Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MJ Thomas 2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > Actually, it’s not “over” until you and others
> > here have read my 300+ page hypothesis in its
> > entirety.
>
>
> If 299 pages are entirely reliant upon a flawed
> foundation one page one, then no, we do not need
> to read any further. Your theory dies before you
> get past that point.
>
> The fact is, if the foundational assumptions are
> wrong, then the rest of the theory isn't worth the
> paper on which it is written.
>
> Your foundational assumptions are wrong. Here's
> your basic assumption:
>
Quote:
> Indeed I did start with an
assumption, i.e. that
> the entire Pyramid and its passages and chambers
> could have been designed without recourse to
> anachronistic mathematics (pi, Phi, etc.), even
> more anachronistic geodesic and astronomic data,
> and only using the royal cubit of 20.632”/524mms
> as the base unit of measurement.
(Emphasis added).
>
> As I have repeatedly explained,
this is a false
> assumption. There are no grounds for assuming it
> in the extant evidentiary record. Good, workable,
> acceptable theories
never, I repeat, NEVER, start
> with an unevidenced speculation as the entire
> foundation for the rest of the line of reasoning.
(Emphasis added).
Let’s see if I understand you correctly.
You are saying that there are no valid grounds for my assuming that “the entire Pyramid and its passages and chambers could have been designed
without recourse to anachronistic mathematics (pi, Phi, etc.), even more anachronistic geodesic and astronomic data, and only using the royal cubit of 20.632”/524mms as the base unit of measurement.”
But, Anthony, all the available evidence – leaving aside the various interpretations of the Pyramid’s actual design and dimensions – says (not in any particular order) that the builders of the Pyramid
did not, repeat
did not know pi, Phi, etc;
did not, repeat
did not know the polar diameter of the earth, the distance from the earth to the Sun, etc;
did not, repeat
did not know things such as specific gravity, atomic weights; and so on, and so on;
did not, repeat
did not encode any occult, sophisticated or advanced knowledge in the Pyramid’s dimensions;
did not, repeat
did not use a base unit of measurement other than the royal cubit; and
did not, repeat
did not use any ratio other than the seked for the slope of the Pyramid’s sides;
did not, repeat
did not use any mathematics more advanced than that seen in the Egyptian Mathematical Papyri.
What you seem to be failing to grasp is that my hypothesis is based entirely on all of this evidence – evidence accepted by, I imagine, almost every person with a working knowledge of Ancient Egypt, and the Pyramid Age in particular.
> And again,
> it doesn't matter HOW intriguing your coincidences
> are, if you take away your unevidenced assumption,
> then they become nothing but meaningless
> coincidences.
But, as I have pointed out above, my assumption is based very soundly on evidence that is accepted by Egyptologists everywhere.
Pyramidologists use modern maths to support their theories about Khufu's Pyramid.
I use AE maths to demolish the Pyramidologists theories about Khufu's pyramid.
In doing so I have - entirely unexpectedly, I assure you - found what appears to be the methods (maths-based) Khufu's architect used to establish the size of the Pyramid and the sizes and shapes its passages and chambers and their various features.
I remind you that I hold the view that the general layout was probably based on religious and traditional factors combined with the king's personal wants.
MJ
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/23/2009 02:32PM by MJ Thomas 2.