Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MJ Thomas Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Would you be happier, Anthony, if Kanga and
> others
> > who see the existence of the 3:4:5 triangle
> in the
> > King's Chamber as intentional referred to it
> as
> > seked 5 1/4 instead of as a 3:4:5 triangle?
>
>
> Seqeds are Egyptian. 3-4-5 triangles are not.

Almost but not quite a rose by any other name...
Are you saying that the AEs of this period had no sense at all of what we today refer to as the Pythagoras Theorem?


> > What makes you think that the 4th Dyn
> Egyptians
> > wouldn't have incorporated this geometric
> figure
> > in the designing of the KC, and in the
> directly
> > obvious way that it is?
>
>
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Why would the Pyramid's designer not have incorporated seked 5 1/4 (the AE equivalent of a 3:4:5 triangle?) in a pyramid's chamber?


> > Can you offer an alternative detailed
> explanation
> > for this triangle appearing as and where it
> does?
>
>
> Certainly.
>
> This "triangle" doesn't actually appear at all.
> It is created by modern people selecting various
> dimensions of a structure and then imagining that
> they form a triangle.

I see the actual appearance of this triangle in the KC as currently unprovable because of the 2" or so tilt in the Chamber floor.


> You have no evidence that the AEs ever saw the
> hypotenuse that closed the triangle... only the
> legs that determine the seqed. That's the answer.

Well, yes it is an answer, but I think you are being a touch over-confident in describing it as the answer.

Just for the record, I don't think the AE's were concerned with the hypotenuse of a triangle when it came to designing pyramids and their interiors.
I hope to one day start a thread on the whys of this.

MJ