>>Because your forearm (the cubit measure) is approximately 28 fingerwidths in length. At one point a number of us checked this out, and the number varies slightly (because of differences in growth) but on the average it's 28.<<
Yes I know about that hypothesis. This is another one:

1/a = 137.03599911

1/28 = 0.035714 = 1/a – [1/a]

>>You've made a few assumptions that aren't correct. Not all rocks are made of silica. In this case, the rock is limestone, which is the compressed bodies of sea creatures and corals. So the correct formula is CaCO3 (reference: [encarta.msn.com] and many other pages.)<<
Yes I know about that but the chamber that encodes the molecular weight of silica is not made of limestone, it is made of granite, and granite according to wiki:

“A worldwide average of the average proportion of the different chemical components in granites, in descending order by weight percent, is:[2]

* SiO2 — 72.04%”

So they were not encoding limestone they were encoding the general Earth composition.

>>It was sheathed in granite, which is a rock whose composition depends on where it comes from and is more than pure silica: [en.wikipedia.org]<<
So we need the general composition of Aswan granite to see if they were correct.

>>Seth actually wasn't an air god -- he was the god of the desert.<<
So that would match Silicon(Atomic number: 14)

>>That concept was taken directly from Star Trek. I think we can prove to your satisfaction that the writers of Star Trek (Harlan Ellison, James Blish, and others) did not build the pyramids. Ellison is as short as I am and wouldn't stand for any king telling him to go off and build a heap of stone.<<
What’s important is to note the similarities between Silicon and Carbon, the question being, can intelligent life evolve in beings who’s chemical composition is based on Silicon?

>>I'd like to point out that the temple was heavily damaged and has been restored. We don't know completely what the place originally looked like.<<
From the books that I have read I haven’t seen anybody question the number of columns and statue bases.

>>If they knew chemistry, then why didn't they name the elements and refer to them in carvings and paintings? Why was the chemistry of their manufactured items (like faience) so wildly variable in quality and composition?<<
I don’t think the AE knew chemistry either.