Mysteries of The Great Pyramid Explored...

a reply to: Hanslune

u mean one person

tallet

i will wait for the peer reviews

u have made up your mind

what if the peer reviews disagree with tallet and just says they were taking rocks to giza?

will u interpret that to mean building stones to the pyramid?

see how those kind of nonsense questions just show your bias?

see how i went looking for translations and the text while u just stick with one persons opinion because it backs your belief?

see how u use a magazines with obvious bias to confirm your own belief without any supporting evidence?

see how wiki has failed you?

i doubt you see any of that

and im off to bed

patience is a virtue

originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: Hanslune

u mean one person

tallet

i will wait for the peer reviews

u have made up your mind

But you are already saying you suspect him, lol. Oh please tell me what I 've made my mind up about? Why wait for PRP since you don't trust Tallet?

what if the peer reviews disagree with tallet and just says they were taking rocks to gizah

will u interpret that to mean building stones to the pyramid?

Nope, you keep making up silly stuff, why is that? I'd interpret it based on what it said filter thru my previous knowledge

see how those kind of nonsense questions just show your bias?

see how i went looking for translations and the text while u just stick with one persons opinion because it backs your belief?

No idea what you are talking about - is this more stuff you've made up?







patience is a virtue

originally posted by: Another_Nut

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: 131415

You appear to be dismissing the Wadi al-Jarf papyri - why is that?

Question: you seem to be hinting around that your are some form of Velikovskian Saturnist?

well to start Wadi al-Jarf is not a papyri its a port

u are refering to a papyri found there called the diary of Merrer

The majority of these documents date to the 27th year of Khufu's reign and describe how the central administration sent food and supplies to Egyptian travelers.

and for some reason i cant find a copy or even a full translation of it

just assertions by mainstrean magazines (aka attributions on wiki to magazines)

the only academic attribution is here
and possibly here

and it mentions nothing about the diary

perhaps Tallet is hiding something

if u can provide a translated text or really any copy of this diary ill listen

but i dont think u can

o wait i found this here

“Although we will not learn anything new about the construction of Cheops monument, this diary provides for the first time an insight on this matter,” Tallet said.

and an excellent reply by scott here

Until we can see the full text of these papyri and the context
> in which certain things are said, it is all conjecture.

so ...yea . so far u have only listened to wiki

and that means squat in the real world

but nice parrot job

To me, what "means squat" is your assertions, noting that you didn't include the link, or even the information that I posted on the page before your above quoted post.
Try here.

You first said you couldn't even find an academic attribution that mentioned Merer's journal, when it was mentioned in a quote from the same academia.edu website you cited, and linked to as well, right here in this thread.

Now, if you can't wait for a full translation, so what? Neither can I.

But I won't be assuming we're being lied to about it.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Hey Harte

I love how Another_Nut went on a fact free 'making stuff up spree', and created a whole scenario for lovely little me. It shows just how imaginative he is and how people who make up fantasy can create stuff out of whole cloth, then act like it is real.

I - as you noted - loved particularly how he started the ground works for suspicions against the people who made the finds of papyri so it will be easier to dismiss them if the translation come up with anything supporting any mainstream ideas. I suspect we won't and the key points have already been addressed. It will just be bureaucratic bean counting, of course it could be something new which will MEAN, it will be absorbed into the hated and despised consensus of science......

originally posted by: datasdream
...Our present understanding of electricity requires a metallic conductor or a metallic antenna.

It seems that way, yes. But is that really the case?
One of the fundamental concepts in electrical systems is the "circuit"....meaning circle or loop. As in, the circuit must be complete--from the source(supply), through the system, back to the source(return)--for electricity to flow.

So why is there only one wire--the supply--coming to your house?

Because the return is the ground...literally. Somewhere close to your main breaker box, or perhaps at your meter, there is a copper rod jammed a few feet into the ground. At the power plant with the generators actually making the juice, those generators are also connected to copper rods jammed into the ground....and the circuit from your house to the power plant is closed. Somehow. Even if it is hundreds or thousands of miles away. Through dirt and rock and water and whatever.

This is already half of Tesla's proposed "wireless" power system. There is no wire for the return, because the whole Earth functions as the wire, even though it isn't metal. The other half of that system proposed to use the atmosphere as the supply wire. It wasn't a broadcast, like we think of wireless today. It was to be true conductance....just without wires.

Over long distances wireless energy transfer is a power waster as much of the power gets dropped.

Wireless broadcast is a power waster, yes.

In any case I am not arguing that the Giza complex was an ancient power generator, because I have no idea about that. I am just saying, wires are not necessary.

originally posted by: Tsurugi

originally posted by: datasdream
...Our present understanding of electricity requires a metallic conductor or a metallic antenna.

It seems that way, yes. But is that really the case?
One of the fundamental concepts in electrical systems is the "circuit"....meaning circle or loop. As in, the circuit must be complete--from the source(supply), through the system, back to the source(return)--for electricity to flow.

So why is there only one wire--the supply--coming to your house?

Because the return is the ground...literally. Somewhere close to your main breaker box, or perhaps at your meter, there is a copper rod jammed a few feet into the ground. At the power plant with the generators actually making the juice, those generators are also connected to copper rods jammed into the ground....and the circuit from your house to the power plant is closed. Somehow. Even if it is hundreds or thousands of miles away. Through dirt and rock and water and whatever.

That's a mischaracterization that shows that you don't understand how alternating current works. There is no closed circuit between the power plant and your house. Current flows from the plant toward your house for one 120th of a second, then flows from the ground (at your house) back towards the power plant for one 120th of a second, and then repeats.

The current flows because the power plant manupulates the voltage in the line. The current never makes it back to the plant.

However, you are correct in attributing this to Tesla. Along with most electrical generators and motors.

Also, I'm glad that you stated that the GP wasn't a power generator. That alone elicits a star from me.

Harte

Single wire earth return (SWER) or single wire ground return is a single-wire transmission line which supplies single-phase electrical power from an electrical grid to remote areas at low cost. Its distinguishing feature is that the earth (or sometimes a body of water) is used as the return path for the current, to avoid the need for a second wire (or neutral wire) to act as a return path.

Single-wire earth return is principally used for rural electrification, but also finds use for larger isolated loads such as water pumps. It is also used for high-voltage DC over submarine power cables. Electric single-phase railway traction, such as light rail uses a very similar system. It uses resistors to earth to reduce hazards from rail voltages, but the primary return currents are through the rails.[1]

en.wikipedia.org...


The resistivity of soil is much higher that copper so if they use this method they are not worried about losses.


en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: AthlonSavage

Single wire earth return (SWER) or single wire ground return is a single-wire transmission line which supplies single-phase electrical power from an electrical grid to remote areas at low cost. Its distinguishing feature is that the earth (or sometimes a body of water) is used as the return path for the current, to avoid the need for a second wire (or neutral wire) to act as a return path.

Single-wire earth return is principally used for rural electrification, but also finds use for larger isolated loads such as water pumps. It is also used for high-voltage DC over submarine power cables. Electric single-phase railway traction, such as light rail uses a very similar system. It uses resistors to earth to reduce hazards from rail voltages, but the primary return currents are through the rails.[1]

en.wikipedia.org...


The resistivity of soil is much higher that copper so if they use this method they are not worried about losses.


en.wikipedia.org...

Again, the current doesn't itself travel through the ground back to the power plant's ground wire.

The current travels back and forth along the wire. Electrons come from, and go into, the ground at both sites, motivated by voltage manipulation.
Losses are less than they would be if you tried to set up such a system with a returning wire. Imagine doubhling the cost of transmission wire and maintenance and you might begin to understand this.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Don't tell me you better get on to Wiki and rewrite the explanation cause they think in a single wire system it goes through the ground.

And its a testable theory who is right by using DC. Have positive terminal connected to the wire, and supplying a load some distance away with the output side of load connected into ground using a stake. At the negative terminal at the supply side also stick a copper stake into ground, with also connecting a shunt of known higher resistance to the ground path. This shunt will be used to measure voltage drop across with a multimeter. If your right then even with DC used at high voltage no voltage drop will occur across shunt resistance.

If your wrong there will be a voltage there, even if a small one (less than milli volts). This is not a difficult theory to test prove or disprove with a variable voltage DC supply, wire and some copper rod stakes. For safety purpose use low DC safety voltage level. The low voltage will require using a small transmission distance so stick stake which is connected to the output of load (which can be a low watt light globe); a meter away.

Current can definitely be transmitted through ground as predicted by the equation I = V/R. V is the voltage of the source and R is resistance between + and -ve outputs. A component of the transmission path resistance is the resistance length path in the ground. A problem experienced in power distribution is ground loop faults which is exactly this phenomena at work where location point A has a different ground potential to location point B and fault currents flow through earth between these points.

well, actually you´d have to adress all important data and details for understanding the construction, I think.
- quarried/ cast stones build above the natural stone formation/ hill underneath.
- stones on the outside have MASSIVE wear of water flows on them.
- queens chamber walls show salt water residue.
- so called ´observation shafts´were never used or were never usable for any kind of observation of the pyramids outside because they were sealed and are angled and too near the chambers bottom. Have rather purely TECHNICAL background.
- the so called subterrean chambers also show MASSIVE water wear from extensive water flows.
- the massive wall surrounding the pyramid and its function around the pyramid.
- the fact that the river nile was much nearer the site than today.
- 2 massive verticlal shafts on two sides of the pyramid for construction.
-´kings chambers´ environment, shows clear characteristics of working/ construction environment, NO Burial site.
was originally hermetically SEALED, no polished granite, no lid, no inscriptions, ´sarcophagus´ has massive wear of construction.
NO BURIAL CHAMBER.
- found granite balls and metal in shafts.

i will leave this here

a reply to: SLAYER69

Hi Slay, Immaculate!

The wheel was invented somewhere around 3500 B.C. and 300
yrs later was finally implemented to transportation. So did Khufu
have an army? Did his army have chariots? I just don't see how a
time frame of 6000 yrs of civilization, even allows for the long period
of evolution needed for the very idea of building a pyramid. And there
seems to be no evidence at all of this evolution either. It's as if
someone just showed up out of no where with the knowledge.
And was so impressive that everyone went along with this idea.
And I thought the great pyramid was the first pyramid. But I'm
only part ways thru the vid haha. I get excited. I'll go watch the rest
and see if you smack me in the head. SnF my brother!

originally posted by: anti72
well, actually you´d have to adress all important data and details for understanding the construction, I think.
- quarried/ cast stones build above the natural stone formation/ hill underneath.

Quarried no sign of cast stones

- stones on the outside have MASSIVE wear of water flows on them.

Not at all you are probably confusing the pyramid with the Sphinx enclosure

- queens chamber walls show salt water residue.

The limestone used in construction has salt it in and it leeches out

- so called ´observation shafts´were never used or were never usable for any kind of observation of the pyramids outside because they were sealed and are angled and too near the chambers bottom. Have rather purely TECHNICAL background.

No known use - lots of theories thou

- the so called subterrean chambers also show MASSIVE water wear from extensive water flows.

Nope - are you saying all this to try and push the "giza pump" idea?

- the massive wall surrounding the pyramid and its function around the pyramid.

Explain further ? Do you mean the wall associated with mortuary temple or something else?

- the fact that the river nile was much nearer the site than today.

True

- 2 massive verticlal shafts on two sides of the pyramid for construction.

??

-´kings chambers´ environment, shows clear characteristics of working/ construction environment, NO Burial site.
was originally hermetically SEALED, no polished granite, no lid, no inscriptions, ´sarcophagus´ has massive wear of construction. NO BURIAL CHAMBER.

Burial chamber with damaged sarcophagus

- found granite balls and metal in shafts.

A few things were found in the shafts


Your point is?

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: SLAYER69
It's as if
someone just showed up out of no where with the knowledge.
And was so impressive that everyone went along with this idea.
And I thought the great pyramid was the first pyramid. But I'm
only part ways thru the vid haha. I get excited. I'll go watch the rest
and see if you smack me in the head. SnF my brother!

Ah no may I suggest you read I.E.S. Edwards, The pyramids of Egypt, ISBN 0-14-022549-8 for what more probably happened and how the great pyramid design was developed by the Egyptians after a period of oops and tries.

a reply to: douglas5

Great book

Newspapers often print speculation or material that is not correct.

a reply to: Hanslune

Roman historian Pliny, who wrote that deep below the Sphinx is concealed the "tomb of a ruler named Harmakhis that contains great
treasure", and, strangely enough, the Sphinx itself was once called "The Great Sphinx Harmakhis who mounted guard since the time of the Followers of Horus " . The fourth-century Roman historian Ammianus

A manuscript compiled by an Arab writer named Altelemsani is preserved in the British Museum, and it records the existence of a long, square, under-ground passage between the Great Pyramid and the River Nile with a "strange thing" blocking the Nile entrance.

As Emile Baraize's massive 11-year sand and seashell clearing
project neared completion in 1935, remarkable stories started to
emerge about discoveries made during the clearing project. A
magazine article, written and published in 1935 by Hamilton M.
Wright, dealt with an extraordinary discovery under the sands of
Giza that is today denied. The article was accompanied by origi-
nal photographs provided by Dr Selim Hassan, the leader of the
scientific investigative team from the University of Cairo who
made the discovery.

Archaeologists made another major discovery at that time.
Around halfway between the Sphinx and Khephren's Pyramid were discovered four enormous vertical shafts, each around eight feet square, leading straight down through solid limestone. It is called "Campbell's Tomb" on the Masonic and Rosicrucian plans, and "that shaft complex", said Dr Selim Hassan, "ended in a spacious room, in the centre of which was another shaft that descend-ed to a roomy court flanked with seven side chambers ". Some of the chambers contained huge, sealed sarcophagi of basalt and granite, 18 feet high.

That chamber was named the "Tomb of Osiris" and was shown
being "opened for the first time" on a fabricated television docu-
mentary in March 1999. While originally exploring in this area in
1935, Yet claims it was not opened until 1999 Hasass again caught telling lies

www.galactic-server.com...

a reply to: douglas5



Yes Campbell's tomb

Yep Hawass was a bit of media whore.

Why would people hide a great discovery? As noted before articles are sometimes wrong either by intend or error.



The tomb is at N on the map above

This site has a good overview of the underground finds at Giza

a reply to: Hanslune

K, I'll write that down with the assumption that there's
some pretty solid history to it and not just more theory.
Book stores, libraries, amazon or just google? And thank
you for the reply Hans.

a reply to: Hanslune


thanks for that link Hanslune i am still trying to find a 1912 article in the times of India about amazing finds at Giza

originally posted by: douglas5
a reply to: Hanslune


thanks for that link Hanslune

i am still trying to find a 1912 article in the times of India about amazing finds at Giza

Hmmm I haven't heard of that one I'd be interested in seeing it.