Karlis Posted April 30, 2012 #51 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Well, give or take 2 degrees they actually do. While browsing for more information about the alignments, hers is one site with these figures:Each side is oriented almost exactly with the four Cardinal points. The following being the estimated errors: north side 2'28" south of west; south side 1'57" south of west; east side 5'30" west of north; and west side 2'30" west of north. Source: <http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_2.htm> Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cormac mac airt Posted April 30, 2012 #52 Share Posted April 30, 2012 No it couldn't, Polaris was nowhere near the pole when the pyramids were built (assuming the commonly accepted timeline) the pole star would have been Thuban. Not meant as an argument but why couldn't it have been either one or both as, per the Stellarium program, Polaris was within 2 degrees during the month of May throughout the 26th century BC and Thuban was within the same for much of the last 6 months of the year for the same period. cormac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrad Clough Posted April 30, 2012 #53 Share Posted April 30, 2012 grumble... okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted April 30, 2012 #54 Share Posted April 30, 2012 (edited) While browsing for more information about the alignments, hers is one site with these figures: Each side is oriented almost exactly with the four Cardinal points. The following being the estimated errors: north side 2'28" south of west; south side 1'57" south of west; east side 5'30" west of north; and west side 2'30" west of north. Source: <http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_2.htm> Thoughts? That while quite clearly being capable of identifying Polaris they had shortcomings at the correct use of a square? Edited April 30, 2012 by questionmark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted April 30, 2012 #55 Share Posted April 30, 2012 (edited) Whereas, anywhere on earth, at Equinox, at precisely mid day, when that can be determined, shadows point precisely North.... or South, depending on which hemisphere your in? As for establishing true north, modern science is not required. Any number of methods will achieve it. The average Boy Scout ought to be able to do it. Exactly right. The first thing that popped into my head. Boy Scounts use the shadow from a stick method starting in Elementary School. 10 year olds can find true North. Also I agree they did not care so much for North and South, but more for East and West. Edit: Note: The longer the stick, the more datapoints you can have and the more accurate you get. If you use a long stick and mark off points, say, 100 feet long, then put sticks at the ends of those points, and repeat, you can get a line that is true West-East and is marked off the entire length of a pyramid. No, it always appears due east at the point of sunrise, wherever you are. The angle you're thinking of means that it doesn't go up in a straight line, so it quickly moves away from due east, but at the moment of sunrise, it's due east of you, wherever you are. This is why ancient monuments like stone circles took great pains to pinpoint exactly which day the equinox was (which is easy enough over the space of a few years if you have permanent markers). The north pole is an exception only because the sun doesn't rise there at all at the equinox. I don't beleive that is quite true. If you are in Alaska or Greenland on the Equinox, you're not going to see the Sun rise directly in the East. It will still appear to be to the south. The Equinox is when the day/night is 50/50. It does not indicate that the Sun passes directly overhead. The only place the Sun is directly overhead during the Equinox is the Equator. An equinox occurs twice a year (around 20 March and 22 September), when the tilt of the Earth's axis is inclined neither away from nor towards the Sun, the center of the Sun being in the same plane as the Earth's equator. On a day of the equinox, the center of the Sun spends a roughly equal amount of time above and below the horizon at every location on the Earth, night and day being of roughly the same length. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equinox There is artifact Proof! that the Pyramids and Sphinx of Giza are 1000s of years older than Dynastic Egypt. There has been a discovery in West Virginia that shows the Pyramids & Sphinx with the oldest art & symbols accepted by established archaeology. Many of these artifacts are made of metal and this metal has been tested and found not created by modern man. The artifacts have highly advanced forms of art and symbols. This discovery will absolutely prove Ancient Advanced Civilization. You can view some of these artifacts and ancient ooparts that are supported by this discovery at http://pangeawv.com Odd how your name and the linked site's name are so similar. You wouldn't be the owner of the site? UM frowns on self promoting of sites here. You can put the site in your signature though, if you want to. The proof that the pyramids and sphinx are older is not very believable. Unless... you want to believe.... Edited April 30, 2012 by DieChecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted April 30, 2012 #56 Share Posted April 30, 2012 <p>That would be quite easy to establish too, there are nice little programs that calculate that:<br /> <br /> Polaris 2500 BC: and Polaris today, both on April 30th at 19:16 GMT Edit: Note that there was a considerable movement due north, but very little away from true north. Good stuff Q. Very Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted April 30, 2012 #57 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Good stuff Q. Very Interesting. Thanks a lot, and we are back to the classical: There are hardly no mysteries other than underemployed busybodies are creating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaden Posted April 30, 2012 #58 Share Posted April 30, 2012 There is artifact Proof! that the Pyramids and Sphinx of Giza are 1000s of years older than Dynastic Egypt. There has been a discovery in West Virginia that shows the Pyramids & Sphinx with the oldest art & symbols accepted by established archaeology. Many of these artifacts are made of metal and this metal has been tested and found not created by modern man. The artifacts have highly advanced forms of art and symbols. This discovery will absolutely prove Ancient Advanced Civilization. You can view some of these artifacts and ancient ooparts that are supported by this discovery at http://pangeawv.com I took a look and discovered it was the same type of site that other "oopart" sites are... The kind I avoid. Why is the absurd (albeit spectacular) so much more believable than than the evidence supported mainstream view? These sites come under the heading of " I'll believe anything I read as long as it's not mainstream" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flibbertigibbet Posted April 30, 2012 #59 Share Posted April 30, 2012 It also seems that continental drift should possibly be taken into account, though if you check up on Google opinions vary as to how much this might have affected the alignment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swede Posted May 1, 2012 #60 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Not really. The African plate is slowly moving northwest at a rate of ~ .75" (~2 cm)/year. In the last 4500 years it would have moved ~ 281.25' (85.73 m). A basically irrelevant figure. The repeatedly proferred speculations in regards to celestial alignment having been utilized in the Giza constructions may have a base-line conceptual flaw. As kmt_sesh and others have already suggested, a simple sun-stick (shadow stick) is all that is required. While seasonality and time of day can somewhat alter the precision of this "instrument", the accuracy of such on the solstices is remarkably accurate. Repeated readings would contribute to the degree of accuracy. . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allanp Posted May 1, 2012 #61 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I want to know why the Giza pyramid builders never left any drawings, pictographs, etc, on how they constructed the monuments. They recorded every other aspect of life in drawings. Perhaps the pyramids are a lot older than than the "guestiment" of 4200BC, built by a previous race of people wiped out by the Great Flood of around 10-12000BC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmt_sesh Posted May 1, 2012 #62 Share Posted May 1, 2012 (edited) I want to know why the Giza pyramid builders never left any drawings, pictographs, etc, on how they constructed the monuments. They recorded every other aspect of life in drawings. Perhaps the pyramids are a lot older than than the "guestiment" of 4200BC, built by a previous race of people wiped out by the Great Flood of around 10-12000BC? Welcome to UM, allanp. Dig deeper than that and you'll find something interesting. Exceedingly few schematics of any kind exist for Egyptian monuments: from Early Dynastic to Roman Period. They couldn't have cared less if some people leaving four thousand years later knew how they built their monuments, and the things preserved in paintings and reliefs on the walls of temples and tombs are quite divorced from ordinary concerns. What mattered to the Egyptians was the end result, not what got them there. Almost certainly building plans existed for the Great Pyramid, the Karnak temple, the edifice at Abu Simbel, and all of the other state monuments. Probably they were on papyrus and did not survive. Perhaps—and the chance is exceedingly slim, I admit—such plans managed to survive and are awaiting future discovery. But there is no doubt whatsoever that the Egyptian built each and every one of the monuments for which they are famous. Carbon dating, for example, confirms the Great Pyramid at Giza was built in the early to mid-third millennium BCE (c. 4700 to 4500 BCE). Archaeological analysis confirms the Sphinx as we know it belongs to Khafre, builder of the second Giza pyramid. No evidence exists for an advanced civilization inhabiting the Nile Valley prior to the Egyptians. All evidence confirms the people who founded the great kingdom of Egypt were the Egyptians themselves. Think of it in a wider scope. Where are the building plans for the ziggurats of Mesopotamia? Where are the building plans for great cities like Babylon and Hattusa? Where are the building plans for the Acropolis? Where are the building plans for the Colosseum? We know these things exist, but there's little proof from their own builders of how they went about planning and building them. Should we attribute all of these things to lost civilizations, too? On a final note, there is no evidence for a Great Flood such as presented in the Hebrew Bible. Edited May 1, 2012 by kmt_sesh 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentalcase Posted May 1, 2012 #63 Share Posted May 1, 2012 To add to what KMT has put, the homes for the workers were found (and dated, as well as bodies, etc.), so it is no mystery. The plans would be great to find and who knows they may be somewhere under the urban landscape? More likely looted thousands of years ago when looting was the way of life out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Voodoo Posted May 1, 2012 Author #64 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Isnt cooper tools too soft to be useful for making hardest limestone pyramid blocks? And how did they cut granite without steel or diamond,espically flat surfaces ,without mistakes? Like some ancient sarcophags. Also we have diorite and quartzite artifacts which are created during late Stone age yet today with steel tools we have problems to create them.How were they made? Did Egyptians used cement between blocks on GP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjorkstrand Posted May 1, 2012 #65 Share Posted May 1, 2012 They were done by 10,500 BC. Source= Edgar Cayce Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted May 1, 2012 #66 Share Posted May 1, 2012 (edited) Isnt cooper tools too soft to be useful for making hardest limestone pyramid blocks? And how did they cut granite without steel or diamond,espically flat surfaces ,without mistakes? Like some ancient sarcophags. Also we have diorite and quartzite artifacts which are created during late Stone age yet today with steel tools we have problems to create them.How were they made? Did Egyptians used cement between blocks on GP? They cut the stone mainly with other stones. as well as with wooden wedges and water. The copper tools were for finishing work, and if you think about it, they had like 5 years to finish each (granite) piece. Not extremely hard to accomplish. Also unfinished blocks and blocks in the process of being cleft of the quarry wall have been found. The evidence is very strong. The Egyptians did use a cement, or at least mortor, was used in the building of the Great Pyramid. The number of 500,000 tons of mortor out of around 6 million tons is commonly used. So around 1/12th of the pyramid is mortor/cement. This is NOT CONCRETE mind, but limestone cement. http://en.wikipedia....Pyramid_of_Giza Edited May 1, 2012 by DieChecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted May 1, 2012 #67 Share Posted May 1, 2012 It also seems that continental drift should possibly be taken into account, though if you check up on Google opinions vary as to how much this might have affected the alignment. That would have to be less than 0.1 degree during the last 4000 years, what changed a little more is the relation to the Arabian plate and the European plate. that would have little influence over the north alignment though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flibbertigibbet Posted May 1, 2012 #68 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Not really. The African plate is slowly moving northwest at a rate of ~ .75" (~2 cm)/year. In the last 4500 years it would have moved ~ 281.25' (85.73 m). A basically irrelevant figure. The repeatedly proferred speculations in regards to celestial alignment having been utilized in the Giza constructions may have a base-line conceptual flaw. As kmt_sesh and others have already suggested, a simple sun-stick (shadow stick) is all that is required. While seasonality and time of day can somewhat alter the precision of this "instrument", the accuracy of such on the solstices is remarkably accurate. Repeated readings would contribute to the degree of accuracy. . A movement of 85 m is not negligible. The length of the base is only 230 m. This could have affected the angle quite considerably, if the movement had deviated in any way from a precisely straight line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted May 1, 2012 #69 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I want to know why the Giza pyramid builders never left any drawings, pictographs, etc, on how they constructed the monuments. They recorded every other aspect of life in drawings. Perhaps the pyramids are a lot older than than the "guestiment" of 4200BC, built by a previous race of people wiped out by the Great Flood of around 10-12000BC? The big era of the drawings was the middle kingdom. At the time of the 3d dynasty they started to have some relevance, and that is about the time when the pyramaditis started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted May 1, 2012 #70 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Isnt cooper tools too soft to be useful for making hardest limestone pyramid blocks? And how did they cut granite without steel or diamond,espically flat surfaces ,without mistakes? Like some ancient sarcophags. Also we have diorite and quartzite artifacts which are created during late Stone age yet today with steel tools we have problems to create them.How were they made? Did Egyptians used cement between blocks on GP? Depends on what else is in the copper. In the first centuries of copper forging blacksmiths had already discovered that adding additional components hardens copper (which is by the way how somebody decided to dump some tin in it and discovered bronze). Bronze was used in quarrying until steel came largely available, that would be the renaissance age. And no, they did not use cement but plenty of other types of mortar, like clay/sand and gypsum/sand mixtures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted May 1, 2012 #71 Share Posted May 1, 2012 (edited) A movement of 85 m is not negligible. The length of the base is only 230 m. This could have affected the angle quite considerably, if the movement had deviated in any way from a precisely straight line. The figure Swede posted is only relevant to the distance from where the measurement was taken, to the actual north pole. In the case of the Giza plateau, this distance is just under 6700 km. The error induced by the movement of the continent of Africa since that time is therefore ~0.000013%. Negligible. Edited May 1, 2012 by Leonardo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flibbertigibbet Posted May 1, 2012 #72 Share Posted May 1, 2012 The figure Swede posted is only relevant to the distance from where the measurement was taken, to the actual north pole. In the case of the Giza plateau, this distance is just under 6700 km. The error induced by the movement of the continent of Africa since that time is therefore ~0.000013%. Negligible. I understood his figure to mean that the African plate has moved 85 m in 4500 years. If this movement has been in a straight line, then you are correct. However, if the movement has curved or been irregular in any other way, even very slightly, it could have twisted the angle of orientation of the pyramids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted May 1, 2012 #73 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I understood his figure to mean that the African plate has moved 85 m in 4500 years. If this movement has been in a straight line, then you are correct. However, if the movement has curved or been irregular in any other way, even very slightly, it could have twisted the angle of orientation of the pyramids. And that is precisely what I was thinking, the plate both turns and slides, as far as we know it is a counter-clock movement. From the mesozoic to the present it was less than one degree, as you can see in this nicely done animation on the Berkeley website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted May 1, 2012 #74 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Since there are gaps between visible stars, it is clear there is not always a star aligned due north. Sometimes there's just a gap. In any case, if you didn't already know which direction due north was, how would you know which of the stars in that area were aligned to it? When there is no star at exactly true north, there are a collection of stars surrounding it that rotate around a point that is exactly true north. These stars appear to be in rotation around that point - of course, it's the Earth that's doing the rotating. The Egyptians could have waited a few hours for two of the stars to be in a line that is perpendicular to the Earth's surface - checking with a plumb line. When these two stars lined up with the plumb line, then true north would be evident, and to the degree of accuracy we see in the alignments of the structures Kmt_sesh mentioned. Harte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentalcase Posted May 1, 2012 #75 Share Posted May 1, 2012 (edited) Isnt cooper tools too soft to be useful for making hardest limestone pyramid blocks? And how did they cut granite without steel or diamond,espically flat surfaces ,without mistakes? Like some ancient sarcophags. Also we have diorite and quartzite artifacts which are created during late Stone age yet today with steel tools we have problems to create them.How were they made? Imagine a world without modern tech, then you could be an expert at specific tasks. Each role had chosen experts. It seems they used fire for much of thier extreme cuts, then smaller tools for the polishing process. Fire and water, hot n cold, stone on stone and sometimes copper, etc.. Seems they were much smarter then we first imagined. I've seen plenty of experiments on monolith building that have led me to lean toward the fact that they were very good at what they did. Achieving what today, would be difficult. edit; ugly typo. Edited May 1, 2012 by Mentalcase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now