MJ Thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Anthony,
>
> You write, 'Why would you ask me to look for 22/7
> (3 1/7) after explaining that it is not that
> number which we find in the pyramid's slope.'
>
> You can twist and turn the wording anyway you
> like, but the fact remains that seked 5 1/2
> naturally incorporates (not sure that's the
> correct term but it'll have to do for now) the
> ratio 22/7.

No, it does not.

The seqed 5 1/2 refers to 5 palms and one half palms. A palm is 4 digits. This means it is 22 digits total. This is compared to the full number of digits in a cubit, which is seven palms, or 28 digits.

In other words, the actual ratio provided by the seqed, (the number that it actually incorporates, as you put it) is 22/28, or 11/14. You could even switch it around to read 28/22 (which is more technically accurate).

11/14 is not the same, nor can it ever be confused with, 22/7. To get to 22/7, you have to insert an additional factor that is is not part of the pyramid height, sidelength, or perimeter.

There is no such number "incorporated" into the pyramid. Period. Asserting it is there will not change that fact.

Anthony

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.