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 -

Scientists reveal hidden corridor in Great Pyramid of Giza


Recommended Posts

And this just poses more questions. I was expecting any further investigation after the original scans to confirm an entrance corridor, but what we get is not an entrance corridor at all, but a dead end. I don't buy the suggestion that it is relieving pressure for a corridor underneath it, it's not needed, and certainly not that far out from the center line of the pyramid. Surely this is a trick of the builders and the real entrance to G1 is still yet to be found, or at least an entrance that leads to, where? a burial chamber underneath the Queen's Chamber ? hm.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is from Nile Magazine, and who is to say this is wrong...

png

But seriously, there is a lot more going on than we think. Speculating, it almost looks as if the rough floor of this new corridor could just be the upper surface of the ceiling of a filled in corridor below it, and it would need to be filled in as otherwise the muon detectors would have detected it. The void above the GG is only detected because the muon detectors placed in the GG. No voids can be detected under the horizontal passage and Queen's Chamber because it would need a further void below them for the detectors. It's difficult not to notice that a horizontal line drawn from a point under this new corridor, but above the entrance passage, ends up conveniently under the Queen's Chamber. However, if such a corridor existed it would need to avoid the ascending passage. Then there's the big void, which I think should now be seen as real and not an echo or whatever as the scans have proven to be spot on with this new corridor.

Edit: Link to the paper, which can be dl as a pdf. Lots of science, most way over my head, but I will draw attention to Fig 5 which has diagrammes to show more clearly the position of this new corridor in relation to the other structures in that part of the pyramid.

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 4
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reading about this and think I would agree with the local expert that it's some kind of weight distribution mechanism. Perhaps to easy the stress above the main entrance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The professor from Munich whose team conducted the probe with the endoscope, Christian Grosse, in an inteview with tagesschau, the German equivalent of BBC news, says that after this find has been fully evaluated, they will move on to the big void. He speculates about a potential connection between this new corridor and the big void, which would I guess go with Houdin's theory. There could be just that one stone block by the sarcophagus in the King's Chamber, and a few feet or so of rubble under the old excavation in the Queen's Chamber separating us from, ?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While an interesting feature I think they’re making more of it than is currently warranted. Notice how it goes from a void to a corridor with no evidence it was ever intended to be used for common foot travel. 
 

cormac

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

While an interesting feature I think they’re making more of it than is currently warranted. Notice how it goes from a void to a corridor with no evidence it was ever intended to be used for common foot travel. 
 

cormac

Sure, cormac, but the way they sealed the pyramid it was clear that the whole interior was not intended for common use. 
Look at all the extra work they gave themselves to put the subterranean pit in there, and why...? no one is going to use it, supposedly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Sure, cormac, but the way they sealed the pyramid it was clear that the whole interior was not intended for common use. 
Look at all the extra work they gave themselves to put the subterranean pit in there, and why...? no one is going to use it, supposedly. 

I’m not talking about solely after it was sealed but AT ANY POINT. That it’s a void is irrefutable but being an actual corridor isn’t in evidence. And a writers making it more than what is evidenced to continue baseless speculation is really inexcusable IMO. 
 

cormac

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

I’m not talking about solely after it was sealed but AT ANY POINT. That it’s a void is irrefutable but being an actual corridor isn’t in evidence. And a writers making it more than what is evidenced to continue baseless speculation is really inexcusable IMO. 

So, you are reffering to Hawass then:

Quote

Former Egyptian antiquities minister Zahi Hawass told NBC News on Thursday that he believes this discovery to be the most significant of the 21st century. During his reign from 2509 to 2483 B.C., Khufu, a pharaoh of Egypt’s 4th Dynasty, had a massive pyramid constructed on the Giza plateau outside of Cairo. “The discovery today tells us there is something important to be discovered soon under that tunnel, which could be the real burial chamber of Khufu,” Hawass said.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/2/2023 at 3:35 PM, Wepwawet said:

And this just poses more questions. I was expecting any further investigation after the original scans to confirm an entrance corridor, but what we get is not an entrance corridor at all, but a dead end. I don't buy the suggestion that it is relieving pressure for a corridor underneath it, it's not needed, and certainly not that far out from the center line of the pyramid. Surely this is a trick of the builders and the real entrance to G1 is still yet to be found, or at least an entrance that leads to, where? a burial chamber underneath the Queen's Chamber ? hm.

I would like to inform anyone that what makes sense to us might have been completely different in that time and day. If something obviously doesn't seem to be a a factor now, like a theory that it might relieve stress on the structure or around the entrance, the people who designed it may have thought otherwise as theories come and go and some are disproven along the way. So, with something this old, it is difficult to tell what their thoughts may have been.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess putting aside his tendency towards exaggeration it's still a pretty big discovery. Hopefully they turn up some interesting debris or maybe more writing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pri_585627111.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&c

Old image, and the big void may just as well be horizontal as sloped, but the small void is now confirmed of course.

This is just observations:

As the detectors can only be placed in existing passages with access, we will only get a north to south slice of the pyramid, and any voids east or west of the two detected voids cannot, with existing technology, be detected. So we just have what we have in the image. The exposed gabling on the north face of the pyramid can be seen by broken fragments to have extended out further. Whether this now destroyed section was filled in or left as a void cannot be known, but the exposed part that still stands was certainly blocked of. Yet, there is a void behind the blocking, and further blocking at the end of the newly found void. If this space continued further into the pyramid it will be completely filled as otherwise it would have been detected. The only known original structure under this void is the descending passage. If there is a filled in passage between this new void and the descending passage it does not need protection, so why the gabling. If there is no as yet undectable passage directly under this new void, then is the gabling really protecting the descending passage. I think not as it is too far underneath this new void, and this gap increases sharply the further into the pyramid it goes. If there really was the intention of providing protection for the descending passage, then it would surely have continued further, and have continued all the way over the ascending passage to the GG, but nothing is detected. The builders have worked out that large open spaces such as the two chambers and the GG need protection, but small passages do not, so the function of the gabling on the north side of the pyramid, while certainly looking like stress protection, appears to be doing nothing, and just how much weight and stress is there at the outer edge of the pyramid, hardly anything at all right at the outer face.

This is speculation:

However, this void with it's gabling cannot have no purpose, I don't believe for one second that it is an error, something they tried and discarded. Therefore It seems to me that there may well be a passage directly under this gabled void, a passage larger than the descending and ascending passages, and that it has been filled in as a defence measure after it had been used for whatever purpose it had, and the structure above was needed as stress protection due to the size of the speculative passage. This speculative passage then makes a turn where this new void ends, and even if not filled in from this point, is out of range for the detectors. Houdin can then be looked to for a potential solution as to where this speculative passage goes.

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ShadowSot said:

I guess putting aside his tendency towards exaggeration it's still a pretty big discovery. Hopefully they turn up some interesting debris or maybe more writing. 

Who's that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, we are 'assuming' that the Egyptians built the Great Pyramid.  To my knowledge there is no real way to know that was the case.  I also see absolutely no reason why the Egyptians would have...even if they could have, and I don't think they could have... built such a thing.

It seems more likely to me that the Egyptians 'inherited' the Great Pyramid from someone else.  The Egyptians simply did not have the technological means to build the Great Pyramid...and no real reason to.  I don't buy any of that BS about the Pharaohs wanted them built for when they died.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, joc said:

First of all, we are 'assuming' that the Egyptians built the Great Pyramid.  To my knowledge there is no real way to know that was the case.  I also see absolutely no reason why the Egyptians would have...even if they could have, and I don't think they could have... built such a thing.

It seems more likely to me that the Egyptians 'inherited' the Great Pyramid from someone else.  The Egyptians simply did not have the technological means to build the Great Pyramid...and no real reason to.  I don't buy any of that BS about the Pharaohs wanted them built for when they died.   

The problem with that is at a minimum two-fold. One, radiocarbon dating of the mortar used in the GPs construction places it within the timeframe of Khufu, plus or minus a century or so while Egyptian history dates to at least circa 3100 BC. Two, while the average weight of GP blocks is given as 2.5 tons that’s just the average and NOT each blocks true weight as depending on actual size many would have weighed well less than half that. 
 

cormac

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, joc said:

First of all, we are 'assuming' that the Egyptians built the Great Pyramid.  To my knowledge there is no real way to know that was the case.  I also see absolutely no reason why the Egyptians would have...even if they could have, and I don't think they could have... built such a thing.

It seems more likely to me that the Egyptians 'inherited' the Great Pyramid from someone else.  The Egyptians simply did not have the technological means to build the Great Pyramid...and no real reason to.  I don't buy any of that BS about the Pharaohs wanted them built for when they died.   

So, depictions of Egyptians constructing large structures do not convince you?

They, btw., dìd have the technology. Just not the kind of technology we would use to build such a large structure.

They also had a lot of time, ànd a lot of workers.

Edited by Abramelin
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

The problem with that is at a minimum two-fold. One, radiocarbon dating of the mortar used in the GPs construction places it within the timeframe of Khufu, plus or minus a century or so while Egyptian history dates to at least circa 3100 BC.

More like plus two centuries give or take. No minus.

Quote

Two, while the average weight of GP blocks is given as 2.5 tons that’s just the average and NOT each blocks true weight as depending on actual size many would have weighed well less than half that. 

Given there are 2.3 million blocks, not sure that's the best argument. 

Edited by Thanos5150
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Abramelin said:

So, depictions of Egyptians constructing large structures do not convince you?

That does sound convincing. Can you link to these pictures of Egyptians constructing large structures? 

Quote

They, btw., dìd have the technology. Just not the kind of technology we would use to build such a large structure.

They had just about the same exact technology

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, joc said:

First of all, we are 'assuming' that the Egyptians built the Great Pyramid.  To my knowledge there is no real way to know that was the case.  I also see absolutely no reason why the Egyptians would have...even if they could have, and I don't think they could have... built such a thing.

It seems more likely to me that the Egyptians 'inherited' the Great Pyramid from someone else.  The Egyptians simply did not have the technological means to build the Great Pyramid...and no real reason to.  I don't buy any of that BS about the Pharaohs wanted them built for when they died.   

You have over 27,000 posts here. How can you still be this ignorant? 

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

More like plus two centuries give or take. No minus.

Given there are 2.3 million blocks, not sure that's the best argument. 

2.3 million blocks is not a given, it’s an estimate which doesn’t take several things into account. 
 

cormac

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cormac mac airt said:

2.3 million blocks is not a given, it’s an estimate which doesn’t take several things into account. 

Of course it is estimated, that is a given, but even the most conservative credible estimates, taking these several things into account which is why the block count is lowered, are around 2,000,000. Not to mention 2.3 is already a lowered estimate from the earlier 2.5 million. So if your argument is: 

"Two, while the average weight of GP blocks is given as 2.5 tons that’s just the average and NOT each blocks true weight as depending on actual size many would have weighed well less than half that."  

Does it really matter if its 2.3 or 2.0 million? Or how about 1.5 or 1.0 million?  

Its interesting though that you accept the 2.5 ton average which is based on this 2.3 million yet not the total estimate itself which if less blocks this means what for this 2.5 ton average? Is it higher...? 

Edited by Thanos5150
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

Of course it is estimated, that is a given, but even the most conservative credible estimates, taking these several things into account which is why the block count is lowered, are around 2,000,000. Not to mention 2.3 is already a lowered estimate from the earlier 2.5 million. So if your argument is: 

"Two, while the average weight of GP blocks is given as 2.5 tons that’s just the average and NOT each blocks true weight as depending on actual size many would have weighed well less than half that."  

Does it really matter if its 2.3 or 2.0 million? Or how about 1.5 or 1.0 million?  

Its interesting though that you accept the 2.5 ton average which is based on this 2.3 million yet not the total estimate itself which if less blocks this means what for this 2.5 ton average? Is it higher...? 

G1 Courses by Size

Percentage of volume by course:

stonelayers.gif

 

Link to comment
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.