Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

There are no mysteries other than in the mind


filsdabeille

Recommended Posts

On 5/19/2016 at 7:40 PM, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

This thread ought to be fun.

I thought so too. What a waste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Indeed. It looks like that prediction didn't pan out.

You can ride your camel off into more interesting adventures. Me? I'm trapped in my bandages.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok..

Does enyone agree with hereunderKheops developpement - Shafts.jpg ?

1 Cubit = 0,5236 meter = π/6 = ϕ²/5 meter    30° of 1 metre radius circumference.

5744da3e04cf2_Kheopsdeveloppement-Shafts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Examples E and G above presuppose that both Queen's Chamber shafts are perpendicular to the apotheme, from end to end which is incorrect as one of them isn't even straight to begin with. One only has to look here:

The Upuaut Project

cormac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, filsdabeille said:
Quote

Ok.

1 Cubit = 0,5236 meter = π/6 = ϕ²/5 meter    30° of 1 metre radius circumference.

The cubit was/is a physiological measurement system, and thus subject to a rather high degree of variation. The length of the cubit can vary from ~ .43-.53 m. Based upon recovered artifacts, the length of the Egyptian Royal Cubit is considered to range between .523 and .529 m. Thus, you have rather superimposed the relationship of pi/6 into the verifiable data. Hence, subsequent calculations are flawed.

Also, you have not yet addressed some of the more pressing (from my personal perspective) concerns. Based upon your previous contributions, would it be your position that your mathematical "soup" represents the vestiges of a "lost global civilization"?

Clarifying the above would be advantageous to the readers in regards to assisting you.

Edit: Punctuation.

 

Edited by Swede
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the lost civilization the great thinkers were considering stellar transportation and powered of crystal powered vectron rays when they were interrupted by pushy fellows insisting the next great stone construction 'encode' phi!

What again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2016 at 9:00 PM, filsdabeille said:

Time to end and conclude this topic titled: "There are no mysteries other than in the mind"

...

Byebye ;-).

That all sounded rather final to me...  but whatever.  A flounce one way, then another...it all adds to the pigeonhole that has been forming..

Now, is it OK for Filsdabeille to proceed without answering ANY of the very reasonable questions put to him above, and yet now expects us to waste our time wading thru more reams of improperly notated and uncited measurements, without the slightest sign of any point?  Not only are these measurements unranged and uncited, Swede has shown that at least some are FALSE and we still await any sign of even the remotest logic for his choices of mathterbation, yet he thinks it's ok to just fling more at the fan?

Frankly, I think it is very rude to completely ignore the valid requests of forum participants.

Edited by ChrLzs
Spelin erur..
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok... I understand your messages determined to point out the flaw rather than considering the geometrical aspects and overall consistency of the architectural design, motives and reasons to object.

I'd wish to apologize if my passage seemed like that of a monkey in a glassware store, but have my reasons.

I can also understand undignified responses, given the material quality of the research UPUAUT project compared to my empty cry in the wilderness. Great job, admirable team work, and I'm certainly not questioning or challenging results by all means. Excellent presentation!

But whatever the accumulated knowledge base, it doesn't change the fact that the shafts, all of them, point to figures whose area is Pi. This is perfectly visible in my diagrams, not results of measurements, but logic. And the architects could not have spontaneously constructed such edifices without incorporating the best of their credos. We are here in presence of pure atemporal and omnipresent mathematical objects, qualifying for divine qualities.  

It may be the diagrams are effectively flawed with minor errors, but the overall precision resulting from pure geometrical construction are so precise that whatever the error involved, there are limits obviously, the Pi/Phi/Meter scheme prevails, however one would and what reason, deny it concluding until someone can prove me wrong.

Can anyone prove the construction's wrong?

From what I see, it seems "stellar transportation and powered of crystal powered vectron rays " theories have more credit than the simple 51°50' slope corresponding to Acos(1/ϕ), the pertinence of 4/√ϕ, or the perfect juxtaposition of the shafts merely coincidental, given the architects either were too advanced for such trivialities, or too retarded to have constructed a geometrically sound edifice.

Maybe going back to the very basics...

Can we at least agree on the construction of Phi issued from a 2:1 rectangle, whereby half the diagonal + half unit is Phi, resulting in a 51°50' when rotated against the vertical unit and corresponds to the Cheops slope. The Wikipedia summary says so...

If the Pi area was just an isolated case, I would understand all the above objections and critics, but it is recurrent in Kephren, Mykerinos, and other places. See attached.

Numerology, or Geometry ?...

  

 

Kephren 3.jpg

Mykérinos 3.jpg

5745c658ba222_Kephren3.jpg.275e57c9aa74e

5745c73651b7f_Mykrinos3.thumb.jpg.ed7110

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Did you ever stop to consider that the flaws being pointed out in your assertions have a direct bearing on their accuracy?

 

 Do you intend on ever address the issues people have found problematic with your conjectures or are you just going to keep making unsubstantiated statements without even attempting to cite source data or answer a question.?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any arbitrary measurement extension of a triangle can lead to any number we want. That does not demonstrate anything... except that we have to much time on our hands.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For your previous pics to be accurate the shafts would necessarily have to be perpendicular in three dimensions. They are not as the majority are not completely straight in either 2-dimensional or 3-dimensional representations, the latter of which can be seen below:

cormac

UPUAUT Project side view - shafts from Kings Chamber.jpg

UPUAUT Project view looking from above - southwest to northeast - shafts from Kings  and Queens Chamber.jpg

UPUAUT Project top view - shafts from Kings Chamber.gif

5745d3d616a2e_UPUAUTProjectsideview-shaf

5745d3f02f39c_UPUAUTProjectviewlookingfr

5745d6e6ea7fd_UPUAUTProjecttopview-shaft

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
3 hours ago, Jarocal said:

 Do you intend on ever address the issues people have found problematic with your conjectures or are you just going to keep making unsubstantiated statements without even attempting to cite source data or answer a question.?

I know which one I think will happen...

 

--Jaylemurph

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I see are numbers being made to dance, you could through manipulation of the data (extend this line here on the perpendicular, extend thus line here straight down... Etc) say that the makers of the Volkswagon encoded Pi into its construction.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

All I see are numbers being made to dance, you could through manipulation of the data (extend this line here on the perpendicular, extend thus line here straight down... Etc) say that the makers of the Volkswagon encoded Pi into its construction.

That wouldn't take any manipulation of data.  All you need to do is look at the camshaft.

Harte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the importance in light of  the amount of feedback and clear comments participants have contributed with their precious time in asserting respective convictions.

I am now convinced there is no point in persuing correlated coincidental relationships if in fact they don't correspond to the overall consensus, thanks to the overall present consensus.

Consensus is like God, a purely mental product nobody has seen but many will kill or die in name of.

There have been repetitive references to the nulity of my case and waste of time in this thread, but nobody was asked to waste his time either. On the other hand some came up with very interesting observations, such as Cormac's (thanks, very interesting observation indeed), or others unfortunately forwarding subjects pertaining to previous or remote discussion.

There's no need pointing out Umberto Eco's idea that arbitrary extension of a triangle or number can lead to any number we want, and thus exercising pure numerology... the extensions are not arbitrary, but logicaly anchored not only in the shafts, but also the natural properties of the triangle. One needs to know the intricate beauty of Phi mathematics to appreciate the subtleties of the said relations, and that is not everybody's cup of tea.

The premisses ? (That's a reccuring challenge): it simply is what is known as Euclide geometry, a cultural heritage greece has elegantly recycled.

The measurements ? Nothing more that what Wikipedia has to says.

So, to conclude... there seems (haha.. just received a message from Hart, promoting his favourite candidate for presidency) if truth is the reason of the majority, brute force too, I'm obviously way out of Mose's track ( it's just an expression depicting 40 years in the desert, not antisemism ).

And happy about that ☺

Thanks again for the support !

Cheers 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And with that I think it's time to put this discussion to bed because I don't see it going anywhere.

Anyone may feel free to send me a PM if you disagree, but be prepared to offer a very good reason for me to reopen this thread.

Thanks.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.