Why are the pyramids built with the sized stones that they are?

If we were pyramid builders why would we choose to have such a stone of such a size? What is the reasoning for this? Is it integrity, do smaller stones break and collapse under immense weight? Is it something more? Is there a special number of stones used? Etc?

reply to post by FreeMason


Once I heard this interesting theory that the blocks where moved by resonance. By sound and because of the vibration the stones would lose mass and hover, or something like that.

Well maybe the stones had to be a certain seize ( think volume ) to pick up the frequency. per example a smaller block would have a higher freq because it was less of volume.

Good question!

reply to post by FreeMason

Because someone was sending a message forward in time. We just haven't figured out the whole message yet. Probably, because we aren't quite as smart as they hoped we would be by now.

I recommend anyone interested spend some time watching the below documentary that details the evolution and engineering of pyramid building in Egypt.



The first pyramid builder was Sneferu, and there's sufficient record of Sneferu's first attempts at pyramid building with the first at Medium that collapsed, then what's known as the Bent Pyramid, and finally The Red Pyramid.

Afterwards, we get an established trend of consecutive rulers building pyramids in the early dynasties where Khufu built the Great Pyramid.

Later on, due economy of labor, and expendable wealth, the pyramid building trend stopped and we see monument building in sculptures, and temples as per Ramses.

None of it is really all that "mysterious" as many fringe sources might want one to think. There's a wealth of legitimate documentation, scholarship, and study onhand for anyone to review given enough time and real interest.

reply to post by FreeMason


Smaller stones are easier to move than bigger stones?

reply to post by FreeMason


THREADS oops like this are what took me to the internet for the answers but like the pyramid every one you think you answer you create 3 more .

were they poured concrete / were they lifted by sound / pulled by slaves .
are there bigger pyramids in china being hidden by the goverment because blond haired blue eyed people do not go down well over there ?? .

the history we are told is xxxx to put it mildly this is not up for discussion in my head as i just go bla bla bla mr hawass .

you can do wonders with water people but a stream/ river will move 1 mile east in a 1000 years and as velikovsky wisely put in worlds in collision in 1950 has the sun always risen in the east .

do not forget they took that book of the shelves and burned it ?? who is the nazis now then .

the gods of eden by andrew collins is a fair read for those that are interested on sound technology

I understand it to be the crumble factor. The smaller the building stone, the easier it is to dislocate it , especially in an earthquake. The same principle is used in current construction using stone. While small is easier to work with, it does not stand up to vibration.

Additionally, the Egyptians rarely used mortar, which is absolutely required using small stone/brick.

What is there so hard to understand?

Naturally, the stones would be the biggest possible while it's still possible to transport them. (Eg. on a boat on the Nile)

You can't built pyramids which last 4000 years with "small" stones which any grave robber may just carry away etc.
The ancients built structures with LARGE stones so the structures would last, obviously.

Klassified
reply to post by FreeMason

 

Because someone was sending a message forward in time. We just haven't figured out the whole message yet. Probably, because we aren't quite as smart as they hoped we would be by now.

We have a winner. We're too stupid to figure it all out.

Klassified
reply to post by FreeMason

 

Because someone was sending a message forward in time. We just haven't figured out the whole message yet. Probably, because we aren't quite as smart as they hoped we would be by now.

read decoding the great pyramid by peter le mesurier .

he had too much time and a tape measure on his hands .

i never got passed measuring my winkie .

i am a sagitarius half man half horse i did not want to pull the P IN MY AVATAR so i just put in a BULL .

xxxk it is saturday and i am drunk again game on

The pyramids are 14 stories high. Think about that aspect alone.

A friend of mine is a contractor and visited Egypt and the pyramids with his wife. When he returned, the first thing he said to me was, "nobody can tell me those pyramids were built by humans back in 3000 BC. To move those mammoth stones which weighed an average of 2.5 tons and lifting them just 2 stories would be a feat at today's technological standards!" He went on to say that it boggled his mind seeing how tight the joints were and how over 2 million stones were cut and lifted to such heights.

For all the theories that have tried to explain how these pyramids were built, doesn't it say something to the fact that even the brightest engineering minds can't agree on how they were built. That speaks volumes.

Emerys
reply to post by FreeMason

 

Smaller stones are easier to move than bigger stones?

I think you missed the point to the question.

The stones are much BIGGER than one would have assumed would be used for construction of such pyramid.

NoRulesAllowed

What is there so hard to understand?

Naturally, the stones would be the biggest possible while it's still possible to transport them. (Eg. on a boat on the Nile)

You can't built pyramids which last 4000 years with "small" stones which any grave robber may just carry away etc.
The ancients built structures with LARGE stones so the structures would last, obviously.

edit on 62013RuSaturdayAmerica/Chicago02PMSaturdaySaturday by NoRulesAllowed because: (no reason given)

So "hard to understand"? For one, the construction of the pyramid has baffled man for thousands of years. Sure, every generation you get two opposites. Those who like to mystify it exponentially, and those who like to pretend they KNOW how it was built. BOTH are likely WRONG.

It IS a mystery, regardless of what anyone would like to believe.

The question is, why use such large stones? Your explanation makes literally no sense, because stones HALF THE SIZE of the current ones could have been used, and it likely still would have stood the test of time, and no mortal would have been able to come CLOSE to lifting it.

Emerys
reply to post by FreeMason

 

Smaller stones are easier to move than bigger stones?

I don't trust that pharoah, he didn't have big enough stones...

See, they were all about penis envy. "Look how BIG my pointy thing is!"

I dunno to be honest, I'd say it's to do with structure. Mass to weigt. I cant build a fire let alone a stone structure so I'm completely at the whim of anyones ideas.

Interesting question tho OP.

Maybe smaller ones were built long before, but as they were smaller stones they eroded over time to nothing, and this was the concern of someone who was about to enter the after life and wanted his abode to remain stable for ever.

WeRpeons
The pyramids are 14 stories high. Think about that aspect alone.

A friend of mine is a contractor and visited Egypt and the pyramids with his wife. When he returned, the first thing he said to me was, "nobody can tell me those pyramids were built by humans back in 3000 BC. To move those mammoth stones which weighed an average of 2.5 tons and lifting them just 2 stories would be a feat at today's technological standards!" He went on to say that it boggled his mind seeing how tight the joints were and how over 2 million stones were cut and lifted to such heights.

For all the theories that have tried to explain how these pyramids were built, doesn't it say something to the fact that even the brightest engineering minds can't agree on how they were built. That speaks volumes.

It says two things to me.

1: your friend wouldn't last very long in a world where things are not done for them.
2: that we have no need to build pyramids so we don't put the effort into building them. We've sent people to the moon. Tell that to an Egyptian 3000 years ago and he'd boil you for being a demon.

They were not stupid, but they were also living in a time where if you had a problem, you developed novel ways to over come it. You didn't throw your hands in the air and go "Naww, that's stupid. I can't do that. I'm going to the pub." - they had nasty people with whips and stuff saying "Yes you are. Go on, it's not that hard." and thinkers with the ability to think laterally would devise ways to achieve the impossible.

We have no such need. In fact, the worst thing we have to put up with is getting that parking space before that tosser from Finance gets it, and you have to walk 20 meters in the rain to get to the office before you can grab your coffee mocha from the coffee machine and have a ciggy with Mick and Alicia before you go in and start doing helpdesk.

That's it. Why would people who spend their entire day either in automatic pilot mode because every single thing is done for them, or in barely there mode because they instantly need something superficial, be able to comprehend the mind set of people who build massive structures.

I look at a sky scraper. I don't go "Phwoar I couldn't do that. No way can humans do that!" because I've never seen a crane. We don't know how they did things because we don't need to do the same things.

There are some tribes on this planet who have intricate subtle ways of doing things. Small little steps that take on no obvious meaning. But put together, the bigger picture comes into focus, and they manage to catch a massive bounty of (insert thing)... thinking of it as a direct issue, we'd never come up with it. But to someone who lives it, they have come up with it, do it, and it's not space magic!

Other than that, it might be aliens. But I wish, like god, they'd left us a little bit of evidence other than our vastly complex imaginations...

reply to post by supermarket2012


Also it is a sad fact that a lot of the stones were removed, the coverings were removed, over time by various people.

I'd love to be able to see some of the ancient structures on our planet, as they originally were. We see old stones and crumbling limestone.. but they were supposedly very impressive.

The only real thing that gives us these wonders is time. I imagine at the time they were built, people looked at them the same way we look at tall odd looking buildings. Fleeting "Wow that's huge." turns into "Yeah I've seen it..." and then they all die.. the next lot come along "Wow that's huge. I can build something with that!" and proceed to ruin it.

If it's still there in any form by time we get to it, the "Wow that's huge!" factor is accompanied by "Wow that's really old too!" and we put it in a book.

I wonder what things we will leave behind for people in another 3000 years. Those half human deformed nuclear mutants.. they've probably learnt to devour calcium rich lime stone as sustenance and man then the pyramids will be in danger!

I respectfully disagree. I don't build scyscrapers for a living, but I know enough to understand the feat. First of all, scientists and engineers HAVE tried building pyramids, on a much smaller scale I might add. They failed. Second, the pyramids at Giza aren't even that big when compared to a couple others. Your assertion that whips and threats (i.e. fear) would somehow motivate people (with levers and pullies or whatever you believe they did this with) isn't very convincing. I'm not saying we couldn't build a pyramid today if we REALLY had to. I do realize we do things differently as well. All I'm saying is that, given what I see from my perch, it's a lot more likely that the architects/builders were more advanced. It's easier for me to believe they had better tools/knowledge than what we have today. Regardless of what we believe, the evidence of how they were built left with the people. AFAIK, not a single tool has been found to suggest how the pyramids were built. THAT is even MORE interesting to me.

reply to post by FreeMason


This thread will get jumped by the ATS resident pyramid "experts" or the "I saw a video/read a book/talked to someone that explains it all.

So I will call this out from the start, I am not an expert. Just another interested layman.

The pyramids are built with various sized stones with various degrees of finishing. For instance the outer sides are dressed beautifully while the inner bulk of the pyramids are quarry rough. The roof stones of the tomb are immense and come from some distance while the support stones elsewhere were quarried on site.

My question is why would they cut and move stones so large? I am not on board with UFO's moving them but some dudes pulling them with ropes? For me, the same level of 'yeah right' on both theories.

Some Eqyptologist moves one small stone 10 feet and extrapolating from there does not cut it. I have said it before and I will put you to sleep again, just because you can grow a lettuce plant in your window sill does not mean you are instantly an expert on running an agribusiness.

WeRpeons
The pyramids are 14 stories high. Think about that aspect alone.

A friend of mine is a contractor and visited Egypt and the pyramids with his wife. When he returned, the first thing he said to me was, "nobody can tell me those pyramids were built by humans back in 3000 BC. To move those mammoth stones which weighed an average of 2.5 tons and lifting them just 2 stories would be a feat at today's technological standards!" He went on to say that it boggled his mind seeing how tight the joints were and how over 2 million stones were cut and lifted to such heights.

For all the theories that have tried to explain how these pyramids were built, doesn't it say something to the fact that even the brightest engineering minds can't agree on how they were built. That speaks volumes.

row row yer boat gently down the stream [ LIFE IS BUT A DREAM ] NUFF SAID .

HOW MUCH WATER HAS BEEN PUMPED OUT OF THAT AREA ON A DAILY BASIS ??? .
BIT LIKE THE NATIONAL DEBT OF THE U.S .Aaaaaa.

a.t.s let us SPONCER A . MEMBER ===== SCOTT CRIGHTON .

I AM A MUPPET but i can carry this mans bags [ ken]
i pay my own way in life do not suffer fools gladly and have read all the old stuff [ petrie tec ]

the hassle in egypt at the moment is PLANNED

when i asked the 2nd in command of the british embassy at the time for DIGGING RIGHTS ] YE YOUNG AND DAFT PEOPLE .

i am a big guy i can carry bags folks 6-3 [of pure scottish daftness] but a gentleman i am on the planet for a good time not a long one .

i ken the word for BRIBE [ BAK SHEES ] DYSLEXIC ]


I CAN GET YOU ANYWHERE A.T.S viz vest na .

anywhere ??? with MY ID .

ye talk is cheap FOLKS put your money where your mouth is .


but BUT WE ARE 100S OF YEARS BEHIND THE AGENDA ].


allah ack barr and all that xxxx

reply to post by FreeMason


The size of the stones was dictated by the design of the structure.

Which of course begs a few other immediate questions:

Who really designed the structure?

What was the structure really designed for?

And that's just for starters obviously...