The Surprising Truth Behind the Construction of the Great Pyramids

The Surprising Truth Behind the Construction of the Great Pyramids

www.livescience.com

According to the caller, the mysteries had actually been solved by Joseph Davidovits, Director of the Geopolymer Institute in St. Quentin, France, more than two decades ago. Davidovits claimed that the stones of the pyramids were actually made of a very early form of concrete created using a mixture of limestone, clay, lime, and water.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Seems this would make more sense than carrying up thousand ton blocks.

www.livescience.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Over the past couple of years, there have been extensive threads dealing with the construction of the pyramids on the Giza Plateau. Huge long threads which tried to come up with innovative solutions to the years of hard labour requiring multitudes of workers.

This clears all that speculation away. I think this finally may be a milestone to that neverending speculation.

From your link;

"What started as a two-hour project turned into a five-year odyssey that I undertook with one of my graduate students, Adrish Ganguly, and a colleague in France, Gilles Hug," Barsoum says.

A year and a half later, after extensive scanning electron microscope (SEM) observations and other testing, Barsoum and his research group finally began to draw some conclusions about the pyramids. They found that the tiniest structures within the inner and outer casing stones were indeed consistent with a reconstituted limestone. The cement binding the limestone aggregate was either silicon dioxide (the building block of quartz) or a calcium and magnesium-rich silicate mineral.

*bolding mine

Clicking on the link will provide hyperlinks within the text.

I highly recommend reading this if you are even just a little interested in ancient building techniques.

Kudos for bringing this maxseamus
````````````
grammar edit and added link



[edit on 19/5/07 by masqua]

Originally posted by maxseamus


Seems this would make more sense than carrying up thousand ton blocks.

www.livescience.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I will disagree.

If the pyramids where made of "concrete" then so would many other building in Egypt represent this building method.

Also, the method would have been perfected and spread across much of the known world, which it wasn't.

A technology that great in that age would not have been reserved for one project.

Even still, there is evidence of the quarries, accounts and no evidence of how they where molded.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Even still, there is evidence of the quarries, accounts and no evidence of how they where molded.

If you read the article and follow the links, it will show that both quarried stone and concrete were used.

I think it's a possibility.

This thread has already been started Here.

Cool topic though

well this new theroy may explane the egyptions building but The giant granete stones were cut theres no other possibilty and there was one left at the oringial quary check out these cut and moved stones and I bet no one even attempts to explane how they were moved and stacked into a wall.
www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk...

[edit on 19-5-2007 by xcalbiier]

Originally posted by xcalbiier
well this new theroy may explane the egyptions building but The giant granete stones were cut theres no other possibilty and there was one left at the oringial quary check out these cut and moved stones and I bet no one even attempts to explane how they were moved and stacked into a wall.
www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk...

[edit on 19-5-2007 by xcalbiier]

Indeed, no one can answer how granite is cut and moved, especially considering that copper and bronze (what the egyptians had during the pyramid age) is considerably softer than granite.