It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Question for the forum: What would the ancients have needed to determine planetary orbits?

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: punkinworks10

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Just one more question at what point had mathematics advanced enough that an elliptical orbit could be calculated?

Hans , like I said that would have been at the point that newton laid down the basics of dynamic physics, and codified calculas. Until you have those computational techniques, describing an elliptical orbit is impossible.


Thank Punkinworks

So let's see the claim is that calculus is required to calculate an elliptical orbit. Other thoughts? We have a number of gifted mathematical nerds here so what is your opinion on this?




posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: 131415

Are you proposing one of the 'billiard ball' scenarios then?

For lurkers there were earlier theories that the solar system we see now was quite 'active' during ancient times, with Venus popping out of Jupiter, Mars running around, etc. One of the better known of these theories was covered in a book called, 'Worlds in Collision' written by Immanuel Velikovsky and first published April 3, 1950. There were others too.


Velikovsky got a lot of things right - unfortunately planets colliding in human memory probably wasn't one of them.


A cosmology based entirely on the supposition that our coherent worldwide mythology is history, rather than creative fiction writing is something that I have come to deeply believe. The whole idea that planets were seen a lot closer then they do today is completely nuts. But it has personally helped me understand what in remote antiquity suggested to humans the idea of an afterlife, why the gods of more recent times were conceived of as real, and how phenomena experienced thousands of years ago are still reflected today in politics and religions. Eventually enormous connections begin to be made between almost everything. And I mean EVERYTHING. Can we prove without a shadow of a doubt that the solar system hasn't changed at all in 4.5 Billion years. When do we start taking the ancients at their word?


Some realizations I've come to:

1. All mythologies are cosmological in nature. They are describing the interactions/physical characteristics of planets. In a context befitting of life on planet earth.

2. All religions are cosmological in nature. They are describing the interactions between planets - Anthromorphicized as Human Beings or Geographical areas on planet earth - when in fact they solely existed up there. The Celestial Mountain to the North - and the Celestial Ocean to the south. Moses spreading the Red Sea, Battles with Huge Armies and no crime scenes existing in the archeolocial record. Jesus walking on water. It never ends.

3. Almost all of the GeoPolitical endeavours by Modern man are directly related to these same planetary relationships from antiquity - Every significant war. The creation of nations. Their flags. Their ideologies. Greeks vs Trojans, Communism vs Democracy. Constantly being played out - by every generation without their consent or knowledge.

4. All ancient monolithic structures are scaled models of the celestial events seen in ancient skies.

5. All Cave Paintings/Rock Art are also representative of events seen in ancient skies. (There's a reason Cattle Cults were so prevalent! Same reason the Bull of Heaven was so revered)

6. Many of the Geological formations on planet earth can be directly explained through the electrical interactions between planets. (See The Grand Canyon, Great Lakes Formation, Mans subsequent obsession with Gold, Major Climate Changing events throughout Earth's entire history etc etc.)



They didn't need advanced calculus or telescopes. The God's (Planets) were both feared and adored the world over. Their arrivals and departures transformed entire civilizaions/political structures/religous beliefs. And in more than one instance brought about catastrophe unimaginable by todays experiences. Its all their in the written record. Just told in the context of Human Beings down here on Earth.




A skeptic all my life: As it turns out Santa/Satan actually did/do exist. (Both the planet Saturn)
edit on 20-10-2014 by 131415 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Hanslune

Ok, so to calculate a planetary bodies orbit, you have to understand gravity, as I previously said, and as gravity is an acceleration (9.8m/sec^2) an understanding if calculas is required. The computational techniques of calculas define acceleration as the second derivative of the position function f(x)=y and velocity is the first derivative.
You can't define the acceleration of gravity without calculas.

Since my mobile doesn't have s mathematical symbol library I'll bypass the proofs of such things.

By the way I'm one of those math nerds, minor in math, as a byproduct of an engineering program.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

punkinworks10, the work of Kepler would indicate you do not need to know the gravitational constant, nor calculus, to determine a planet's orbital radius. Kepler's laws did not need either, however they are considered descriptions of a planet's motion, without understanding the whys. Newton was able to expand on Kepler's theories. Newton's laws of motion and universal law of gravity did that, and his development of calculus paved the way for understanding orbital mechanics.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: punkinworks10

punkinworks10, the work of Kepler would indicate you do not need to know the gravitational constant, nor calculus, to determine a planet's orbital radius. Kepler's laws did not need either, however they are considered descriptions of a planet's motion, without understanding the whys. Newton was able to expand on Kepler's theories. Newton's laws of motion and universal law of gravity did that, and his development of calculus paved the way for understanding orbital mechanics.


So BM its your contention that a planetary orbit (average?) could have been determined by math (less) than calculus, but to fully understand how that number was derived and what it meant you would need calculus?



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: 131415


1. All mythologies are cosmological in nature. They are describing the interactions/physical characteristics of planets. In a context befitting of life on planet earth.


That seems a stretch; how does the Shinto creation myth fit in with that? How does the Kotoamatsukami and Kamiyonanayo fit into your idea?



3. Almost all of the GeoPolitical endeavours by Modern man are directly related to these same planetary relationships from antiquity - Every significant war. The creation of nations. Their flags. Their ideologies. Greeks vs Trojans, Communism vs Democracy. Constantly being played out - by every generation without their consent or knowledge.


Can you possibly explain that a bit more how do the planets figured into Trojan war? Are you talking the actual planets or the Gods associated with them?


4. All ancient monolithic structures are scaled models of the celestial events seen in ancient skies.


All? What does the Ishibutai Kofun have to do with the ancient skies?


5. All Cave Paintings/Rock Art are also representative of events seen in ancient skies. (There's a reason Cattle Cults were so prevalent! Same reason the Bull of Heaven was so revered)


Why would the people of that time not have have been interested in the actual animals that they hunted?


6. Many of the Geological formations on planet earth can be directly explained through the electrical interactions between planets. (See The Grand Canyon, Great Lakes Formation, Mans subsequent obsession with Gold, Major Climate Changing events throughout Earth's entire history etc etc.)


? Huh? Okay I'll bite what does the erosion of teh Grand Canyon have to do with interactions of the planets (what do you mean by interactions by the way, you mean their movements??)




They didn't need advanced calculus or telescopes. The God's (Planets) were both feared and adored the world over. Their arrivals and departures transformed entire civilizaions/political structures/religous beliefs. And in more than one instance brought about catastrophe unimaginable by todays experiences. Its all their in the written record. Just told in the context of Human Beings down here on Earth.


...and?




edit on 21/10/14 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: Harte


originally posted by: Hanslune

First off I don't have the math(s) ability to answer this question myself so if I could call upon the many gifted posters here to answer it.



One see's claims that the ancient knew the orbits of the inner (and outer) planets.



So what instruments, mathematics and skills would be required to obtain that information? The Europeans and others seemed to have worked on this problem for centuries until they resolved it.



So having placed the question I back away and hope that those more gifted by Saint Hubertus can answer it.


The first thing they would need is a theory of Heliocentrism, which the certainly did not have and almost certainly could never have had, since the Sun, the Moon and planets obviously circled around the Earth.



Armed with heliocentricity, they could have established reasonable estimates of the orbits of visible planets using the same means they were using to plot their positions in the sky - good eyeballs and standard positioning equipment. They had the former, and they built the latter (stone circles, the edges of ziggurats, etc.) However, they could not have begun to do this without having the concept that these bodies orbited the Sun.



This is why Europeans had the various layers of "crystal spheres" turning around the Earth for so many years, with the planets turning little circles on their individual spheres; until moons were observed to be going around Jupiter.



Harte
Man I was hoping someone would say this
Great post!



Now if we could just get someone to pull that curtain aside, I'd like to see the Wizard so he can tell us the reason for all the lies.

Hah.

One guy says I'm full of it, one agrees.

Good thing I know everything - I know I'm right, regardless.

As far as pulling back a curtain, I don't know what you are trying to say there.

Harte



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Plasma Science: Hans Alfven - Nobel Prize Winner

Today, magnetic fields are detected everywhere, even in the “empty” depths of intergalactic space. Magnetic fields cannot exist without causative electric currents. The naked electric force is 39 orders of magnitude (a thousand billion billion billion billion times) stronger than gravity. The visible universe is constituted almost entirely 99.9% of electrically active plasma.

To then suggest that our early ancestors may have witnessed awe inspiring electrical events in the skies—the source of unified myths and symbols around the world shouldn't be that big of a leap once you come to terms with the role of Electricity in the universe.

I've taken it a bit further (as have a few others) in suggesting that a curious number of historical HUMAN BEINGS infact never existed on earth. They never fought any battles here. Instead they solely existed in the Viewable Skies of antiquity as celestial displays.

-The Shinto Myth - "The Way of the Gods" - all one needs to do is replace gods with planets. or take Katrina the Water God that lived in the Southern United States and defeated vast armies. And simply call it what it is: An Electrical Event personified into having Human Characteristics.

-The Trojan War - by all accounts probably did not occur on planet earth at all. The asteroid belt today is curiously named "Greeks" and "Trojans" … there is a long lineage in human history of applying the notion of Wars, Armies, Battles to the interactions of Planets entering/exiting the Asteroid Belt - and dragging/pulling/pushing their prisoners (comets/debris) along with them. One can look into the "Followers of Horus" any/all of Thutmose III's endeavours for a tiny sampling of additional evidence. Were the events witnessed during the period of time the stories were created? Or were they simply recounting previous generations observations. Up until a certain point in history I'd wager its probably both.

-The Ancients certainly were interested in the animals they hunted. Horned animals simply provided the visual connection to what was seen in the skies. Kind of like a crescent moon except lit from differing angles.

One can deduce any number of visual design aesthetics to seeming obscure irrational statements/observations/symbols from antiquity within the confines of a lab. The beautiful thing about Plasma is that it can be scaled/duplicated and directly observed.







edit on 21-10-2014 by 131415 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-10-2014 by 131415 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: 131415
Plasma Science: Hans Alfven - Nobel Prize Winner

Today, magnetic fields are detected everywhere, even in the “empty” depths of intergalactic space. Magnetic fields cannot exist without causative electric currents. The naked electric force is 39 orders of magnitude (a thousand billion billion billion billion times) stronger than gravity. The visible universe is constituted almost entirely 99.9% of electrically active plasma.

To then suggest that our early ancestors may have witnessed awe inspiring electrical events in the skies—the source of unified myths and symbols around the world shouldn't be that big of a leap once you come to terms with the role of Electricity in the universe.


Just a note when you lift stuff from other websites link to them please

Material from

So you are a believer in the electric universe idea then?


I've taken it a bit further (as have a few others) in suggesting that a curious number of historical HUMAN BEINGS infact never existed on earth. They never fought any battles here. Instead they solely existed in the Viewable Skies of antiquity as celestial displays.

-The Shinto Myth - "The Way of the Gods" - all one needs to do is replace gods with planets. or take Katrina the Water God that lived in the Southern United States and defeated vast armies. And simply call it what it is: An Electrical Event personified into having Human Characteristics.


Doesn't work I picked that myth because of its complete unsuitability to being converted into what you said above. May I suggest you read about it before trying to categorize it.


-The Trojan War - by all accounts probably did not occur on planet earth at all. The asteroid belt today is curiously named "Greeks" and "Trojans" … there is a long lineage in human history of applying the notion of Wars, Armies, Battles to the interactions of Planets entering/exiting the Asteroid Belt - and dragging/pulling/pushing their prisoners (comets/debris) along with them. One can look into the "Followers of Horus" any/all of Thutmose III's endeavours for a tiny sampling of additional evidence. Were the events witnessed during the period of time the stories were created? Or were they simply recounting previous generations observations. Up until a certain point in history I'd wager its probably both.


No asteroid can be seen from earth so not sure how humans would have imagined/seen this? Only Ceres can be seen by persons with exceptional eyesight and in perfect conditions (usually at high altitude and no moon). The asteroid belt was named by Europeans who at that time would have all studied classics, ie Homer in school and would have been very familiar with the story.


-The Ancients certainly were interested in the animals they hunted. Horned animals simply provided the visual connection to what was seen in the skies. Kind of like a crescent moon except lit from differing angles.

One can deduce any number of visual design aesthetics to seeming obscure irrational statements/observations/symbols from antiquity within the confines of a lab. The beautiful thing about Plasma is that it can be scaled/duplicated and directly observed.


.....and the reason we don't see all this in historic - modern times is?




However we seem to have off topic a tad!
edit on 21/10/14 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Hanslune:

From Wikipedia:
The word Shinto ("way of the gods") was adopted, originally as Shindo,[8] from the written Chinese Shendao (神道, pinyin: shén dào),[9][note 2] combining two kanji: "shin" (神?), meaning "spirit" or kami; and "tō" (道?), meaning a philosophical path or study (from the Chinese word dào).[6][9] The oldest recorded usage of the word Shindo is from the second half of the 6th century.[8] Kami are defined in English as "spirits", "essences" or "gods", referring to the energy generating the phenomena.[10]

There might not be a better description of the Philosophical/Religious Belief systems built on the Collective Observations by man within our Electric Universe. Or I don't know maybe you believe there's a guy that actually lives in the clouds? Or that Spirits - aren't the literal Sprites seen all over the world. Its ok if you do!


I actually quoted Hans Alfven - the Father of Plasma Science - no need to credit anyone else for regurgitating his findings. You seem to have a real "Thing" about authorship of information. Its a really horrible notion.

As far as your original question: of which you seem to already have the answer to so I'm not sure why you bother making threads asking?

I've provided you with a unifying theory that all mythologies are derived originally from human observed celestial events. It doesn't need advanced calculus (which they didn't possess) to deduct gravitational theories that are all but insignificant in light of the last 60 years of legitimate scientific research. The written record is littered with actual depictions of the planetary orbits - some have even gone as far as to catalogue their appearances + rotations + length of stay.

But I guess that's off topic ?
edit on 21-10-2014 by 131415 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: punkinworks10

punkinworks10, the work of Kepler would indicate you do not need to know the gravitational constant, nor calculus, to determine a planet's orbital radius. Kepler's laws did not need either, however they are considered descriptions of a planet's motion, without understanding the whys. Newton was able to expand on Kepler's theories. Newton's laws of motion and universal law of gravity did that, and his development of calculus paved the way for understanding orbital mechanics.


So BM its your contention that a planetary orbit (average?) could have been determined by math (less) than calculus, but to fully understand how that number was derived and what it meant you would need calculus?


Yes, and the work of Kepler and Cassini are proof of that, as a rough average of the planetary orbits were achieved before Newton (or Leibniz) published their studies on calculus. Kepler's laws alone did not arrive at the distance between the sun and planets, that would require precision instrumentation and Cassini's use of parallax to determine at least one planet's distance (Mars) to Earth, from which all the others could then be deduced. Newton however was the first to explain how the planets behaved the way they did.

You would need more than just the mathematical skills to establish orbital distances though, you would still need the precision instrumentation. If you are combining astronomical observations from different points of the globe (required, to determine parallax), you would also need to have a working latitude/longitude system as well.

There's enough written and left to us by the ancient Greeks to judge how far they came to obtaining any understanding of the solar system, Eudoxus, Apollonius of Perga, Hipparchus, and especially Aristarchus of Samos, who created a heliocentric model of the solar system and even calculated the sizes of the sun, earth, and moon and their distances. Had someone of that era had a breakthrough in establishing planetary orbits, other writers of that era would have commented on it, or built on that work.

Ultimately, it's not math alone that allowed us to gauge the distance between planets, it's precision instrumentation and the use of parallax. Even today, that is how distances in astronomy are measured. Because the distances are vast, the angles involved are minute, the tiniest of fractions of a degree, almost certainly beyond anything the ancients could have made and used. Tycho Brahe was supposedly the first to demonstrably measure a parallax of 0.005°, Cassini attempted to judge the distance to the stars, measuring a parallax of 0.001°(and failing to find anything).



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 08:05 PM
link   
double post - please delete!
edit on 21-10-2014 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune
First off I don't have the math(s) ability to answer this question myself so if I could call upon the many gifted posters here to answer it.

One see's claims that the ancient knew the orbits of the inner (and outer) planets.

So what instruments, mathematics and skills would be required to obtain that information? The Europeans and others seemed to have worked on this problem for centuries until they resolved it.

So having placed the question I back away and hope that those more gifted by Saint Hubertus can answer it.


Honestly, the number one tool and resource was time. They had the ability and desire to watch the stars night after night, year after year, and found patterns through them.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Hans, I have a question for you:

What is the ancient Egyptian hieroglyph for Pi?
Or for Phi?

Doesn't seem to exist, right?

Let's move forward to the Greek period, circa 400-200 BCE:
What is the Greek sign for Pi? π.
For Phi: ϕ.

If the ancient Egyptians had developed Pi or Phi, there would have been an impact on the language. A hieroglyph would have been used to represent it. They made extensive use of hieroglyphs for their numbers, some commonly used fractions had a special hieroglyph. Yet, a concept as bold as π or ϕ never entered into the Egyptian lexicon, as it did the Greek.

This is a little off topic, it's just a comment on the extent on ancient mathematics in some cultures.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Biggest answer that's missing is time. With time everything is possible.
even with a telescope and tracking stars you need the time to see the movement.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 10:17 PM
link   
So when did the Earth become flat with the sun revolving around it if man was cognizant of the size and orbits of the planets and the sun?



posted on Oct, 22 2014 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: 131415
Hanslune:

From Wikipedia:
The word Shinto ("way of the gods") was adopted, originally as Shindo,[8] from the written Chinese Shendao (神道, pinyin: shén dào),[9][note 2] combining two kanji: "shin" (神?), meaning "spirit" or kami; and "tō" (道?), meaning a philosophical path or study (from the Chinese word dào).[6][9] The oldest recorded usage of the word Shindo is from the second half of the 6th century.[8] Kami are defined in English as "spirits", "essences" or "gods", referring to the energy generating the phenomena.[10]


You missed another part of that wiki

Kami or shin (神) is defined in English as "god", "spirit", "spiritual essence", all these terms meaning the energy generating a thing.[10] Since the Japanese language does not distinguish between singular and plural, kami refers to the divinity, or sacred essence, that manifests in multiple forms. Rocks, trees, rivers, animals, places, and even people can be said to possess the nature of kami.[10] Kami and people exist within the same world and share its interrelated complexity

Wiki on Shinto



There might not be a better description of the Philosophical/Religious Belief systems built on the Collective Observations by man within our Electric Universe. Or I don't know maybe you believe there's a guy that actually lives in the clouds? Or that Spirits - aren't the literal Sprites seen all over the world. Its ok if you do!


There is no association with celestial 'electrics', you also didn't reference my use of terms for the first two sets of gods, are you conceding that?



I actually quoted Hans Alfven - the Father of Plasma Science - no need to credit anyone else for regurgitating his findings. You seem to have a real "Thing" about authorship of information. Its a really horrible notion.


Nope you are seriously wrong; I suggest you read the requirements for quoting material from other source in this forum. You really don't want to get the mods on your case.


I've provided you with a unifying theory that all mythologies are derived originally from human observed celestial events. It doesn't need advanced calculus (which they didn't possess) to deduct gravitational theories that are all but insignificant in light of the last 60 years of legitimate scientific research. The written record is littered with actual depictions of the planetary orbits - some have even gone as far as to catalogue their appearances + rotations + length of stay.


Yes I've seen lots of mentions of the electrical universe by fringe believers over the years. So you have evidence for planetary orbit information? Well please provide then.


But I guess that's off topic ?


Nope, EU is off topic except for that part that deals with orbits, what I'm trying to avoid are long pontifications on the EU idea.
edit on 22/10/14 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
Hans, I have a question for you:

What is the ancient Egyptian hieroglyph for Pi?
Or for Phi?

Doesn't seem to exist, right?

Let's move forward to the Greek period, circa 400-200 BCE:
What is the Greek sign for Pi? π.
For Phi: ϕ.

If the ancient Egyptians had developed Pi or Phi, there would have been an impact on the language. A hieroglyph would have been used to represent it. They made extensive use of hieroglyphs for their numbers, some commonly used fractions had a special hieroglyph. Yet, a concept as bold as π or ϕ never entered into the Egyptian lexicon, as it did the Greek.

This is a little off topic, it's just a comment on the extent on ancient mathematics in some cultures.


Absolutely unless they used some other glyph (assigning a mathematically meaning to it or created a portmanteau of two glyphs - but then that's probably getting a bit far out on the pier of probability)

From what I've seen the AE lacked the mathematically framework to do orbits - even if they had come up with the idea of planets/solar system/etc.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune
First off I don't have the math(s) ability to answer this question myself so if I could call upon the many gifted posters here to answer it.

One see's claims that the ancient knew the orbits of the inner (and outer) planets.

So what instruments, mathematics and skills would be required to obtain that information? The Europeans and others seemed to have worked on this problem for centuries until they resolved it.

So having placed the question I back away and hope that those more gifted by Saint Hubertus can answer it.


What do you mean by 'the ancients'?

The instruments, mathematics and skills are irrelevent, the important factor is the 'why'. Necessity being the mother of all invention and all that, the specialism of the skills and ability followed from the need to know, and was subsequently refined and made easier by the development of the instruments which in turn developed into a necessity for greater and greater accuracy which led to the specialism of instrument making...blah, blah, blah.

As others have pointed out, some of the planets could be seen, at times, and patterns could be observed and we do love patterns...largely because our brains have developed in order to remember and recognise complex patterning. Mathematics, as a discipline/specialism, really, is a by product (and formalising expansion) of pattern recognition.

The 'why' very much depends on what you mean by 'the ancients'.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
Hans, I have a question for you:

What is the ancient Egyptian hieroglyph for Pi?
Or for Phi?

Doesn't seem to exist, right?

Let's move forward to the Greek period, circa 400-200 BCE:
What is the Greek sign for Pi? π.
For Phi: ϕ.

If the ancient Egyptians had developed Pi or Phi, there would have been an impact on the language. A hieroglyph would have been used to represent it. They made extensive use of hieroglyphs for their numbers, some commonly used fractions had a special hieroglyph. Yet, a concept as bold as π or ϕ never entered into the Egyptian lexicon, as it did the Greek.

This is a little off topic, it's just a comment on the extent on ancient mathematics in some cultures.


Absolutely unless they used some other glyph (assigning a mathematically meaning to it or created a portmanteau of two glyphs - but then that's probably getting a bit far out on the pier of probability)

From what I've seen the AE lacked the mathematically framework to do orbits - even if they had come up with the idea of planets/solar system/etc.


Schwaller de Lubicz believed that the Ancient Egyptians encoded Pi into their monuments and buildings explaining it's use, in some detail, in The Temple In Man. The esoterica associated with building, particularly, of temples, suggests and continuity, as well as protectionism, of geometry right through to the Enlightenment when knowledge became sufficiently dispersed to enable it to be discussed openly. Either way, it seems to be open to debate...


Some Egyptologists[1] have concluded that the ancient Egyptians used an approximation of π in their monuments, as the Great Pyramid of Giza was built so that the circle whose radius is equal to the height of the pyramid has a circumference equal to the perimeter of the base (it is 1760 cubits around and 280 cubits in height).[2] Others have argued that the ancient Egyptians had no concept of π and would not have thought to encode it in their monuments. They argue, based on documents such as the Rhind papyrus, that the shapes of the pyramids are based on simple ratios of the sides of right angled triangles (the seked),[3] however, the Rhind Papyrus in fact shows that the seked was derived from the base and height dimensions, and not the converse.[4]

An Egyptian scribe named Ahmes wrote the oldest known text to imply an approximate value for π. The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus dates from the Egyptian Second Intermediate Period — though Ahmes stated that he copied a Middle Kingdom papyrus (i. e., from before 1650 BCE). In problem 48 the area of a circle was computed by approximating the circle by an octagon. The value of π is never mentioned or computed, however. If the Egyptians knew of π, then the corresponding approximation was 256/81.[3][5]


en.wikipedia.org...

But given the esoteric traditions associated with both temple building and mathematics, it is most likely only through reverse engineering the buildings themselves, rather than in seeking it in written language, that would reveal that they had that understanding. Much the same can be said of the gothic cathedrals of the 11th and 12th centuries of Europe and where you find the sequestering of the craftsmen from the general population in order to preserve the 'magic' of the spectacle of the divine that those buildings represented so that they could work the necessary ju-ju.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join