The function of the Great Pyramid of Giza

a reply to: Phage

Whats got me is why would you use weak human slaves when youve got perfectly good elephants everywhere at that time.

a reply to: Phage

double post

a reply to: Harte

Why havnt you showed them this? I have no doubt you know about it.

www.smithsonianmag.com...

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Harte

Why havnt you showed them this? I have no doubt you know about it.

www.smithsonianmag.com...

I think it came up already, though not linked.
The typical response is that was just a repair operation.

Besides, I'm tired of trying to educate people that don't even want to know. I do that for the whole school year.

Harte

An average block of the pyramids are about 5 ft long, 5 ft. wide, 6 ft. deep.

Each block weighs about 15 tons, on average.


How many slaves max, per block?

Not nearly enough to actually hoist it up a single millimeter from the ground....that's for sure.

Thousands of slaves don't make any difference, because the objects, and the structure, limit any manpower, to the point it would be virtually worthless.

And what about the idea of moving 15 ton blocks on a ramp, on wooden logs, to roll blocks over to the site, and slide them up, and up, hundreds of feet?

It cannot work, for several reasons..

If it did, we'd have already done it, long ago.

Nobody has done what.. cannot be done.

a reply to: turbonium1

Where you aware thr romans moved much heavier stones building temples. For example in Baalbek the romans moved stones weighing in a colossal 800 tonnes. Western wall in Jarusalem the largest stone is 517 tonnes. Great pyramid the stones were from 25 to 80 tonnes. So these are no where near the largest stones mankind has moved. So you claiming its impossible is silly.

Now about egyptians they would have floated the blocks to the base of the pyramid. And yes we know they used ramps. We found found Retaining walls of a ramp at the pyramids of the queens of Khufu near the Sphinx dor example showing us where ramps were. Now eventually ramps will become useless as you move up however thermal images may have given us a clue how they did it.



historum.com...

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: Phage

Whats got me is why would you use weak human slaves when youve got perfectly good elephants everywhere at that time.

I wanted to come back to this because yes it would have been useful. However there were no elephants in egypt and to my knowledge no evidence has been discovered. I would think if elephants were used they would have been mentioned somewhere. And we would have found elephant bones somewhere. And they would have found some reference to elephants in the records we found. But what you made me wonder is why didnt they seems loke that would have been a great idea. Maybe the difficulties of taming and carring for them would have been to great. But ill give you the thinking outside the box award.

originally posted by: turbonium1
An average block of the pyramids are about 5 ft long, 5 ft. wide, 6 ft. deep.

Each block weighs about 15 tons, on average.

Sorry, no. The limestone blocks in the GP average about 2 to 3 tons each.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: turbonium1
An average block of the pyramids are about 5 ft long, 5 ft. wide, 6 ft. deep.

Each block weighs about 15 tons, on average.

Sorry, no. The limestone blocks in the GP average about 2 to 3 tons each.

Harte

a reply to: kborissov

No, 2 to 15 tons, see drHawass.com

a reply to: kborissov

No, 2 to 15 tons, see drHawass.com

a reply to: dragonridr
And of course you can prove that the megaliths in Baalbek do not predate Romans, right?

originally posted by: kborissov
a reply to: dragonridr
And of course you can prove that the megaliths in Baalbek do not predate Romans, right?

Yes we can any other questions?

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: kborissov
a reply to: dragonridr
And of course you can prove that the megaliths in Baalbek do not predate Romans, right?

Yes we can any other questions?

No other questions, just the one I posted...I am still listening...

The function of the Pyramids may be more simplistic. You have a large labour force with time on their hands because the irrigation of crops by the rich Nile makes food plentiful. So they create a religion in which subjects that serve Osiris are ensured a successful afterlife. Thus building monuments isn't seen as labour for the pharaohs but a religious undertaking that's self rewarding.

Resulting in monuments which mark the location of dismembered parts of Osiris body (Plutarch’s Myth of Osiris), So it really didn't matter if a pyramid took 50 or 500 years to finish. It was the journey, not the destination, that made one of the most powerful civilisations in history.

originally posted by: glend
The function of the Pyramids may be more simplistic. You have a large labour force with time on their hands because the irrigation of crops by the rich Nile makes food plentiful. So they create a religion in which subjects that serve Osiris are ensured a successful afterlife. Thus building monuments isn't seen as labour for the pharaohs but a religious undertaking that's self rewarding.

Resulting in monuments which mark the location of dismembered parts of Osiris body (Plutarch’s Myth of Osiris), So it really didn't matter if a pyramid took 50 or 500 years to finish. It was the journey, not the destination, that made one of the most powerful civilisations in history.

I think the key question is if that civilization had the knowledge to build anything that complex as GP (which beyond any doubt is the most complicated structure/system that has been ever built on this planet). No, they did not, not even a fraction of that knowledge needed to complete this project.

a reply to: kborissov

(which beyond any doubt is the most complicated structure/system that has been ever built on this planet)

False.
European cathedrals are far more complex and involve far more engineering and construction skills. They too were built of stone.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: kborissov

(which beyond any doubt is the most complicated structure/system that has been ever built on this planet)

False.
European cathedrals are far more complex and involve far more engineering and construction skills. They too were built of stone.

Cathedrals are beautiful but they are not made of 1M randomly sized blocks, laid out in a structure with tolerance on the pyramid sides a few cm. That is just one pick, lots other complex problems were solved on GP. People who know engineering know what I am talking about.

a reply to: Phage


That would be true if the GP didn't actually have eight sides, which caused a shadowing during the day of the equinox.

a reply to: anonentity

Why would that make it particularly complex in comparison to a European cathedral?
It's a pile of stones.