New Pyramid Theory: Khufu's Great Pyramid, its Building Grid, the Number 7 and the 'Diamond Matrix

heritage-key.com...

For thousands of years, scientists from around the world have tried to understand how the Egyptians designed and built the Great Pyramid of Giza – the last remaining of the seven wonders of the ancient world.

Now, an architect and researcher at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) says he has the answer to this ancient puzzle.

According to Ole Bryn, the Great Pyramid's building grid was developed based on the prime number seven – and the core of Khufu's 146.6 meters high monument is likely a step pyramid.

This I thought was interesting.

It wasn't until the 1920s, when aerial photographs of the area were taken, that it was revealed that Khufu's pyramid is not set on a square base. Rather, as Bryn explains, “the centre line on each face is moved inwards by a short distance at the base.”

Don't know anything about the subject, just thought you pyramid buffs could enlighten me.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/79818e80a1fa.jpg[/atsimg]

OMG I did it, yea, I posted a picture, Oh I am going to be dangerous now, lol



[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/79818e80a1fa.jpg[/atsimg]

The building grid for the Great Pyramid of Giza, also known as the Pyramid of Khufu, or the Pyramid of Cheops, as drawn by Norwegian University of Science and Technology architect and Associate Professor Ole J. Bryn

reply to post by Stormdancer777


I have always thought the pyramids may have been built to hide some thing under them what better wayto hide something than to pile thousands of stones on top of it (just a thought)

reply to post by majestic3

wow does that go under ground

Originally posted by majestic3
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

I have always thought the pyramids may have been built to hide some thing under them what better wayto hide something than to pile thousands of stones on top of it (just a thought)

You know what, I always thought they would have been a good place to hide, literally.

Originally posted by majestic3
reply to post by majestic3

 

wow does that go under ground

OH, yea, it does seem like it.

reply to post by Stormdancer777
is it the Egyptians that always talk about an underworld makes you wonder if it could be an entrance

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Have you checked down your street.
you might have some armoured police cars on their way

Originally posted by majestic3
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

is it the Egyptians that always talk about an underworld makes you wonder if it could be an entrance

I wouldn't doubt it, majestic, that is a neat observation, the underworld.

www.ntnu.no...

Here is a PDF file, I haven't read it yet.

reply to post by Stormdancer777
nice one

Originally posted by majestic3
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

nice one

I guess figures six of the PDF could explain your question , somewhat.

reply to post by Stormdancer777

There is an ever increasing group of scientists who believe the pyramid is 7 to 12 thousand years old, not the 3 thousand that puts it in the age of pharoahs. There have been recent discoveries of aquatic fossils in the upper stones and evidence of sea water erosion on stone faces indicating the pyramid was under water for a very long time.
IMO the Egyptians did not build the pyramid nor was it intended for burial, the lack of hyroglyphics within the structure (unlike every other Egyptian monument) indicates this is so. In addition the recent comment by an Egyptian professor that "there is something not of this world" within the pyramid hints at it's real purpose.
I think the time has come to unwrap this "gift" and see what is inside, to dismantle it from the top down (keeping careful records for possible reconstruction) and see what it contains.

rune.galactic.to... Here is a cool story that talks about the hidden passages of the Pyramid. It also talks about 7s. And how everything from time to distance related to sacred 7. Who knows if real or not. Just interesting. I will have to read pdf you just posted. Thanks!

Originally posted by Trublbrwing
There is an ever increasing group of scientists who believe the pyramid is 7 to 12 thousand years old, not the 3 thousand that puts it in the age of pharoahs.

Not to be a troublemaker here, but the pyramids date to about 2500 BC, which makes it around 5,000 years old. There's not an "increasing group of scientists who believe it's 7-12,000 years old." There are a few and they're very determined and none that I know of is a professional archaeologist who worked in Egypt.

There have been recent discoveries of aquatic fossils in the upper stones and evidence of sea water erosion on stone faces indicating the pyramid was under water for a very long time.

Uhm... the fossils were there embedded in the rock used to build the pyramids. They date to the Cretaceous, some 65,000,000 years ago. The erosion of the pyramid is pretty typical for any neglected structure several thousand years old.

In addition the recent comment by an Egyptian professor that "there is something not of this world" within the pyramid hints at it's real purpose.

Which professor is this? (I'm not being mean, but I am being curious. I like to check sources.)

Originally posted by majestic3
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

is it the Egyptians that always talk about an underworld makes you wonder if it could be an entrance

As far as I know, there isn't an "entrance" to the Dua'at.

Now, the Greeks had an "entrance to the underworld", said to be located several places.

Andrew Collins has been working on what he calls "The Cave of the Snakes" under the Giza pyramid, but his relationship with Hawass has not been very good for some time and both are known to sensationalize finds:
www.examiner.com...

While many of you don't like Hawass, some might be interested in reading his comments. In brief, we have an author (not a trained archaeologist) who is exploring a structure (I think it was done without permission -- that he was tresspassing) that has been known for hundreds of years (I have confirmed this with non-Hawass sources) and was documented by a formal dig done in the early 1900's.

Hawass says it's a catacomb -- and that's not unlikely. Certain temples DID have ceremonial catacombs after the time that the Greeks took over Egypt and some of these are very well known. If it's a catacomb, it does fit with the date of the structure and several other things.
www.drhawass.com...

I haven't read the original dig report and don't know how far back it goes -- but it's a known structure. One of these days I'll look up the original reports and see what they had to say about these chambers.

Anyway, as far as I know there wasn't an "entrance" to the Duaat -- but I could be wrong since I have only studied Egyptology informally for a number of years and there's a lot I don't know about it.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

According to Ole Bryn, the Great Pyramid's building grid was developed based on the prime number seven – and the core of Khufu's 146.6 meters high monument is likely a step pyramid.

Don't know anything about the subject, just thought you pyramid buffs could enlighten me.

It's been discussed seriously on Egyptology boards, because we know that they did have some sort of building plan (they just didn't preserve them carefully for future generations.) and a method that they used. The thing that I find most objectionable is that they didn't have number theory and had no idea what a prime number is.

The theory also does not account for the change in the slope of the GP or several other pyramids (some are straight sided, others have a change in the angle.)

But academics are finding it an interesting idea. I'm not sure that it will ultimately hold up (you'd need some sort of evidence), but it's been discussed quite a bit recently.

reply to post by Byrd

Byrd: Not to be a troublemaker here, but the pyramids date to about 2500 BC, which makes it around 5,000 years old.

SC: We find this date of c.2500 BCE for the construction of the Gizamids presented in countless mainstrream books. Alas, however, none of these books present any hard evidence to back up this date. All we are presented with is questionable C-14 dating, incomplete King Lists, a couple of dubious cartouches of Khufu and Rachaf, all of which is bound together by Manetho's incomplete Aegyptiaca which indicates there may in fact be as many as 123 missing mortal kings between the 4th and 8th dynasties. Furthermore, the Inventory Stele presents evidence that the Sphinx (at least) existed BEFORE Khufu's time (and, by extension, Rachaf's time).

If the pyramids do indeed date to c.2,500 BCE then please present the hard evidence that proves this as fact. If you cannot present such evidence then please desist from making such unfounded claims. If it is a "best guess" made by scholars that you are referring to, then please indicate such. If this makes me a "troublemaker" then so be it.

Regards,

Scott Creighton

^I'm curious as to the dating as well. I know you know your stuff Byrd, can you at least point us in the direction of whatever studies/researches are considered to be evidence of the dating of the Great Pyramid? I'd like to read the research that is usually cited as being proof/evidence of the currently accepted date. Thanks