It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

Help ATS via PayPal:

# Pi, Golden Ratio and Speed of Light encoded into Great Pyramid

page: 4
46
share:

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 10:13 AM

Both of these units are totally arbitrary- not in any way constants of the universe, or chosen for mathematical reasons. Furthermore, as far as we can tell, the Egyptians used neither, of course. They're modern inventions.

Ok, but here we have two references to that same number: 299 79|2 458 this number is apparently found in two separate places. The lengths of the circles (which I haven't checked and might be false) AND the latitude.

You are wrong if you think that seconds and meters are not based on constants. The physical phenomena which scientists sample to produce these units are chosen because they are constant. You don't get good systems of measurement by choosing non-constant bases.

Metre: "Since 1983, it has been defined as "the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1 ⁄ 299,792,458 of a second"

Second: Between 1000 (when al-Biruni used seconds) and 1960 the second was defined as 1/86,400 of a mean solar day (that definition still applies in some astronomical and legal contexts).[3][4] Between 1960 and 1967, it was defined in terms of the period of the Earth's orbit around the Sun.

But maybe even these measurement based systems are not where to look, ultimately, for references and inspiration? What if the constants that the ancient egpytians used, and the ones we measure today, are all based on the constants of mathematics and number itself?

I am willing to bet that it's possible to derive very close to that 299,792,458 number from using mathematics alone.

1 / the speed of light = 3.33~ × 10-9 s / m
each decimal digit = 3.3~ bits

This is a pretty sweet coincidence, go look at it yourself on google:

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 10:21 AM

Originally posted by yampa
Metre: "Since 1983, it has been defined as "the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1 ⁄ 299,792,458 of a second"

Second: Between 1000 (when al-Biruni used seconds) and 1960 the second was defined as 1/86,400 of a mean solar day (that definition still applies in some astronomical and legal contexts).[3][4] Between 1960 and 1967, it was defined in terms of the period of the Earth's orbit around the Sun.

Do you really think there's any consistent, logical reason to choose your unit of time to be 1/86,400 of a day? Doesn't that strike you as extremely arbitrary?

You mean to tell me that an ancient civilization, completely isolated from our own, would sit down to standardize their unit of time measurement and say, "Hmmm, yes, 1/86,400 of a solar day, that makes the most sense!"

"Now how are we going to define our cubit.... I know! the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1 ⁄ 299,792,458 of a second! Of course! Nothing could be simpler!"

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 10:52 AM

Originally posted by yampa
Metre: "Since 1983, it has been defined as "the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1 ⁄ 299,792,458 of a second"

Second: Between 1000 (when al-Biruni used seconds) and 1960 the second was defined as 1/86,400 of a mean solar day (that definition still applies in some astronomical and legal contexts).[3][4] Between 1960 and 1967, it was defined in terms of the period of the Earth's orbit around the Sun.

Do you really think there's any consistent, logical reason to choose your unit of time to be 1/86,400 of a day? Doesn't that strike you as extremely arbitrary?

You mean to tell me that an ancient civilization, completely isolated from our own, would sit down to standardize their unit of time measurement and say, "Hmmm, yes, 1/86,400 of a solar day, that makes the most sense!"

"Now how are we going to define our cubit.... I know! the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1 ⁄ 299,792,458 of a second! Of course! Nothing could be simpler!"

Why do you characterise these people as glib and thoughtless? Have you really considered the effects of thousands of years of pre-modern mathematical study on the abilities of these people?

I can derive lots of things related to angular rotations/divisions of a circle/'harmonics of light' from the numbers 86400, but I won't bother because you aren't listening.

As I said above, I think people with a good knowledge of the structure of numbers might be able to derive the speed of light, using math and observations of the sun and stars alone.

You don't agree, and you think everything in the world is free floating and random, and that constants are all arbitrary. Because that's the way you've been programmed to think by 20th century western industry owned science.

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 10:59 AM

Originally posted by yampa
Why do you characterise these people as glib and thoughtless? Have you really considered the effects of thousands of years of pre-modern mathematical study on the abilities of these people?

I can derive lots of things related to angular rotations/divisions of a circle/'harmonics of light' from the numbers 86400, but I won't bother because you aren't listening.

As I said above, I think people with a good knowledge of the structure of numbers might be able to derive the speed of light, using math and observations of the sun and stars alone.

You don't agree, and you think everything in the world is free floating and random, and that constants are all arbitrary. Because that's the way you've been programmed to think by 20th century western industry owned science.

I'm not denigrating the knowledge or scientific ability of the ancient Egyptians in the slightest. I'm even willing to consider that they might have measured the speed of light. I just reject the idea that they had the same units of measurement that we do today.

In order for the number 299,792,458 to mean "the speed of light" you have to be measuring it in meters per second. This is a cold, hard fact.

So maybe there are some strange, numerological reasons to pick the number 86400 (which you decide aren't worth describing in this thread.) Okay, fine. Why not pick 1/64, 1/3600, 1/174000 ? Unless there is a really, really good reason specifically to pick your unit of time to be 1/86400 of a solar day, and not some other number, then they would have had to stumble upon on our same unit of seconds entirely by coincidence. This doesn't strike you as unreasonable in any way?

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 11:08 AM

Originally posted by yampa
Why do you characterise these people as glib and thoughtless? Have you really considered the effects of thousands of years of pre-modern mathematical study on the abilities of these people?

I can derive lots of things related to angular rotations/divisions of a circle/'harmonics of light' from the numbers 86400, but I won't bother because you aren't listening.

As I said above, I think people with a good knowledge of the structure of numbers might be able to derive the speed of light, using math and observations of the sun and stars alone.

You don't agree, and you think everything in the world is free floating and random, and that constants are all arbitrary. Because that's the way you've been programmed to think by 20th century western industry owned science.

I'm not denigrating the knowledge or scientific ability of the ancient Egyptians in the slightest. I'm even willing to consider that they might have measured the speed of light. I just reject the idea that they had the same units of measurement that we do today.

In order for the number 299,792,458 to mean "the speed of light" you have to be measuring it in meters per second. This is a cold, hard fact.

So maybe there are some strange, numerological reasons to pick the number 86400 (which you decide aren't worth describing in this thread.) Okay, fine. Why not pick 1/64, 1/3600, 1/174000 ? Unless there is a really, really good reason specifically to pick your unit of time to be 1/86400 of a solar day, and not some other number, then they would have had to stumble upon on our same unit of seconds entirely by coincidence. This doesn't strike you as unreasonable in any way?

86400 / 60 = 1440

I'm going to have to resort to quoting new agers here, because I don't have the time to work out something sane and scientific and useful. But afaik, 144 is a killer number for those guys:

Harmonics of light: Several friends corrected me concerning which is the light harmonic: 144 or 288?..they decided that 144 is light and 288 is double light:

9 (1/16th light),
18 (1/8th light),
36 (1/4th light),
72 (1/2 light),
144 (light),
288 (2x light),
576 (3x light),
1152 (4x light),
2304 (5x light),
4608 (6x light),
9216 (7x light)...

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 11:20 AM

Originally posted by yampa
86400 / 60 = 1440

I'm going to have to resort to quoting new agers here, because I don't have the time to work out something sane and scientific and useful. But afaik, 144 is a killer number for those guys:

Harmonics of light: Several friends corrected me concerning which is the light harmonic: 144 or 288?..they decided that 144 is light and 288 is double light:

9 (1/16th light),
18 (1/8th light),
36 (1/4th light),
72 (1/2 light),
144 (light),
288 (2x light),
576 (3x light),
1152 (4x light),
2304 (5x light),
4608 (6x light),
9216 (7x light)...

This is great and all, and 86400 / 60 does equal 1440. So why must a civilization pick this fraction of a solar day when determining their unit of time measurement? Is there absolutely no other possible fraction of a solar day that is as meaningful? And even so, is this the same reasoning used by the Eleventh General Conference on Weights and Measures when they settled on a standardized second?

Now, of course you realize that in the modern day, the choice of 1/86400 of a solar day is far too imprecise for scientific measurement. The length of the day changes, after all. We couldn't very well pin our measurements to this value which changes on a yearly basis, so it was decided that "one second" equals 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom. This is the "second" that is used when we define the speed of light to be 299,792,458 meters per second. If the Egpytians had a measure of time that was even a little different, for whatever reason, then their "speed of light" doesn't equal 299,792,458.

As far as I can tell, these "harmonics of light" are meaningless gibberish... A harmonic must be some multiple of a base frequency. Depending on your choice of fundamental frequency, literally any wavelength could be a harmonic. What are their units? How did they decide that "144 is light"? What does this even mean?

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 11:23 AM

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 03:57 PM

This is great and all, and 86400 / 60 does equal 1440. So why must a civilization pick this fraction of a solar day when determining their unit of time measurement? Is there absolutely no other possible fraction of a solar day that is as meaningful? And even so, is this the same reasoning used by the Eleventh General Conference on Weights and Measures when they settled on a standardized second?

You're concentrating on the measurement of seconds.

You could also point out that, for this constant to be "encoded" into the great Pyramid, the Ancient Egyptians would have had to have established the system of latitude and longitude (at least, latitude) that was first invented (with a different system) by the Greeks in the year 3 BC.

Latitude can be measured by finding the angle the sun or stars make above the horizon. However, we know how the Ancient Egyptians measured angles - degrees, minutes and seconds wasn't it.

The claimant needs to first show that the AE's had any sort of "grid-type" locational methodology whatsoever prior to making the claim that the speed of light - in meters per second (as you have pointed out) is involved in where the Great Pyramid was located for construction.

I anxiously await any such attempt to establish such a locational system among the Ancient Egyptian civilization of 2600 BC.

Harte

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 06:51 PM

Originally posted by Harte

The claimant needs to first show that the AE's had any sort of "grid-type" locational methodology whatsoever prior to making the claim that the speed of light - in meters per second (as you have pointed out) is involved in where the Great Pyramid was located for construction.

I anxiously await any such attempt to establish such a locational system among the Ancient Egyptian civilization of 2600 BC.

Harte

Obviously I'm not going to be able to establish how they did anything, because there's no physical or historical evidence. All I could do would be demonstrate why they might have picked certain numerical constants from the structure of numbers and/or the motions of the sky (which might actually take me a long time to answer because I don't really know). I have a feeling it's possible to derive much about the behaviour of the solar system and the configuration of the planets from numbers alone. It is possible that written evidence of this kind of knowledge was simply purged at some point and people forgot.

I have no idea how they could establish a latitude system which matches our current approach (but haven't really studied how latitude is formulated). But it is definitely a fact that the numbers 2997924 can be found on that pyramid, using a modern system, and anyone can check this via google maps.

Seems pretty remarkable to me considering how obsessed the ancients were with the concept of the divinity of light and the worship of the sun. But I guess people who don't care about numbers, physical constants or universal laws will not find this remarkable.
edit on 22-5-2012 by yampa because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 09:42 PM

Originally posted by AlchemicalMonocular

Originally posted by murkraz
..what is old news is subjective..

Google "speed of light" great pyramid and if you had you would find this is old news and nothing subjective about it. That similarity has been proposed and discussed for well more than a half-century.

I understand your need to argue this easily made point in the attempt to keep your thread - and ego -alive but the MOF is that, as I have said twice before, now as succinct as I can, no one gives a sh\$\$. Old, new, revelatory (which it isn't), etc.

Move on.

Unfortunately I hadn't come across the apparent speed of light details until two documentaries that it took for me to absorb this stance and the supposed calculations.

Clearly it is subjective "when" a person acquires info themselves. Speaking generally, then yes, this is old news, but I've always found those shouting old news, to be annoying.

Just because such things are old and swept under the rug as you see it yourself, means little. In fact, you seem to be giving off the impression of some ego by reiterating that this is old, and no one gives a crap, despite the people before and after your post who have found the details new and interesting. Like I said at the beginning of my post, "I would like to hear impressions of these "finds" and the accuracy of the claims involved."

Why? Because people find it interesting. Stop speaking for yourself over others.

Whatever problem you seem to have, you can take it elsewhere if it bothers you so much.

posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 06:45 PM

maybe so, but there are still ignorant people that don't know any of this information at all!
let other people learn aswell bro

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 04:47 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 05:12 PM

As stated in the timewave thread,.
How is it related to thePyramid

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 05:45 PM

Originally posted by murkraz
Honestly, it takes another level of ignorance to insinuate that farmers and "normal town people" encoded the speed of light and other principles in their, already advanced and complicated structure.

Ignorance on another level. I'll just never understand it. It's just naturally something I cannot accept.

Ok, accept this, then. Consider this stupid "speed of light" claim:

10) If you draw two circles, one inside, and one outside the base of the Great Pyramid. If you subtract the length of the inside circle from the length of the outside circle, you get the Speed of Light at 299,792458, this is the number in the pyramid: 299,79

You'll notice the OP doesn't say 299,79 (sic) what. Meters? Pyramid inches? Cubits?

But even so, the speed of light is 299,792 meters per second, more or less. Now, the lack of units in the original claim aside, I'm pretty damned sure the Egyptians of Khufu's time didn't use meters OR seconds. The meter wasn't even defined until 1791. So how, exactly, are pyramidists claiming that the thing magically encodes the speed of light using units that weren't going to be invented for 5000 years or so?

The answer is, you can't. They're woo artists using random relationships they find to try to frantically scratch out some meaning that isn't there.

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 05:48 PM

Originally posted by yampa

You are wrong if you think that seconds and meters are not based on constants. The physical phenomena which scientists sample to produce these units are chosen because they are constant. You don't get good systems of measurement by choosing non-constant bases.

Any fixed length is fixed. The meter's length was arbitrarlly chosen. As is the duration of a second - there's no innate reason to choose that fraction of a day.

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 05:54 PM

Did anybody catch in the video this screenshot? Anybody have an idea what it is?

Look at 24:16 in the video of the original poster. there is an object hovering over the pyramid. It looks a little behind and to the left in the image.

posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 10:33 PM

I've been a lurker here for some time and finally decided to create an account to respond to your posts. I think your assumption that our measure of time today is somehow unique from how it has been measured in the past. I'm no expert by any means but the IIRC, the Egyptian calendar was 365 days long and days were split into 24 hours.

If you consider that the second was originally based on the "mean solar day" something that was measurable by the Egyptians, then I find it completely plausible that the mathematical geniuses behind the design of the pyramids could have come to the same measurement of the second.

Since our calendars are based on calendars created by our ancestors, I believe it is foolish to think that our finer measurements of the passing of time are that drastically different.

posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 10:37 PM

Originally posted by th3dudeabides

Did anybody catch in the video this screenshot? Anybody have an idea what it is?

Look at 24:16 in the video of the original poster. there is an object hovering over the pyramid. It looks a little behind and to the left in the image.

It is a hot air balloon. You can see them in the clips seconds before that as well...

posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 10:58 PM

Originally posted by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
Revelations of the Pyramids

the video to watch....

This is such old news, I can't believe that ATS mods still allow for threads like this to remain.

Some of us our new members and just don't have the time to sift through literally thousands of threads from the past 13 years (hope I got that right). I enjoy reading threads like this, so relax and move on to the next thread if you don't like it!

posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 11:00 PM

Originally posted by wahoorider

I've been a lurker here for some time and finally decided to create an account to respond to your posts. I think your assumption that our measure of time today is somehow unique from how it has been measured in the past. I'm no expert by any means but the IIRC, the Egyptian calendar was 365 days long and days were split into 24 hours.

Well, since a year actually is 365 days, that particular division cannot be surprising, right? However, though it's true that the Ancient Egyptians knew there were 365 days in a year, they set their own calendar at 360 days. This didn't change until after the Romans (I believe it was) took over.

But it's true that the Egyptians divided a day into 24 hours - 12 dark and 12 light.

What this means, though, is the length of Ancient Egyptian hours changed with the seasons since, for example, the summer days were longer than 12 of our hours. IOW, In Ancient Egypt, hours did not have any fixed length. The Greeks established that system later.

Originally posted by wahooriderIf you consider that the second was originally based on the "mean solar day" something that was measurable by the Egyptians, then I find it completely plausible that the mathematical geniuses behind the design of the pyramids could have come to the same measurement of the second.

I'd be interested in seeing your reasoning there, since minutes and seconds are the results of dividing by 60 while hours result from dividing by 24.

Not to mention the previously mentioned fact - okay, I'll mention it - that daylight hours in the Summer were longer for the Egyptians than they were in the Winter.

Originally posted by wahooriderSince our calendars are based on calendars created by our ancestors, I believe it is foolish to think that our finer measurements of the passing of time are that drastically different.

You'd be right. We've always lived on a planet that has 365 (and a quarter) days per year.

Harte

top topics

46