Astronomical Architecture of Great Pyramid

Ya I mean among the Egyptians of Khufu's time.

I know all too well older mathematical abilities. Good point - base 12 systems.
 
I would like to mention that astronomy, and the motions of the moon and the sun during the time of the pyramids where different than our current understanding of the motion of the moon and stars.

it appears that the earth was 90 degress from its current postion, meaning that the north pole was at the equator,

the reason the pyramids are triange is because that is the motion of the earth at that time.

DwayneD.L.Rabon
 
It's interesting that, according to Plato, the diameter of the circular island within the concentric canals of the City of Posidon was 5 stadia, which with the Greek Foot being 12.15 inches, means that the diameter of the City of Posidon was the same length as the base perimeter length of the Great Pyramid, 1,760 Greek Cubits, and 1,760 Egyptian Royal Cubits.
 
I've been reading up on the so-called Megalithic Yard, which was the unit of measure to survey many of the henges and other megalithic sites in France and England, this measure was apparently based upon the frequency of a pendulum swing during a solar year, not precession based, so as the Great Pyramid and the City of Posidon were laid out by the precession based Cubit of 20.632 inches, we see at least two standards for surveying in the ancient world, but of course, only the precession mapping technique with Cubits allowed the accurate navigation of the Earth.
 
Last edited:
And to that i will add that, the pyramids was on the equator and the north pole was pointed at the sun. of which the earth wobbled in a triangle, forming night and day on the equator.

Appearntly the penddulum swing would be of different duration in eygptian time.

DwayneD.L.Rabon
 
IceAgeCivilizations said:
along with the Celtic Cross for measuring precession
Click to expand...
Earths precession is very slow, 1 degree every 72 years. Thats 0.01388 degrees every year. Therfore celestial observations over many years, even several generations, would be required to measure with any degree of accuracy. Yet you say you can measure this "wobble" with a one-off measurement, using a 'Celtic Cross'??
 
Nickelodeon said:
Yet you say you can measure this "wobble" with a one-off measurement, using a 'Celtic Cross'??
Click to expand...
This works just fine if you can impose a further lateral displacement between paired observations. IAC achieves this by having shifty eyes.:)
 
SkinWalker said:
You are completely and utterly incorrect. Experimental archaeology has been conducted to determine man-hours needed to do the construction. The used copper chisels and wooden wedges and quarried rock in the exact way mentioned in Egyptian texts. Moreover, when geologists "date stones" they are dating the stone, not when it was quarried. There is no evidence in the geology of the stones that indicate the Great Pyramid is any older than the dynasty its placed in.
Click to expand...

The Sphinx has been reworked and rebuilt several times in the past!
Geology employs different methods of measuring rate of erosions for bedrock stone and quarried stone respectively!
http://www.robertschoch.net/Geological%20Evidence%20Sphinx%202000.htm
 
It would be fascinating to see how proponents explain how pre-literate societies were able to pass on their astronomical observations with enough detail as to derive procession from them.

Kooks and woo-woos always start with a conclusion and work backwards, identifying only that which supports the conclusion. It isn't enough to have an observation of something you can't explain and say "it can't be explained, therefore it can be explained" as mystery-mongers and significance-junkies so often do.

In this case, IAC offers a possibility for why it seems that pre-literate and newly literate societies are aware of precession, but he fails to demonstrate successfully two things: 1) that they truly were aware of precession, 2) the method by which they were able to transmit culturally the observations to which the conclusion of precession would be derived.
 
I guess Skin doesn't know anything about Hamlet's Mill, about how Georgeo de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend hypothesized, back in the 60's, that the ancients "somehow" were measuring precession, considering the proliferation of precession measuring numbers such as 12, 24, 36, 54, 72, 108, and 432 in ancient legends and architectures. It's a great read Skin, corroborates my ancient mapping finding, and in fact, was part of the inspiration for the finding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top