Ahatmose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was asking either you or Corvidius to show an
> example of an Egyptologist who has studied the
> math of Egypt. I sense that you can't because
> there isn't one. If you don't mind I think I will
> get off this merry-go-round.
>
> db

By math you mean the dimensions of the monuments for crypto/esoteric reasons, as their arithmetic has certainly been studied. So, in regards your posts about Karnak I would say that you are looking for answers that do not exist. The reason why is that the only math involved is in the construction to build a specific building containing a specific series of ever decreasing internal spaces. The plan of their temples does vary of course, but not by much, and no "hidden" design in the dimensions of the individual components of a temple can be discerned, nor in it's overall plan.

I do not see this attempt to see a "hidden" plan, meaning or whatever in classical temples or medieval cathedrals, where while the building is built to a specific aesthetic combined with the needs of structural integrity, it is what happens within the structure that has importance, not some Dan Brown crypto thingy. Yet when we get to AE, oops, there "must" be "something odd going on".

But, and while I have not come across you before, I'm sure I'm boring you with long rehearsed arguments, you should not look at an AE temple with an eye to it's width, length or height overall, or in it's walls and columns, but in the spaces they contain, and that they hide. It was their practice to hide the gods, including dead kings, and beyond the bare fact of burying them. The "holy of holies" and the shrine that contained the statue of the god, or in a tomb the mummy within it's ever smaller shrines and then coffins. Both are complementary, though this is often overlooked, if even known beyond "nerdland". Would you look for any "mysterious" math within a tomb as you are with the temple? perhaps not as the layout and meaning of the NK tomb is very well understood, as is the temple, partly because they tended to write on it's walls what was going on and what each part of the temple was for, with some argument over the role of the rekhyt bird, sorry, "nerdlish" again.

It's late and I should probably have left this for when I have more time, but I hope you get at least the gist of what I am saying, even if you probably do not agree with me, and in short, it's the purpose of the temple and it's ever smaller spaces that is important.

I see you have been provided with some links, and I will suggest some books. Their relevance is that you can see Karnak in various stages since Europeans came along and started reconstruction, and at a point in the last century before we get to where we are today. The first book is the 1987 edition of "Monuments de l'Égypte", which has excellent drawings and plans of Karnak, though it needs a magnifying glass in places to read the dimensions they give, and I'm sure that will be of interest to you. The other book is "The Temples of Karnak" by Schwaller de Lubicz. This is not his "woo" book, it is a huge volume containing his large scale and very good quality photos he took of every part of the complex, and properly annotated and referenced as to exactly what you are looking at and where it is. This can be cross referenced with some of the papers in the links posted here which have the translations for every wall and column and obelisk. From memeory the current state of karnak dates from restoration carried out beginning in the 1980s and into the 1990s, but it is always ongoing as the place is falling apart.