers for a revised size of 38,071.27 kilometers. The equatorial diameter of Earth is 12,756.2 kilometers. There's nothing "pretty close" about the two.

cormac

So the first gives a diameter of 12762 km and the second gives 12124.

This doesn't seem to be so bad for people who are ascribed the knowledge base that the Egyptians normally are.

*Right figures, wrong word above. While the figures are accurate they still don't match what you claimed which was:

A 5% error in circumferance is pretty close to the proper diameter.

They're not remotely "pretty close".

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Right figures, wrong word above. While the figures are accurate they still don't match what you claimed which was:

They're not remotely "pretty close".

Everything is perspective... ...always has been.

This reminds me of a "joke" on one of the "IQ tests" when I was a kid. You remember the ones

like if a plane with 200 passengers crashes right on the Canada/ US border where do they

bury the survivors. One was if there were a solid metal ring that encircled the planet and you

cut it and spliced in a ten foot section then how much room would be available between the ring

and the planet? Most people just guess something very very small but in actuality of course, if

you do the math there's more than three feet. (you don't bury survivors by the by)

Iconsider the difference between 12762 and 12124 for a diameter of the earth to be fairly nomi-

nal given the means they had to measure it. It would have been crossed checked in various ways

but this error is better than any modern traiuned scientist could obtain with the materials and know-

ledge they has available probably.

This isn't to say that I agree the OP necessarily is correct. But he makes a stronger argument

than most of the others. It is entirely reasonable to think he's right since it's known the size of the

earth always used to be underestimated. My primary objection to the argument is simply that the

theory is looking only at G1. It seems that if G1 were intended to contain technological information

then others would as well. I believe there is such information in the pyramids but I'm not convinced

by any single theory to date. Some are high quality and some aren't; this one seems fairly good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything is perspective... ...always has been.

This reminds me of a "joke" on one of the "IQ tests" when I was a kid. You remember the ones

like if a plane with 200 passengers crashes right on the Canada/ US border where do they

bury the survivors. One was if there were a solid metal ring that encircled the planet and you

cut it and spliced in a ten foot section then how much room would be available between the ring

and the planet? Most people just guess something very very small but in actuality of course, if

you do the math there's more than three feet. (you don't bury survivors by the by)

I consider the difference between 12762 and 12124 for a diameter of the earth to be fairly nomi-

nal given the means they had to measure it. It would have been crossed checked in various ways

but this error is better than any modern traiuned scientist could obtain with the materials and know-

ledge they has available probably.

This isn't to say that I agree the OP necessarily is correct. But he makes a stronger argument

than most of the others. It is entirely reasonable to think he's right since it's known the size of the

earth always used to be underestimated. My primary objection to the argument is simply that the

theory is looking only at G1. It seems that if G1 were intended to contain technological information

then others would as well. I believe there is such information in the pyramids but I'm not convinced

by any single theory to date. Some are high quality and some aren't; this one seems fairly good.

They weren't measuring the diameter of the earth, but according to the OP were measuring the circumference. And based on utilizing a non-existant 12 hour/60 minute per hour period of daylight measurement from the 26th century, multiplying it against an incorrect GP perimeter yardage to acquire a further incorrect total. And you consider that "pretty close". I guess if one's making up the facts is considered pretty close, you're right. Two wrong items multiplied together don't equal a right answer, no matter how many times one tries.

cormac

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And based on utilizing a non-existant 12 hour/60 minute per hour period of daylight measurement

Periods of time, Hours and Seconds, are derived from the Earth's daily rotation.

In modern times we divide the day into 24 units called Hours.

The Hour is further divided into 60 Minutes of 60 Seconds. The same as dividing degrees in a circle.

Resulting in 86.400 seconds in a modern day.

The ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Indian and Chinese divided the day into 12 units.

The 360° sky was divided yearly by 12 Moons, Months or Zodiacs and daily by 12 hours.

The resulting Hour and Second was twice as long as ours.

43 200 seconds in the ancient day.

The original units of length, Yards, are also derived from the Earth's rotation, and Time.

Divide the equatorial distance travelled in 1 second by 1000 and call it a Yard.

The rotational velocity of the earth was exactly 1000 yards/sec. (Equivalent to 1005.6 today)

Note: 1 Yard equals 1.0077 British Yards.

This calculates to a 39,806 km equatorial circumference, about 99.4% of the currently accepted NASA figure of 40,030 km.

Not bad!

The Great Pyramid’s perimeter is 1000 Yards, exactly one ancient second of rotation.

THE PYRAMID REPRESENTS A CIRCLE - THE EARTH

A circle with a 1000 yard circumference has a radius of 159.15 yards. R = C/(2π)

Petrie calculated the pyramid's height to be 160.38 British yards or 159.15 yards. (5776.0 ± 7.0 inches)

By making the height equal to the radius suggests the pyramid was intended to represent a circle. Simple as that.

radius-height.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Periods of time, Hours and Seconds, are derived from the Earth's daily rotation.

In modern times we divide the day into 24 units called Hours.

The Hour is further divided into 60 Minutes of 60 Seconds. The same as dividing degrees in a circle.

Resulting in 86.400 seconds in a modern day.

The ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Indian and Chinese divided the day into 12 units.

The 360° sky was divided yearly by 12 Moons, Months or Zodiacs and daily by 12 hours.

The resulting Hour and Second was twice as long as ours.

43 200 seconds in the ancient day.

The original units of length, Yards, are also derived from the Earth's rotation, and Time.

Divide the equatorial distance travelled in 1 second by 1000 and call it a Yard.

The rotational velocity of the earth was exactly 1000 yards/sec. (Equivalent to 1005.6 today)

Note: 1 Yard equals 1.0077 British Yards.

This calculates to a 39,806 km equatorial circumference, about 99.4% of the currently accepted NASA figure of 40,030 km.

Not bad!

The Great Pyramid’s perimeter is 1000 Yards, exactly one ancient second of rotation.

THE PYRAMID REPRESENTS A CIRCLE - THE EARTH

A circle with a 1000 yard circumference has a radius of 159.15 yards. R = C/(2π)

Petrie calculated the pyramid's height to be 160.38 British yards or 159.15 yards. (5776.0 ± 7.0 inches)

By making the height equal to the radius suggests the pyramid was intended to represent a circle. Simple as that.

radius-height.png

The Ancient Egyptians had no concept of minutes or seconds and their hour was based on the available sunlight during the daytime, which varied, and was not based on a set 60 minute period of time. So all you're doing is fabricating a total to, what for the Ancient Egyptians, would be non-existant units of measure. It's meaningless.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sun rises in the east on the equinox and in the south on the winter solstice.

.

it does WHAT??

you might want to check these things before you post 'em clad, otherwise the egg/face scenario keeps coming in to play.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

it does WHAT??

you might want to check these things before you post 'em clad, otherwise the egg/face scenario keeps coming in to play.....

I didn't define these terms. The ancient Egyptians did.

If you want to understand the fundamentals of the pyramid and the measurements

used it is necessary to understand the builders and techniques used for building them.

We can't just glance at the ruins and rush off to judgement or we'll end up with nothing

but mysteries and assumptions. There is absolutely no choice but to actually study these

ruins and their builders to try to understand them.

Why not start with the definition of summer; when the sun rises in the middle of the sky?

The beauty of such an approach is that we gain insights into many orther terms as well.

It even highlights the probability that they did define the minute by the rate at which the

sun left the center of the sky. This rate is exactly one minute per day. How can you know

this is a mere coincidence?

The alternatiuve is to presume everything they said was simply incantation and nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The rotational velocity of the earth was exactly 1000 yards/sec. (Equivalent to 1005.6 today)

Note: 1 Yard equals 1.0077 British Yards.

This calculates to a 39,806 km equatorial circumference, about 99.4% of the currently accepted NASA figure of 40,030 km.

Not bad!

The Great Pyramid’s perimeter is 1000 Yards, exactly one ancient second of rotation.

This is also meaningless since at 40,075 kilometers/25,046 miles in circumference, dividing that by the 24 hour period of a day, one gets 1043 miles/5507040 feet per hour which makes that 1529.7 feet per second.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might even point out that if the minute were defined as the rate at which

the sun leaves the center of the sky then it follows that the second was defined

as the interval between human heartbeats. Nature was set to man's clock.

All of nature was anthropomorphized in every way they understood. All knowl-

edge became encoded in nature and knowledge was expressed and explained

in terms of nature. Man was part of the great dance of nature.

Why should people simply discount two second long seconds or an error in

ancient estimation of the size of the earth? Why discount the possibility the py-

ramid reflected this estimation when the ancients implied the pyramid was an

extension of the earth?

There seems to be a virtual knee jerk reaction to dismissing every new theory

about pyramids unless it's made by an Egyptologists using the givens and var-

ious assumptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Why should people simply discount two second long seconds or an error in

ancient estimation of the size of the earth? Why discount the possibility the py-

ramid reflected this estimation when the ancients implied the pyramid was an

extension of the earth?

There seems to be a virtual knee jerk reaction to dismissing every new theory

about pyramids unless it's made by an Egyptologists using the givens and var-

ious assumptions.

What's proposed in this thread is being dismissed because of the errors in fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's proposed in this thread is being dismissed because of the errors in fact.

I don't think the math being off or poorly defined is fatal to the theory. The builders went

to a lot of effort to build a huge "X" marks the spot and they just might have had something

in mind. Even if you believe it was a tomb the fact is they went to a lot of effort to build as

they did. They went to a lot of effort. The solstice is only 28 hours away and the earth will

look like this when it occurs (12:04 CDT);

solstice_map_june2013_600.jpg

The sun can be in any spot and this year just happens to look like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.