MJ Thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I suggest that this technique came about through
> the architect realising that pi (as the equivalent
> 3 1/7 or 22/7) is inherent in the seked 5½ (1
> royal cubit rise to 5½ palms run) and then
> conceiving the idea of recording his knowledge of
> pi as 3/ 1/7 or 22/7 in the form of squares,
> rectangles and linear measurements not only in the
> superstructure of his king’s pyramid, but also in
> its passages and chambers.

Hello MJ:

1) How did the architect "realize" the 14:11 seked (4/pi) ratio and why does it "coincidently" fit into the Rc design?

2) Your suggestion of the Kc perimeter [sub floor] that measures 2x20 + 2(10 + sqrt2) = 62.828 is very close to 20x3.142 = 62.84...a given, but you must realize what combination of numbers I used: 2, 10 and 20, there's no sign of pi used anywhere.

> then conceiving the idea of recording his knowledge of
> pi as 3/ 1/7 or 22/7 in the form of squares, rectangles
> and linear measurements not only in the superstructure
> of his king’s pyramid, but also in its passages and chambers.

Now that's a switch...!
Are you finally admitting pi is involved within the complete structure?
A breakthrough !!!!

Since you propose the designers used the wall of the Kc to provide us with the pi ratio you must realize that knowledge of the entry location into G1 had to be known/provided. This was not wetting the thumb and sticking it into the air to find the exact spot; so what clue did they provide?

If you look at the complete site, and I know you already are aware of its directional limits being 1000 x sqrt5 by 1000 x sqrt2 or 1732x1414, then the total perimeter of the site is 2(1732 + 1414) = 6292 = 2000xpi ! That's 100 times your suggested Kc measure.
But there is a problem with this. How do you determine what measure was used to prepare the site. Who claimed it was the Royal cubit; who said they divided it into 28 parts and where is the evidence at the site?

Knowing these outer limits to represent pi then why go to such extremes to duplicate it in the Kc and cover it with flooring slabs? And that raises other questions...

What do the floor slabs represent...or how do they alter the dimensions in "ratio" fashion?

As for the antechamber...Dave has it right; too many variables to claim your technique of measure.

Nice concept about the pi/Kc relationship...but you are missing too much to substantiate the overall precision and intricacies of the Kc.


Best.
Clive