MJ Thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>

> Are you saying that the AEs of this period had no
> sense at all of what we today refer to as the
> Pythagoras Theorem?


Of course not. That would be a logical fallacy to categorically state a negative. I'm saying we have no evidence whatsoever to suggest they DID know the Pythagorean Theorem.

Ergo, it is a logical fallacy to include it in theories about the culture in question. That's all.




>
>
>
> 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?
>


Absurd question. No different than "Why wouldn't they incorporate the price of a gallon of milk in 2007 in the pyramid?"

You, or anyone arguing they did it intentionally, must demonstrate why they would have done so. Just saying they did is completely irrelevant.


> >
> > 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.
>


No, MJT. The triangle does not exist because it only has two sides! That, by definition, is not a triangle!


>
> > 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.


I'm not the one doing the AE mindreading act here, pretending I KNOW that they saw the third side of a triangle that simply did not exist.

These triangles of 3-4-5 proportion require us to IMAGINE a third side. In the same way, the incorporation of Pi in the exterior angle of the pyramid requires us to IMAGINE another factor (2) that is not part of the actual pyramid dimension.

If it was so bloody important, why not draw one single stupid picture of it in all of 3000 years of Egyptian history???????

Obvious answer: IT WASN'T IMPORTANT.

There is no further discussion unless you discover and present evidence of intent. Sorry. That's just reality.


>
> 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




Anthony

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