MJ Thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hermione Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > 1. Whether or not the AE of the OK were
> capable
> > of building circular constructions (and,
> following
> > Lee's post yesterday, it seems that there
> were
> > circular forts), there is no evidence that
> they
> > realized the significance of the ratio 22/7
> as the
> > diameter-circumference ratio.
>
> I agree there is no textual evidence.
> However, this could be simply because the AEs did
> not see the ratio as at all significant.
> That the perimeter of a square is always 4 times
> the length of a side is not mentioned (AFAIAA) in
> any of the Mathematical Papyri, so are we then to
> assume that the AEs did not know: Perimeter of
> square = 4 times length of a side?
That is a simple, self-evident mathematical fact. A knowledge of pi is, OTOH, more complex. So I therefore don't see how your argument could be used to imply that the AE realized the significance of the ratio 22/7.
>
>
> > 2. It is difficult to understand what
> > significance, if any, should be attributed to
> any
> > alleged juxtapositions of dimensions of 22
> and 7
> > units in the GP.
>
> But nobody – and certainly not me – is alleging
> “juxtapositions of dimensions of 22 and 7 units in
> the GP.
>
> Yes, there is a clear occurrence of the number 7
> in the number of corbellings in the Grand
> Gallery.
> Yes, there is a dimension of 22 royal cubits in
> the vertical distance between the base of the
> Pyramid and the point at which the Scored Line
> intersects the Descending Passage floor.
> But these are not at issue here, which causes me
> to suggest that you are misunderstanding what is
> meant by:
> Dimension A = Dimension B multiplied by 3 1/7
> and
> Dimension A = Dimension B divided by 3 1/7.
You're right: I had misunderstood.
> Why should we expect any reference on the part
> of the Pyramid’s architect to a
> diameter-circumference ratio to be in any way
> covert or esoteric in the first place?
>
> It is quite feasible that the AEs knew of but did
> not attach any significance to the
> diameter-to-circumference ratio,
Once again: hard evidence for this - in the form of a mention in the MP - is lacking ...
> thus making its
> incorporation in the planning of the Pyramid’s
> dimensions a perfectly mundane affair.
>
> Again, I think that seked 5½ is the key to Khufu’s
> architect using 3 1/7 extensively in his
> calculations of the Pyramid’s dimensions.
> It is how we today generally look at it that is
> the root of the problem.
>
> Person A: “Khufu’s architect used 3 1/7 in his
> calculations of the dimensions of the Great
> Pyramid and its interior.”
>
> Person B: “What! But the AEs didn’t know pi! So,
> sorry ol’ chap, but you are quite simply wrong,
> wrong, wrong.
>
> Person A: “Um, excuse me, who said anything about
> pi?
Without a sight of all the evidence - presumably the material in the 300 pages that you've already mentioned - I don't think I could comment further on this.
Hermione
Director/Moderator - The Hall of Ma'at
Rules and Guidelines
hallofmaatforum@proton.me