How were the pyramids in Egypt built?

[cladking]

@ElvisL1ves

You get a lot of that at state funerals, even today, yes.

According to Egyptologists the PT are incantation and magic, not ritual.

[cladking]

“Mḫnti-’irti” is khenty irty who is the hermaphroditic god(dess) of the mehet weret cow which caught the water used to build the king…"

@ElvisL1ves

Yep, that’s pretty absurd, all right.

This is precisely whart Egyptologists believe.

How ironic this is about as close as they ever get to being right in a right handed way.

[GIGObuster]

@cladking

I’m confident you consider this more “hand waving”. But I can duplicate everything I’ve done.

:rolleyes:

Sure you can, but until others can replicate it is just running in circles.

@cladking

I believe anyone could follow the same path of logic and see the samne evidence.

The numbers of the ones you have convinced here are close to zero, and that is being generous.

@cladking

There are no experiments to prove me right or wrong but by the ancient standards I believe this really is “theory” and not just another all too human individual suffering some strange confirmation bias.

Yeah, never mind that the ancient Egyptians quoted the PT for funerary reasons and not for watery tarts or floating structures in the air or suave Tom Collins cocktails.

[cladking]

@ElvisL1ves

Some things never go out of style.

There was a lot about not set(ting) the arms of nut.

1321a. Nut (is) she who cannot be fertilized without putting (down) her arms,.

The geyser can’t spray into the sky (nut) unless the arms of the sky reach into the earth and embrace it.

782c. The whole earth lies (lit. is) under thee; thou hast taken possession of it;
782d. thou encompassest the earth and all things (therein) in thine arms;
782e. mayest thou establish this N. in thee as an imperishable star.

Perhaps “embrace” is a scientific term for “encompasseth”. There’s a great deal I don’t know yet. This is a completely different way of thinking and everyone just assumes they thought like we do but were sun addled.

Their thought was very organic and often even orgasmic. They had several terms and glyphs for the latter.

[ElvisL1ves]

It should actually have been surprising if none of those hieroglyphics were porn, I suppose.

But doesn’t that mean you should consider, er, figurative meanings for “geyser”?

[Trinopus]

It was high time for this conversation to get dirty.

[cladking]

@ElvisL1ves

It should actually have been surprising if none of those hieroglyphics were porn, I suppose.

But doesn’t that mean you should consider, er, figurative meanings for “geyser”?

Well, sure, except this geyser’s efflux destroyed life rather than creating it and it was cool water.

868b. thy water, thy cool water-libation is the inundation of the Great One (who) which is come forth from thee.

22a. This is thy cool water, Osiris; this is thy cool water, O N., which went forth from thy son, which went forth from Horus.
22b. I have come; I have brought to thee the eye of Horus, that thy heart may be refreshed by it. I have brought it to thee. It is under thy soles.

589a. Horus comes; he recognizes his father in thee, for thou art young in thy name of “He of the fresh water.”

1883c. thy water is to thee; thine inundation is to thee;

I am the water-hole; I am the flowing (or, overflowing).

…And at the risk of starting a pissing contest (or worse);

Utterance 379.

667. To say: Thy water is in heaven; thy thousands are on earth; O ’iśii-ḥȝ!

[Clark_K]

In light of the thousands of posts since the infamous Post 152, I thought it might be helpful to go back and review your debunking. Your post is in the quote boxes. My questions and comments are in italics.

There are no depictions of ramps concurrent withthe great pyramid building age.

Does any art from the period depict construction via geyser? No? Then you can’t claim the absence of a construction technique in art means that technique did not exist.

Some 98% of all the lifting to build pyramids was done on the great pyramids but Egyptologists down play this by talking about volume or height rather than work.

Temples are low buildings, hollow, and require very little lifting of stone.

There’s no evidence for ramps and very little for other methods.

The book “Ancient Egyptian Technology and Innovation” by Ian Shaw says evidence of ramps has been found at Sinki, Meidum, Giza, Abu Ghurob and Lisht. It goes on to say, “No such ramps have actually survived at the Great Pyramid itself … but enough traces have survived around some of the other Old Kingdom pyramids … to suggest that at least five different systems might have been used.”

Ramps are still used. They are often the simplest solution to bridge between two different and adjacent levels.

*You say ramps are still used and they are often the simplest solution. Why, then, would the Egyptians not have taken advantage of this simple, useful tool? *

One of the big weaknesses in believing in ramps is that the first pyramis was a great pyramid. They didn’t warm upon 100’ pyramids anbd went straight to a 200’ one.

*Why is this a weakness for ramps and not for geysers? Surely if building a ramp system for a 200 foot pyramid was too much of a challenge, then building the GeyserMatic 2686BC would also be too much. *

The pyramids are sitting on huge water collection devices. These had to have been built first. The pyramid is a five step structure because it had to be to pull stones up one step at a time. The evidence is all there.

*Originally, I thought these “water collection” devices must be some feature that actually exists and which you were interpreting in some novel way. Now I’m not convinced they exist at all. So please clarify whether you believe, based on your reading of the texts, that these devices must exist or whether they are actual known objects that other people can see and touch.

Also, to take a step back, why does your theory require collection of water? I thought the geysers shot up, filled the counterweight and lifted the stones. After that there would be no need to retain the water, particularly not underneath the pyramids.*

It was the PT that told me where to look to find it. It was the PT that tied the histirical, cultural, and physical evidence together. The PT won’t be evidence itself until Egyptologists understand it and attempt a new translation.

There’s just no real evidence that ramps were used to lift even a single stone on a single great pyramid. The ramp remains that exist are too flimsy, point in the wrong direction, or point at the BASE of the pyramid. My theoiry can account for almost every single one of these “ramps”. Indeed, I even know the ancient name of one which was the “ladder of set” and it was operated by the “knsti-canal” at the end of the winding watercourse. They weren’t used by bumpkins to drag stones hother and yon. They were used by counterweights to position stones for the main counterweights. There were funiculars operating on the causeways that unloaded barges and brought stone to the “Great Saw Palace” (“the factory where many stones were cut” in English).

Proof that ramps weren’t used must wait for the powers that be to use 1970’s technology to prove beyond doubt the route of the stones and mode of lifting. They are currently not seeking such information but a virtually air tight case can be made against ramps by observation and logic alone. While innumerable signs point away from ramps I’ll try to limit the discussion to only the major points.

Historical accounts say that the stones moved to the pyramid 300’ at a time after a priest attached a piece of paper to them. This is inconsistent with ramps.

Isn’t it inconsistent with your theory, too? Perhaps we should disregard claims of stones moving 300 feet at a time.

Indeed, there are no historical accounts until more recent times that involve ramps. Herodotus’ description almost precisely matches the usage of counterweights. (they were shaped like the dorsal carapace of a grasshopper and composed of “short pieces of wood”.) They were built in “battlements” (steps) and the lifting devices could be moved between them.

The culture has no word for “ramps” as applied to lifting objects. There is no such record for the use of this term. While they, no doubt, physically used ramps to lift objects the lack of the word is glaring omission. There is no “god of ramps” and not a single drawing of a ramp from the great pyramid building age.

Far more importantly is there is no overseer of ramp builders, ramp architects, or ramp dismantlers buried anywhere in Egypt. There are no overseers of basket makers, no overseers of harness makers or salve makers. There is not even a single stone dragger or his overseer in evidence. The pyramid town had equal numbers of men and women and was a tiny fraction of the size that would be required to drag stones and build ramps. The town is hardly large enough to supply such a large army with water and supplies far less do all the work themselves. It is little larger than a couple soccer fields. Indeed the builders’ town was a mere 300’ by 700’. By today’s standards this would accomodate only 933 people in an office building. People need far more space where they live. Only about 40% of the population was men so there wouldn’t even be nearly enough labor to supply food and water to the thousands necessary to build ramps and drag stones up them. You say ancient people didn’t mind being cramped up. Modern sanitation and processes are more efficient than they were in 2750 BC but let’s say they were willing to be jammed in cheek to jowel. This only increases occupancy to about 2800 men which is still grossly insufficient. With so many people in close contact disease would spread like wildfire. Since there were storage and production fascilities in the town as well it’s highly improbable that there were numbers even approaching these levels.

Would you provide the data you used to estimate that the town was 300 by 700 and that this could accommodate, at most, 2,800 men?

Logic says that on a gargantuan project that a highly efficient means must be used. Ramps not only are hugely inefficient due to the high friction and high cost of building and dismantling ramps but also because the weight of the team dragging stones to the pyramid top is simply wasted as they walk back down on already constricted and overused ramps.

Would you provide the data you used to calculate that pulling stones up ramps is less efficient than pulling them straight up the side of the pyramid? You may be correct, but I’d like to see some proof.

Getting the manpower necessary to build this requires massive ramps because 55 HP being done by men at extraordinarily low efficiency requires vast numbers of men. They couldn’t even see the pyramid to build it under the amount of ramping that would be needed to project so much power.

We’ve seen drawings of several possible ramp systems. Some are massive, some aren’t. Why do you think the Egyptians were not smart enough to design a relatively small ramp? Even if a ramp involves a lot of labor, it’s still much simpler and less prone to breakdowns than your GeyserMatic.

Logic says it would be far easier to just drag stones up the side from the top. Friction is reduced to almost nothing since the route of the stones can be greased. The men don’t have to lift their own weight and can pull much more effectively from a level surface. The concept that they must have used ramps is absurd when there are numerous better evidenced and easier means.

Maitaining this level of efficient power with muscles alone would require massive ramps and a means for the workers to get back down. Then there is the impossibility of cladding the structure with any possibly evidenced ramping system. Anything that required cladding stones as they went would leave nothing for ramps to adhere to and any other means would require the ramps to be rebuilt to apply the cladding.

Then comes the physical evidence which just puts a nail into the heart of the ramp ideas. Perhaps most glaringly is the utter lack of any evidence whatsoever for ramps on the pyramid. This wouldn’t be such a glaring void if not for the existence of numerous vertical lines visible in the pyramids. These lines tend to appear in pairs with one on opposite sides. This is consistent with counterweight operations where one line marks the counterweight and the opposite the route of the stones. It is most highly inconsistent with any ramping ideas. Simply stated ramps wouldn’t leave such lines no matter how they were configured except for ones that can be ruled out by logic such as integral ramps. The grooves on the Great Pyramid are also these routes of the stones that the builders called the “ladders of the Gods”.

I’d like to see a cite for your claim that these grooves were called “ladders of the gods.”

Simply stated you can see the routes of the stones right up the middles and in two places above the boat museum. You can also see that these pyramids are five step (battlement) pyramids on some pictures but especially in the gravimetric scan half way down the page here;

http://hdbui.blogspot.com/

I have a truly beautiful depiction of these five steps drawn on the scan but can’t get permission to use it. But this is still conclusive proof that it’s a five step pyramid which is more than adequate to debunk ramps. They would not have used steps unless it was necessary and the only reason steps might be necessary is that they could lift the stones only 81’ 3" at a time.

I don’t know what you mean when you say the Great Pyramid was a step pyramid. But putting that aside, ramps can be just as useful for building a step pyramid as for any other type.

Each of the great pyramids after Djoser’s were five step pyramids. There is simply no reason to build these as step pyramids unless the height of each step defined the height they were able to lift stones. In order to lift stones to the top they must have needed to be relayed the greatest distance they could lift. Of course this could be as simple as the length of the ropes by which they lifted them up the side. No matter the actual reason it simply isn’t consistent with ramps. It is highly consistent with counterweights and using water for ballast since the geyser sprayed 80’ and this is the height of the steps. It might be consistent with locks that lifted 81’ 3" at a time or any water or ballast lifting system limited by natural laws or infrastruture/ materiel concerns. It is not consistent with ramps.

If I understand how the GeyserMatic worked, it lifted stones the initial 81 feet but no further. Why would anything above that level have to be done in steps of 81 feet? After that, the geyser’s lifting abilities are irrelevant to the design and construction process, no?

Ramps can’t explain the various infrastructure all around and within the pyramid. They are inconsistent with the history, culture, logic, physical evidence, and the evidence left by the actual on-site builders.

They’re not inconsistent with history or culture. You acknowledge they had ramps and used them for some purposes, so there’s nothing a-historical or a-cultural about the possibility of using them for pyramid construction. As for logic, I have not seen a single person agree with your argument that using ramps would be illogical. The physical evidence you’ve described does not make a strong case against ramps or for geysers.

Perhaps the greatest inconsistency is the cultural evidence right on site. In the pyramid builders cemetery is the “Overseer of the Boats of Neith”. This would be the loader on the south side in all probability but it could have nothing to do with ramps. There are canal overseers, overseers of metal shops, director of draftsmen, inspector of craftsmen, controller of a boat crew, controller of the side of the pyramid, inspector of metal workers and a host of other jobs that reflect a sophisticated and intelligent culture. Most tellingly is that there is a “Weigher/ Reckoner”. This job would be critical on a device that was said to be sensitive enough to tell the difference in weight of a “heavy heart” from a feather. The quarrymen who shaped the stones were called “sculptors” and the “Chief of Sculptors” is buried on site. They found a standard weight in the queens “air siphon” and a hook. Every job is accounted for but the word “ramp” isn’t even attested in the great pyramiud building age.

In point of fact there simply isn’t anything consistent with ramps. While the evidence isn’t deep it is very broad that counterweights were used and the vertical lines on the great pyramids are simply sufficient to say ramps are debunked. This scale is tipped so much you’d think there’s nothing on the ascender at all. There were no ramps. They are debunked.

You can, and will, believe what you want, but this doesn’t debunk anything. Interpreting your post generously, I’d say it speculates about an alternative to ramps without providing any real evidence.

[ElvisL1ves]

@Trinopus

It was high time for this conversation to get dirty.

Hey, tell the guy who’s posting all those filthy hieroglyphs!

[dropzone]

@GIGObuster

But of course, since realizing what I’m talking about shows how wet your ideas are.

I know you had to reach back nearly to the 19th century for “wet” used in that context, but anything for a pun!

@cladking

It’s not only Egyptologists that I’ve apparently offended but a lot of people and experts in the soft sciences. I guess when you say things like “everything people believe is false or true only from a specific perspective” soft scientists feel pretty uncomfortable.

Hey! Archaeology and Physical Anthropology have rigored themselves up enough to almost be semi-hard sciences! If you’re talking about Cultural Anthropology, yeah, it’s still in Marshmallowland, but so is your “science.”

@wolfpup

Have you tried reading this thread?

[Runs away, having made his one and only contribution to it.]

Too late. You posted and now you can never leave.

@cladking

According to Egyptologists the PT are incantation and magic, not ritual.

You’re confused again. Incantation and ritual are what magic is made of.

[cladking]

@Clark_K

*You say ramps are still used and they are often the simplest solution. Why, then, would the Egyptians not have taken advantage of this simple, useful tool? *

I don’t have much time right now. Let me just address this.

Ramps are a simple straight forward means to bridge two different altitudes. They are not at all simple to bridge to 200+ different altitudes of the Great Pyramid.

But far more importantly is that ramps are exceedingly difficult to operate. The more weight you want to transfer the more difficult they become. They are exactly as difficult to operate as the difference in altitude of their ends times the weight of the marterial moved times the reciprocal of their efficiency. Since the efficiency is low and the amount of weight is staggering it makes ramps staggeringly difficult to operate. And this goes many times over when it would have to reach 481’.

Normally ramps are very easy to engineer. They often involve nothing more complicated than laying down a two by eight plank. In this specific case though ramps are so incredibly difficult to engineer even modern science has failed to come up with a workable model. Every proposal has been “escheresque” and most proposals have been impossible. The only model actually described ids brand new this year and hhas at least three fatal flaws that make its usage impossible and it has no evidence to support it. Worst of all it contradicts the evidence that does exist.

Ramps are a useful tool to get a wheelbarrow load of cement up on a low scaffold. They might work OK for many such loads. But they are not viable solution for building skyscrapers and pyramids with 2 1/2 ton stones.

[GIGObuster]

@cladking

Normally ramps are very easy to engineer. They often involve nothing more complicated than laying down a two by eight plank. In this specific case though ramps are so incredibly difficult to engineer even modern science has failed to come up with a workable model. Every proposal has been “escheresque” and most proposals have been impossible. The only model actually described ids brand new this year and hhas at least three fatal flaws that make its usage impossible and it has no evidence to support it. Worst of all it contradicts the evidence that does exist.

Nah, it only shows that once again you are just an ignorant of what stone masons and researchers found when making a smaller pyramid in 1997.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/1915mpyramid.html

ROGER HOPKINS: We’re moving our first stone into the pyramid. This is going into the inner works of the support of our pyramid. It’s what we call a core block. It’s not finely dressed. It’s very rough. We’ll do that after it’s in place.

NARRATOR: Although the men were able to roll the blocks end over end, it was a slow and laborious process. There’s evidence that wooden rollers were used by the ancient Egyptians, so Roger tries some out on a nearby concrete driveway.

ROGER HOPKINS: This is a piece of cake, Mark. We could do it with about. . .

MARK LEHNER: This is ten men?

ROGER HOPKINS: Yeah. Ten men, easy. We’re actually going up an incline right now that wouldn’t be unlike coming out of the quarry.

NARRATOR: Rollers work well, but only on a smooth, hard surface. So, they’re of no use on Roger’s sandy site. At neighboring pyramid complexes, the remains of clay roadbeds have been found into which the ancient Egyptians imbedded wood, like railway ties. Perhaps a sled loaded with one of Roger’s two-ton blocks will slide over this surface. Mark thinks it might.

MARK LEHNER: We’re going to try to, within all the confusion, wet the ties and make it slippery, and see if it goes on the ties without a layer of slick clay. If the just the ties, the wooden ties themselves—sleepers. If the sleepers will carry the sled. Nobody thinks it’ll work. They think we’re crazy. They’re irritated, massively irritated at even making the attempt. They think we’re wasting our time. Roger doesn’t.

ROGER HOPKINS: Ha-ha-ha!

MARK LEHNER: Hey, it works! Hey!

MARK LEHNER: Well, I think it’s good just to see that it works, because this is another case where hands-on, trial archaeology I think really proves some points. Because even the men, even the experienced masons here, were saying vehemently that this isn’t going to work, and they were almost angry and irritated about it. And lo and behold, it got off the rollers.

ROGER HOPKINS: Once we were on the wood, we got that lubricant and the friction, we took right off. Are you still a lever man?

MARTIN ISLER: When necessary. Ramps when necessary. Levers when necessary. I mean, there’s no such thing as one way only.

ROGER HOPKINS: I think sledding is a lot faster. Once you’ve got the rhythm, the teams trained, and the proper roadbed, I think you can move right along.

MARTIN ISLER: On the lower part of the pyramid, which is basically 87% of the volume of the pyramid, why not use ramps? But above that, you can use levers. Take advantage of anything you can make.

NARRATOR: Roger’s ramp is similar in construction to one that Mark has noticed leaning against a tomb. It was probably built about the same time as the great pyramid that stands behind it.

MARK LEHNER: They must have been using it for the construction in some way. And all these books are written about pyramid building, and they say they made mud brick ramps. Other people say they didn’t use any ramps. They say there are no ancient ramps. And we’re standing on a ramp that’s probably from the time of the building of this mastaba, whether they used it for debris or for these stones, and it’s about 5,000 years old.

ROGER HOPKINS: Well, you can see the debris down here where it’s very similar to the way that we’re laying our stone and tufla in.

MARK LEHNER: And this isn’t the only ramp that still exists out here at Giza. I mean, there are others for hauling stones from the quarries up to the cemeteries. There are construction embankments. This has got to be how they constructed the pyramid ramps. It has to be this material.

@cladking

Ramps are a useful tool to get a wheelbarrow load of cement up on a low scaffold. They might work OK for many such loads. But they are not viable solution for building skyscrapers and pyramids with 2 1/2 ton stones.

As Lehner and Hopkins showed, with real stone, you are indeed just showing all once again the levels of ignorance you are reaching for.

One can see the video in tudou if one is willing to see Chinese subtitles, I recommend some browser script protection tough.

[cladking]

@Clark_K

I
*Why is this a weakness for ramps and not for geysers? Surely if building a ramp system for a 200 foot pyramid was too much of a challenge, then building the GeyserMatic 2686BC would also be too much. *

A ramp for a 6 1/2 million ton pyramid could involve up to eight times the lifting as the pyramid itself dependent on its configuration. But the evidence states that even if a spiral ramp could have been used (it couldn’t because no sloped visible lines exist), it couldn’t reach the top because its footing would block the ramp below near the top and even it would weight some one million tons. The objective of a balance system is to make it as light as possible. It would require very few resources and be quickly made and adjusted to the specific task at hand. A ramp would chew up vast quantities of wood which they didn’t have available.

*Originally, I thought these “water collection” devices must be some feature that actually exists and which you were interpreting in some novel way. Now I’m not convinced they exist at all. So please clarify whether you believe, based on your reading of the texts, that these devices must exist or whether they are actual known objects that other people can see and touch.

They are actual physical objects in advanced states of ruin. Some are missing altogether except for the level line at the pyramid base. The G1 water collection device is extremely well preserved. They are the flat rectangular areas adjacent to G1 and G2;

These are water tight stuctures that were built before the pyramids and were surrounded by coffer dams. That they were water tight is simply deduced from the fact the ground was carved to accept tura limestone blocks. This is the same stone that made the pyramid itself water tight.

Also, to take a step back, why does your theory require collection of water? I thought the geysers shot up, filled the counterweight and lifted the stones. After that there would be no need to retain the water, particularly not underneath the pyramids.*

Water was run down the cliff face in counterweights. This work actually tripled the effectiveness of using water. Even pyramids where cliff face counterweights weren’t employed served the purpose of impounding water.

Isn’t it inconsistent with your theory, too? Perhaps we should disregard claims of stones moving 300 feet at a time.

The cliff face counterweights would have fallen just about 300’ along the cliff face. The “ramp” tothe Sphinx Quarry along which the stones flew could be seen from miles.

Would you provide the data you used to estimate that the town was 300 by 700 and that this could accommodate, at most, 2,800 men?

I fear this is an old copy of the debunkment and this has been repaired. The builders viullage was actually closer to 500 by 1100 feet if memory serves. This is still a small fraction of the room needed by an army stone draggers and ramp builders.

Would you provide the data you used to calculate that pulling stones up ramps is less efficient than pulling them straight up the side of the pyramid? You may be correct, but I’d like to see some proof.

I could do the calculations but I find it tedious at best. Logic should suffice.

It’s not just the huge effort needed to build ramps but the unnatural work of dragging stones on a sloped surface. The ground slopes away behind your feet making traction difficult. If it’s slippery you can’t pull and if it isn’t the stone doesn’t want to move. You are at the mercy of the men ahead on narrow ramps. You have no supplies and are walking away from your rest station. If you tire there’s no relief handy and if you pass out or are injured there’s no first aid. The friction of the stone requires significantly more stone pullers to compensate for it and then the entire weight of the team, the sled, and any supplies is wasted at the top since you just have to walk back down congested ramps. Pulling stones up from the step top is far easier and requires no heavy equipment and supplies. You can even arrive at work fresh if you are pulled up yourself.

We’ve seen drawings of several possible ramp systems. Some are massive, some aren’t. Why do you think the Egyptians were not smart enough to design a relatively small ramp? Even if a ramp involves a lot of labor, it’s still much simpler and less prone to breakdowns than your GeyserMatic.

They didn’t build sheer walls. Walls had slopes of no more than about 72 degrees. They didn’t practice building little pyramids and perfect ramps but rather the very first pyramid was a great pyramid. And it was stepped which is difficult to build with ramps.

[XT]

I was talking to a friend of mine today, and he said to mention the Pyramid of Djedefre at Abu Rawash, since there is a lot more evidence of ramp use there and to ask Claddy his thoughts on it, and how they built this one without the magical geyser they supposedly used at Khufu’s pyramid (I don’t think he ever did say how they moved the geyser around to build the other pyramids, come to think of it).

[GIGObuster]

@cladking

The cliff face counterweights would have fallen just about 300’ along the cliff face. The “ramp” tothe Sphinx Quarry along which the stones flew could be seen from miles.

And the ancient Egyptians only bothered to quote the PT in the context of funerary matters, funny that those flying stones and huge counterweights that you talk about were seen by thousandths of people and yet it did not cause them to make paintings or engravings of such portents. :rolleyes:

[cladking]

@Clark_K

I’d like to see a cite for your claim that these grooves were called “ladders of the gods.”

I fear this statement is an extrapolation of a single line in the PT that calls the cliff face counterweight run the “ladder of set”. This sahould make the vertical lines of the pyramid the ladder of seker or ladder of isis etc.

974c. that N. may ascend to heaven on it and do service of courtier to Rē‘.
975a. Let also the ladder of god be given to N., let the ladder of Set be given to N.
975b. that N. may ascend to heaven on it, and do service of courtier to Rē‘,

I no longer have as much confidence in my understanding of this utterance.

941a. N. goes therewith to his mother Nut;
941b. N. climbs upon her, in this her name of “Ladder.”

This next one is determinative because the location of kebehwet is wellestablished at the top of the ladder;

468a. To say: Greetings to thee, O daughter of Anubis, who is at the windows, of heaven,
468b. thou friend of Thot, who is at the double rail (end) of the ladder.

It’s not as certain that the groove is the ladder however. Indeed, the window of heaven should be at the top of the first step at 81’ 3". The debunkment could stand a little updating.

I don’t know what you mean when you say the Great Pyramid was a step pyramid. But putting that aside, ramps can be just as useful for building a step pyramid as for any other type.

The gravimetric scan shows it’s a five step pyramid with 81’ 3" steps;

Any ramp placed on a step top would have to be removed of course. This might do fine for simple ramp systems but would be a lot more work for massive or spiral ramps.

If I understand how the GeyserMatic worked, it lifted stones the initial 81 feet but no further. Why would anything above that level have to be done in steps of 81 feet? After that, the geyser’s lifting abilities are irrelevant to the design and construction process, no?

Once you get a stones to 80+’ all you have to do is shorten the ropes and lift them a little higher. This was Imhotep’s claim to fame.

[GIGObuster]

@cladking

The gravimetric scan shows it’s a five step pyramid with 81’ 3" steps;

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LBVqPcf0nf4/UQPMkhQ9eCI/AAAAAAAAAHQ/EDQHLWrdzRk/s320/Densitogramand+copyright.jpg

This is bullshit, one of the very experts that did made the scan produced another drawing that in their expert opinion showed what was observed, a spiral structure with right angles going up.

[cladking]

@XT

I was talking to a friend of mine today, and he said to mention the Pyramid of Djedefre at Abu Rawash, since there is a lot more evidence of ramp use there and to ask Claddy his thoughts on it, and how they built this one without the magical geyser they supposedly used at Khufu’s pyramid (I don’t think he ever did say how they moved the geyser around to build the other pyramids, come to think of it).

It’s not a certainty there ever was a pyramid at Abu rawash. It is commonly believed a rather significant pyramid was there and stones have been harvested for many years. I don’t have a strong opinion about this place a couple miles north of Giza but I suspect there’s something glaringly obvious that I’m missing. It makes no sense that there’s a hole in the ground where the subterranian chambers should be.

As a wild speculation I’d guess there was some industrial purpose and water was fed to the “valley temple”. The site may have only provided head pressure and source for water.

This is in a military zone I believe and data is even harder to come by than it is for Giza.

[cladking]

@GIGObuster

This is bullshit, one of the very experts that did made the scan produced another drawing that in their expert opinion showed what was observed, a spiral structure with right angles going up.

Most of the lines are parallel to the base and it’s impossible for lines parallel to the base to be ramps.

[cladking]

@GIGObuster

And the ancient Egyptians only bothered to quote the PT in the context of funerary matters, funny that those flying stones and huge counterweights that you talk about were seen by thousandths of people and yet it did not cause them to make paintings or engravings of such portents. :rolleyes:

This is exactly what they did draw but people misinterpret the drawing too.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=imgres&cd=&ved=0CAgQjBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcarrington-arts.com%2Fskr3.JPG&ei=76deVdX5LNT9oQSSkYCoBA&psig=AFQjCNGAVjxu7dVGINVaPDNed2X-7AJe5Q&ust=1432353135882668

Most drawings of the pyramids were made in scientific perspective and it just looks like gods standing in boats to us. There are others as well such as osiris standing in the djed holding the king’s ka (the pyramid) and the symbol for the geyser; an ankh. All the art and all the writing supoports geysers and there is no cultural support for ramps. Did I mention the word “ramp” isn’t even attested from the grerat pyramid building age? The PT refers to boats that fly up and alight and gods that build the earth high. Nowhere is there any suggestion that men dragged stones. There were no overseers of stone draggers and nowhere for so many men to bunk.

Ramps remain debunked.