| April 26, 2024, 11:45 am UTC |
 |
| In: The Hall of Maat > Ancient History - Ancient History and Archaeology > Topic |
| Goto: Forum List • Create A New Profile • Log In |
|
Ancient History •
Ancient Egypt •
Laboratory •
Humanities •
Apocalypse •
Paper Lens •
Coffee Shop Exhibitions, Conferences, Lectures, Journals • Alternative Geometry and Numerology |
| July 22, 2001 04:04AM |
<HTML>> One of the problems with that is the blocks are placed so
> tightly together in spots that the geopolymer theory was
> CREATED to account for an in situ creation.
Yeah, but not exclusively it seemed to me... geopolymers solve the lifting problem too, so if lifting is really not a problem, they could have poured the blocks at ground level so as to have them tighly bound together, then in some instance you would have to use mortar to join two different series.
About the blocks getting smaller and smaller... can't this be by design ? otherwise, this is gonna be even more far fetched... but, hmm, what if they used the same sets of casing to pour their blocks in, their inside volume could get smaller and smaller
ahemm ok i give up
Francis.</HTML>
> tightly together in spots that the geopolymer theory was
> CREATED to account for an in situ creation.
Yeah, but not exclusively it seemed to me... geopolymers solve the lifting problem too, so if lifting is really not a problem, they could have poured the blocks at ground level so as to have them tighly bound together, then in some instance you would have to use mortar to join two different series.
About the blocks getting smaller and smaller... can't this be by design ? otherwise, this is gonna be even more far fetched... but, hmm, what if they used the same sets of casing to pour their blocks in, their inside volume could get smaller and smaller
ahemm ok i give up Francis.</HTML>
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.