fmetrol Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, you are attempting to turn this around.

Putting the evidence BEFORE the theory is not "turning it around".



> I am
> looking for evidence to verify that the well, the
> sub and connecting passageway, from the rock down,
> were all built as one.


They are all part of the same structure, even though the structure continues underground. We find the same kind of "melded" structure in other pyramids, but there is no talk of them having been built at different times.

Please look at the the profile plans of Sneferu/Meidum, Snefereu/Bent, Khafre, Menkaure, Shepseskaf, and Neferirkare for examples of pyramids whose passages begin in the superstructure of the pyramid and then extend into the bedrock below.

It is inappropriate to pull Khufu's pyramid out of this grouping (especially when its predecessors and immediate antecedents have the same kind of structural template). At this time, the cultural custom seems to have been to create a passage through the superstructure and into the bedrock below.



>
> If you remove the pyramid that is what remains.


But as I've said above, to "remove the pyramid" is what you would have to do to at least a half-dozen other pyramids. Are you willing to extend your argument to those pyramids as well? If so, what do you think this new speculative reasoning will tell us?

Personally, I think you would have a much better time trying to do this with pyramids wherein the chambers and passages are not part of the superstructure. Good examples of this style pyramid would be Userkaf, Djedkare-Isezi, or Unas. They have no contact between their pyramids and the chambers underneath. Yet to remove Unas' burial chamber from its pyramid is an unthinkable concept.




>
> I remember previous discussions on the trial site
> where it was claimed it had nothing to do with the
> pyramid, just a coincidence that had the
> appearance of the real thing.

The proximity, angles and measurements make that a near impossibility... but don't let the spaghetti crowd know I said that...lol.



> The evidence for
> this was that someone unknown had later cut a
> foundation into the area surrounding the
> descending passageway. Probably all belonged to a
> temple someone said. I think the main reason for
> denial was that the vertical shaft had no place in
> a pyramid. Experimentation wasn't considered.



I don't recall this. I personally think the trial passages were cut to "test fit" any of the grave goods, and the vertical shaft was there for observation purposes as the goods passed through the toughest part of the test.



>
> So now we are discussing the well, the rock cut
> passageway and the underground chamber all of
> which can be viewed independently from the massive
> structure build on top.


Not in comparison to other pyramids that have similar rock-cut passages in their structural composite.




>
> I am wondering for instance if the rock cut part
> of the passageway is simply a continuation of the
> built part or if the built part followed the angle
> of the rock cut passage below it.

See above. I can't pull one pyramid out of a half-dozen and say "THIS one is different!"




>
> Are there any deductions to be made from the trial
> site where extensions downwards are clearly
> visible?



No, it ends just beyond the area they would need to have the workers "backed up" behind the load they were trying to lift up into the ascending passage mock-up. It ends abruptly and roughly, as if that area didn't need to be an accurate reproduction. Hence, I don't think that area had to be an accurate reproduction... the area being tested was the intersection.




Anthony

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