Hi MJ,

Actually the RMP is dated to 1650 BC which is about 900 years removed from the old kingdom, after the first intermediate period and I don't need to tell you what that means since you are so culturally aware.

Regarding problem #56:
Cause thou that I know the seked of it. You are to take half of 360; It becomes 180. You are to reckon with 250 to find 180. Result: 1/2 + 1/5 + 1/50.
A cubit being 7 palms, you are to multiply by 7.
1 ---- 7
1/2 --- 3 + 1/2
1/5 --- 1 + 1/3 + 1/15
1/50 --- 1/10 + 1/25
Its seked is 5 1/25 palms. [7]

5 1/25 palms / 7 palms (one cubit) = 18/25 palms

So you are saying they used only palms? LOL, it is the mathematical process they are learning, and I am sure the process is just as valid using any other unit of measure.

In the Old Kingdom arithmetic was written in an infinite series system that rounded off unity (1) = 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + 1/64 + ... by discarding 1/64 unit. This of course is the Eye of Horace 63/64.
(64/64)/n = Q/64+(5 R)/n
then 1/n = (5 R)/n+Q/64
therefore R = 1/320 (64-n Q), n!=0.
(Q= quotient, R= remainder)

This form of equation is the manner in which modern mathematicians translate this information and I should think the Ancient Egyptians did much the same.

This was eliminated from Problem #56 to save confusion:
A cubit being 7 palms, you are to multiply by 7.
1 ---- 7
1/2 --- 3 + 1/2
1/5 --- 1 + 1/3 + 1/15
1/50 --- 1/10 + 1/25

its seked is 5 1/25 palms.

It is sufficient to say for our purposes that (5 1/25 / 7) = 18/25, a run of 18 and a rise of 25, it avoids confusion since people in this day in time seem to have an aversion to fractions. Also, there has to be some method of measure to be employed by the masons. Here is the problem with your thinking, measure the height of each course of masonry in the G1, calculate the first 10 courses in digits, palms, and cubits, this will suffice to tell you on what unit of measure were they based? Hint: it is not the digit, palm or cubit. For example in the first course there are 58+3/5 inches, if it were calculated in digits there would be 79+47/81 digits, or 19+14/162 palms or 2+955/1134 cubits. Now this would seem highly unlikely because there are only 448 divisions of the cubit on any of the cubit rods, so they could not divide the cubit into 1134 divisions, nor could they divide the palm into 162 divisions, or the digit into 81 divisions, as defined by the cubit rod and since they worked generally within 11/11340 of a cubit tolerances, that being 1/50 th of an inch.

What did they know other than what the cubit rod and RMP are not telling us?

Regards