Roxanne,
"clear signs of quarrying"
-- Note: Barsoum has changed Davidovits theory to part carved, part cast.
"no trace of casting cement"
-- I don't know. I was just giving an example of 1 hole in the carving theory... just as you have given 1 hole in the cement theory.
by
rich
-
Ancient History
Barsoum has claimed that it is Calcium-Magnesium-Silicate and Calcium-Silicate. His paper also mentions a bunch of really big molecules (or contaminants)(I don't know if that is the proper word... but these big molecules would seem to be a small percentage).
********
I'm trying to see if this stuff can be worked out simply. If Diatamaceous earth is an additive... in portland cement..
by
rich
-
Ancient History
Archae,
Excellent posts. It's great to see someone else who is well-versed on this theory.
Should I assume that: A. You are against the theory (and cannot be swayed) OR B. There are problems with the science and the chemistry (that need to be fixed if this theory will ever be proven).
I agree there are problems with the chemistry. A lot can be learned from "Educated Posts"
by
rich
-
Ancient History
C Wayne Taylor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hello,
_snip>
>What is clear is that the samples have passed
>through two intermediaries and the exact source of
>the samples is unknow to the researcher. I asked
>Barsoum to comment on this. It has been many
>weeks and I have not recieved a response.
Was that Davidovits or Demort
by
Archae Solenhofen
-
Ancient History
Quote from above link:
"The sample chemistries the researchers found do not exist anywhere in nature. “Therefore,” says Barsoum, “it’s very improbable that the outer and inner casing stones that we examined were chiseled from a natural limestone block.”"
Barsoum et. al. (2006) based this conclusion apparently on a single source... Ireland (1947). It's cited 4 times in the pap
by
Archae Solenhofen
-
Ancient History
Barsoum's radio interview from February:
Barsoum's Presentation (400 slides, 1 hour long)(pretty good presentation):
*********
This debate is old... and no new information is in this article. Barsoum is a better presenter than Davidovits/Morris.
Davidovits theory used the Pozzolan of Kaolin Clay as the secret ingredient. Barsoum shows there is no Alluminum, hence Davidov
by
rich
-
Ancient History
I'm always suspicious of someone whose career could directly benefit from (or at least is directly related to) a great "discovery" about ancient Egypt.
Davidovits and his Geopolymers.
Dunn and his Giza Power Plant.
Neugebauer's stellar alignments.
Houdin and his Architectural Tunnels.
Howard Vyse and his amazingly fortutitous find of Khufu's heiroglyph
by
Don Barone
-
Ancient History
Here is a working link for :
Davidovits, J. (1984) Analysis and X-Ray diffraction of casing stones from the pyramids of Egypt and the limestone of associated quarries. Science in Egyptology Symposia 1984, pp. 511-520.
Archae Solenhofen (solenhofen@hotmail.com)
by
Archae Solenhofen
-
Ancient History
Marc,
You might wish to have a look at his publicist's posts here at Ma'at. Unfortunately, I just did a search, and they are not in the active database. They were brilliant debates, and so much information was shared that it cannot be summarized easily... except to say the geopolymers fell quite flat when pressed hard for evidence by people who know the subject better than Morris or
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
I e-mailed Davidovits, and asked his opinion on the fact that the building blocks have different sizes.
I might visit his laboratory in the near future, it's only a one hour drive from where I live.
by
Marc Steurbaut
-
Ancient History
Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Marc Steurbaut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>>>the evidence would be overwhelming.
>>He has a huge argument: the composition of
>>the stones.
>No, he has no such argument. The provenance of the
>stones explains their composition.
by
Archae Solenhofen
-
Ancient History
Excellent Pics!!!
Here is a paper I came across recently by J. Davidovits:
Do any of the claimed sites of sample collection in Fig 2 correspond to any of the known Pharonic quarries locations or the location in your photos above?
Davidovits, J. (1984) Analysis and X-Ray diffraction of casing stones from the pyramids of Egypt and the limestone of associated quarries. Science in Egypto
by
Archae Solenhofen
-
Ancient History
Davidovits and his geopolymers.
Utter garbage. Pseudoscience of the worst sort. Technobabble intended to fool anybody who is not intimately familiar with chemistry and geology.
These theories have been categorically debunked by geologists since they first appeared over a decade ago. It is, for lack of a better word, hogwash.
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
AE was a very well organized society, so we can imagine them moving the blocks, but how they hoisted them up is indeed a big mystery.
Do you know the work of this guy?
He has posited that the blocks of the Great Pyramid are not carved stone, but mostly a form of limestone concrete, casted on the spot.
This was rejected by archaeologists, but what do they know about concrete?
A Belgian sc
by
Marc Steurbaut
-
Ancient History
Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm always suspicious of someone whose career
> could directly benefit from (or at least is
> directly related to) a great "discovery" about
> ancient Egypt.
>
> Davidovits and his Geopolymers.
>
> Dunn and his Giza Power Plant.
>
> Neugebauer's stellar alignmen
by
Ronald
-
Ancient History
I'm always suspicious of someone whose career could directly benefit from (or at least is directly related to) a great "discovery" about ancient Egypt.
Davidovits and his Geopolymers.
Dunn and his Giza Power Plant.
Neugebauer's stellar alignments.
Houdin and his Architectural Tunnels.
One might make the argument that it takes an engineer to recognize engineeri
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Archae Solenhofen Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ya.... what happened to the zeolites?
>Guess they got pee'd off and went away...
I guess that's one way to get rid of all that Member II limestone disaggregating clay minerals... of course Barsou
by
Archae Solenhofen
-
Ancient History
Phew! - 17 years ago
I ran a search and Ian didn't come up. Margaret was the only one I found who published in that year.
Well, at least THAT'S off the table.
and you can find out all about Davidovits at www.geopolymer.org
Mr. Poured Block himself.
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
You're quoting MARGARET MORRIS?
Davidovits' PUBLICIST?
Come on, DaveL. Talk about stretching the credulity. You'd do better quoting Hancock or Bauval. At least they haven't been busted going around to messageboards and logging in as multiple individuals just to create supportive "debate" amongst themselves!
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
Davidovits actually DOES talk about the Bosnian pyramid. And he specifically says it does NOT look the same to him. He says it looks like "Opus Caementium" which was not in use before the Roman Colliseum.
Disclaimer: This statement does not express an opinion on Davidovits or his concrete pyramid theory, though.
by
rich
-
Ancient History
QuoteIt is an interesting theory... which is under-developed. I will do my best to re-hash answers to questions... so that this theory is not "totally discredited". If it turns out to be "totally discredited", then that's fine too. One less thing to waste time on. I am curious to learn, "Why this theory doesn't work... why it is discredited... rather than unprov
by
DoveArrow
-
Ancient History
Irna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Byrd Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I do academic research on American rock art
> sites,
> > and the inscriptions on the rock are
> obviously
> > new. Believe it or not, there's a color and
> shade
> > difference in old in
by
rich
-
Ancient History
Off Topic (reason for re-introducing the debate):
Dear Anthony,
Sorry for the old material. I was thinking that not everybody is familiar with Davidovits free publications. I am thankful to see someone else who has researched the subject. Also, thank you for your posts and involvement in the "New Debate" on "old material". I have no new information to offer. Just my c
by
rich
-
Ancient History
Is a bad answer better than no answer?
Davidovits claims there is proof of evolution in the concrete... and claims earlier pyramids were made with this method as well. When I look at Djoser's step pyramid, I don't see it. Anyways, here is some literature from Davidovits with a summary of "his evidence", and a brief discussion on the "Evolution of Concrete" in Eg
by
rich
-
Ancient History
"synthetic zeolyte Z23"
-- Glad to see someone else who is pretty knowlegable of the theory.
As discussed, there is "Some Evidence". This evidence has clearly has not been proven "definitive". However, in my opinion, it reaches the "intriguing" level.
***********
Davidovits formula says "plant ash". Large quantities of Ash has been foun
by
rich
-
Ancient History
You made my point:
QuoteDavidovits adds an unknown quantity of some mysterious ash.
And it is this mystery ingredient that has helped him identify the limestone. He won't publish it so other geologists can debunk him, which is what would surely happen within a few seconds.
Kind of like what happened with his "synthetic zeolyte Z23". Urine and soot, from an stone sur
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
"Yeah, and umm.... he's the only one who has been allowed to examine it, if I recall... and the only one who knows the "secret ingredients" that he uses as proof that they are the same. He's hidden his real data. "
-- His ingredients are listed... but he does not list proportions.
1. Kaolin Clay is the MYSTERY POZZOLAN added. It may even be cooked (Kaolinite).
by
rich
-
Ancient History
rich Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Great Point Anthony. What is the point of a crazy
> theory with no evidence?
>
> Davidovits has offered "some" evidence for his
> theory.
> 1. He created a "roman concrete" block in Egypt,
> that looks like a pyramid block. (This, however,
> does not show the pyramid was ma
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
Doug Weller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>Both this report and Morris used the 'Lauer
>Sample', given to Davidovits by J P Lauer and from
>the Ascending Passsage. Barsoum et al also have
>something from the outer casing, the source may be
>in the journal article.
From Table I. they have claimed to have 3 "small chunks"
by
Archae Solenhofen
-
Ancient History
Great Point Anthony. What is the point of a crazy theory with no evidence?
Davidovits has offered "some" evidence for his theory.
1. He created a "roman concrete" block in Egypt, that looks like a pyramid block. (This, however, does not show the pyramid was made this way.)
Video:
2. Xray analyses of the pyramids:
3. Recent NY Times article:
"From the geo
by
rich
-
Ancient History