It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Also unanswered how on earth did they move these massive amounts of granite.have you seen how big the statue of ramses the 2nd is
Originally posted by tauristercus
Originally posted by grover
reply to post by Merriman Weir
The Romans supposedly developed concrete in and around 200 BC. If this hypothisis is correct then it would predate the Romans by over 2000 years.
BTW I am giving you a star for this thread.
[edit on 27-9-2009 by grover]
Yes, it appears that this 'artificial limestone' technology may indeed pre-date the Romans by millenia. Quite possible it was once used extensively but over time, forgotten and slipped into obscurity.
In fact, it also mentioned that many of the stone jars/urns used by the Egyptians ... the ones with extremely narrow necks that increase into very bulbous main sections .... may also have been 'cast' rather than using a hunk of rock/stone that was hollowed out to form the jar/urn.
The main problem being that it's difficult to understand how the huge volume of rock/stone material from the inside of the jar/urn was removed if the only access was down the inside of the very narrow neck.
How would you go about grinding away that material to form the inside of the jar/urn ?
Originally posted by Chovy
So they never used pulleys OR modern technology?
How did they do it then? Push the blocks uphill?
This may be your answer to the jars
Ancient Egyptian Stone Technology
The purpose in presenting these materials on ancient Egyptian stone technology is to, without prejudice to any particular possibility, encourage the scientific process in uncovering the truth about the skills of the ancient builders. Photos, diagrams and essays by W.M. Flinders Petrie, Chris Dunn and Robert Francis.
Lathe Turned Stone - Robert Francis - Hard evidence of Old Kingdom or pre-dynastic stone turning from the Cairo museum.
Tube Drilling - Robert Francis - Photos and commentaries describing stone tube drilling at Giza and in the Cairo Museum.
Stone Saws - Robert Francis - Photos and commentaries describing tube drilling, sawing and lathe work visible at Giza and in the Cairo Museum.
Mechanical Methods - Extracts from W.M. Flinders Petrie's classic reference work which describe some of his findings at 'Gizeh' - "...the graving out of lines in hard stones by jewel points, was a well known art." "...the lathe appears to have been as familiar an instrument in the fourth dynasty, as it is in the modern workshops." "...tube drills about 18 inches diameter" "...The only feasible explanation of this piece is that it was produced by a circular saw."
Ancient Machining - Chris Dunn - Photos, diagrams & technical discussion of ancient stone machining techniques.
Originally posted by MysterE
Forgive me if this has already been brought up, but as an engineering student, concrete analysis is a requirement. With that said I do not believe a formed stone would be able to stand the weather for such a vast amount of time as the pyramids have. As I understand it concrete is strong under compression,weak under tension, and suseptable to erosion
"... a sample of stone I made with geopolymeric cement and fine limestone is mineralogically comparable to the latter [natural limestone], producing similar peaks on the X-ray charts."
Source: The Pyramids - An Enigma Solved", Davidavits, pg 87-88
"Even if geopolymeric concrete is as strong and beautiful as natural stone ..."
Source: The Pyramids - An Enigma Solved", Davidavits, pg 89
Originally posted by tauristercus
As far as I can understand it, and I'm relying on his established expertise in the subject, Davidavits is saying that the result of geopolymerization in the case of the limestone blocks, is that once they've been set and allowed to harden, that they are visually indistinguishable from naturally occuring limestone.
Also two things that should be known about concrete in construction. One is that it does break down. Air combines with the calcium hydroxide in the concrete to make calcium carbonate known as chalk. This quickly breaks down and produces deep and hazardous gouges in the concrete's surface. Also, anaerobic bacteria which gets into the pores of the concrete structure to leech nutrients which in turns pulls out the stuff that helps to keep it solid. Also if of low quality (which you know damn well it would have to be) containing dolomite, it would cause the concrete to expand which will definitely cause cracking and partial collapse.
Also one other thing that makes this an impossibility. Since the whole structure weighs in the millions and millions of tons and is exclusively "concrete", what about the curing of the concrete structure. Either in slabs or even as a block of poured concrete, it must be cured enough in order for more blocks or another slab can be poured on top of it, otherwise it would be to soft and the weight from the top would start the structure sinking in on itself.
Originally posted by zorgon
Okay we are pouring concrete... ton and tons of concrete continuously for days on end...
where did they get the cement powder from?
Mud from the Nile River contains alumina and is well suited for low-temperature mineral synthesis. A soft limestone with a high kaolinite content was quarried in the wadi on the south of the Giza plateau. It was then dissolved in large, Nile-fed pools until it became a watery slurry. Lime (produced by calcining limestone in simple hearths) and natron (sodium carbonate - also used by the Egyptians in mummification) was mixed in. The natron salt is abundant in the deserts and salt lakes and reacts with lime and water to produce the main ingrediants for producing "artificial" stone. The pools were then left to evaporate, leaving behind a moist, clay-like mixture. This wet "concrete" would be carried to the construction site where it would be packed into reusable wooden molds. Sinai mines produced the arsenic minerals of olivenite and scorodite, needed to produce rapid hydraulic setting in large concrete blocks. In the next few days the mixture would undergo a chemical hydration reaction similar to the setting of cement.
Besides, he hasn't explained why (once they had concrete) they would make millions of individual sized molds to cast every block (no two are exactly alike) rather than using a few molds and pouring those.
...and as someone else said, it takes weeks for a block of concrete that size to cure. It's far faster to just quarry stone.
Originally posted by tauristercus
Seriously, though .... all the raw materials required to create these artificial blocks was locally available and in considerable quantities ...