Hi Mark,

I was highlighting with an example that presented with the same set of data, different people may arrive at different models or conclusions. As such for your geometric model, we need to understand the context of the geometric model. Why, in your opinion, would your proposed model be the most likely model. Also, what are the models limitations - what would falsify your model? At the most extreme, an archaeological dig that finds a papyrus with design plans which details the intent demonstrating a different intent than your proposed geometric one would falsify your model. The chances of that happening are extremely low, so you need to consider what else might falsify your model so we can understand strengths and weaknesses of your proposal. Another survey / set of measurements may also falsify - certain measurements may be significantly off which wouldn't be without precedent. For example, in correspondence with Keith Hamilton, he mentioned that the 3rd chamber of the Red Pyramid has been re-assessed in [www.egyptian-architecture.com] At the end of this study you will see that the 3rd chamber is now 1m less in height and has only 13 corbels (instead of the previously reported 14)!

Regards,
Brendan