RLH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> You say “They either multiplied or divided by 2”
>
> But here you multiplied by 28.
>
> >28 * 1 = 28....naturally
> >28 * 2 = 56
> >28 * 4 = 112
> >28 * 8 = 224
> >8(224) + 4(112) + 1(28) = 13(364)
>
> Contradiction?

No, perhaps I should have said doubled/halved. The 28 is the value I want to multiply so I doubled(X2) then doubled again(X2 X2=X4) etc.

> >You used digits. The Seked is usually stated
> in palms.
>
> Yes I think I have been saying that from the start
> must convert to palms.

Not Really.
7d rise:5.5digits run = 1.2727272727272727272727272727273
7p rise:5.5p run = 1.2727272727272727272727272727273

Again the unit is not that important as long as both are the same unit.
Ex:
7/5.5= 1.2727272727272727272727272727273 using palms for both units.
28/5.5=5.0909090909090909090909090909091 using digits for rise and palms for run.

The lengths are the same just the units were changed and someone not paying close attention could make a huge error.

The 7 digits is 1/4 the 28 digits needed for a 7 palm rise.
The 5.5 digits is 1/4 the 22 digits needed for the 5.5 palm run.

The ratio is the same.
A rise of 274.4(pick a unit) and a run of 215.6(same unit as rise) still equals a Seked of 5.5.


> Yes but I gave you 14 digits rise by 11 digits run
> and you divided by 2 to get 7 digits rise by 5.5
> digits run and from what I understand about the
> Seked it is expressed in palms run.

Quote

Example:

Rise 14 and run 11. (14 / 11) = 1.272727

Quote

See I gave an example of 14 rise and 11 run and you had to convert that to 7 and 5.5 so I don’t see how that is as easy or easier or no different then just using the rise run.

Actually you only gave the ratio without stating what unit was being used at first. Referring to the above explanation of the unit selection you should now see it had no impact on the Seked whether the unit was palms or digits.


> Therefore 5.5
> digits run would not be 5.5 palms run so even
> though they are similar to 7 palms rise by 5.5
> palms run I do not think it is valid to just
> divide by 2 and call it done. I gave the example,
> could I follow that method and divide 25 digits
> rise and 13 digits run by 2 to give an indication
> of what the Seked is? I think we both agreed no!

Nope, it didn't work that way but I did show how I converted it to find the Seked unfortunately I just deleted it from this response.


> You ended with = 13 (364) Didn’t look like a Seked
> value to me.

My bad I thought you already understood the multiplication process and cross multiplying and division to palms which I used but did not show originally.


> >7 * 26/50(1/2 + 1/50) = seked
> >Why did you use these steps and these values?
>
> >And yes I know that the end result is the
> Seked in question
> >but it looks like the values were reverse
> engineered.
>
>
> Well yes I’m lazy so I took the 25 rise by 13 run
> and then 13 / 25 =
> AE Calculator = ½ + 1/50
>
> I took the 13 / 25 = ½ + 1/50
> And multiply by 7 because 7 palms to a cubit.
>
> 7 * ½ = 3 ½ = (7 * .5 = 3.5)
> 7 * 1/50 = (7/50 = AE short calculator above) =
> 1/10 + 1/25
>
> = Seked 3 ½ + 1/10 + 1/25
>
> I did the same for the GP 440 cubits by 280
> cubits
>
> 440 / 2 = 220 half base.
>
> 220 / 280 = 22 / 28 = 11 / 14
> 11 / 14 = ½ + ¼ + 1/28
>
> 7 * ½ = 3 ½
> 7 * ¼ = 1 ¾ = 1 + ½ + ¼
> 7 * 1/28 = ¼
>
> 3 ½ + 1 + ½ + ¼ + ¼ = Seked 5 ½
>
> So maybe not like the AE, but it appears to work.
> Like I said just learning AE so any help is
> appreciated.

That's fine I figured it was worked out like that but just wanted to be sure. So there's an AE calculator out there in the internet world. I vaguely remember somone mentioning that with possibly a link.

The unit fractions can become a pain when trying to convert our values from today to the AE values. This is why I think they used certain values due to the fewer fractions that needed to be remembered.

> > >What do you think a Seked is?
> >>
> >> 7 palms rise by x palms run. ….
> >>
> >> What do you think a Seked is?
>
> >The same thing as the word water.
> >A easy to remember word to describe Dihydrogen
> oxide.
>
> >The word Seked is a word to describe/mean the
> Rise/Run ratio.
>
> Yes in palms.

Most often written as palms yes but 28d:22d is the same as 7p:5.5p which are both Seked 5.5 in the long run.

> >> I’m not sure rise/run or seked played any
> part in
> >> the planning of early pyramids.
>
> >So they decided on a width and length but
> decided
> >they would stop on the height when they got
> tired?
>
> No but the King could have said make me a pyramid
> 440 cubits wide by 280 cubits tall without any
> knowledge of what the Seked or rise/run would be.

Sure this is possible but isn't it too coincidental that this works out ot be an easy Seked?
What if he said make it 417 cubits to **Encode** the number of years my ancestors have been Pharoah and make it 261 cubits high to **Encode** the number of wives I have.
What would that Seked look like? That works out to be 5.5919540229885057471264367816092 in our decimal form.


> On the other hand would a King say make me a
> pyramid 440 cubits wide and use Seked 5 ½ because
> I don’t care what the height will be!

What if he said I want it taller then Dad's and I don't care what the width is as long as my pyramid looks bigger. This way I save material, get it done quicker, and the workers can get on with another project or go back to increasing my country's wealth.

I can see either of your scenarios but you would need a reasonable Seked to ensure quality work. Whether they chose the base length, the pyramid height, or both from a chart of previously worked out values I am fairly certain the Seked, or Rise:run,was used somewhere in the decision.


> Yes I agree a strong argument for them. However
> the Seked seems more abstract to me.

No problem. Wearing scented animal fat on my poor quality wig to cover the scent of my sweating seems bizarre to me.

> To close this up I will just say if we go with 28
> digits to the cubit and 7 palms to the cubit and 4
> digits to the palm and the Seked is x palms run
> then what if the early cubit was not divided into
> palms. I believe there are some older rods that
> are divided into halves and some into thirds with
> no palms. How would that affect the results of
> Seked 5 ¼ or Seked 5 ½ ?

That's a good question. It depends on if these were used prior to them making a standard height for the Seked ratio. If not then no biggy just do like you have been doing rise divided by run or for the simpler role of "You go X many up of this cubit and Y many across the layer of blocks. Got it you 40,000 workers?"

> To be clear I’m not saying the Seked didn’t play
> some part in pyramid construction I’m just not
> sure it did.
> I think our differences come form you claiming
> the Seked is just rise/run whereas I think it is
> specific to 7 palms rise by x palms run. So maybe
> we should just agree to disagree.

No problems there. Just remember they more then likely didn't start off the construction process with a standardized rise of 7 palms. The question is when DID it become standard.

> If I don’t get back, it was nice chatting with
> you.
Take care.


regards,
Lobo-hotei
lobo

Treat the earth well, It was not given to you by your parents, It was loaned to you by your children.
Native American Proverb