But you fell into the same trap as many do! You attempt to explain a GP base being less then 440 cubits when there is no real reason to do so.
9068.8 inches divided by 440 = 20.610909 inches per cubit.
20.610909 inches times 280 cubits = 5771.0545 inches! Petrie has GP height between 5769 and 5783 inches so 5771 is in the range.
I didn’t see your inch value listed but I’m guessing it is
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Don Barone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... Schmidt’s team has unearthed circular floors
> of polished stone, benches, and T-shaped stone
> pillars weighing 7-10 tons and up to 17 feet tall.
> ...
>
>
>
> From the dimmest past ...
>
>
>
> ... And I saw written on them that generation
> upon generation
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Does anyone have a clue why this thread and this one are here in the math section?
The only thing I see in common is Cladking but nothing to do with math.
Is this just a dumping location for things not wanted in the main Egypt section?
Just wondering?
RLH
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Lobo Wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------
>They either multiplied or divided by 2.
>Since the Seked has a standardized height of 7
>and I reached 7 after the first division the run divided
> by 2 gave the seked value they tended to write even
>though the Seked was a name used for the Rise/Run ratio.
You say “They either multiplied or d
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Hi Don,
I have an old dictionary and it has this to say about the inch.
It was also formerly divided into 12 parts called lines, and originally into 3 parts called Barleycorns. It’s length having been declared by a statute apparently of 17 Edw. II, given in the Cottonian Manuscripts
( Claudius D2 ) to be that of 3 grains of barley dry and round placed end to end lengthwise.
So maybe
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Lobo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >But for your clarity....14 rise/ 11 run. The
> units are not important
> >(except for them being the same unit) gives
> the same Seked.
> >As for your math processes requested.
> >
> >14 / 2 = 7
> >11 / 2 = 5.5
>Go read up on AE mathematical processes like mult
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
>But for your clarity....14 rise/ 11 run. The units are not important
>(except for them being the same unit) gives the same Seked.
>As for your math processes requested.
>
>14 / 2 = 7
>11 / 2 = 5.5
>
So why did you divide by 2 a magical guess? You say there is no difference but you divided by 2, is that not a difference?
From that could I also then,
25 / 2 = 1
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Lobo Wrote:
The Seked is the rise/run. (7/5.5)= 1.272727
No difference or easier accomplishment.
Regards,
Lobo-hotei
lobo
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are so funny and get me laughing ! I notice you took on the easy one of 14 and 11.
Yes (7 / 5.5) is 1.272727 but what I think you are failing to acknowledge is t
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Sirfiroth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> G1 base is divided in half by the approximately
> 37" inset at the base running vertically at the
> center of each side mentioned by Petrie.
---------------------------------------------------
Hi Sirfiroth:
Yes those indents are interesting! I think I read somewhere that Petrie found a mark in
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Warwick L Nixon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> good point..."Also to find the center of the
> pyramid would they measure 219 cubits and then add
> x amount of digits or parts of a digit to find the
> middle? "
>
> allways remembering that in the case of G1 they
> were unable to establish a middle until they had
> encorp
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Don Barone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... Over what distance? This is an absurd claim if
> you're talking about anything greater than a
> hundred cubits or so, in a straight line, on a
> relatively flat surface. ...
>
> The Great Pyramid is, according to Petrie, on
> average 9068.8 inches
>
> Using 20.62 we get 439
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Hi Don,
If you divide the distance from the (north side of G1 to the south side of G3) by the distance from the (east side of G1 to the east side of G3) I get something like ratio 1.4252653.
Have you looked into this?
RLH
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Just a word of caution! I wouldn’t be to quick to assign a mathematical process to the creation of these arcs. Not to say the AE used a mechanical solution in their process but it is at least possible.
Also a simple thing like placing a very long board on top of a pole supported in the middle and weighting down the ends could create these kinds of curves. Just look at the curved
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Don Barone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi "O"
>
> Perfect answer !!!
>
> Hermes in ancient Ionic and modern Hellenic is:
>
> ERMHS = 5 + 100 + 40 + 8 + 200 = 353
>
> But as I said this also refers to Mercury:
>
> And you probably know this but did not make the
> connection but (the square root of
by
RLH
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I don't have Budge's Dictionary, and p. 436 isn’t
> on line.
--------------------------------------------------------
RLH
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Martin Stower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anyone have this?
>
>
>
> It would appear to be this one: Mysteries of the
> Pyramids (1988).
>
> I find no sign of a DVD release.
>
> I note that there was an earlier, similarly titled
> documentary, also directed by Kronick and narrated
> by Sharif: Mysteries
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Dave Lightbody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm trying to understand the symbols below the
> shen on the some typical re-horakhty funerary
> stele.
Shen ring! Is that the circle in the picture that has its diameter tied to its circumference?
RLH
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
RLH wrote
> I believe the Seked is a specific measurement
> where the rise is (1 cubit, 28 digits or 7 palms)
> by x palms run, so while 14 rise by 11 run is the
> same angle it is not a Seked 5.5.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lobo Wrote
It's not? First, a Seked is the measurement as a slope/angle. Second, 14/11 sl
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Lobo Wrote:
>>Uhmmmmmmm,......you read what you quoted right?
> Look again at the bold part.
Yes that is why I wrote nice story. Just that it has nothing to do with Khafre and his choice for his pyramid height and base length. We would need to know what he was thinking and none of us know that.
I believe the Seked is a specific measurement where the rise is (1 cubit, 28 digi
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Lobo wrote:
*Pharoah says make mine bigger then his and build it faster and remember I am trying to be nicer then the last Pharoah.... this isn't a real conversation but one that could fit Khafre easily.
The architect chose higher ground allowing for less height in construction and also a Seked to allow a similar size but with less mass thereby minimizing the construction time.*
------
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
RLH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A circle with a diameter of 1cubit (28 digits) has
> a circumference of 3 1/7 cubits (88 digits) that’s
> 3 cubits and 4 digits, 3 1/7 = 3.1428571 and 22/7
> = 3.1428571.
>
> A circle with a radius of 1cubit (28 digits) has a
> circumference of 6 2/7 cubits (176 digits) that’s
> 6 cubits and 8 d
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Thanks Lee!
No doubt the seked guru’s will avoid this like the plague.
Regards,
RLH
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
A circle with a diameter of 1cubit (28 digits) has a circumference of 3 1/7 cubits (88 digits) that’s 3 cubits and 4 digits, 3 1/7 = 3.1428571 and 22/7 = 3.1428571.
A circle with a radius of 1cubit (28 digits) has a circumference of 6 2/7 cubits (176 digits) that’s 6 cubits and 8 digits, 6 2/7 = 6.2857143 and 44/7 = 6.2857143. 6.2857143 divided by 2 = 3.1428571= 22/7 = 3 1/7.
I know the dig
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Lobo wrote:
>
>Wow! Really? Well I just counted and Pi came in second with 7 times used.
> Needed? Try that word you used earlier, C-O-N-T-E-X-T.
Are you saying in the past two conversations I have had with you that I used the word pi 7 times?
> Blind grasping. I didn't confirm 22/7.
>Usually those who want Pi found see "22 and 7" as 22/7.
>Artefact
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Lobo
It’s amazing how when I eliminated the word proof from the equation you needed to use the words proof, prove and proven 8 times in your arguments.
But thank you for confirming the 22/7, that was the only question.
As for the rest can you please provide a reference (from Khufu) to what Khufu was thinking by choosing the pyramid dimensions he did?
RLH
320 ro divided by
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Lobo wrote:
>> Since the 5.5 seked had been used already at least once( proving Pi by y'alls standards)
>> then why would this God(Pharoah) on Earth create his pyramid using someone else's
>> recycled "hidden meaning"?
Not sure about others but I’m not saying it is proof! I’m only saying (pi 22/7) could be a reason. No one knows what Khufu was thinki
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Warwick wrote:
>>Or it might be that they used the same design principle for the shafts as
>>for for the exterior slope.....Sekeds.
I think I said that! What do sekeds have to do with channeling sky water into the KC?
PS. The exterior slope angle is seked 5.5 not 11 or 7.
>>But... what does the design principle have to do with the purpose?
If they were design
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Well by the north shaft being seked 11 and the south being seked 7 might at least raise some doubt that they were for magic sky water. The implication (might) be they were more for geometric reasons then any other.
RLH
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Lee:
No I had not seen Milo’s site I found the info here
But thanks for the link it was very interesting reading.
One has to think that if Ahmes copied it from an older document that the door is at least open.
RLH
by
RLH
-
Ancient Egypt