Hi Alex,

What you now propose is just the scheme that has already mentioned on this thread for which you raised the objection that it did not explain the upper slope of the Bent Pyramid, so you now want to focus on just the lower section to avoid your own question mark which is reasonable enough.

I agree that the corner angle of Bent Pyramid is slope angle of faces of Red Pyramid, but not quite as you would have it.

Just look at your table again and imagine that the state of construction was with the north side finished with casing stones to 90 cubits, the south side not started with respect to casing stones, and the east and west sides finished with casing stones to a level of 45 cubits. Then the plan is changed to a truncated pyramid. The only opportunity to get an entirely new slope below the level of the bend was on the south side in this hypothesis, but a good attempt was made on the east and west sides by overcompensating, aiming for the seked of 5 palms.

This gives a corner angle on the south side as cotangent 100/99 which is the slope of Red Pyramid as Petrie and Dorner from the mean you suggested of 44 degrees 40 minutes, accurate to within 3 arc minutes.

The upper slopes of Bent Pyramid were finished at the seked of 7.5 palms. Now calculate where the north slope intersects the south slope at the peak. The pole is at the cotangent of 280 from the middle of the east side or the west side for the proposed model at 4.5 palms north of the natural pole.

The height of the Bent Pyramid would be 198 cubits assuming 360 base for seked of 5 palms to 90 cubits then seked of 7.5 palms to peak.

The height of Bent Pyramid would be 199.2 assuming 360 base, tangent 10/7 for lower part and seked of 7.5 palms for upper part.

But the pole is 4.5 palms north of the east-west axis, so the south face of the upper section has a horizontal of (180 cubits minus 1800 digits) plus 4.5 palms, and 116.357.. cubits horizontal at the seked of 7.5 palms is 108.6 cubits added to the 90 cubits is 198.6 cubits (which is the mean of 198 and 199.2 cubits).

The crucial symbolism at the Bent Pyramid became the south side facing the Satellite Pyramid when a decision was made to change the shape to a truncated pyramid, and the south side faces the Satellite Pyramid with a slope corresponding to the same cotangent 100/99.

This explains the rather ugly bulge out towards the north end of the Bent Pyramid at the level of the bend.

The Red Pyramid has an incredible design in the light of the Bent Pyramid which is not off topic because I started this thread to share the proposed design with this forum.

Can you spot it?

Mark