Sirfiroth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RLH wrote: I would say considering 22 * 7 for
> area and 22 / 7 for circumference where is the
> need for 14 / 11 or 14 * 11 ?
>
> That would be logical if pi in any form were
> present in any of the papyri or any other AE
> textual documents. It would seem the seked, as
> demonstrated in many problems, as the preferred
> method determining the rise run of a pyramid with
> the 5 1/2 seked giving only the appearance of
> using pi.
>
> Surprisingly, the simplest method of calculating
> the circumference using their method shows to be
> (radius / 7 * 11 * 4 = circumference). i.e. Ten
> cubits 206 2/11 / 7 * 11 * 4 = 1296 which is both
> the perimeter of the square and the circumference
> of a circle. So if one wishes to build a pyramid
> with a 5 1/2 seked the length of side / 11 * 7 =
> height of the pyramid, Right?

Well yes as 7 is the Height and 11 is the Side then you are just saying S*(H/S)=H or S/(S/H)=H
and H/(H/S)= S*4=C or P and H*(S/H)=S*4=C or P.
But that would imply they knew the base and height before they started.


> Or one can divide
> the perimeter by 44 and multiply by 7 giving the
> ratio of 44:7 as the ratio of 2 pi and that is why
> I stated they were aware of pi and for a valid
> reason chose not to use it.
>
> Regards,
> Jacob
>


Absolutely if they were intending any circle symbolism in the GP or seked 5 ½ they had to know some form of pi otherwise the circle symbolism is just there by accident.

Regards
RLH