I see that Anthony's thread re Khufu's pyramid and pi has been closed.

Well, as Anthony saw fit to publically make some rather disparaging and totally unfounded remarks about me and my work on this subject, I feel I should be allowed to post a reply to him.

So here goes, folks.

Hello Anthony,

You write, ‘Since your work is based upon the false fact that 11=22,’

No, Anthony, it is not based on such nonsense.
My hypothesis is that a) the simple formulae Dimension A = Dimension B multiplied by 3 1/7 or Dimension A = Dimension B divided by 3 1/7 were used extensively in the planning of Khufu’s pyramid and b) the seked 5½ was the source or inspiration for this.


You write, ‘I don't have a "view". I have a fact-based logical conclusion.

Interesting; I, too, have ‘a fact-based logical conclusion’ but it is different to yours.
I wonder which, if either, will prove, if ever, to be correct…


You write, ‘I've presented the mathematical facts that incontrovertibly demonstrate it’

Actually, you have done no such thing.
Would you care to demonstrate how the application of seked 5½ does not create in a pyramid: the height of the pyramid is to the perimeter of its base as a circle’s radius is to its circumference?


You write, ‘No, my objection to the dishonest claim that "3 1/7 was used extensively in the designing of Khufu's pyramid" is that it is a dishonest claim. It is false. It has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be false.’

There is nothing dishonest in my hypothesis, Anthony.
My evidence is drawn from the works of, to name a few, Howard-Vyse, Piazzi Smyth, Flinders Petrie, Rutherford, the Edgar brothers, Cole, Reisner, Gillings, Siliotti, Lehner, Hawass, Legon, et al.
My method is the application of simple arithmetic and basic lineal/linear geometry not at all dissimilar to what we see in the Mathematical papyri.
Also, as you have not read my hypothesis it is insensible of you to assert, ‘It has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be false.’
All that you have achieved so far is wrongly conclude that for 3 1/7 to ‘appear’ in the dimensions of Khufu’s pyramid (exterior and interior) requires the totally spurious arguement 11 = 22.
The other error you are making here is automatically associating 3 1/7 with pi and then arguing that because the 4th AEs did not know pi they could not have intentionally used 3 1/7 in the planning of Khufu’s pyramid.
It is, whether one likes it or not, highly plausible that Seked 5½ was the inspiration for the employment of 3 1/7 in the designing of the interior Khufu’s pyramid.
Now, whether this inspiration was influenced by the naturally produced link between seked 5½ and the ratio we know as pi remains to be seen.
However, the appearance of pi in the dimensions of the King’s Chamber suggests, repeat suggests, to me that it was.

MJ