Given theres no smoke without fire, perhaps there was afterall one star symbolically projected through mirroring onto the Giza Plateau, though not represented by a Pyramid, rather the Chosen Place at the Sphinx, and that star being fiery Regulus....here's how.



My understanding of any greater site layout for Giza essentialy involves sub-division of the Plateau into ten sectors, indicated through the risng/setting position of key stars, from a relative central viewpoint between the paws of the Sphinx.

These are indicated in terms of four degree banding, to give a spoked wheel effect, but importantly they give margin of error for rising positions over extended periods, as for example Arcturus could be rising between 36* to 40*, with Spica rising between 72* to 76*, thus allowing for shift in any conceptual design would have been a good idea on their part.





In conceptual terms then that is quite simple, from the central point the lines project toward the Horizon, this being defined to a large extent by the Pyramids themselves, which impact upon and define the horizon at certain points, with interplay between these and the setting stars behind them.


The greater conceptual concern i'm suggesting here, is that when one looks at the natrual relative positioning of Spica and Arcturus, in conjunction with Regulus, then the triangular configuaration suggests similar geometry, if Regulus is conjectured at the centre and the circle projected from that point, directly substituting the position of Regulus for the Sphinx.









Whilst at first glance the triangles appear quite similar, there is a problematic discrepancy of some 4 degrees to take into consideration, the ten sector division obviously involves 10x36* angles, whilst the Regulus centred traingle is more like 32*.


However taking into consideration this 4* discrepancy, if the natural star positions are projected onto the Giza schemata, one finds the natural circular proportion in accordance with the suggested Geometry for Giza, the Heavenly triangle can be aligned to the setting position of Arcturus relative to it rising at 36 degrees, such that it is in alignment to the SE corner of G1.

That will then leave the setting position of Spica 4* short, given the angular discrepancy












If the relative stellar positions are then shifted a furthur 4*, this will find accordance with the setting position of Spica relative to it's rising at 72* and thus be in accordance with the NE corner of G2, given the 4* shift the alignment at G1 will have shifted to a point relative to Arcturus rising at 40*, and the NW corner is indicated through alignment.

A furthur 4* shift would give the setting position of Spica relative to it rising at 76*, and give alignment to the NW corner of G2, thus essentialy the 4* discrepancy can be utilized to shift between the minimum and maximum degrees of tolerance for the rising/setting of these stars, with considerable ingenuity...









Throughout any conceptual shifting the central position of Regulus remains unchanged of course. The fact that the Sun was rising merged with Regulus at the summer solstice would be critical to the symbolism of this, and thus the Sun also in a symbolic sense could also be translated to the central Sphinx...given a little magic.



[homepage.ntlworld.com]


Morph.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/11/2008 09:29AM by Morph.