Clive Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MJ Thomas Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I wish it were true...then it would fit
> perfectly
> > into the base width of G3 (aprox 4150")."
> >
> > So please do tell what you are referring to
> as not
> > being true.
>
> As the sentence reads...I wish it were true. I
> don't know if it is true and neither do you.

But this is the case for every recorded measurement of Khufu's pyramid, regardless of who made the record, be it Smyth, Petrie, M&R or whoever.
Which, IMO, makes your statement somewhat vacuous.


> > IMO, if a hypothesis is about intentional
> > mathematical relationships between two or
> more
> > dimensions, then it is essential that the raw
> data
> > - the actual dimensions - are measured as
> > accurately as possible.
>
> They were, but now you believe 2 inches from a
> total of 4000+ is the determining factor of right
> from wrong.
> Go for it...!

Hmm. I have this uneasy feeling that you are being deliberately obtuse.


> > An actual difference of plus or minus a
> couple of
> > inches could easily grow into a significant
> error
> > in the hypothesis.
>
> It can't grow...it can only shrink. It's the
> hypotenuse that is being measured...the distance
> below base is calculated from it.

I was not referring to a single, specific measurement but all measurements.
If dimension B is a multiple of A, and A has a margin of error, then there is a potential problem - and the greater that margin of error the greater the potential problem.


> A two inch discrepancy in 4000" is a concern...but
> one-two inches in 58" is no problem.
> Great logic...you have me convinced.

Please don't insult what little intelligence I have, Clive.
If I am concerned about a variation of 2" over 4,000", which generally speaking I am and for the reason I've given, then naturally and very obviously I am going to be more concerned about a variation of 1" to 2" over 58".

MJ