Well I’m not offering proof! I will leave that up to you if you want to look for it. I was just showing an artistic way to find the tangent point of the circle for your D to F line.
You wrote this <As to actually figuring out the angle correctly since we do not know the angle within the circle to the tangent I do not see how we can figure it out.>
The length of my vertical line is 5
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Just think of my drawing as a mirror image of your drawing. I reversed it because with my CAD zero is at 3 o’clock and 90 degrees is at 12 o’clock , it just makes reading angles much easier for me.
Regards
RLH
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Don wrote
> As to actually figuring out the angle correctly since
> we do not know the angle within the circle to the tangent
> I do not see how we can figure it out.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe use this method to find the tangent of your circle = red line from c to d.
I see you have the length fro
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Khazar-khum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're using reproduction tourist papyrus as the
> basis for this? Really?
>
Well you do realize that it is a reproduction of an actual tomb ceiling, don’t you?
I thought one image might be better then two!
But that does not change the subject matter of my post. What we see or think of a
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
I see some discussion about the upside down and/or backward design of Giza compared to Orion’s belt. On the ceilings of some AE tombs depicting day and night they are upside down and backwards to each other.
From here.
So my question is would the AE see Giza compared to Orion as wrong or in their minds would this be the correct way to depict Orion at Giza?
RLH
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Jammer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mark,
>
> You were correct. A 90 degree triangle with a base
> of 200 and a height of 100 would have a slope of
> 22.5 degrees and therefore a run of 14 palms for a
> rise of 7 palms.
>
> I misunderstood.
>
> Jammer
No you are still wrong!
Seked 7 has a slope angle of 45 deg
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Hi Mark
Mark Wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>You have to find a reason why 10 x pi x height of Niche
>should have been designed in the way you suggest,
>or rather as Piazzi Smyth suggested.
Well it’s not my discovery so there is no reason for me to find the reason. Having said that there appears to be many times 10 examples with
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If there was an external hook when he pulled the
> rubber bands an air gap would appear between them
> where the hook was attached.
Well maybe! I can only offer my best guess.
Do you think the two rubber bands are actually passing through each other and linking internally?
Regards
RLH
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Making the tiger disappear is fairly easy I can't
> figure out how he did this one with a pair of
> rubber bands.
Looks like to me that the rubber band in his left hand has a small external hook on it or maybe two hooks. The illusion is that the rubber bands are linking internally when they are not.
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Warwick L Nixon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Obviously the average American is programmed to be
> obsessed by G1 from the very first time a Kid
> earns a dollar bill babysitting or delivering
> papers.
>
> warwick
>
A totally ridicules statement!
The only thing obvious is your ignorance about pyramids and Americans.
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Lobo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > > Absolutely. Perhaps you can use your
> > > expertise in unit fractions to show how 22/28 equals 3 + > > 1/7?
> >
> >½ * 4 = 2
> >¼ * 4 = 1
> >1/28 * 4 = 1/7
> >2 + 1 + 1/7 = 3 + 1/7
>So you agree my value is accurate while yours needs to be multi
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
northstar2595 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Your thing about the QC niche and pi does seem to
> work though. That was a good observation. No way
> to tell if it's a real design basis or not. It
> works as well with a GP height of 396 remens as it
> does with 280 cubits.
Hi Nortstar2595
It is not my discovery I read it in
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
lobo-hotei Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RLH Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > That’s true I asked something like the RMP
> would
> > so no reason to think the answer would be in
> unit
> > fraction.
>
> Glad you finally understood. Perhaps next time
> simply ask
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Sirfiroth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi RLH,
>
> Anthony is saying we should do nothing and we are
> wrong for doing something that questions the
> status quo.
>
> Regards,
> Jacob
Hi Jacob,
You could be correct! It’s hard to argue for star pointers or sky pixy dust when there is a mathematical reason.
Regards,
RLH
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sirfiroth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Anthony wrote:
> > It's not complicated.
> >
> > Just wrong.
> >
> > Please demonstrate how it is wrong and what
> your
> > choice of a grid would be?
> >
>
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
lobo-hotei Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RLH Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > >Lobo wrote:
> > >
> > >It would be 8.909 or 8 + 10/11.
> > >
> > >
> > Very good now we are on the same track
> > (except the 10/11 is not unit fractions).
>
>
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Anthony wrote:
>The point was you SELECTED the grid, without giving any reason for
>WHY it was the ONE grid that should be used to decipher the metrology.
>Bad form. Period.
>
>Anthony
Sorry I didn’t mean to make it to complicated to understand. Maybe this will help make it easier?
Example
GP height = 280 cubits and half base = 220 cubits
28 * 10 = 280
22 * 1
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Lobo wrote:
>It would be 8.909 or 8 + 10/11.
>
Very good now we are on the same track (except the 10/11 is not unit fractions).
So 7 rise by 5.5 run is (Seked 5.5) and 5.5 rise by 7 run is (Seked 8 + ½ + 1/3 + 1/22 + 1/33 )
This does establish the fact that if we are talking about Sekeds then there are two different Sekeds involved.
>Or it would simply be 11 palms high
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Khazar-khum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let me get this straight.
>
> Kepler influenced G1?
Not sure but wouldn't it be the other way round if anything?
RLH
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Hi Sirfiroth
> I have found in the past too much information muddles the works.
I agree I should not of requested that kind of reply here! Not the time or place to go into it. I do think there is some evidence to support zero point energy and I’m interested in finding out more about it. If you do come up with some info you want to share you can PM me or better yet I can send you my e-mai
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Hi Sirfiroth
Not sure I completely understood all that (when I was a kid I got very excited getting a new toy, not so much when I got new school supplies) but can you expand a little more on the “ zero point energy....” part.
Thanks
RLH
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Very impressive!
>
> I think something will show up if you do this in
> plan as well.
>
> ____________
> Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.
Hi Cladking and thanks.
Regards
RLH
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Lobo wrote
> Why if you started at each bottom corner of that red rectangle and
> ran thru the Seked lying on it's side(7 going horizontal and 5.5 palms
> going verticle) I am betting that you will reach the opposing upper corner.
Hi Lobo, we meet again! I love your faith in all things seked but before we start would you mind answering one question for me?
7 run
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Warwick L Nixon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How did you arrive at a 7 by 7 grid to overlay?
>
> Have you attempted to overlay various grids? ie
> 6x6,12x12, whatever?
>
> if so how did the results of those measure up
> propotionately?
>
>
> Warwick
>
To arrive at a whole number you can only divide 28 by 1,2
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
3+1/7 - 13 years ago
There is some discussion about is there any proof supporting a 3+1/7 aspects to the GP.
I think this may be something to consider.
In this drawing the grid is comprised of larger blue squares comprised of smaller 7 by 7 squares.
In this I find the king chamber shafts exit/contact the outer casing at a distance of 22 sevenths above the base and a distance of 28 sevenths from side to side.
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Sometimes this!
She’s Talking again =>
Can lead to this!
Beer Run =>
But thank goodness for this!
Toast =>
RLH
by
RLH
-
Coffee Shop
Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you ever bothered to actually
> READ Leedskalnin's writings, you'd realize the man
> had absolutely no foundation in practical
> science.
>
> Just in practical leverage.
>
> Anthony
>
>
>
Well I don’t know! He must of did some experimenting with electromagnet
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
northstar2595 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Oh, it makes plenty of difference, the difference
> between solving the Great Pyramid and not. In
> other words, it's the most important thing ever.
>
>
The GP is already solved it was 440 wide and 280 cubits tall with a perimeter of 1760 cubits.
A circle with a radius of 280
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
northstar2595 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>And, yes, the Royal Cubit of the Great Pyramid really was 20.62 inches.
Maybe you should read
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Petrie Ch. 20, Values of the cubit and digit.
The cubit in the Great Pyramid varies thus:—
By the base of King's Chamber, correcte
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology