As above so below.

I can't remember all of the equations and values offhand, but I know that the orbits of the planets can be predicted from knowing the others. A planet beyond mars was mathematically predicted and people started looking for it. What they found was the asteroid belt.

So my point is, since the planets follow this mathematical pattern, then that same mathematical pattern could be seen in other things, either intentionally or by accident, and it wouldn't necessarily mean that these other instances of the pattern were directly related to planetary orbits.

Lastly, even if something in the Giza layout does directly relate to the inner planets, that wouldn't be that amazing. Venus and even Mercury can both be seen with the naked eye, though Mercury is a bit tough for the casual observer.

Observer 99 I believe you are thinking of Titius–Bode law

A few comments on the work above

Contrived from modern bias and knowledge

If this was so important to the AE they would have duplicated it - they didn't

The AE didn't plan or view the giza necropolis plateau from the top down, only two top down diagrams exist from AE (AFAIK) they are about small scale (gardens and temples I believe) and from thousands of years later

If they wanted to show the orbit of planets they would have marked them out physically on the ground, but then there is zero evidence that they understood the orbits of the planets, the planets they believed were gods

Needless to say, you cannot see this on the ground so what point would it have served?

14 steps to figure it out - okay

Requires a non-standard view (simplified) view of the orbits of the inner planets to be oriented 107 degrees to get it to fit....

Orbits are not circular but elliptical

I think we can add this one to the large list of mutual contradictionary theories about the pyramids

I would suggest that someone take this to BAUT forum to get even more detailed analysis