Clive Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MJ Thomas 2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> then they would be much, much closer to it
> > than they are.
> > As it is, both are around 3 feet too short.
>
>
> MJ:
>
> Recalculate your measures.

My mistake. 'Too short' should read 'too long' - but the difference of around 3 feet is still there.
Your quoted measurements: 4568" and 4571"
Dave Light: '4534" is 220 cubits i.e. half exterior base length'
Your quoted measurements = +34" and +37"

If we go by Cole's survey results of the Pyramid's base (which I take to be more accurate than Petrie's), then we have:
1/2 North side mean 4532.5" = your quoted measurements +35.5" and +38.5"
1/2 South side mean 4536.5" = your quoted measurements +31.5" and +34.5"
1/2 East side mean 4535.3" = your quoted measurements +32.7" and +35.7"
1/2 West side mean 4534.6 = your quoted measurements +33.4" and +36.4"

Now, Clive, are you going to stop playing about and simply tell us what, in your opinion, the significance/s of these measurements equivalent to 4568" and 4571" was/were to the Pyramid's builders?
Or are we to expect more of your fatuous (IMO) comments such as:
Dave Lightbody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 4534" is 220 cubits i.e. half exterior base length

Dave:
You are very close to part of the answer.
Best.
Clive.

MJ


We can't all be right, but we could all be wrong ...