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.

 

Pyramids......sound and water???

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Don't mind the hardcore archos and anthros around here. One is quite bearable, the other...well, I'll leave it to your conclusions.

I don't care what a couple pictures show to be the case. Current mainstream theory says that the large pyramid was built in 20 years, and that the egyptians placed a stone every 2 minutes approximately. Hang on, I'll do the math real quick....or I'll use wiki...


The accepted values by Egyptologists bear out the following result: 2,400,000 stones used ÷ 20 years ÷ 365 days per year ÷ 10 work hours per day ÷ 60 minutes per hour = 0.55 stones laid per minute. Thus no matter how many workers were used or in what configuration, 1.1 blocks on average would have to be put in place every 2 minutes, ten hours a day, 365 days a year for twenty years to complete the Great Pyramid within this time frame. This equation, however, does not take into account among other things the designing, planning, surveying, and leveling the 13 acre site the Great Pyramid sits on.


Nor does it take into account, placement errors, math errors, weather, and any thing else that may chip into that time.

Something is wrong with the current theory, IMO, by this alone.

Edward Leedskalnin of the famous Coral Castle in Florida, has always interested me. Edward didn't have slaves or paid workers to quarry, cut, transport (twice by the way, dismantled the whole thing, and moved it all like 10 miles, then re-erected everything) and erect stones upwards of 50 tons!!
He always claimed to have the knowledge of the pyramid builders, and took it to the grave, claiming fear of the knowledge would be used immorally.

Edward Leedskalnins' Coral Castle

Maybe he used sound and water.




posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 12:27 AM
link   
...and creating some interest on what would otherwise be just another thread full of long-debunked ideas, my thanks, Marduk. I'd vote you WATS but the button seems to have disappeared from my screen. Maybe I'm out of votes or something.

As for the incomparable Byrd, what can I say? Magnificent.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Easy with throwing that word around. Especially in the realm of history.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 12:40 AM
link   


Something is wrong with the current theory, IMO, by this alone

if you take what Wiki says at face value its quite clear that its second statement doesnt stand up




Thus no matter how many workers were used or in what configuration

this bit is incorrect
seems to have been copied from a pseudo history website
its 1.1 blocks per team every 2 minutes
so if you had 100 teams you would have 200 minutes to do 1.1 blocks
or 200 teams 400 minutes per 1.1 blocks
or 300 teams 600 minutes per 1.1. block
this is the little piece of detail that is always missed out of this calculation
there are two reasons for this
1) because some people want you to think aliens did it
2) because orthodox egyptologists rely on the mystery of the pyramids to carry on brining in the tourist dollar and there wouldn't be as many tourists dollars if there was no mystery

so its not lost technology
its just economics



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 12:46 AM
link   
Luckily you got your degree in something other than english comprehension.

Let me help. It is saying that to lay all those blocks in the time period accepted in the current theory, with the parameters of 10 hr work days, everyday; that it doesn't matter how many people did it. 1 or 1,000,000, they HAD to place at LEAST, 1.1 blocks every two minutes. Period. The writings say 20 years. Accepted theory, accepts that time frame.

:edit: and unless wiki has the 2,400,00 blocks as an incorrect number, or has mistated the work parameters, then it doesn't matter where MATH is posted.

[edit on 17-1-2007 by nextguyinline]



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
Easy with throwing that word around. Especially in the realm of history.

Which word? 'Facts'?

I agree that historical fact is hard to establish. However, the facts Marduk mentioned, such as the need to massage geometry to make the alignment of the Pyramids match those of the stars in Orion's belt, and the method by which large blocks of stone can be moved using ramps and rollers, are not historical. They are facts about the physical world around us and can be verified by anyone who bothers to check.

Without denying for a minute that the Pyramids are a mind-boggling human achievement, nor that the mysteries of their construction have been solved down to the last detail, it still remains more prudent to accept that they were built by ordinary (if technologically primitive) human beings using methods easily comprehensible by our technologically advanced culture. Of course, some people aren't satisfied with this and must invoke gods, aliens, science so advanced as to be indistinguishable (to us) from magic, etc. I suppose we all have a weakness for that kind of thing, otherwise we wouldn't be on ATS. Personally, my weakness consists of finding such nonsense -- and the people who generate it -- amusing.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 12:53 AM
link   
I may have missed that premise, but I was under the assumption the OP's assertion is that HUMANS used sound and water. My mistake if I did.

To ponder the veracity of current theories does not inherently imply that something non-human built the pyramids. Not that you think that, just a general statement.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
Luckily you got your degree in something other than english comprehension.

Ooh, you wicked, wicked person, you.


1 or 1,000,000, they HAD to place at LEAST, 1.1 blocks every two minutes. Period. The writings say 20 years. Accepted theory, accepts that time frame.

No-one's contesting the (elementary) maths. I am sure you understand Marduk's point, which is that just over half a block a minute is a pretty high rate of work if you're using only one team of builders (no matter whether the team numbers ten, a hundred or a thousand men). However, if you have ten teams working simultaneously, each team would only need to move a block into position every five minutes or so. Which sounds a lot more achievable.

Mysteries about the Pyramids remain. The biggest mystery of all is that an entire civilization should, over a period of twenty years, all but destroy itself by committing all its economic resources and a large chunk of its population to building a collection of ugly and unprofitable monuments. Set beside that little conundrum in mass psychology, the question of how the damn' things were built is trivial.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 01:18 AM
link   
Your right. MY comprehension skills of Marduks last post was lacking, to say the least. Sorry, I was hasty. I'll blame it on the time of morning
..and my bad day.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 01:37 AM
link   


The accepted values by Egyptologists bear out the following result: 2,400,000 stones used ÷ 20 years ÷ 365 days per year ÷ 10 work hours per day ÷ 60 minutes per hour = 0.55 stones laid per minute.

this as I said is incorrect





NUMBER OF VARIOUS BLOCKS OF STONE USED TO BUILD THE GREAT PYRAMID
Number of platform blocks used (2.5 ft x 10 ft square), equals (759.3 x
759.3(pyramid base)) - (412.7 x 412.7(core base))/(10 x 10(platform block
base)) = 4,062.

Number of CORNER Casing stones where the pyramid faces meet equals 201 steps
x 4 sides = 804.

Number of side casing stones equals ((244 x 127) + 8,953) = 39,941.

Due to Bedrock Core, in the center of Step 1 through 10, the total number of
blocks needed is reduced by 13,016.

THE NUMBER OF ALL BLOCKS BEHIND THE CASING STONES EQUALS
(590,712 - 804 - 39,941) = 549,967.

1/5 as many as Wiki claimed



Luckily you got your degree in something other than english comprehension.

yes I got mine in commone sense
you claim that it doesnt matter how many people helped build it it still means 1.1 blocks every two minutes
thats rubbish
it is an estimate from a dubious reference source
2,400,000 stones used ÷ 20 years = 120,000 each year
÷ 365 days per year = 328 .76712 per day
÷ 10 work hours per day = 32.876712 per hour
÷ 60 minutes per hour = 0.5479452 per minute

so if you had two teams moving blocks you could have 1.0958904 per minute
if you had twenty teams moving blocks you could move 10.958904 per minute
if you had two hundred teams moving blocks you could move 100.958904 per minute
if you had two thousand teams moving blocks you could move 1000.958904 per minute

the estimated number of workers per layer is 7,945.men
the average weight of one pyramid block is an average 2 tonnes
thats 2000 kilograms
thats equivalent to 1000 2 litre bottles of water by volume and weight
are you claiming that 7945 men couldn't accomplish that with time to spare
even a weak human can carry 4 such bottles so lets say they can carry 8 each
7945 x 8 bottles of water = 63,560 per team per layer
and these were hardened quarry workers
and they didn't have to physically lift each block
they used sledges to carry the boats from the river where they were deposited by boat

your degree isn't in mathematics is it
luckily for the egyptians it isn't in pyramid building either


[edit on 17-1-2007 by Marduk]



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 01:45 AM
link   
I said I was sorry.


And no, I don't have a math degree. My mistake was approaching the construction linearly.

[edit on 17-1-2007 by nextguyinline]



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 01:52 AM
link   
it took me twenty minutes to work out the math and find references so I didn't see yoru post
no worries
you live and learn don't you

still the biggest mystery of the Gizamids is
why bother
I mean if you were on a pyramid construction team wouldn't you move to britain
you'd only have to wait 4000 years for a ship going in that direction
but you could sit down while you were waiting



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 02:07 AM
link   


Your right. MY comprehension skills of Marduks last post was lacking, to say the least. Sorry, I was hasty

My god
someone who's mature enough to admit they were wrong publically and to issue a retraction without delay


You have voted nextguyinline for the Way Above Top Secret award



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Nor does it take into account, placement errors, math errors, weather, and any thing else that may chip into that time.

Something is wrong with the current theory, IMO, by this alone.

Edward Leedskalnin of the famous Coral Castle in Florida, has always interested me. Edward didn't have slaves or paid workers to quarry, cut, transport (twice by the way, dismantled the whole thing, and moved it all like 10 miles, then re-erected everything) and erect stones upwards of 50 tons!!
He always claimed to have the knowledge of the pyramid builders, and took it to the grave, claiming fear of the knowledge would be used immorally.


I agree. There is definatly something missing in regards to how they were built, and more importantly, why they were built.

I was waiting for someone to mention the coral castle
Id like to hear some peoples explanations to that one aswell..

www.thothweb.com...


"At least six thousand years ago, before even the wheel has been invented, highly complex monuments were constructed using blocks of stone that weighed as much as 800 tonnes apiece. Was it simply a colossal amount of human effort that led to the construction of ancient monuments such as Stonehenge in England, Sacsayhuaman in Peru, Baalbek in the Lebanon and the pyramids of Giza, or was there a secret to their construction? These ancient sites are simply a few of the relics of the past, relics whose construction can’t be fully explained by our current understanding of scientific knowledge in the ancient world. "


Eight Hundred Tonnes....even the worlds biggest crane would have trouble trying to lift a block of that magnitude! And there are blocks in other monuments which weigh up to 1000 tonnes!! I refuse to believe that brute force alone was responsible for moving them, it is just illogical.

I mean, keeping an entire nation focused on building these "tombs" for 100 years just makes no logisitical sense. Assuming brute force was used, the amount of man power needed, the amount of food and water needed to sustain the people, amoungst other things, just makes it unrealistic.

More over, the precision building of these monuments is something to bare in mind when suggesting brute force/human power alone was used. Simply pushing these blocks into place doesn't make any sense. Have u ever tried to push a washing machine into perfect alignment in your kitchen? If you don't lift it clear off the ground, then place it, it makes it very difficult to get it exactly aligned.

My own theory regarding WHY they were built is this; They are simply a message from ourselves in the past, but one which is so gigantic and mysterious it demands attention. I believe they left them as a warning to us. They are all made out of stone, and providing there is no earthquake or volcano etc to destroy them, they would withstand the test of time simply because they are made of Earth material. In regards to the warning, i only need say 2012, because thats another discussion entirely.
`````````````````````
Added 'ex' tags for external material

[edit on 17/1/07 by masqua]



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 09:20 AM
link   
how were these stone's carved out again

since limestone is a very hard rock and granite well, lets just say it is a bit harder

how were these GIANT chunks carved out and where could they have been carved out of , AND HOW WERE THEY MOVED TO THE SITE WHERE THE pyramids stand today (by camels, by levers? , how long would this take?

when do people start realizing that when u keep trying to force the answers into a box of beleifs under the AUTHORITY of what "history" suggests it will not fit, and then you ask yourself what were they build for again and u try to fit that in the box that history suggests

at what points to you say hey you know what maybe we dont have the answers maybe we simply do not know, kind of like how some people needed to know how the world was made and religion made up a story that god created it in 7 days to satisfy our unknowing minds , we don't know, but we are willing to beleive anything besides not knowing

the conclusions made by historians that have been built upon for generations after generations were made at a time when man kind had a scrap of it's current knowledge and understanding but people have been pressured to make info. fit into a box for generations, and it ain't workin









[edit on 17-1-2007 by cpdaman]



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 09:33 AM
link   
I agree with alot of what you said 'cpdaman'.

As i said in my first post i believe, "he who controls the past, controls the future". There is alot of talk about the holocaust for example, and how that event mite not be as accurate as we are led to believe. Even 9/11 for example, all it takes is a few years and already the majority of people have just accepted the version of events our leaders want us to believe..

As for religion though, i disagree with the stance that it is all lies and manipulation, although i wont deny that in the present day and age thats exactly what its being used for. I think there is alot of truth in religions, the spiritual side of it all, but again, that has been lost of scrambled over time. Anyway, i disgress.

Take stonehenge for example. Those stones came from Wales (correct me if im wrong)...why on earth would people want to move stones such a great distance just to make a calendar? Also, if you examine the root that they would have had to take to get the stones from wales to stonehenge, it just makes no real sense as to why they picked these stones, unless of course, they could move them with incredible ease..



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
I don't care what a couple pictures show to be the case. Current mainstream theory says that the large pyramid was built in 20 years, and that the egyptians placed a stone every 2 minutes approximately.


Those are the old calculations which assumed a solid structure built from the ground up. As it happens, the Great Pyramid was constructed over a rocky outcrop and ultrasound of the structure in the 1980's revealed that there are a number of places made up not of rock, but of sand:
www.touregypt.net...

And estimates made using the same tools and methods available to the Egyptians then show that it could be constructed in as little as 10 years with 25 years being the upper limit. This is discussed on the same (very badly edited) page in Wikipedia that you cited:
en.wikipedia.org...



Edward Leedskalnin of the famous Coral Castle in Florida, has always interested me. Edward didn't have slaves or paid workers to quarry, cut, transport (twice by the way, dismantled the whole thing, and moved it all like 10 miles, then re-erected everything) and erect stones upwards of 50 tons!!
He always claimed to have the knowledge of the pyramid builders, and took it to the grave, claiming fear of the knowledge would be used immorally.


That's actually mostly urban legend. He was using modern tools unavailable to the Egyptians. There's pictures of him standing around with his coral blocks hoisted into the air and ready to load on his truck ... by a very ordinary and commonplace (for the time) setup of 3 poles and a block and tackle pulley. And some chains.


Maybe he used sound and water.


...from that very same website, a link to the page with two photos showing his block and tackle rig which is hoisting one of those large blocks of stone:
www.coralcastle.com...



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 10:01 AM
link   
You know, i usually just set on the sidelines and take in all of this information on these forum and just ponder on the possibilities in my mind without adding my $.02. But after seeing the way Marduk trashes your thread with his i can Google and Wiki everything and disprove anything anyone says, i felt that i had to put in my thoughts this time. Marduk, if your gonna criticize everything everyone says on here, you may wanna learn how to properly organize a paragraph. It looks like a 10 year old wrote the stuff that you put in here. You guys that just go Google or Wiki everything and post links without actually adding to the conversation make me wonder if you have any thoughts of your own. Instead of adding to this thread, you are more worried with what kind of education this thread starter has. Who really cares. As he stated at the beginning, these are his ideas not fact. These forums would be alot more informative if we didn't have to read all this crap that people like Marduk post in here.

Anyways, back to the subject. I did alot of research a while back into tuning forks and pyramids. There was actually a guy in Florida that built a castle with this technique. I'm not sure where i read about it, but i'm sure a quick google search will come up with something (Marduk here's a chance to do your specialty). I think this is a highly plausible idea that you have, and i hope this thread will continue and bring about more interesting ideas.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Wiki also says on the link u posted;

"This study fails to take into account however, especially when compared to modern third world construction projects, the logistics and craftsmanship time inherent in constructing a building of nearly unparalleled magnitude with such precision, or among other things, the use of up to 60-80 ton stones being quarried and transported a distance of over 500 miles."

Building the pyramid is one thing, but the transportation of the stones is equally, if not more impressive. 25 men to transport a 1.5 tonne block, so roughly 1000 to move a 60 tonne block..

Using modern equipment, the study concludes:

“Utilizing the entire Indiana Limestone industry’s facilities as they now stand [for 33 quarries], and figuring on tripling present average production, it would take approximately 27 years to quarry, fabricate and ship the total requirements.”

Also;

"The accuracy of the pyramid's workmanship is such that the four sides of the base have a mean error of only 58 mm in length, and 1 minute in angle from a perfect square. The base is horizontal and flat to within 15 mm. The sides of the square are closely aligned to the four cardinal compass points to within 3 minutes of arc and is based not on magnetic north, but true north. The ratio of the pyramid's perimeter to two times its height is approximately 3.1421, about 0.1% off from the mathematical constant pi."

That kind of accuracy, combined with the weight of the stones, the logisitcs of transportation of the stone simply smacks of somethign greater than just man power, especially given this was thousands of years ago, and even today, we would have trouble replicating such a feat using the technology we "assume" they had and the same man power.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline:edit: and unless wiki has the 2,400,00 blocks as an incorrect number...


2,300,000 is the more commonly cited figure, but I believe that old estimate comes from when they thought it was a solid structure (the sand chambers hadn't been found) and built on flat ground (it was built over a rocky prominence). Crystalinks shows a low figure of 540,000 blocks, based on the estimated volume of the outcrop and the sandfilled chambers.
www.crystalinks.com...

The truth probably lies between those two extremes.

Now... Marduk does bring up a good point -- the estimates assumed that one group of men would grab a block, take it to the top (with everyone else waiting) and then run back down for another one. It does not take into account 5 or more labor gangs each bringing up a stone at the same time or that they might be working on more than one side of the pyramid at the same time.



[edit on 17-1-2007 by Byrd]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join