|
|
Post by Don Barone on Aug 23, 2008 23:05:54 GMT -5
Hi all ... Taking a design of John Legon, this has been suggested. Image 1:  Image 2:  198 = 1 280 / 198 = 1.414141 (Exact would be 198 x sq rt 2 = 280.014 14/1000ths of a cubit) Below all red lines equal sq root of 2 when 198 = 1 unit  Some more very interesting square roots of 2 ...  and these two interesting images ...   and with this explanation ... in the diagram please note that there is segment of a circle. In fact it is exactly 1/4 or a circle and ... well you all are going to enjoy this .... the radius of the circle is 280 cubits. Thus THE CIRCUMFERENCE of the circle is 280 x 2 x Pi = 1759.29189 sq cubits. BUT the segment of the circle we can see and that is scribed is 1/4 of that. Divide 1759.29189 by 4 and we get 439.823 CUBITS. This matches EXACTLY the distance of the average side of The Great Pyramid in cubits. So the arc distance of this segment is exactly the same as the base of the pyramid and is 2.222222 units Which leads to this diagram ...  and this explanation ... If we use 99 as a base 1 unit we get 99 = 1 198 = 2 220 = 2.22222222222222 440 = 4.44444444444444 280 = 280/99 = 2.8282 = square root of 8 green line = square root of 12 Purple line = sq root of 16 = 4 units Now we will draw in the square root of 3 arc ...  and the other side ...  and drawing the tangent line to the sq root of 3 circle (arc segment)  and tying in the last "shaft"  Can't vouch for the accuracy of this image but trying to tie in the underground chamber as well ...  From these diagrams it would appear to be a simple matter to lay these things out and that square root of 2 and square root of 3 were major influences on the design and placement of the shafts as were sq rt of 2 and 3 on The Giza Plateau. Very interesting ... isn't it ? Best Don Barone Addendum ... A possible layout for the underground chamber.  |
|
|
|
Post by Don Barone on Aug 24, 2008 22:40:57 GMT -5
A post by King Menes - To those who seek: Over the years many solutions for the geometry of The Great Pyramid have been offerred. This, to the best of my knowledge, is the simplest, involves no circles and can be drawn by simply stretching the cord and measuring the distance. It was partly the latest round of posts from Robert which led me to see this very simple solution. Please enjoy as I present an explantion of what we actually have at Giza and within The Great Pyramid. Many have suggested that the shafts are sighting lines to the stars but I am afraid that those who suggested that were dreamers and mis-informed. They are simply lines in a stunning geometrical puzzle that has now, I think, been solved. Please enjoy the show. Image 1:  By King_Menes In this above image we see The Great Pyramid with it's height of 280 cubits marked along with it's base of 440 cubits. We have also marked 220 which is the half way mark of the base and have also marked and measured where the "shafts" break through the side of the pyramid. This occurs at 131.5 cubits (maybe 131.6. Will explain later) and 154 cubits. Also the floor of "The Kings Chamber" has been marked and measured as well and is labelled at about 82 cubits. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In this next image ...  By King_Menes... we have measured the distance across the pyramid at the point where "The King Chamber Shafts" exit the pyramid and we have established that it measures 198 cubits (+ or -) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This next part was established by John Legon but he really seemed to miss the significance of what he had found. The key breakthrough in all of this is the fact that the "shafts" meet at a point exactly level with the suppossed apex of The Great Pyramid at a distance of 297 cubits from the centerline of The GP and is basically 1.5 times the distance of the distance across the "King's Chamber shafts". (198 x 1.5 = 297) See the diagram below. On this diagram I have also shown a line drawn 280 cubits horizontally at the level of the apex  By king_menes at 2008-08-24 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now this next diagram is as far as I know the first time that this has been presented anywhere. I have checked a variety of sites and do not recall ever seeing this configuration drawn before yet it's simplicity is giggling producing. It shows finally how and why the shafts to the left of the diagram are placed where they are. It also finally gives a logical and mathematical and geometrical reason for the top of the pyramid to be missing and explains very graphically why it measure 459 feet (+ or -) to the flat part of the existing top of The Great Pyramid. Please enjoy diagram number 4 in our pursuit of the perfection that is The Great Pyramid.  By King_MenesPlease note the the King's Chamber shaft meets the horizontal line drawn at the apex - at the point where the slope line of the Great Pyramid meets the base projected up to this horizontal line. And secondly please note (for the first time anywhere) that the projection of The Queen's Chamber shaft meets the vertical line drawn from a point 280 cubits left of the center at a point which is 459 feet above the baseline and is in fact the present existing surface top of The Great Pyrmaid. It is brilliant in it's simplcity ! There are many more images to come and after this I have already formulated in my mind how this all ties into The Giza Plateau as well. It is stunning in it's simplicity and it is simply one of the neatest AND LARGEST geometrical puzzles ever devised and although the math is so basic it will yield I am sure many more hidden things. KM cheers Don Barone |
|
|
|
Post by Don Barone on Aug 27, 2008 22:51:11 GMT -5
Most Egyptologists suggest that "the intended distance" for The Great Pyramid was 440 cubits on it's base and 280 on it's height. John Wall and Anthony were adamant that seked 5.5 was used in the construction. Well this would seem to agree with their thoughts. I am presently searching for a consensus on what this first of 4 angles is agreed to be by the majority of Egyptologists and anyone who has measured them. This image would seem to hint at a 7/11 grid and 5.5 seked. And thus this first angle I show should be 32.47 degrees (tan of 126/198 = 0.636363 ... = tan of 32.47 degrees ) [Note: .636363 = 1 divided by 1 and 4/7ths] [Second Note: Divisor to arrive at 11, 5.5 and 7 was 18 ... 8 + 1 = 9 and also 154 is .55 or 55 percent of 280 and .55 as a decimal = 1.818181 ... ]  An analysist of the other 3 angles will be forthcoming. Best Don Barone |
|
|
|
Post by Don Barone on Aug 28, 2008 0:23:31 GMT -5
Hi all ... According to my thinking the angle of the second shaft should be and is ... 39.47 degrees  This makes the angle of separation EXACTLY 7 degrees. Pretty neat actually. Here are some figures from John Legon's site: ... This angle agrees closely with Gantenbrink's finding of 39° 36' 28" for the southern shaft, given a reported uncertainty of 1/5°; while the stated angle of 39° 7' 28" for the northern shaft is said to be uncertain within 2° at present, since only a short fractured section at the lower end could be measured.12 In view, however, of the axial position of the Queen's Chamber, the probability that the two shafts were intended to emerge at the same level on the north and south sides of the pyramid, and the fact that the horizontal sections at the lower ends are the same length, there is no reason to doubt that the northern shaft was constructed with the same angle of slope as the southern shaft, ( Don Barone's inserted note: I have it at 39.47) in close agreement with the theoretical requirement. ... Shafts from Queen's Chamber North South Mean Angle of Slope, Petrie 37° 28' 38° 28' 37° 58' Shafts from Queen's Chamber North South Mean Angle of Slope, Gantenbrink 39° 7' 28" 39° 36' 28" 39° 22' ... While the King's Chamber was placed at the exact level in the Great Pyramid at which the diagonals of the horizontal cross-section measure 440 cubits, and equal the sides of base, the level of 131.5 cubits for the outlets of the shafts from the Queen's Chamber is that at which the diagonals of the cross-section measure exactly 330 cubits or 3/4 of the sides of base. Again, at the level of 154 cubits now obtained for the outlets of the shafts from the King's Chamber, the diagonals measure just 280 cubits, and equal the height of the Great Pyramid. It should be more obvious than ever, therefore, that the design of these shafts was determined by considerations of geometry, symmetry, and the desire for a coherent dimensional design, and had nothing to do with the conjectured astronomical alignments. Shafts from King's Chamber North South Mean Angle of Slope, Petrie 31° 33' 45° 14' 38° 23' Shafts from King's Chamber North South Mean Angle of Slope, Gantenbrink 32° 36' 45° 00' 38° 48' I have it at 32.47 or 32 degrees 28.2 minutes. Within 7.8 minutes. Pretty accurate I should think. Best Don Barone |
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Aug 28, 2008 11:01:11 GMT -5
 Don, You say you try to tie in the "underground chambre" as well. The RC call this 'chamber' PIT--Unfinished, Symbolizes bottomless pit--no escape, but by well up past the Cross of Christ. The diagram shows a line to Draconis with 7 stars, rather 6 smaller and 1 larger one, "unseen." I don't know if this means anything in your diagraming. You repeatedly mention how marvelously "simple" is the scheme, and the RC do agree with you that "Geometrical symbology is the simplest, most ancient, and at the same time most efficient type ever known and used. It uses the simplest geometrical forms, many of which were undoubtably the first attempts at the pictorial expression of thought and idea forms by the progenitors of the human species, incalcuable ages ago. Geometrical symbology also furnishes to the Rosicrucians and especially the Freemasosn a tangible, demonstrable reason for the veneration he has been taught to cherish for Geometry as the primal and Divine Science." You did say somewhere, casually: "I do sacred geometry all the time". Charlotte
|
|
Don,