Pyramid models solar system
Discussion
Anyone interested in the meaning behind the Great Pyramid? It's the oldest, yet most advanced construction on Earth. After recently climbing throughout it's interior I can confirm it has no internal markings of any kind. It certainly doesn't appear to be a tomb or a work of art, which the egyptologists would suggest. The real meaning seems to be hidden in it's actual physical dimensions. From this perspective an engineer, mathematician or someone with an open mind can apreciate it's meaning in a clearer manner, than would be possible from a traditional viewpoint.
The ratio's of the dimensions of each plane, angle, interior shafts and the room sizes are all considered from a mathematical point of view. It's not the actual measurements which are important, more the ratio's between one aspect and another. No matter which unit the dimension's are measured in, be it inches or millimeters, the ratio numbers remain constant. It is possible to obtain exact measurement of the earths diameter, mass, distance from the sun, angle to the stars, and much more simply from studying the Great Pyramid. Even numbers only recently discovered via satellites and lasers are clearly stated, such as precession. It's all set in stone, all you have to do is measure it.
Obviously the technical prowess raises more tricky questions, governing human history, but that's another long issue!
www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/Wonders%20of%20the%20Great%20Pyramid%20Revealed.html
The ratio's of the dimensions of each plane, angle, interior shafts and the room sizes are all considered from a mathematical point of view. It's not the actual measurements which are important, more the ratio's between one aspect and another. No matter which unit the dimension's are measured in, be it inches or millimeters, the ratio numbers remain constant. It is possible to obtain exact measurement of the earths diameter, mass, distance from the sun, angle to the stars, and much more simply from studying the Great Pyramid. Even numbers only recently discovered via satellites and lasers are clearly stated, such as precession. It's all set in stone, all you have to do is measure it.
Obviously the technical prowess raises more tricky questions, governing human history, but that's another long issue!
www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/Wonders%20of%20the%20Great%20Pyramid%20Revealed.html
Isnt there a bloody great granite box inside, roughly human sized? At a rough guess I'd suggest it's a tomb, especially considering all the others are. The article metioned 'air vents' but I think these are widely believed to be vents for the 'soul' of the dead person to escape.
I've read a few issues of New Dawn and I remember it being mainly based on wild presumptions, pseudo-science and conspiracy theory. Good fun to read though.
>> Edited by jamiet on Friday 22 April 17:02
I've read a few issues of New Dawn and I remember it being mainly based on wild presumptions, pseudo-science and conspiracy theory. Good fun to read though.
>> Edited by jamiet on Friday 22 April 17:02
There are no wild presumptions in this case. It's just simple geometric shapes, which happen have very specific measurements and ratio's, which correlate exactly to numbers only recently discovered.
The question arises how did the builders of the Great Pyramid know about these specific numbers, without modern technology, many thousands of years ago?
With regard to the other small pyramids (of which there are hundreds) are very poor copies of the original far older Great Pyramid. These small crumbling wrecks were only tombs, and contain no important data. Yet why was the first example far superior to the later versions? It's a little like modern day man having a go at making the first ever building, and coming up with Canary Wharf. Whilst subsequent attempts turning out like small unstable sheds, by comparison. Man has always progressed in every area, except here.
The question arises how did the builders of the Great Pyramid know about these specific numbers, without modern technology, many thousands of years ago?
With regard to the other small pyramids (of which there are hundreds) are very poor copies of the original far older Great Pyramid. These small crumbling wrecks were only tombs, and contain no important data. Yet why was the first example far superior to the later versions? It's a little like modern day man having a go at making the first ever building, and coming up with Canary Wharf. Whilst subsequent attempts turning out like small unstable sheds, by comparison. Man has always progressed in every area, except here.
The Great Pyramid was one of the last pyramids built I always thought. It dates from 2,650 BC, not 10,000 BC. The earlier, and cruder versions, can be found on the other side of Cairo at Sakkahra.
And I thought that it was commonly known to be a tomb for the pharaoh of the time.
Later pharaohs were buried in the Valley of the Kings at Luxor.
And I thought that it was commonly known to be a tomb for the pharaoh of the time.
Later pharaohs were buried in the Valley of the Kings at Luxor.
4WD said:
I visited the step Pyramid in sakkahra. More like a pile of rubble. The Great Pyramid has been carbon dated as the oldest, by a very large margin.
I don’t think that is widely accepted in the scientific community .As for significant ratios I believe you can find them in the Eiffel tower, channel tunnel or a block of cheese if your definition is wide enough
You only have to look at the hieroglyphics at the Sahkarra site to see that they are older. Older hieroglyphics are much simpler than those of the latest dynasties - being much more like pictograms - showing scenes of farming, processions, singing, dancing etc. Later hieroglyphs are much more sophisticated, much more abstract and much more difficult to understand.
And I did not think they were piles of rubble at all. I enjoyed the Sahkarra site much more than Giza - less frenetic, less hassle from hawkers and more interesting (to me).
10,000 BC is far too long ago for the construction of any pyramids. The oldest civilisations in the world began in the Tigris-Euphrates region (modern Iraq), not Egypt, and they date back to about 5,000 - 6,000 BC.
And I did not think they were piles of rubble at all. I enjoyed the Sahkarra site much more than Giza - less frenetic, less hassle from hawkers and more interesting (to me).
10,000 BC is far too long ago for the construction of any pyramids. The oldest civilisations in the world began in the Tigris-Euphrates region (modern Iraq), not Egypt, and they date back to about 5,000 - 6,000 BC.
There are no hieroglyphics at the Great Pyramid though. The only way to date it is by unreliable stories, carbon dating, weather erosion of the rocks etc (which is difficault as the outer limestone layer was removed at some undefined point). Not sure who said 10k years old, not me. As far as I've heard it is the oldest though. Anyway, this is a distracting side issue. The real interest is in the actual known and measurable ratios.
You won't find a single significant ratio in the eiffel tower, slice of cheddar, or another pyramid copy for that matter. Were not talking about a single digit number cropping up. We are talking ratio's accurate to multiple decimal places. You really must read some of Graham Hancock's gathered research. It will take too much effort to explain Precession etc here. If you can be bothered with the reading you may well open your minds up a lot. I was very dubious at the beginning. Now Im in no doubt.
>> Edited by 4WD on Sunday 24th April 12:46
You won't find a single significant ratio in the eiffel tower, slice of cheddar, or another pyramid copy for that matter. Were not talking about a single digit number cropping up. We are talking ratio's accurate to multiple decimal places. You really must read some of Graham Hancock's gathered research. It will take too much effort to explain Precession etc here. If you can be bothered with the reading you may well open your minds up a lot. I was very dubious at the beginning. Now Im in no doubt.
>> Edited by 4WD on Sunday 24th April 12:46
4WD said:
It's not the actual measurements which are important, more the ratio's between one aspect and another. No matter which unit the dimension's are measured in, be it inches or millimeters, the ratio numbers remain constant.
If we do accept this, then...
4WD said:
It is possible to obtain exact measurement of the earths diameter, mass, distance from the sun, angle to the stars,
In what units?
I see you point there, mmm. Tricky one. I guess some cannot be used with an argument.
However, some of the ratio's are totally free from the units used. Ratio's illustrated in rock like - pi, number of days in the year to the last decimal place, the precession error percentage, the basic pyramid unit of measurment (cubit or p-inch) being exactly equal to 1000 or 500 millionth of the earths diameter etc. There are a lot of ratio's like these examples. Both show an exact understanding of astronomical measurement, which they shouldn't have had a clue about back then.
However, some of the ratio's are totally free from the units used. Ratio's illustrated in rock like - pi, number of days in the year to the last decimal place, the precession error percentage, the basic pyramid unit of measurment (cubit or p-inch) being exactly equal to 1000 or 500 millionth of the earths diameter etc. There are a lot of ratio's like these examples. Both show an exact understanding of astronomical measurement, which they shouldn't have had a clue about back then.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff