I don't see any reason for the British Inch to have any direct relationship with the royal cubit as a product of various fractions, because the British Inch was invented by the British, not the Egyptians.

The British Inch is now a derived unit of length by Act of Parliament, and 1 British Inch is equal to 2.54 centimetres, exactly.

Lets take a circle with a radius of 10 royal cubits, and imagine the circle represented by the long walls of the King's Chamber in G1. Then we notice that the cubic diagonal of the chamber is 25 royal cubits and could be a symbolic multiplier, having already considered the diagonal of the Coffer as a multiplier.

A circle with a radius of 250 royal cubits (diameter 500 royal cubits) has an equal area square with a side-length of:
365 x 34 digits, and a perimeter of 1,460 x 34 digits.

Next we notice that the east side-length of the foundations is 2 x 45 digits longer than the intended base square side-length of 440 royal cubits on account of the Corner Sockets, and that this also equates to 365 x 34 digits.

A side-length of 365 x 34 digits equates to 25 x 365 x 34/25 digits or 9125 x 34/25 digits

There are, of course, precisely 309 lunar months in 25 calendar years of 365 days, or 9125 days. This is a very precise astronomical relationship in whole numbers. The number of lunar months in 500 calendar years is 6180 from this simple relationship. In reality I think there are 6180.03 from the modern determination of the lunar month.

We know that 9125 days is the number of days in 25 calendar years, so we end up with a length of 34/25 digits symbolic of 1 day, and 1,460 x 34 digits symbolic of 100 calendar years of 365 days.

If the royal cubit was 20.60 inches then 34/25 digits was 1.0006 inches to 4 decimal places

If the royal cubit was 20.63 inches then 34/25 digits was 1.0020 inches to 4 decimal places

But if we convert to inches then we risk loosing the plot. We should be converting measurements in inches into royal cubits. The length of the royal cubit is not a significant source of uncertainty in this process.

Conversion of 34/25 digits to 1.00 inches to 2 decimal places now appears no more than an irrelevant coincidence.

My hypothesis, based on the evidence presented so far, was that the architect wanted to express the solar cycle in lunar months, and somehow had to integrate 309 lunar months in 25 calendar years and 1460 solar years in 1461 calendar years.

I assumed that the architect would have chosen the simplest way to do this, with no more than a command of elementary arithmetic and knowledge of the circumference of a circle based on a pi value of 22/7.

The solution is an analogue of the circle defining the size and shape of G1.

The design connected the Earth below to the heavens above as if Khufu's spirit transcended the confines of the Pyramid to be with the gods.

A belief in the sun, the moon and the stars as divine beings is a notion far removed from the modern mind, but this was a common perception of the ancient mind.

Can you spot the analogue in the internal architecture of G1? Here is a clue:

The royal cubit was symbolic of 1 calendar year.

Mark