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 -

Update on Scan Pyramid project Oct 2016


Hanslune

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Mangoze said:

It's tough trying to mitigate the apprehension of eisegesis.

Oh , so you admit Cladking is right !    ( I got that by correcting your typos and reinterpreting it   ;)  )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, cladking said:

 Even then they'll probably only come to be seen as fact if they had actually existed.

Oh high five and large LLLLOOOOLLLL  I missed this earlier, thanks Mangooze. Wow so Cladking is finally telling the truth.  I wonder if his brain fell out when he wrote this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well... ...so long as we're all agreed let's just lock this thread and start over.

Might as well talk about how they really built the pyramids.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Swede said:

Note: Your "reference" has precisely zero relationship to Hawass, the muon scan, or Egyptology. Zero.

Further indications of your research/documentation capabilities?

.

I'm sure you can't just take my word on it that he was reported as having confessed it probably couldn't be a chamber (or words to this effect).

I can't get a clean link but it's in post #245;

http://historum.com/ancient-history/96560-scientists-given-green-light-scan-pyramids-25.html

I've never seen anything like this.  I deleted 46 cookies after reading the story.  Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, cladking said:

 

No semantics here.

Tell me what is the difference between a straight line form to an excess of muons and a linear void?

Excellent question. They are completely different.

The straight line refers to the excess of muons. That excess is a measure of the muons due to the muons being deflected. The linear speaks about the deflection.

A linear void is a spatial issue. The notion of linearity for a void indicates a void which has the bulk of its volume along one particular axis.

It is important to note that the report does not mention anything at all about a linear void.

So what is the difference? One is mentioned in the report. One is a measure of muon deflection while the other is a spatial measure.

As we see the two are completely different.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, cladking said:

 

They said they collected muons here because of a thermal anomaly.  What do you think caused the thermal anomaly?

A thermal anomaly is a evidence of a surface difference. It could be matter of color. It could be a matter of shape. It could be a matter of other nearby blocks. It might be nothing more than some subtle orientation of the grains of the rocks.

A thermal anomaly is nothing more than a starting point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, cladking said:

It is a linear void that was found by infrared imaging and I predicted that there would be such things found and I predicted the presense of the mn-canal in exactly this location.  I believe the mn-canal is a linear void with a walkway that carried water to the so called queens chamber. So far I'm right, right, right, right, and right.  I believe if they continue to use science I'll be mostly right in the future.  This is the nature of science and theory.  It makes accurate predictions.  Any guess or hypothesis can make bad preedictions but good theory makes good predictions.  You guys just can't handle the idea my theory is the only one making these correct predictions.

Houdin, for instance, hads a great hypothesis.  It was pure genius.  But it was wrong and it made wrong predictions.  There were no ramps and they are debunked and internal ramps are disproven by his own efforts.  However my theory still stands.  It makes a million predictions and it's about time to get in there and test a few of them.

 

T suggest it is a linear void is simply your opinion not based on anything reported. So far you'e been wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

You've made no predictions that are right in any way or form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, cladking said:

I'm sure you can't just take my word on it that he was reported as having confessed it probably couldn't be a chamber (or words to this effect).

I've never seen anything like this.  I deleted 46 cookies after reading the story.  Good luck.

No actually we cannot you have demonstrated over the years to be a thoroughly compulsive liar. You seem unable to restrain yourself therefore anything you say IS NOT TRUSTED. This is purely your fault and you get to live with.

Why are you afraid of cookies? lol

You 'words to that effective aren't that' That is why I put the quote in. You should try to be accurate and stop trying to twist everything. As you see in the quote below you again have twisted the words which is another reason no one trusts anything you say. Having as you do the solid reputation as a constant liar don't expect anything else BUT mistrust.

Quote

Speaking to Live Science, Zahi Hawass, the Egytpian antiquities minister, confessed that they aren’t sure that the voids in the pyramid are that sizeable. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, cladking said:

I have little doubt that Stereologist understands the technology better than I but probably not the physics.  I really doubt and have from the beginning that the "raw data" is really raw data.  I believe, especially in light of Stereologist's objections, that it probably is processed in some ways (collapsed to two dimensions, probably).  But this doesn't change the facts.  The fact is that whatever this picture is it clearly shows a linear void and the authors clearly called it this.  That they alsao called it indeterminant is irrelevant in the face of the data in my opinion.

But the real point here is that no matter what it is called or it's exact shape the current data is still fully consistent with the prediction.  Even if it turns out to be something else which seems highly improbable, AT THIS TIME it is consistent with the prediction.

 

So far you've shown that you have no idea what is in the reports. You have zero understanding of physics.

A clear example of your inability to understand the reports is that you think that the data has been collapsed to two dimensions. That is known as a projection. Data is collected as a projection. The goal s to infer the 3-d structure from 2-d images. So you've gotten this completely wrong as you have everything so far.

The fact is that the picture does NOT show a linear void. You've been told that time after time, but you'd rather be a liar and a rather stupid liar to boot. I'll remind you that stupid indicates an unwillingness to learn rather than an inability to learn.

So what are you going to state next to continue your 100% failures?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Silver_Lyre said:

What doesn't he know? He say's they're rooms and you say they are not. Testing is still ongoing. Bare in mind... If they were nothing then the muon scans would have shown voids everywhere. But is doesn't. The scans showing voids are only found in 2 places.  

Don't forget that the muon tomography is collecting information from only a small portion of the pyramid. There are a limited number of collecting points. If you take a look at the image I posted of the Fukushima reactor you will notice how low quality that image is, but it was sufficient to determine that the fuels was no longer in the reactor vessel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Silver_Lyre said:

Lying is a big call buddy. Reaching or even defending an incomplete muon scan of the pyramid would prolly be the correct thing to say. Besides like i have already pointed out its far too early to defend or attack any sets of data when the testing is still incomplete. 

So when someone repeatedly claims that the report contains a statement about a linear void and it does not you think that isn't lying?

The first few times  it was a mistake, or a misconception, but now it has made it into a lie.

This is not an issue of the correctness of the report but repeatedly and firmly lying about the report to claim it as support for their personal delusion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's just say I agree that you know everything.  Could you please explain why the researchers think it's a straight line?

Quote

This excess has the shape of a straight line.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, cladking said:

Another thing about these results;

It's not right to see the left hand picture as what the pyramid would look like without the linear void I predicted.  Just as there is no world in which an infinite number of ramps built an infinite number of pyramids there is no world without the mn-canal.  It's impossible for them to get a picture of what it would look like without the linear void.  This drawing on the left is an artist's conception of what it would look like without the void that clearly is seen projecting deep into the pyramid. It is a guess based on the actual evidence.  Before they actually performed the scan the guess would have looked far different and been wrong.  Not even I would have guessed they had right handed shovelers.  Well actually I did propose exacrtly that as the reason the density anomaly is higher on the west side just as this shows more deflection on the west side.

 

This rather incoherent mumbo jumbo shows us that the purpose of the simulation is poorly understand.

The images compare data to a possible scenario. They do this by computing the expected muon scattering. This does not mean that this is the only possibility. It does mean that a corridor as modeled cannot be excluded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, cladking said:

Let's just say I agree that you know everything.  Could you please explain why the researchers think it's a straight line?

 

They did not say that. Only you have made that statement.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They said it was a void and published a picture of a void. They said it was a line and as the picture suggests.  Even Hawass came out today and said it was no chamber, or in other words it mustta been a line.  I don't know what you want.

Would it help if I retracted my prediction of a linear void named the mn-canalunder these cables.  There! It's done. I recant my prediction.

Quote

Each plate revealed significant excess of muons in the same direction. Several studies were then conducted to prove that this excess of muons, which could be interpreted as a void, was not statistical fluctuation or noise. The comparison with detailed simulations shows that this excess is largely above 5 sigmas. A 5 sigma excess corresponds to an effect with a probability above 99.9999%. This value is commonly used in high energy physics as a discovery threshold. This excess has the shape of a straight line. This feature strongly suggests that it cannot originate from inhomogeneities along the viewing lines, but from one or several voids.

Quote

Having conducting those three complementary techniques, we are now able to confirm the existence of a "void" hidden behind the North Face, that could have the form of at least one corridor going inside the Great Pyramid. The precise shape, size, and exact position of this void is now under further investigation.

Maybe they hired a typist for an hour and just needed to keep him busy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, cladking said:

They said it was a void and published a picture of a void. They said it was a line and as the picture suggests.  Even Hawass came out today and said it was no chamber, or in other words it mustta been a line.  I don't know what you want.

Would it help if I retracted my prediction of a linear void named the mn-canalunder these cables.  There! It's done. I recant my prediction.

Maybe they hired a typist for an hour and just needed to keep him busy.

Who published a picture of a void? I don't recall images of anything other than pretty muon images.

No one stated that there was a line. The statement was that the excess muons formed a linear feature. That states nothing about the shape of any voids.

To state there is no chamber does not suggest anything else. It does not mean a line, a circle, or any other geometrical shape. It means nothing more than not a chamber. You are employing a rather ridiculous false dichotomy.

This has nothing to do with your prediction. This is all about the reports. Your prediction is of little importance. The essence of this is getting to what the reports state and not making up wacko ideas not in the reports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, cladking said:

They said it was a void and published a picture of a void. They said it was a line and as the picture suggests.  Even Hawass came out today and said it was no chamber, or in other words it mustta been a line.  I don't know what you want.

Would it help if I retracted my prediction of a linear void named the mn-canalunder these cables.  There! It's done. I recant my prediction.

Maybe they hired a typist for an hour and just needed to keep him busy.

You don't have to recant anything you predicted a canal, Houdin predicted a corridor and neither was found. What we have is some kind of void. Now here is the BIG SECRET....nobody and I mean NOBODY to include Cladking knows what the void is. We ALL have to wait until the research is done. Anyone who says they know what the Houdin void is is simply making stuff up. So Cladking why don't you grow up and stop pretending you know, you don't. Now your over riding obsession will make you repeat that its a canal four or five hundred times while we wait but here's the thing all you are doing is wasting everyone's time.

I see you are still struggling with the word 'could'.

Quote

 that could have the form of at least one corridor going inside the Great Pyramid.

 

Edited by Hanslune
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, stereologist said:

This has nothing to do with your prediction. This is all about the reports. Your prediction is of little importance. The essence of this is getting to what the reports state and not making up wacko ideas not in the reports.

Actually Sterologist it does have everyhing to do with the prediction in that it has everything to do with Cladking's ego and his fantasy world. For ten years he's been in a lone quest to overturn Egyptology. During this time every single idea he has made up has been reduced to toast. Also during this time he found that lying was an effective way of confusing real academics. He is I believe in his late 70's and is so obsessed with this that he does nothing else but post endless geysers and the pyramids and his brilliant prediction - about 45,000 post all on the same subject. He is absolutely desperate to find something, anything that will justify his wasted ten years and failure after failure. These tests are it. Its his whole life expect him to continue to tell lie after lie to somehow try to keep him in the center of the story. He doesn't realize that as a well known incessant lying internet crank no real Egyptologist pays the slightest attention to him.

He's a very sad case really - so please kick him while he's down - he really loves it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

 He is absolutely desperate to find something, anything that will justify his wasted ten years and failure after failure.

 

No!.  Actually everything found in the last ten years points straight at my theory just as this void points straight at the mehet weret.

More accurately it might be said that everything ever found points at my theory and that's how it was rediscovered.

Here are some more predictions for you.  They'll put the plates  several yards down from the bottom of the grand gallery and this exact same passage will show up.  By that time there will be other indications that I'm right. We probably aren't too far from finding our way into Mafdet Lynx.  But first they'll start running some of the tests I've been screaming for.  They'll at least have checked the water in the Osiris Shaft after all these years and found it's consistent with my predictions.  This will lead them to do some of the chemical testing and they'll either turn up copper hydroxide or some other telltale chemicals that shouldn't be there.

Thing are going to start moving pretty fast now. The thermal anomaly got their attention and now this.  Even the ramp debunkment had to have raised a few eyebrows since the word "ramp" isn't even attested from the great pyramid building age.  They'll have the findings of the canal running all the  way through in very short order.  There's probably a stone or two that can be removed to access this feature.  The first reaction will be disappointment because, did I mention, there's nothing in it but dried mud, water erosion, and sand in the walls.   There might be a small conduit that turns to the west about 65' in.  The floor will be three levels, two waterways with the smaller down low and narrow walkway on each side.  There should be a few "windows" that were filled in long ago. The gables will end where the conduit begins.  The roof is flat beyond this.  It will have been fairly well cleaned before it was sealed and quarry marks are unlikely due to enviromental factors though faded ones wouldn't be too surprising.

 

Most of the science that needs to be done is cheap, easy, and fast. Let's hope Scanpyramids is just the first step to something far far larger.  An entirely new scientific construct should result from this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cladking said:

Snip

 

A good example of his multiple delusions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Actually Sterologist it does have everyhing to do with the prediction in that it has everything to do with Cladking's ego and his fantasy world. For ten years he's been in a lone quest to overturn Egyptology. During this time every single idea he has made up has been reduced to toast. Also during this time he found that lying was an effective way of confusing real academics. He is I believe in his late 70's and is so obsessed with this that he does nothing else but post endless geysers and the pyramids and his brilliant prediction - about 45,000 post all on the same subject. He is absolutely desperate to find something, anything that will justify his wasted ten years and failure after failure. These tests are it. Its his whole life expect him to continue to tell lie after lie to somehow try to keep him in the center of the story. He doesn't realize that as a well known incessant lying internet crank no real Egyptologist pays the slightest attention to him.

He's a very sad case really - so please kick him while he's down - he really loves it.

 

I agree that the reason for being untruthful is the prediction. But reason or not the simple fact is that the reports at this time do not report a linear void.

It's okay to be wrong, but this is not a case of being wrong. He is simply being untruthful. I agree it is sad when people refuse to accept the scientific work being done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, cladking said:

No!.  Actually everything found in the last ten years points straight at my theory just as this void points straight at the mehet weret.

More accurately it might be said that everything ever found points at my theory and that's how it was rediscovered.

Here are some more predictions for you.  They'll put the plates  several yards down from the bottom of the grand gallery and this exact same passage will show up.  By that time there will be other indications that I'm right. We probably aren't too far from finding our way into Mafdet Lynx.  But first they'll start running some of the tests I've been screaming for.  They'll at least have checked the water in the Osiris Shaft after all these years and found it's consistent with my predictions.  This will lead them to do some of the chemical testing and they'll either turn up copper hydroxide or some other telltale chemicals that shouldn't be there.

Thing are going to start moving pretty fast now. The thermal anomaly got their attention and now this.  Even the ramp debunkment had to have raised a few eyebrows since the word "ramp" isn't even attested from the great pyramid building age.  They'll have the findings of the canal running all the  way through in very short order.  There's probably a stone or two that can be removed to access this feature.  The first reaction will be disappointment because, did I mention, there's nothing in it but dried mud, water erosion, and sand in the walls.   There might be a small conduit that turns to the west about 65' in.  The floor will be three levels, two waterways with the smaller down low and narrow walkway on each side.  There should be a few "windows" that were filled in long ago. The gables will end where the conduit begins.  The roof is flat beyond this.  It will have been fairly well cleaned before it was sealed and quarry marks are unlikely due to enviromental factors though faded ones wouldn't be too surprising.

Most of the science that needs to be done is cheap, easy, and fast. Let's hope Scanpyramids is just the first step to something far far larger.  An entirely new scientific construct should result from this.

 

You make a bunch of wacky predictions. I really don't care what nonsense you post other than the ones dealing with research being done. Most of this is rambling commentary of no interest.

Knowing that you are completely lost concerning physics and science, why do you bother to make a prediction about where to collect more data. The location of future scans is based on the mathematical requirements of the imaging modality. Tomography isn't done helter skelter. Further measurements would be made where the best gains in imaging can be made.

You also claim that the science that needs to be done is cheap, easy, and fast. Really? How do you know that? The report suggests that the tomography has been performed on a small volume of the pyramid. The work is not done. So how long will it take to complete the work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

 

 

5 minutes ago, cladking said:

 

 

 


 

7 minutes ago, stereologist said:

 

You also claim that the science that needs to be done is cheap, easy, and fast. Really? How do you know that? The report suggests that the tomography has been performed on a small volume of the pyramid. The work is not done. So how long will it take to complete the work?

I'm not saying they shouldn't do scans anywhere they can, I'm just saying there's not a lot to see with the sensitivity of the modern technology.  There's a lot more infrared scanning to do and they really redo the gravimetric with more modern equipment. They should do hot scanning to complement the already completed infrared.  There are passages distant from the pyramid that need to be found using infrared as well.  There are some very expensive tests and measurements that need to be done as well and will have very very important information.

All I meant was that the most important testing that needs to be done is easy and inexpensive. Many of these can run concurrently and it will save money to do so.  The most important testing will make clear what needs to be done next.  It will require the systematic application of human knowledge and our instruments to rediscover how the pyramids were built and why.  It will require a whole new way of thinking to understand the builders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2016 at 0:19 PM, stereologist said:

I have posted 2 longer posts showing how muon tomography works. The images that have been posted by the group in Egypt are showing the deflected muons and not a spatial mapping of the voids.

I posted images and links to x-ray crystallography to show how a DNA scattering looks quite different from the material being studied. But the image contains the information to infer the shape of the material being studied. A problem with all of these methods is that they are prone to orientation issues. An x-ray or shadow changes with the change in the orientation of the imaging. The shadow of a curved object can appear to be straight at times. Similar issues happen in muon tomography. Think about MRI and CAT scans. The device moves around a person to take readings from many positions and then infers the 3-d form from the collected data, no singe piece of which has 3-d information in it

Could you clear up a few question for those of us who aren't as knowledgeable.

They can't scan the Pyramid the same way they can scan a truck, right?  With a truck they know where a muon originated - thus they "know" direction and deflection.

  • How do they know muons came from in the pyramid scans?
  • Aren't they merely detecting many more muons than expected?
  • Is this the reason for the inverted pyramid - to show a possible range of incoming direction?
  • "This excess has the shape of a straight line."  What are they actually referring to here - a mathematical function?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stereologist said:

I agree that the reason for being untruthful is the prediction. But reason or not the simple fact is that the reports at this time do not report a linear void.

It's okay to be wrong, but this is not a case of being wrong. He is simply being untruthful. I agree it is sad when people refuse to accept the scientific work being done.

That is pretty much his standard to misrepresent and repeat errors over and over again. Like he started saying a few years ago that he debunked ramps but refuses to show us how and where he did this? He also refuses to look at evidence for ramps and denies any evidence that they ever existed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
  • The topic was unlocked

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.