Hi Kanga,

Thanks for clarification.

Quote

Gantenbrink is wrong in the numbering of the courses - Petrie's data on the numbering and elevation of the courses is of course correct

I fully agree with this.

Quote

Gantenbrink is right about the overall geometry of the shafts, being based on whole palm sekeds.

How Gantenbrink's model can be "theoretically true" if its predictions do not correspond to the observed data about elevation of KC shafts?

Let's see (for KCS): 154c = 80,63m (if 1c = 0,5236m as Gantenbrink calculated) = 3174,6 in. above pavement.
If we draw the theoretical outlet of KCS by Gantenbrink's model we get the following (red):



The Gantenbrink's model expects the KCS shaft would reach the casing plane at the elevation which is 34 inches (0.86 m) higher than actually observed elevation (about 3141 in. on drawing).

As for measurements by Petrie.
He measured the angles from the outlet of the shaft to 840 in. (or 21m) deep and stated: "It is striking that the slope of both passages continuously increases up to the outside (except just at the mouth of the S. channel); hence these quantities, which only extend over a part of either passage, cannot give the true mean slope; probably on the whole length the means would not be greater angles than 31º and 44½º respectively."

As for measurements by Gantenbrink.
He stated: "Block No. 5 is not accessible to conventional measuring procedures. Here, our video images show that the shaft's angle of ascent declines. From this point, all the way to the outlet on the pyramid's flank (we measured both points), the shaft maintains an angle of 45°. So, despite the extreme fluctuations in the initial section, the shaft seem to proceed with great exactitude and constancy."
He mentions only two measurements for the part interested us and no doubt calculated the slope of the shaft as the average between these two values. (Since the shaft has an angle of 45.5° near the exit to the surface, in order to get an average of 45°, the angle near the entrance should be 44.5°, which corresponds to Petrie's expectations).

Quote

being based on whole palm sekeds.

If this is true then how to explain the angle of slope for example of Red pyramid in the framework of "whole palm sekeds" model? (Petrie reported 44° 36' and stated "Hence it is clearly not 45° "; Dorner reported 44° 44').

Knowing the location of the beginning of the inclined part of the KCS shaft and the location of the outlet to the casing according to Petrie, I calculated that the average angle of the shaft connecting these two points should be 43,95°. Interestingly, this angle is almost coincide with the angle for seked of 7 palms 1 digit = 43,99°.

Quote

In searching for an explanation for these shifts from the "perfect" level of 154c above the base, it will be discovered that the top of course 103, which the KCS shaft (middle) seemingly targets, has a horizontal length of 200 cubits. I encourage everyone to do the maths on this.

200,6 cubits at the elevation of outlet of KCS to restored casing plane.

Alex.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/09/2020 08:08AM by keeperzz.