How to build a Great Pyramid...(and have fun doing it!)

How did the Egyptians build such great pyramids and seemingly so relatively quickly, questions that puzzle many, but the answer is not so difficult and is well evidenced.


The answer is that building pyramids for the Egyptians was a fun activity, apart from cutting all the blocks out of the bedrock and dragging them to the base on low level ramps which wasn't so much fun, but after that raising the blocks to the then current construction level was.


The method involved was a system of counter balance involving wedge shaped platforms running up and down on opposite faces of the pyramid, set against wooden lean to ramp supports on the face of the pyramid, a sort of cable car system. Thus when blocks were load onto one platform at the base of the pyramid face, at the top of the current working level counter weight would be added to the opposite platform, to make the one descend and the other rise, this could simply have involved workers piling on to it for a ride down the pyramid face, like a fairground activity

All the system required was sound joinery and strong high quality ropes, which are well evidenced, a very long rope is just as strong as a short one, and so with this method blocks would fly up the face as fast as you could load and unload them.



That this method was used is evidenced from the time of the Red Pyramid onward, in that there are signs of a pushing in effect on the centre line of the four faces, as one would expect if that is were loads were transfered up and down upon it, this is to the extent that there is a slight turning in effect along the whole pyramid face, as when loads were brought to the current working level and unloaded there would be a slight pushing in of the line of blocks that were then unfixed.





The great advantage of the method is that you would be uploading blocks to the central point on all four faces, with two systems in operation on opposing faces, blocks ever going up, workers ever going up and down, you could maybe charge them for the privilege

The slight turning in of the line on all the Giza pyramids has been noted since aerial photography first observed this, not a desired woo woo aspect of design, but consequence of construction methodology employed.

I've always fantasized about building my own Pyramid, and how I would light it, and provide refrigeration for it. Very cool.

I should build a small pyramid here over the underground river. It would just be a shell though, with a sauna inside.

My kids would love it. It would need to be as strong as a bomb shelter in case a hundred twenty five foot tree fell on it. What a way to kill two birds with one stone.

anything can be fun once after moving the 1000 block bet they wernt having fun.
O did they have cotton candy venders and over priced coffee shops?
hey is my 11 year old met teh hight requirments to ride a block>
O I also hear they are redising block movers to reach speeds of 1.5 mph WOW

reply to post by Kantzveldt


There are an estimated 2.3 million blocks that make the great pyramid. What i have trouble wrapping my head around is, how long would it take to quarry 1 block on average. Or 100 blocks.

If we guess 1 hr on average to quarry, shape, move, and set each stone. (Im using 1 hr as a standard because its a nice round number. )
It would take approx 2.3m hrs. To build just the great pyramid
There are 8,760 hrs in 1 year
Divided into 2.3m = 263yrs.

So how long does it take to quary and set 1 block?

reply to post by Woodcarver



I don't really know, but most of the core blocks weren't finished to any degree, just separated from the bedrock and knocked into basic shape, but certainly time consuming and labour intensive, so i think that the hardest task and then dragging them to the face of the pyramid, but as for getting them up i think that the easiest part, but the one that people struggle with most normally.


reply to post by rickymouse



Yes everyone should build a pyramid using the method i have suggested, overweight people will come in particularly useful, and after keep having to run back to the top of the pyramid perhaps not so overweight after completion, thus great benefit to the health of society.



reply to post by midnightstar


Of course the blocks would rise at speeds proportionate to the number of people providing counter balance, too many the block is shot into outer space and the people crash fatally into the ground, so yes safety regulations would be important.

Woodcarver
reply to post by Kantzveldt

 

There are an estimated 2.3 million blocks that make the great pyramid. What i have trouble wrapping my head around is, how long would it take to quarry 1 block on average. Or 100 blocks.

If we guess 1 hr on average to quarry, shape, move, and set each stone. (Im using 1 hr as a standard because its a nice round number. )
It would take approx 2.3m hrs. To build just the great pyramid
There are 8,760 hrs in 1 year
Divided into 2.3m = 263yrs.

So how long does it take to quary and set 1 block?

a few questions you forgot to address.
How many of these "slaves" would need to climb onto a platform at the other end of this rope in order to counter balance a 200 ton block of stone and raise it into place?
How big would the platform be and were do you get enough material to build at least four of them?
Would there be any "down time" if there to many skinny people and not enough fatties?

reply to post by teamcommander


If each slave wieghs avg 185lbs it would take 2222.22222 of them. If they take up avg 1sqft that area is about 48'x48' unless they stack themselves in a pyramidic shape, which would seriously reduce thier footprint.

It is said that many of the stones came from a quarry that was 500 miles from the build spot in giza. They were most likely transported via the nile. You would need an average estimated speed of the nile river to know how many hours that would be to deliver 1 barge full. And then how many blocks on 1 barge.

I love math. It is irrefutable.

reply to post by teamcommander



For the large stones above the Kings chamber i tend to agree with the theory of a counter balance method using the Grand Gallery and perhaps stone as ballast, but for an average pyramid block maybe around 15 average weight people would raise it, so only around the floor space of a large elevator required.



reply to post by Woodcarver



That doesn't look right at all 2222.2222 people....!!!...i'm not talking about raising all the blocks in one go.

Most of the stones came from quarries' very close, the granite blocks did require special consideration as i mention above.


Again the physical evidence remains that weight was transferred directly up the centre of each pyramid face, that this was directly impacted upon, it's simply a question of accepting the evidence of one's own eyes.

If you balance a mountain on a pivot, anyone can turn it easily. Tillies have been 'round for quite a while and in principle, you could lift any weight with the right configuration. Then you have counterweight cranes of different kinds, and of course, and I am amazed noone seems to have thought of it before: Elephants.... And the place is full of sand, so they can rise the ground easily as they get higher, using packs of elephants to pull the blocks into place. And when they were finished they could just dig out the pyramid....

Hi ...I read this article a few days ago and wanted to add a link ..I found it interesting and plausible . In Control at the Pyramids - an architect’s and builder’s answer to how the pyramids were built blog.world-mysteries.com...

reply to post by the2ofusr1


I am not calling your architect's work plagiate, but Ole Jorgen Bryn, architect at NTNU University in Trondheim, Norway has proposed much the same solution. As it turns out, this is how architects would do it, not just one architect. It's not groundbraking ideas.

Check out www.ntnu.edu... or do a search for Ole Jorgen Bryn

This man seems to have fun moving big heavy objects. Tons of stone and also pole barns by himself.

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by the2ofusr1


This goes over the math of the shape but never talks about the techniques used to make or move the stones. Read the comments at the bottom, they hilariously tear this entire page apart.

reply to post by Kantzveldt


I don't quite fully understand the method you are suggesting. I understand the principle of counter weight lifting, but I can't visualise this process properly. So, let me start from the beginning - with the great pyramid.

All the different miracles aside, lets assume the ancient Egyptian builders had levelled out a 230m^2 area and had all their 2 million blocks within the construction site. Then they lay the first layer, and lets assume this is a full square layer of 2m height (let's say that's one stones height). Now, they need to lift the next set of stones atleast 2m high from the pyramid foundation. You are suggesting they use wedge ramps at opposite ends of this square area? Like a cable car system? Sorry, please elaborate. But lets use the concept of a counter weight pivot or something as such. To lift the lightest blocks in the pyramid (2tonnes/2000kg) they'd need a counterweight of approx. 21 massive 100kg geezers. It's achievable. So, for the sake of simplicity, they layed the whole second layer with 2 tonne blocks, with the working level now standing at 4m tall. The average block weight in the great pyramid is about 15 tonnes (conservative figure) so lets work with that from now on for simplicity's sake. At this point you'd need approx. 150 massive a 100kg/225lb guys as a counter weight. Whatever structure was supporting these load shifts had to be immaculate, but lets ignore that. For the heaviest blocks at 70 tonnes you are talking at the very least 700 massive 100kg plus people. It's looking very unrealistic at that point. Building the whole structure that will support and allow this would take considerable effort itself, let alone the pyramid.

I guess in theory they could use people to continuously lift 2 or so tonne stones and use those stones as additional counter weight, and I'm also guessing that's your method at its essence, right? But when you try to visualise how that would work considering the actual physical size of these blocks and the fact you'd need this system operating effectively on every level of the pyramid. It would have been an unworldly task regardless, especially as they had to flipping lift 2-70 tonne stones in the first place! That's the real mystery of the pyramids. You can't just slide it onto ramps lol, you'd need perfect tolerances for that. Even getting those 70 tonne blocks an inch off the ground would been utterly amazing for them to do - with apparently copper tools, a windlass and perhaps pulley knowledge (though never actually documented).

I mean, you say most of the stones weren't cut to a degree lol. You understand that just shaping ONE of those granite stones in an extremely rough but rectangular shape would take an enormous amount of time. Your copper tool would and should probably fracture a couple times on each block, and it could take days for one man to even get close to shaping one block like that.

Then, considering a good amount of blocks are done to an extremely impressive degree, this would take considerably more time and an exponentially amount more of skill. The casing stones are flat to 1/100th of an inch! They were placed with an average accuracy of 5/1000th of an inch with obviously an intentionally part of that being gap for cement/mortar. That is extremely impressive, and requires great work spent on many individual blocks. The height and base lengths of the great pyramid are chosen on purpose, resulting in a 230.4m (ah good ol' metres) long base and a 146.5m tall height (with its capstone). This isn't random. They used royal cubits that started at 0.523m length and went up in small increments. This is the result of Pi - Phi^2 = 0.523, and they used this to establish a measurement ratio (derived from the golden ratio) of 1 to 0.523, which is infant the royal cubit to metre conversion.


So what does that mean? That means the actual specific end height and base width of the pyramid was more important to them than ease of construction. This required odd cubit dimensions which actually puzzle led experts for quite a while, as they did not understand why they would not pick easier more round dimensions, ensuring equal size blocks can be used uniformly upwards and so forth. Instead, they put extra effort into each stone to ensure those dimensions are achieved. There couldn't have been any #ing about, a few bad tolerance gaps will add up and give a significantly off value. You might think that's just a mathematical coincidence, but 1/6 of pi is 0.5236m. The kings chamber measures 5.24m x 10.47m, and hence the perimeter equates to 10pi to 3 decimal place accuracy. There's are but just a few legitimate examples. So, I think it's safe to say they were going for precision for atleast a good majority of the construction work, not just banging any old roughly rectangular blocks and sliding them into place on a nice, sunny day. This pyramid was to be perfect.

Taking all those factors into account, not to mention quarry sites as far as 500 miles away were used for the great pyramid, it would probably take many years just to prepare all the blocks and transport them. I'd personally say, for the great pyramid, about 10 blocks a week completed the whole process on average. That is an extremely generous figure, but hey lets work with it. That includes everything from cutting out to shaping to polishing to ensuring dimensions to transporting many miles and then to actually place it. That gives a rate of 40 a month approx, or 480 a year approx. Heh. 2million blocks? I don't even need to do the math, it says it is not possible. They had to have been more advanced to some extent IMO. Not over the top technology but perhaps (or likely) more advanced than the ancient Greeks (who definitely had cranes, pulleys, screws, etc etc). But with the current paradigm - copper tools + windlass + a counter weight system, I honestly think 10 blocks a week is what you're looking at.

Of course, the more individual blocks you have being worked on, the more you can have done in one time frame. But judging by the sizes of these quarries, the sizes of the blocks, the actual strength/stamina and technique needed to smack a granite block into 1/100ths of degrees of accuracy, the lack of evidence for any seriously large amount of workers in these areas at those times etc etc I don't think we are talking about the 1000s if whipped, unfed slaves we were once taught - no way, absurdity. If it were engineers and builders, that 10 a week will rise, but even then you would need 1000s of specially skilled and talented, physical fit workers who knew what they were doing and did it in the most efficient manner. At best I would say 100 blocks are fully processed start to finish, and even then that would take (let's assume 5000 blocks a year) about 230 years.

That's the real mysteries for me, even though a lot of it is a mystery in general. Something has to budge, we have to either admit the ancient Egyptians were far more advanced in mathematics, engineering, construction, available technology and so forth OR that they didn't build the pyramids. It boils down to that for me. We have of course surpassed them greatly in terms of technology (maybe not other things) but these feats cannot be overlooked. The rest of the world was practically still walking around in animal furs at this point in time (bar Sumer).

Peace

reply to post by SPYvsSPY


Yea. Wally is def on to something. I dont doubt that this tech would work, even on the much larger scales of the blocks at giza, or more probably a combination of several already proposed techniques, but how much time does this add to the overall project. And it doesnt really explain the accuracy of the butted joints.

I dont doubt that it was built by regular human beings. I just see a lot of inconsistencies in what is considered the OS. Especially the timeline. And the interpretation of the written work.

reply to post by DazDaKing


I agree with everything you just said especially the things that should be ignored, because you have to ignore those things to move forward with that hypothesis. If you stop to think about them you just get lost in befuttlement because you realize that it just doesnt add up.

What we can see is the awe inducing attention to detail. The obviosly painstaking process of shaping, moving, and setting these stones. Dimensions and tolerances that give insight to the basic principles of geometry and natural form.

What shines like a beacon to me, are all of the obvious exclusions of the Official story. Things they pass off as coincidence or just never even address. You tend to notice these glaring inconsistencies when there is an active agenda to cover up the truth. Whatever that may be. But when obvious discrepancies emerge it is usually because some one is lieing.

reply to post by Woodcarver


Thanks man, I just read your earlier post and can see you had a similar way of thinking about it.

The other day I saw something that genuinely made me 'snap' into releasing how real the cover-up is. I decided to randomly watch a documentary on the Sphinx, as it is a ridiculous thing. They didnt build this thing from the ground up, they cut a massssive square area out of the ground, significantly deep and built it from within that enclosure. I mean, all carbon dating tests on its outside give approx. 2500 BC era but the inner material and limestone core push it back to 4500-5000 BC! Not to mention an inventory 'Stella' found from the 4th dynasty period for the Sphinx that showed it was renovation work. Why are we ignoring the science and other evidence? We are doing the whole 'flat earth' thing again because we're/they're accustomed to an idea they don't want to let go for whatever reason (any of the 'sins' basically).

But anyway, this documentary was based around the geologists who first bought up the weather erosion problem. The Sphinx and its whole enclosure show rain erosion clearly, yet the outer area and the smaller limestone periods only show wind erosion. It seems to be generally accepted that Egypts been pretty dry since around. 10,000-5,000 BC. So the logic follows that the Sphinx should be at least ~5000 years old. They even did tests showing the saturation was twice as deep under the front of the sphinx (12 ft) compared to the rear. That means the front is older by atleast twice. Hence, the dates 2500 and 5000 BC crop up again.

You may of heard of this already, as I have a few times before seeing this, but the evidence really is obvious when you see the erosion up close and get comparisons. One of the geologists is a Harvard student who fully understood the implications of his research, so I trust his scientific method of the other tests to an extent, plus I know that various other intelligent and open minded geologists have backed this. They got blasted by the academic community, but the part that got me was seeing the 'Egyptologists' talk lol.

The director of the Giza plateau was just rambling loudly about how much nonsense these theories are and they have conclusive evidence Khufu built it in 2500 BC. But it is the way he presents himself, with that simple minded anger, and no actual detail of evidence but just the use of key words that made me release they really are perpetuating a lie on purpose. It's obvious isn't it. When you have scientific data after data, not to mention historical references (Herectodus with an Egyptian high priest) saying the great pyramid and sphinx were built by Shepard kings before the 1st dynasty - it makes you wonder doesn't it.

There's conclusive proof there's a rectangular chamber some metres under the front of the Sphinx, yet as far as I'm aware no attempt has been to reach it, the Giza authorities won't allow it. That is where the Hall of Records are meant to have been. It pisses me off because they think we're dumb. And if they have and it was 'empty', I simply could not buy it. Something's being kept secret for whatever reason. It all reminds me of the Vatican and whatever crazy history and knowledge is locked up in those archives.

I recently went to Teotihuacan and stood before the Pyramid of the Sun and Moon. Spent the day exploring and considering, avoiding annoying vendors lol as well, but until you have actually seen and touched and stood on these massive structures, believing that with the tools available at that time they did this, I say no. Nope, nada.

You can lever, pulley all you want. No theories I've read or heard explain what I saw there, we are missing something...

Anyway, Heading to Peru soon, I'm hooked. Lol

reply to post by tayton


got to be "Coral Castle Related",,did a look at that years ago,,,pretty amazing,,same scale.

head scratcher.


and it was for love,,,

should do a movie.