Pyramid = Electric Generator

The sand grinding experiment by Stocks and his crew took 14 hours to carve just 3 cm deep into the granite and rendered the saw half as effective by that point. This means it would take 854 hours to carve just 1 side of a 6ft block (not factoring the time of replacing the saws). Considering the 20 year construction time frame (c. 2560–2540 BC) and statistical estimate that the 2.5-80 ton stones had to be quarried, carved, transported 500 miles (804 km) from Aswan (and across the Nile) and set into precise place every 2 minutes, this method is simply preposterous OR the Great Pyramid took far longer than the 20 years that the mainstream suggests. If you piss on granite long enough you'll eventually carve into it too--that's my theory. Now I'll also go sell an $80, 175 page book on that.

reply to post by Sinny

Moving the goal posts? Now your just nit-picking, I acknowledged and accepted the theory you presented!

You made a post asking for someone to duplicate the stone cutting methods and I showed you. There is not "theory" involved, that is a fact. And you responded asking for a video.

Plus, even today you can't leave any copper unattended before the local jack the lads or the scrap come for it! Expecting any equipment to still be around after 2000 years is just a bit far fetched.

Not really, we have found a lot of the tools they have used. Not to mention this "superior" technology would be apparent in the cultures that took over egypt and parts of egypt over the years. The Arabs,Nubian,Greeks and Romans yet none of them can be seen using any type of advanced technology that the Egyptians supposedly had.

What i want to see is a demonstration of power generation by placing a granite over an aquifer. Or running enough electricity through granite to light up a light bulb.

reply to post by MasonicFantom

The sand grinding experiment by Stocks took 14 hours to carve just 3 cm deep into the granite and rendered the saw half as effective by that point.

More like 12 an hour

findarticles.com...
The dry sand sawing results are also contained in TABLE 1. The rate of cutting was just over 12 cu. cm/hour, slightly better than the wet abrasive result. It was noticeable that the effort to reciprocate the saw using the dry sand was far easier than for the wet sand abrasive. The used dry sand powder, grey in colour, poured over each end of the slot, its copper content intact.

I don't get why people believe that the Egyptians made all the other granite statues and pyramids but think that they could not have cut the stones for the great pyramid.

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by chr0naut

 

ok fine. you can leave now

Thank you, it WAS getting very silly.

reply to post by Bedlam
you said it- magically. to us it's magic. that's because they are the smart ones. but you don't really believe in them so the pyramid is nothing but an elaborate tomb.

reply to post by DavidWillts


you won't see that because it is not in it's original state. they gave us bows and arrows and primitive tools to survive without them for a while. I think they come back periodically to check on our progress and hopefully upgrade our technology. I have a feeling they feel some kind of responsibility and compassion for us. Have you heard about zero-point energy? it must have something to do with their technology and it is the answer to the question of why they didn't leave a ton of stuff like infrastructure behind. It would end our energy problems overnight and a slew of other problems would be solved very quickly such as famine and lack of health care and education around the world. That's the tragic part, the willful ignorance (not saying you are) pervasive in the debunker realm.

reply to post by DavidWillts
Ok, that's straight from Denys and would be 15-16 hours to carve 1 side of a 6ft block then. I took 14/3 from this www.science-frontiers.com...
Regardless, there's still the fact his experiment was poorly undertaken and recorded. He also made many assumptions to reach conclusions. books.google.com...=snippet&q=denys%20stocks%20 sand%20saw&f=false
And there's anomalies that he ignored or couldn't explain.

I don't get why people believe that the Egyptians made all the other granite statues and pyramids but think that they could not have cut the stones for the great pyramid.

I'm guessing because of the time frame and how the 2.5-80 ton stones had to be quarried, carved, transported 500 miles from Aswan and across the Nile and then set into precise place every 2 minutes.

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by DavidWillts

 

you won't see that because it is not in it's original state. they gave us bows and arrows and primitive tools to survive without them for a while. I think they come back periodically to check on our progress and hopefully upgrade our technology. I have a feeling they feel some kind of responsibility and compassion for us. Have you heard about zero-point energy? it must have something to do with their technology and it is the answer to the question of why they didn't leave a ton of stuff like infrastructure behind. It would end our energy problems overnight and a slew of other problems would be solved very quickly such as famine and lack of health care and education around the world. That's the tragic part, the willful ignorance (not saying you are) pervasive in the debunker realm.

so in other words

GP discussions are always useless. It's conjecture and circumstantial evidence Vs conjecture and circumstantial evidence. And, of course there's always big players on both sides waiting to make a sh*t load of money with book sales primarily. A Denys Stocks hardcover book sells for $165 on Amazon www.amazon.com... that's like 90c per page!!

reply to post by Sinny


If you could produce electricity, you would not use the pyramids. You have the Nile, the desert winds, and many others plentiful.


The thing about trying to force technological elements on ruins is this. They are not technological pieces.

People don't make power plants out of sandstone and limestone.

reply to post by MasonicFantom

Ok, so that would be 15-16 hours to carve 1 side of a 6ft block. I took 14/3 from this www.science-frontiers.com...
Regardless, there's still the fact his "experiment" was poorly undertaken and recorded. He also made many assumptions to reach conclusions.

Kind of like how you make the assumption that they started building the pyramid and quarrying stone at the same time, they were already building pyramids, obelisks and statues so quarring stone was probably a full time job. You also assume that they were cut perfectly the first time and not broken off and shaped.

I'm guessing because of the time frame and how the 2.5-80 ton stones had to be quarried, carved, transported 500 miles from Aswan and across the Nile and then set into precise place every 2 minutes.

And once again people have no problem in believing that they cut and transported such large stones for other projects. The red pyramid was completed in 10-17 years and is only 140 feet shorter than the great pyramid and 30 feet smaller at the base.

reply to post by Sinny


It reminds me of touring the Colloseum in Rome....most of the metal is gone...it was looted during the wars.

2000 years is a long time to expect everything to be left.

Here is an example of how copper conducts electricity and neutralizes a magnetic field.

In World War II, the Germans laid mines in shallow waters, even in the Thames Estuary. Magnetic sensors detected when a ship's steel hull passed above and triggered the mines. The exploding ships were devastating allied and neutral shipping. Copper to the rescue. Workers simply attached a copper strip around the hull and connected the strip to ship's power. A current passed through the strip, neutralized the ship's magnetic field, and defeated the mines.

www.wonderquest.com...

reply to post by MasonicFantom


Im tending to believe they created alot of the blocks. I think they quarried only stones that needed to be on interior but most of the stones were concrete.

How the Great Pyramids of Giza were built has remained an enduring mystery. In the mid-1980s, Davidovits proposed that the pyramids were cast in situ using granular limestone aggregate and an alkali alumino-silicate-based binder. Hard evidence for this idea, however, remained elusive. Using primarily scanning and transmission electron microscopy, we compared a number of pyramid limestone samples with six different limestone samples from their vicinity. The pyramid samples contained microconstituents (μc's) with appreciable amounts of Si in combination with elements, such as Ca and Mg, in ratios that do not exist in any of the potential limestone sources. The intimate proximity of the μc's suggests that at some time these elements had been together in a solution.

Microstructural evidence

I did see a thread on this a while ago with the same video.

I also remember seeing a doco, where an archeologist, while inside the pyramid kept getting zapped by a bottle he was holding, due to an electric charge inside the pyramid. Its hard to know what was going on back then, i for one, am not even sure the pyramids had much to do with the egyptians themselves. The stuff they CLAIMED they built, are different, to say the least. nice thread, will look into it more.

reply to post by Earthling88


And yet tourists go in an out with no problems with getting zapped by anything. The problem sounds more like he was off his meds.

en.wikipedia.org...
Symptoms described as "brain zaps", "brain shocks", "brain shivers", "head shocks", or "cranial zings" are withdrawal symptoms experienced during discontinuation (or reduction of dose) of antidepressant drugs.

I want to read responses of why the Great Pyramid (GP) was built, not who built it.

There is no evidence supporting that it's a "tomb". So, what is another explanation?

The "Subterranean Chamber" is led to by the 3.5 ft tall "Descending Passageway" which obviously is not a comfortable height for walking upright so calling it a "passageway" is misleading. However, note its appearance www.newdawnmagazine.com...
And compare it to this www.newdawnmagazine.com... with the water source being off to the right and the output line on the left where the "Dead End shaft" is located in the Subterranean Chamber. www.newdawnmagazine.com...

In its completed state the Great Pyramid required a moat, which was fed by a system of aqueducts from the Western Nile (the Ur Nile); an ideal source for a gravity-fed water system, since the Western Nile was at a higher elevation than the plateau. It also explains the remains of a retaining wall that once surrounded the GP.

Now the middle and upper chamber would likely have been designed to somehow react with the very powerful vibrations emanating from the pump in the Subterranean Chamber. The "King’s Chamber" was built entirely from granite and the builders of the Great Pyramid placed five rows of granite beams in it. So, it is obvious that granite was of primary importance in the uppermost chamber. The question is why?

The high-fidelity stereo industry uses granite not only to provide a stable base for equipment but also because of its resonance qualities. According to Tom Danley, the sound engineer featured in the documentary film The Mystery of the Sphinx, the Great Pyramid makes strange sounds because the granite chamber resonates from the rigidity of the stone. What he also discovered was that a number of low-frequency components existed even without a test signal present in the pyramid implying that the chamber was constructed for its resonance, and that it naturally creates a frequency.
However, a compression wave emanating from the Subterranean Chamber would likely have a marginal effect on the granite in the upper chamber. What would be needed to localise the granite is a way to transform the compression wave into sound. This would create enough vibration to activate the granite beams and create a standing wave of resonance. With devices such as Helmholtz resonators built into the Grand Gallery those vibrations would become sound and cause the granite to resonate or ‘sing’. The question is ‘why’, to what effect? With shafts leading to the Great Pyramid’s exterior, the ‘singing’ granite would project its sound into the atmosphere. This, in turn, would create an electrical field in the atmosphere according to physics research.

www.newdawnmagazine.com...

It goes on to say:

Again, we are left with the question ‘why’? The subtle electrical field created by the Great Pyramid would be of little use for means of powering equipment. However, such a field would deflect very low frequencies (VLF) and extremely low frequencies (ELF), frequencies that exist at all times in the atmosphere as a result of thunderstorms around the world. In agricultural experiments, VLF and ELF have been shown to promote plant growth. With the Great Pyramid operating as the engine, all of the pyramids could be connected by a subtle electrical field to create a canopy of sorts thereby deflecting VLF and ELF into the surrounding fields.

Sounds like it was a healthy machine to have around.

Originally posted by DavidWillts
reply to post by Earthling88

 

And yet tourists go in an out with no problems with getting zapped by anything. The problem sounds more like he was off his meds.

en.wikipedia.org...
Symptoms described as "brain zaps", "brain shocks", "brain shivers", "head shocks", or "cranial zings" are withdrawal symptoms experienced during discontinuation (or reduction of dose) of antidepressant drugs.

have a look at this.... www.gizapyramid.com...

Originally posted by DavidWillts
reply to post by MasonicFantom
I don't get why people believe that the Egyptians made all the other granite statues and pyramids but think that they could not have cut the stones for the great pyramid.

One could make the argument that the 'lesser' pyramids you posted earlier in this thread were being made in attempt to emulate an already existing (and much more complex) structure: The pyramids at Giza.

According to the Egyptologists you mentioned earlier, the Sphinx was built at the same time as the great pyramid. They (especially Hawass) hold fast to the theory of both structures being built around 3500 bc, despite the existence of heavy water erosion on the backside of the sphinx that could only come from heavy rainfall. Erosion from rainfall would put the date of creation closer to 10,000 BC. If you're interested, look up the work of R. A. Schwaller de Lubicz, or John Anthony West.

ETA: By the way, Hawass's argument against an earlier dating of the Pyramids / Sphinx is based on the fact that no other evidence of a civilization predating that of ancient Egypt has been found.

Think about it. Egypt prides itself on being one of the world's oldest civilizations, and the Pyramids are what they are most well known for. When people look at the pyramids they are filled with awe, and wonder what type of civilization could create such a structure. To admit the existence of an earlier civilization would be to discount the history of Egypt itself.

Alternative theories for the 3 large Giza Pyramids are not even tolerated/entertained by the mainstream because the first image that most think of is the Great Pyramid when they think of Egypt. Without it, Egypt's history is less fantastic and they're currently nothing but a rioting mass being taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood. They cannot afford to lose "their" pride and glory. Even if they find some technological instrument in a hidden chamber within the Great Pyramid they will cover it up or make some of those most absurd excuses imaginable to discredit it or say that someone somehow in modern times placed it there.

reply to post by ddaniel

One could make the argument that the 'lesser' pyramids you posted earlier in this thread were being made in attempt to emulate an already existing (and much more complex) structure: The pyramids at Giza.

One of the "lesser" pyramids i posted is actually taller than one and has a larger base than two of the great pyramids.

According to the Egyptologists you mentioned earlier, the Sphinx was built at the same time as the great pyramid.
They (especially Hawass) hold fast to the theory of both structures being built around 3500 bc,

According to some of the egyptologists that is the case. But Egyptology are divided what pharaoh not what civilization. Hawass maintains that the Sphinx was built around 2550BC in the time of Khafre. The "water erosion" does not really hold up considering the Sphinx went through a restoration in the 18th dynasty. Not to mention the most crippling fact of this water erosion theory is that there is no evidence of it being built by anyone else.

Hawass's argument against an earlier dating of the Pyramids / Sphinx is based on the fact that no other evidence of a civilization predating that of ancient Egypt has been found.

That is not his only argument and it is not really a bad one. There are other things like the drainage ditch on the causeway that indicate that the sphinx was built afterwards.

When people look at the pyramids they are filled with awe, and wonder what type of civilization could create such a structure. To admit the existence of an earlier civilization would be to discount the history of Egypt itself.

Actually Egyptologists in Egypt would not be happier if people started appreciating the other structures and other pyramids of Egypt.