Topic: The Pyramids

[Djozer]

Make a loop out of rope, and tie 12 knots in it. Pull tight at key point knots 3, 7 and 12 units along its length - you have yourself a right angle.

I'm well aware of the theory mate, trust me - as I said, I've set out grids on sites I've worked on. However, even with modern survey tapes it's incredibly hard to set out a grid to the degree of accuracy that the Great Pyramid exhibits - that's why most modern archaeological sites and construction sites (and I've worked on both) tend to use EDMs, where possible. I don't mean to have a go, I'm just stating the facts as I see it, from experience gained in my own working life. If the pyramid is as accurately laid out as claimed - and the accuracy element I've read in several (non-conspiratorial) sources - then that's one hell of an impressive feat of engineering. Nothing alien, mysterious or magical about it, but very impressive engineering.

[The Gulleysucker]

This seems plausible...accuracy achieved via a light source.... a bit like a modern laser level...

...The tombs are aligned north-south with an accuracy of up to 0.05 degrees. How the Egyptians did this has been unclear. Today, you could align a building north-south by pointing the sides towards the pole star, which sits roughly at true north. However, a wobble in the Earth’s axis of rotation (called precession), means that the positions of the stars changes gradually over time.

In the third millennium BC, no star sat at the north pole. Instead, all the stars in the north sky rotated around an imaginary point marking the north pole.

Experts thought the ancient Egyptians might have watched a single star circle this imaginary point and aligned their pyramid with the circle’s centre.

Alternatively, they might have measured north by tracking the path of the Sun. Either way, the accuracy with which they mastered this should have been about the same during the entire pyramid-building period.

But the accuracy wasn’t constant, Kate Spence of Cambridge University points out. Instead, the alignment of successive pyramids first steadily improved up to the building of the Great Pyramid, then later deteriorated. This makes perfect sense, she says, if the architects were measuring the alignment using not one star, but two: Mizar in Ursa Major (the Big Dipper) and Kochab in Ursa Minor (the Little Dipper).

Rewinding the astronomical clock using modern computers shows that the two stars rotated around the pole opposite each other in the Old Kingdom sky. In other words, an imaginary line joining the stars passed through the north pole. When the two stars lay vertically above each other, both would mark the position of true north for the pyramid builders.

However, due to precession, the line joining Mizar and Kochab only drifted into precise alignment with the north pole in 2467 BC, then wandered away (see graphic). The orientation of successive pyramids faithfully tracks this drift, Spence says, explaining the rise and fall of north-south alignment precision.

If Spence is right, it is now possible to use astronomical records to date the pyramids to the nearest five years. For example, construction of the Great Pyramid at Giza began between 2485 and 2475 BC.

“I’m as convinced as I think one can be in archaeology,” Spence says.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn174-pyramid-precision/

[Jiminy Cricket]

I'm well aware of the theory mate, trust me - as I said, I've set out grids on sites I've worked on. However, even with modern survey tapes it's incredibly hard to set out a grid to the degree of accuracy that the Great Pyramid exhibits - that's why most modern archaeological sites and construction sites (and I've worked on both) tend to use EDMs, where possible. I don't mean to have a go, I'm just stating the facts as I see it, from experience gained in my own working life. If the pyramid is as accurately laid out as claimed - and the accuracy element I've read in several (non-conspiratorial) sources - then that's one hell of an impressive feat of engineering. Nothing alien, mysterious or magical about it, but very impressive engineering.

I think, though, having a closed loop will make it much easier to achieve. No measuring, and remeasuring, to get the three distances to meet at three vertices. Of course, you'd need to do other things, like pre-tentioning the rope, just like they do with modern structural cabling to remove the non-true elastic element of stretching (where fibers bed down upon tensioning, but not spring back). I'm no engineer, so someone else might better explain this and/or use more accurate terms than me.

[conman]

Or, 'white' inhabitants of (fictional*) Atlantis were originators of Pharaohian Egypt, the Aztec civilisation, etc.

* For the benefit of wingnuts, Atlantis is fiction.

Wrong

[The Gulleysucker]

Just a quick addendum to my post above, I think some people are perhaps getting confused between the precision of the orientation which has always been interesting, but mistaking it as instead a reference to the precision of the structure itself.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Wrong

You are mistaken.

I meant the Earth bound Atlantis (somewhere, supposedly, in the Atlantic). That picture is of true Atlantis, on another planet. They even had spin-off documentary series about it.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Just a quick addendum to my post above, I think some people are perhaps getting confused between the precision of the orientation which has always been interesting, but mistaking it as instead a reference to the precision of the structure itself.

Both are impressive it would seem. But, as per your post regarding north/south alignment, nothing magical about it.

[Samie]

Atlantis existed after Pangaea broke up.  I learn't that watching a documentary. 

[Anywhichwayicant]

But you are using the same kind of 'God of the gaps' arguments put forward by creationists. Just because we don't know how something occurred or works, it does mean we jump to fantastical conclusions. But in this case, it is even worse - we largely know how these feats of engineering were achieved. The Egyptians were not stupid. They had the same brain capacity as 21st century humans. If the Egyptians had produced a stealth bomber, or the LHC, then you might have reason to suppose that something else was going on.

I didn't jump to any fantastical conclusions though. I wasn't suggesting that aliens built them. I was just questioning what we allegedly know, not suggesting anything magical or other worldly.

[redbyrdz]

This seems plausible...accuracy achieved via a light source.... a bit like a modern laser level...

...The tombs are aligned north-south with an accuracy of up to 0.05 degrees. How the Egyptians did this has been unclear. Today, you could align a building north-south by pointing the sides towards the pole star, which sits roughly at true north. However, a wobble in the Earth’s axis of rotation (called precession), means that the positions of the stars changes gradually over time.

In the third millennium BC, no star sat at the north pole. Instead, all the stars in the north sky rotated around an imaginary point marking the north pole.

Experts thought the ancient Egyptians might have watched a single star circle this imaginary point and aligned their pyramid with the circle’s centre.

Alternatively, they might have measured north by tracking the path of the Sun. Either way, the accuracy with which they mastered this should have been about the same during the entire pyramid-building period.

But the accuracy wasn’t constant, Kate Spence of Cambridge University points out. Instead, the alignment of successive pyramids first steadily improved up to the building of the Great Pyramid, then later deteriorated. This makes perfect sense, she says, if the architects were measuring the alignment using not one star, but two: Mizar in Ursa Major (the Big Dipper) and Kochab in Ursa Minor (the Little Dipper).

Rewinding the astronomical clock using modern computers shows that the two stars rotated around the pole opposite each other in the Old Kingdom sky. In other words, an imaginary line joining the stars passed through the north pole. When the two stars lay vertically above each other, both would mark the position of true north for the pyramid builders.

However, due to precession, the line joining Mizar and Kochab only drifted into precise alignment with the north pole in 2467 BC, then wandered away (see graphic). The orientation of successive pyramids faithfully tracks this drift, Spence says, explaining the rise and fall of north-south alignment precision.

If Spence is right, it is now possible to use astronomical records to date the pyramids to the nearest five years. For example, construction of the Great Pyramid at Giza began between 2485 and 2475 BC.

“I’m as convinced as I think one can be in archaeology,” Spence says.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn174-pyramid-precision/

That is interesting and brings home how old the pyramids are.

So old that the stars were different.

[Djozer]

I think, though, having a closed loop will make it much easier to achieve. No measuring, and remeasuring, to get the three distances to meet at three vertices. Of course, you'd need to do other things, like pre-tentioning the rope, just like they do with modern structural cabling to remove the non-true elastic element of stretching (where fibers bed down upon tensioning, but not spring back). I'm no engineer, so someone else might better explain this and/or use more accurate terms than me.

That makes sense. I don't think we know exactly what surveying tools they used, but pre-measured triangles, crosses or squares for right angles seems reasonable, in conjunction with measuring cords, sighting staffs and plumb bobs. I'd guess it would have taken considerable time and effort checking and re-checking to set out the initial base and subsequent courses, but given the manpower and time devoted to the construction generally I doubt they were too bothered by the effort needed. It was, quite literally, a monumental mobilisation of manpower and resources.

Anyway, this is dull as fuck, so apologies. I'm sure we're all mostly in agreement that the pyramids are amazing but were merely the result of human ingenuity and effort, and are far more interested in Atlantis and the aliens. To that end, here's an old coin with an alien on it.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Not sure why people seem stuck on how they got the blocks to the Pyramid as they were quarried right next to it,only the largest of them were quarried down stream.As for right angles haha we're not talking about Neanderthals ffs.

[Anywhichwayicant]

Not sure why people seem stuck on how they got the blocks to the Pyramid as they were quarried right next to it,only the largest of them were quarried down stream.As for right angles haha we're not talking about Neanderthals ffs.

We're talking 2,000,000 blocks, weighing an average of 2+ tonnes. In twenty years. Using 'primitive' tools.

Simply nonsense.

We're not talking about sacks of spuds. I don't think people appreciate the skill, ingenuity and TIME required to accomplish this.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

We're talking 2,000,000 blocks, weighing an average of 2+ tonnes. In twenty years. Using 'primitive' tools.

Simply nonsense.

We're not talking about sacks of spuds. I don't think people appreciate the skill, ingenuity and TIME required to accomplish this.

I think that I do but then I laugh at conspiracy theorists.

You're also ignoring the FACT that not all of the blocks were 2 ton,most of the inner 'blocks' were just filler with some being small enough for a young lad to lob over a two storey house.

At least you have moved on from claiming that they were all ferried to the site.

[SP]

We're talking 2,000,000 blocks, weighing an average of 2+ tonnes. In twenty years. Using 'primitive' tools.

Simply nonsense.

We're not talking about sacks of spuds. I don't think people appreciate the skill, ingenuity and TIME required to accomplish this.

100,000 per year, about 300 a day. Not unfeasible with huge manpower and multiple production lines. 20 stones an hour.

After 2 million of them, they probably got quite adept.

[Phil M]

100,000 per year, about 300 a day. Not unfeasible with huge alienpower and multiple production lines. 20 stones an hour.

[Elmo!]

100,000 per year, about 300 a day. Not unfeasible with huge manpower and multiple production lines. 20 stones an hour.

After 2 million of them, they probably got quite adept.

Did they form a blockchain?

[Anywhichwayicant]

I think that I do but then I laugh at conspiracy theorists.

You're also ignoring the FACT that not all of the blocks were 2 ton,most of the inner 'blocks' were just filler with some being small enough for a young lad to lob over a two storey house.

At least you have moved on from claiming that they were all ferried to the site.

Two tonnes is the average weight though. Many of the blocks were multiples of that. That's a pretty big average weight.

[Alan_X]

That's fucking shocking (the underlying racism, not your post) if true, in this day and age. I can almost understand people holding such views in less enlightened times, and there's ample evidence that they did, but today? Get to fuck.

That said, there are undeniable pyramids on Mars, and a giant stone face, so there was definitely Ancient Egyptian - extraterrestrial contact. This is no conspiracy theory, it's scientific fact. There may be no actual evidence for it beyond a few grainy images but it's still scientific fact. Maybe the Egyptians influenced the Martians, or there could have been some kind of two-way cross-pollenisation of ideas, art and technology. At this stage we simply don't have enough evidence to make any definitive interpretations.

Can’t be arsed to search for the ‘not sure if serious’ gif so at the risk of being woodshed I will just ask the question.

‘Are you serious?’

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Two tonnes is the average weight though. Many of the blocks were multiples of that. That's a pretty big average weight.

By many you mean very few.

to be honest you're either very,very,very clueless about the Pyramids or you're just playing conspiracy theorist for shits and giggles.

[Party Phil]

This is no conspiracy theory, it's scientific fact. There may be no actual evidence for it beyond a few grainy images but it's still scientific fact.

Welcome to RAWK Dr. Fox.

[Samie]

Didn't NASA say they have discovered what looks like pyramids on Mars?

[Anywhichwayicant]

The AVERAGE weight is two tonnes.

You're talking about young lads lobbing rocks over two story houses.

And I am clueless, just like everyone else is about Giza. I'm not trying to fool myself though.

We don't know. And until we do, stop pretending.

100,000 per year, about 300 a day. Not unfeasible with huge manpower and multiple production lines. 20 stones an hour.

Hold on. 300 blocks (averaging 2 tonnes) a day? Using 'primitive' tools?

The average bricklayer barely does that.

[Alan_X]

You may very well be correct mate. I've never used water to set elevation, but from personal experience I know how hard it is to set up right angles using the 3,4,5 triangle or derivations thereof, from having to set up grids and baselines on sites I've worked on. The larger the site (or square you're setting up), the greater the error tends to be.

I'm not suggesting any sort of supernatural or extraterrestrial influence or assistance, but to have only a few centimetres difference between the lengths of the four bases, when each base was over 200m long, is bloody amazing. In no way is it impossible to achieve using fairly rudimentary technologies, but it's still pretty incredible. I don't mean incredible in the sense that I find it hard to believe, just that I think, fuck, fair play to those guys, that's impressive.

The facing stones are all gone from the great pyramid so what is thus accuracy based on? What’s the source for your statement? 

*edit - and making a 3:4:5 triangle is a piece of piss.

[Alan_X]

The AVERAGE weight is two tonnes.

You're talking about young lads lobbing rocks over two story houses.

And I am clueless, just like everyone else is about Giza. I'm not trying to fool myself though.

We don't know. And until we do, stop pretending.

Hold on. 300 blocks (averaging 2 tonnes) a day? Using 'primitive' tools?

The average bricklayer barely does that.

Ok - you tell us then. How long would it have taken? And why the fuck would they bother if it takes a thousand years to build one?

Also could you answer the same questions for all the other massive prehistoric monuments in India, Cambodia, Central America, Japan, China and so on?

[WhereAngelsPlay]

The AVERAGE weight is two tonnes.

You're talking about young lads lobbing rocks over two story houses.

And I am clueless, just like everyone else is about Giza. I'm not trying to fool myself though.

We don't know. And until we do, stop pretending.

Yes you're clueless as I am talking about actual facts,the outer blocks were on average 2 tons,all of the inner ones apart from those that were part of the tombs weren't cut to perfection and were also made up of rubble,now I also know for a FACT that a young lad can throw a bit of rubble just a bit bigger than his fist over a two story house & I know that because I spent many an hour as a lad on building sites.

CLUELESS..

Have you conceded that 2m blocks didn't make it to site on the Nile ?

And you must know some pretty fucking shitty brick layers.

[Anywhichwayicant]

Ok - you tell us then. How long would it have taken? And why the fuck would they bother if it takes a thousand years to build one?

Also could you answer the same questions for all the other massive prehistoric monuments in India, Cambodia, Central America, Japan, China and so on?

That's the thing, I don't know.

But it took a great mind to plan it, and great skill to execute it.

I'm basing the time scale on what 'experts' have told us. They did all this using primitive tools. So, it either took a hell of a lot longer than 20 years, or the tools they used were not so primitive.

Speaking of man power, imagine how inconvenient it would be having hundreds or even thousands of people trying to manoeuvre one block into place. 

[Anywhichwayicant]

Yes you're clueless as I am talking about actual facts,the outer blocks were on average 2 tons,all of the inner ones apart from those that were part of the tombs weren't cut to perfection and were also made up of rubble,now I also know for a FACT that a young lad can throw a bit of rubble just a bit bigger than his fist over a two story house & I know that because I spent many an hour as a lad on building sites.

CLUELESS..

Have you conceded that 2m blocks didn't make it to site on the Nile ?

And you must know some pretty fucking shitty brick layers.

The overall average is 2 tonnes. I don't care how many pebbles were included, the AVERAGE is TWO TONNES.

Some blocks weighed up to 10 tonnes.

Do you know the definition of 'average'?

[The Gulleysucker]

...Hold on. 300 blocks (averaging 2 tonnes) a day? Using 'primitive' tools?

The average bricklayer barely does that.

It's around 600 per day for the average bricklayer....http://www.self-build.co.uk/bricklaying-costs-m2-or-thousand

You're getting ripped off.

And I am clueless,...

Quite possibly.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

That's the thing, I don't know.

But it took a great mind to plan it, and great skill to execute it.

I'm basing the time scale on what 'experts' have told us. They did all this using primitive tools. So, it either took a hell of a lot longer than 20 years, or the tools they used were not so primitive.

Speaking of man power, imagine how inconvenient it would be having hundreds or even thousands of people trying to manoeuvre one block into place.

They used copper chisels and had teams of people working for each stone mason so his chisle was alwaysn sharp.Incredibly the human mind was just as great back then as it is now.

And you aren obviously basing it on what your conspiracy 'experts' are telling YOU.

[Alan_X]

Two tonnes is the average weight though. Many of the blocks were multiples of that. That's a pretty big average weight.

So are you saying it would be impossible to move them or just need a lot of manpower?

[conman]

And I am clueless

Quite possibly.

[Anywhichwayicant]

It's around 600 per day for the average bricklayer....http://www.self-build.co.uk/bricklaying-costs-m2-or-thousand

You're getting ripped off.

And how much does the average brick weigh? No more than 10 pounds?

So we're saying that the average bricklayer lays only twice the amount of bricks that the Egyptians laid (two tonne blocks) in a day?

[WhereAngelsPlay]

The overall average is 2 tonnes. I don't care how many pebbles were included, the AVERAGE is TWO TONNES.

Some blocks weighed up to 10 tonnes.  EIGHT

Do you know the definition of 'average'?  DO YOU ?

[WhereAngelsPlay]

And how much does the average brick weigh? No more than 10 pounds?

So we're saying that the average bricklayer lays only twice the amount of bricks that the Egyptians laid (two tonne blocks) in a day?

I think we have found the problem.   

[Anywhichwayicant]

So are you saying it would be impossible to move them or just need a lot of manpower?

Either extraordinary manpower which would create it own problems, or their tools weren't so primitive.

[Djozer]

‘Are you serious?’

No.

*edit - and making a 3:4:5 triangle is a piece of piss.

Correct. However, using a 3, 4, 5 triangle to accurately set out a grid, baseline or some other form of horizontal plan is not a piece of piss if you are talking about distances larger than a few dozen metres. I've been there - it's one of those things that sound easy but isn't. Discrepancies multiply. To get the lengths of each basal side accurate to within a few inches is pretty astonishing, in my opinion (which is obviously not an expert one). I'm basing the accuracies on some reading I had to do for university, though, so admittedly this was several years ago now and, as you say, the facing stones have gone so the researchers would have been working on estimates. I do remember the egyptology module lecturer impressed on us how much quackery went on with regards to archaeology as a whole, and the pyramids in particular, but he also was of the opinion that the pyramids, as with many large scale Egyptian monuments were really rather astonishing achievements of architecture considering the knowledge and technology they had available.

I've already been over this in previous posts and can't really be bothered again - no offence - but I maintain that the great pyramid, and probably most other pyramids, is an astoundingly impressive feat of human engineering and labour, as with many other large monuments from various ancient cultures across the globe. At the risk of repeating myself, I'm not ascribing any extraterrestrial or mystical influences to their conception or construction, merely saying it's pretty fucking mad what ancient civilizations got up to when they put their minds to it. That's it, the end.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Either extraordinary manpower which would create it own problems, or their tools weren't so primitive.

Yeah true,I bet they would've had to build a city and provide eveything that the builders & labourers would need.

Now I wonder if we have ever found any evidence of that,have we any ?

[The Gulleysucker]

The overall average is 2 tonnes. I don't care how many pebbles were included, the AVERAGE is TWO TONNES.

Some blocks weighed up to 10 tonnes.

Do you know the definition of 'average'?

Have you ever tried to move a rock?

I have.

It was around half a ton.

It took me a while but using a large iron bar as a lever and another rock as a fulcrum I was able to postion it on the blades of a heavy duty sack truck.

Levers are great, once you understand them they enable huge forces to be applied and with little effort.

I then pulled the sack truck up a slope in our garden around 75m  with only the assistance of my wife.

Just the two  of us.

Wheels and rollers are great too.

It took around 10 minutes.

Now think what a team of say 200 people could do.

There's no mystery involved, it's pretty straightforward.

[Chakan]

<snip>

Gully's wife btw

Spoiler

[close]