I rarely visit this Forum as the material presented just seems to endlessly recycle the same ideas among a small group of posters with no actual reference to the real Egypt and some basic facts that just get ignored.
Personally I don't find Clive's ideas remotely creditable and that goes for the increasingly baroque mathematical fantasies that are getting constructed upon them.
This sort of thing has been going on for several hundred years and the more of these theories I see the more it becomes obvious that you can "prove" anything you like with mathematics. Many of the theories are mutually incompatible but they are championed by opposing camps with strings of decimals points and evangelical zeal and frequent exclamation marks (always a bad sign).
To revise my statement above "You can prove anything and nothing with mathematics and you can do it at the same time."
But this latest thread introduces a new element which could have come straight from Smyth, the Edgar brothers, Rutherford or Davidson. I have all their books and have read them and have others in a similar vein. There's much to learned from Smyth and the Edgar brothers with less of value in Rutherford and nothing at all from Davidson.
The point where these author's work becomes valueless is when superstition gets mixed up with numbers and logic and reason become confused with "beliefs".
Smyth's book is a product of its time but he thought he'd found a timeless truth. Time has showed otherwise and it will do the same to these latest ideas. New theories will come along that will reflect the times and the technology that produced them rather than any research into the Ancient Egyptians who so often get left out of the picture in the rush to hail the latest "discovery".
I'll stick to the other Forums and leave the number crunchers and their calculators to carry on here and I suspect neither of us will miss the other.
Jon