Hello Clive,

I 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.

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

Firstly, I consider referring to the Seked 5½ as the 4/pi ratio highly misleading.
Seked 5½ is equivalent to our cotangent 1.272727 recurring, which equals 51:50:34; whereas 4/pi is equivalent to our cotangent 1.273239545, which equals 51:51:14.31.
The fact that the difference between the two angles is a mere 0:0:40.32 is not sufficient reason to argue or imply that the AEs knew pi – as distinct from knowing that the circumference of a circle is to all intents and purposes always 3 1/7 times its diameter.
Another point we need to keep in mind here is that the pi ratio is a product of fairly sophisticated mathematics, whereas the 3 1/7 ratio can be found by practical measuring and the simplest arithmetic.

Secondly, I don’t follow what you mean by, ‘why does it "coincidently" fit into the Rc design?’ (I’m presuming you mean Kc – i.e. King’s Chamber)


You write, ‘2) your suggestion of the KC perimeter 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.’

This highlights the highly important and pertinent fact that there is more than one way of arithmetically or mathematically reproducing the dimensions of the side (north and south) walls of the King’s Chamber, which then begs the question: which of the two methods, if either, was the method used by Khufu’s architect?


I wrote, ‘… 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.

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

Methinks you have me mixed up with another poster, Clive.
I have been arguing for nearly thirty years now that the architect of Khufu’s pyramid used multiplication and division by the number 3 1/7 extensively in his calculations of the dimensions of the entire Pyramid.
What I am not arguing is that the architect knew and utilised pi in the planning of his king’s pyramid.
I am, however, now suggesting that Khufu’s architect knew that the diameter-to-circumference ratio was invariably and to all intents and purposes 3 1/7, and at some point discovered that Seked 5½ produced a pyramid with a perimeter at the base equal to twice its height multiplied by 3 1/7; and I further suggest that this simple observation was what prompted the architect into utilising 3 1/7 in his determinations of the dimensions of the Pyramid's passages and chambers.


You write, ‘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?’

Firstly, Clive I am not proposing “the designers used the wall of the Kc to provide us with the pi ratio”.
I am suggesting that the architect utilised the number 3 1/7 in his planning of the side (north and south) walls of the King’s Chamber.
I am most certainly not suggesting that pi is encoded in these side walls.

Secondly, there is here no need what-so-ever for “knowledge of the entry location into G1 … to be known/provided.”
I suggest that the architect started with a simple 2 x 1 rectangle floor plan (possibly as 2 10x10 squares) and went on from there.


I’m afraid that the bulk of the remainder of your post comes across to me as nothing more than rhetoric which is, I feel, best ignored for now.

MJ