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 -
WVK

Did Ancient People Use Acid to Shape Stone?

171 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Swede
 
ShadowSot

Just a thought, but since the change over seems to have happened during construction, might it be something more straightforward? The megalithic structures may have been larger and more durable, but they'd have also been more difficult to repair. 

 Makes sense to be to shift to a lighter, less durable, but more easily repairable construction style. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanos5150
21 hours ago, Abramelin said:

The mixture or agent was made on the spot.

And? What does that have to do with this: 

Things to consider as well is the amount of this product needed would have been many tons-an entire industry of its own. Then there are the safety hazards of extracting, processing, transporting, and using such a caustic material.  And how is it we find the Inca mines and quarries for the stone but not the magic clay?    

Quote

And 'many tons' must be a huge exaggaration.

To who? One gallon of water = 8.34lbs. 239.8 gallons equals one ton.  For sake of argument we'll assume one bucket of magic mud equals one gallon of water. Every block has 6 sides so lets say the average block required just two 8.34lb buckets of mud. Let's take just a sample of 2,000 of the largest blocks from Sacsayhuaman.  So 4,000 buckets at 8.34lbs each equals 33,360lbs. Divide that by 2,000 (one ton) = 16.8 tons. I think this qualifies as "many tons" don't you? For just 2,000 blocks at one site which in reality is more like double or triple that not even factoring in all of the stone working at all of the sites that needed this magic mud across the Inca Empire. 

Quote

The stuff was applied only to the surfaces of the worked stone to make that surface more malleable.

And? Blocks have six sides that need to be shaped which multiple coats would need to be applied. When you use solvent of any kind it dissolves its target becoming diluted with that substance and looses its efficacy. How much of say the sides of a block would need to be removed to get it to a flat surface able to be mated with another block? 6 cm ? 12 cm? One coat would soften how much of the surface- one millimeter?  Two? Scrape it away and do it again. Scrape it away and do it again. Instead of getting caught up in theoretical chemistry maybe just start with common sense first and if it passes those test then go from there. 

 

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WVK

The pattern of stone blocks in the walls of ancient Inca construction, particularly those at Machu Picchu, are not random, but seem to be systematic. The patterns seem to make no sense if each stone block was cut to fit into its particular place in the wall. The patterns do, however, seem to make sense if you consider that they might have been the result of the method I propose in this essay.

http://www.paulandellen.com/essays/essay165.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trelane
42 minutes ago, WVK said:

The pattern of stone blocks in the walls of ancient Inca construction, particularly those at Machu Picchu, are not random, but seem to be systematic. The patterns seem to make no sense if each stone block was cut to fit into its particular place in the wall. The patterns do, however, seem to make sense if you consider that they might have been the result of the method I propose in this essay.

http://www.paulandellen.com/essays/essay165.htm

Still,.....no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanos5150
19 minutes ago, Trelane said:

Still,.....no

What if he threw in one of these:

5480b01755726676736754491fd4d19b.jpg

Would it at least get you to a maybe? 

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trelane
4 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

What if he threw in one of these:

5480b01755726676736754491fd4d19b.jpg

Would it at least get you to a maybe? 

Hmmmmm, you might just get me with that.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanos5150
8 hours ago, Trelane said:

Hmmmmm, you might just get me with that.

Did I mention it also comes with "a prestigious certificate of Five-year membership from Gavin Publishers"? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DodgyDaoist
On 9/16/2021 at 8:07 PM, Abramelin said:

The mixture or agent was made on the spot.

And 'many tons' must be a huge exaggaration.

The stuff was applied only to the surfaces of the worked stone to make that surface more malleable.

 

This is an extract from a paper in 1981 on making of cements from plant extracts with a look towards the Pre-Incan's. If one is able to make cement by dissolving of rocks, one should be able to soften a particular surface area that could be worked.

https://www.geopolymer.org/wp-content/uploads/CemPlant.pdf

Another very interesting article on the other side of the world regarding Egyptian limestone concrete casting

https://www.geopolymer.org/archaeology/pyramids/pyramids-3-the-formula-the-invention-of-stone/

And one on Roman geopolymer concrete

https://www.instructables.com/Roman-Geopolymer-Concrete-Recipe/

IMHO, maybe we need to rethink the building techniques employed to build some of the megalithic sites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abramelin

May the gods have mercy upon your poor soul...

:unsure:

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WVK
On 9/5/2021 at 6:15 PM, jaylemurph said:

I mean, the idea works once you brutally dismember Ockham’s razor…

—Jaylemurph 

Can Ockham explain how the walls of Sasahuaman were constructed?
If (big if) they could make concrete then each block could be cast in place one next and on top of another using forms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
21 minutes ago, WVK said:

If (big if) they could make concrete then each block could be cast in place one next and on top of another using forms.

Where are the remnants of these processes then?

They would have to have an industrial area where these jobs were performed.

Where are the forms?

Making concrete is a pretty complex operation.

There is no way they produced the amount needed to construct what is there without leaving any trace of the technology needed for such structures.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Abramelin
1 hour ago, WVK said:

Can Ockham explain how the walls of Sasahuaman were constructed?
If (big if) they could make concrete then each block could be cast in place one next and on top of another using forms. 

I am talking from memory now, but I think I remember the Spanish conquistadors were there when the Quechua (the Inca were their leaders, and spoke a different language amongst themselves) were still busy building parts of Saqsayhuaman.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph
1 hour ago, WVK said:

Can Ockham explain how the walls of Sasahuaman were constructed?

I doubt it, but you completely misunderstand my point. Probably deliberately. 

—Jaylemurph 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abramelin
1 hour ago, Abramelin said:

I am talking from memory now, but I think I remember the Spanish conquistadors were there when the Quechua (the Inca were their leaders, and spoke a different language amongst themselves) were still busy building parts of Saqsayhuaman.

Too late to edit.

If the conquistadors were present during the building of - part of - Saqsayhuaman, wouldn't they have recorded any odd or weird technique used to build these walls?

That's why I suggested that any stuff that may have been fabricated to soften the prepared rough edges, or added tó those edges was made in minute quantities... on the spot.

So no big jars containing many gallons of some dangerous liquid near the construction, no, just a tiny cup.

Edited to add:

This technique may have gone unnoticed by the conquistadors. And maybe not even intentionally by the builders.

Edited by Abramelin
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WVK
1 hour ago, jaylemurph said:

I doubt it, but you completely misunderstand my point. Probably deliberately. 

—Jaylemurph 

No, not deliberately.  Just seeking the simplest explanation which, so far,has proven elusive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph
8 minutes ago, WVK said:

No, not deliberately.  Just seeking the simplest explanation which, so far,has proven elusive.

So you’re simultaneously seeking the simplest explanation whilst rejecting what is by far the simplest explanation?

Interesting. Do… do you understand what “simple” means? I do not think that word means what you think it means.

—Jaylemurph

 

  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gaden
9 hours ago, DodgyDaoist said:

This is an extract from a paper in 1981 on making of cements from plant extracts with a look towards the Pre-Incan's. If one is able to make cement by dissolving of rocks, one should be able to soften a particular surface area that could be worked.

https://www.geopolymer.org/wp-content/uploads/CemPlant.pdf

Another very interesting article on the other side of the world regarding Egyptian limestone concrete casting

https://www.geopolymer.org/archaeology/pyramids/pyramids-3-the-formula-the-invention-of-stone/

And one on Roman geopolymer concrete

https://www.instructables.com/Roman-Geopolymer-Concrete-Recipe/

IMHO, maybe we need to rethink the building techniques employed to build some of the megalithic sites.

 If the Egyptians had used a geopolymer, why aren't the stone more consistently shaped? Why are the facets so uneven and irregular?

building-blocks-great-pyramid-500.jpg.2c4e230c92f11c6405ffb4cdbe770d43.jpg

If you were to make a form in order to pour a stone, wouldn't you build it with straight sides? Why do some of the stones show the lines created by breaking them apart as in the one directly behind the man's head and the next four stones in that row as well as others? Directly to this man's right is either an unfinished saw cut, or a very thin stone, neither of which would be present if the builders had used a geopolymer. And what do we make of the Maurier Papyrus? What do we make of the quarries next to the Pyramids?

Quarries for the extraction of stones for the construction of the pyramids  of Egypt

Why is there obvious quarrying if the stones were poured? And why would you believe the author of the paper you submitted rather than geologists who all agree that the stones are natural? And, yes, I did read where the author said geologists were full of it (my paraphrase), but again, why believe him? 

Edited by Gaden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
2 minutes ago, Gaden said:

 

building-blocks-great-pyramid-500.jpg.2c4e230c92f11c6405ffb4cdbe770d43.jpg

Directly to this man's right is either an unfinished saw cut, or a very thin stone, neither of which would be present if the builders had used a geo polymer.

That's probably mortar.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gaden

Joint.jpg.1c71043bd43338c85b6907230dcfb132.jpg

3 minutes ago, Harte said:

That's probably mortar.

Harte

I considered that, but, I don't think there would be grooves next to it. 

Edited by Gaden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
6 minutes ago, Gaden said:

I considered that, but, I don't think there would be grooves next to it. 

Look at the line of mortar just above this guy's head. By the way, this is another example of stones that certainly weren't "poured."
1582745115_GPCloseup2.1.jpg.e48b9369a18d84ca772f744a17771ba9.jpg

Harte

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.