How were the pyramids in Egypt built?

[cladking]

@dropzone

• If the geyser you envision tops out at–what was it?–81’-3", how do you get water higher than that?

It simply wasn’t necessary to have water above this level because they could have lifted every single stone 81’ 3" at a time to the top.

It does appear however they probably lifted some water to ~450’ level. They would have lifted this just as they lifted the stones. I believe they did this to get finer control of stones high upon the pyramid. This is evidenced by the higher gravity area on the NE corner at this altitude. By the time they were finishing up on top they had ample supplies of water so a little less efficiency in lifting didn’t matter since they gained speed and control.

There was no truly "excess"water until the step tops were mostly finished but once the pyramid bulk (the five steps) were done water was no longer at much of a premium.

[cladking]

@Czarcasm

I’ve seemed to have misplaced my autographed first edition copy-so sorry. Would you mind quoting or linking to the appropriate text?

Egyptologists only need provide bibliographies!!!

My computer isn’t working well right now. Maybe you can get this to work;

Operations carried on at the pyramids of Gizeh in 1837: with an account of a...

[Czarcasm]

@cladking

Egyptologists only need provide bibliographies!!!

My computer isn’t working well right now. Maybe you can get this to work;

Operations carried on at the pyramids of Gizeh in 1837: with an account of a ... - Richard William H. Howard Vyse - Google Books

Thank you for that link…for it says absolutely nothing of what you claimed it said.

[XT]

[QUOTE=cladking]
Their ropes were apparently configured as slings (loops at each end). These fit over the “tie of isis” which connected it to the counterweight. They used a “cartouche” to belay it at other points. I calculate the main ropes at about 5 1/4" but a little thicker is possible.
[/QUOTE]

And you base this off of…what? Your interpretation of some cryptic Egyptian writing? Do you have a drawing of some kind of this system? How did you arrive at 5 1/4" ropes btw? I know how I did it, but I’m curious how you arrived at such a precise figure.

Also, you don’t seem to understand what I’m getting at with belaying this load. Here’s the thing…you are talking about a counter balance system. Even if it’s precise, you are going to get constant acceleration of the load if one end of the counter balance is heavier than the other…assuming that’s what you are talking about. Which means that if it drops 81’ it’s going to be dropping pretty fast at the end, don’t you think? If you are talking about a neutral system or a negative counter weight system then you aren’t going to have a guy or two sipping Pierre at the bottom, you are going to have to have guys hauling on ropes to assist the counter weight system. You can’t have it both ways without a ratchet system or a capstan or something.

The Egyptians didn’t have the pulley, so you aren’t going to get as much mechanical advantage. The ropes were natural fiber, and even if you used some sort of guard at the friction points the ropes are going to wear…big time. You are going to have a LOT of accidents with this system, which means you are going to have workers crushed, repeatedly, by multi-ton stones falling from fairly large heights. Is there any evidence of such falls? We have worker graveyards…they should be chalked full of crushed workers. As far as I know (and here I don’t actually know) there aren’t any such bodies. Certainly not a lot of them, which anyone looking at even the rudimentary information you’ve given is going to notice. Also, large stones and large water ‘boats’ falling from those heights with that amount of force are going to leave evidence…lots of it. As far as I know there is no such evidence either.

This is in addition to the myriad objections raised already and just focusing on this one small part. These objections seem to be mounting up, however, as nearly every single aspect of your theory just doesn’t pan out.

There were two ports for this worrk. The primary port was the so-called valley temple where Merrer and the other sailors brought the cladding and other specialty stones. Some 1/2 million tons of supplies and equipment were off loaded here for shipment up to the pyramid base by (linear) funicular. There was a secondary port known as the builders village. This one recieved primarily food and other necessities for the workmen. Some small valuable tools were probably shipped here for closer control and accounting and then carried to the job site.

Again, what do you base all of this on? I’ve looked at maps of the Giza plateau complex and your description here doesn’t match those maps. Where are you getting this information?

It is simply absurd to believe they built the cadillac of ramps and then dragged stones over wet sand. Sometimes it’s hard to even take this stuff seriously and it seems to be in the realm of joking.

And yet other peoples used these methods to move large rocks through human history. Regardless, whether they used ramps or didn’t use ramps, it doesn’t make YOUR theory make any more sense. Your repeated focus on this makes it clear that you are trying to divert attention from the flaws in your theory that multiple people are poking holes in. Your theory shouldn’t rely on some version of ‘well, ramps are impossible so they must have done it my way’, which is basically the majority of your assertions in this thread. To me, ramps are pretty obviously the best and easiest solution, though HOW the ramps were configured and used is still open for debate (I’m inclined to a combination of ramp architecture including internal ramps, but that’s just me), but my objections to your theory have nothing to do with whether ramps were used or not.

[Peter_Morris]

@Czarcasm

Thank you for that link…for it says absolutely nothing of what you claimed it said.

I think I see what he means, though. He didn’t link to page 325.

If you go to the correct page, you’ll see the following:

*In carrying on the work, leaves of papyrus, or paper, inscribed with certain characters were placed under the stones prepared in the quarries; and upon being struck, the blocks were moved each time the distance of a bowshot (about one hundred and fifty cubits) and so by degrees arrived at the pyramids. *

A cubitbeing just under 21 inches. So that’s about 260 feet.

On a brief glance through, this appears to be a translation of an ancient text. I’m not sure how reliable the translation is, but at least he’s not making it up himself.

My brief glance showed several mentions of Noah and the Flood, so I’m not inclined to trust it.

[simster]

@Peter_Morris

I think I see what he means, though. He didn’t link to page 325.

If you go to the correct page, you’ll see the following:

*In carrying on the work, leaves of papyrus, or paper, inscribed with certain characters were placed under the stones prepared in the quarries; and upon being struck, the blocks were moved each time the distance of a bowshot (about one hundred and fifty cubits) and so by degrees arrived at the pyramids. *

A cubitbeing just under 21 inches. So that’s about 260 feet.

On a brief glance through, this appears to be a translation of an ancient text. I’m not sure how reliable the translation is, but at least he’s not making it up himself.

My brief glance showed several mentions of Noah and the Flood, so I’m not inclined to trust it.

None of that still mentions anything about the stones or the paper flying.

[cladking]

@XT

The Egyptians didn’t have the pulley…

This is Egyptological nonsense. Egyptologists are forever demeaning and marginalizing these people. The FACT is that the wheel goes back 1000 years before the great pyramids. If they needed a pulley then they’d have made a pulley. The FACT is they buried an “Overseer of the Metal Shop” right on site. These men must have neen busy making something out of metal. Evidence says they could cast objects up to about 200 lbs. I believe this was easy for them since the pullies were made in three parts and weghed in under 200 lbs.

Mechanical advantage wasn’t needed.

[cladking]

@simster

None of that still mentions anything about the stones or the paper flying.

There are other writers.

[simster]

@cladking

There are other writers.

provide citation that any of them said - either of teh two statements below (bolding mine)

@cladking

It appears in legends as well. One has it that a piece of paper was attached to the stone and then it flew to the pyramid. This would have been the paper attached by the “Weigher/ Reckoner” who had adjudged its size and shape for transport and fitting in the structure. This worker was the go-between for the “Overseer of Sculptors” who removed it from tayet (the quarry) and the “Overseer of the Boats of Neith” who loaded it for shipment up the side. These men all worked under the “anubis scientist” who oversaw all operations from atop the pyramid.

The reports simply say the stones moved to the pyramid 300’ at a time and this is the lateral distance down the cliff face. This is where the ramps pointed.

Even the Pyramid Texts refers to stones flying like the “fledglings of swallows” which take their first flight following the contours of the ground. This is the evidence but mnodern people choose not to see it.

[simster]

@cladking

This is Egyptological nonsense. Egyptologists are forever demeaning and marginalizing these people. The FACT is that the wheel goes back 1000 years before the great pyramids. If they needed a pulley then they’d have made a pulley. The FACT is they buried an “Overseer of the Metal Shop” right on site. These men must have neen busy making something out of metal. Evidence says they could cast objects up to about 200 lbs. I believe this was easy for them since the pullies were made in three parts and weghed in under 200 lbs.

Mechanical advantage wasn’t needed.

do you know what a pulley gives you?

Do you have any evidence for the three part pulley that weighed 200 pounds?

[Czarcasm]

@Peter_Morris

I think I see what he means, though. He didn’t link to page 325.

If you go to the correct page, you’ll see the following:

*In carrying on the work, leaves of papyrus, or paper, inscribed with certain characters were placed under the stones prepared in the quarries; and upon being struck, the blocks were moved each time the distance of a bowshot (about one hundred and fifty cubits) and so by degrees arrived at the pyramids. *

A cubitbeing just under 21 inches. So that’s about 260 feet.

On a brief glance through, this appears to be a translation of an ancient text. I’m not sure how reliable the translation is, but at least he’s not making it up himself.

My brief glance showed several mentions of Noah and the Flood, so I’m not inclined to trust it.

So these huge slabs slid on paper 260 feet at a time when struck by…what, exactly? And did they slide up and out of the quarry in the manner?

[cladking]

@XT

And you base this off of…what? Your interpretation of some cryptic Egyptian writing? Do you have a drawing of some kind of this system? How did you arrive at 5 1/4" ropes btw? I know how I did it, but I’m curious how you arrived at such a precise figure.

It’s simply load/ capacity per cross sectiuonal area and converted to a circular expression.

Also, you don’t seem to understand what I’m getting at with belaying this load. Here’s the thing…you are talking about a counter balance system. Even if it’s precise, you are going to get constant acceleration of the load if one end of the counter balance is heavier than the other…assuming that’s what you are talking about. Which means that if it drops 81’ it’s going to be dropping pretty fast at the end, don’t you think?

Yes. Exactly. There are numerous means to slow the system and I believe most were used at one time or another. There are numerous hints of this in the PT and in the physical evidence. I believe that a brake on the pyramid top was employed for G1 between 75’ and 125’. The cable across the pyramid top activated this brake which lifted a basket of standard weights in the airshaft of the queen’s chamber.

There are many ways to slow this and I’d guess from the very beginning they just tried to keepo it fromn getting ouit of control; it hads a low terminal velocity by design. Of course the weight of the rope being transferred from the load side to the counterweight side during lifts complicated the problem but it wasn’t that difficult.

You are going to have a LOT of accidents with this system, which means you are going to have workers crushed, repeatedly, by multi-ton stones falling from fairly large heights.

I believe accidents were unusual and fatalities rare caused by the lifting system. Men simply didn’t stand under these and they rarely broke anyway. Almost all rope breaks are caused by improper use and poor inspection. These people did their jobs right. Obviously.

We have worker graveyards…they should be chalked full of crushed workers. As far as I know (and here I don’t actually know) there aren’t any such bodies.

Of course there were accidents. There is ample evidence the workers had excellent health care including the setting of broken bones and even brain surgery.

Certainly not a lot of them, which anyone looking at even the rudimentary information you’ve given is going to notice. Also, large stones and large water ‘boats’ falling from those heights with that amount of force are going to leave evidence…lots of it. As far as I know there is no such evidence either.

Remember the vertical lines?

[Peter_Morris]

@simster

None of that still mentions anything about the stones or the paper flying.

See footnote 7

@Czarcasm

So these huge slabs slid on paper 260 feet at a time when struck by…what, exactly? And did they slide up and out of the quarry in the manner?

Don’t ask me, I’m not agreeing with him. I’m just pointing out where he’s quoting from.

[cladking]

@XT

And yet other peoples used these methods to move large rocks through human history. Regardless, whether they used ramps or didn’t use ramps, it doesn’t make YOUR theory make any more sense. Your repeated focus on this makes it clear that you are trying to divert attention from the flaws in your theory that multiple people are poking holes in. Your theory shouldn’t rely on some version of ‘well, ramps are impossible so they must have done it my way’, which is basically the majority of your assertions in this thread. To me, ramps are pretty obviously the best and easiest solution, though HOW the ramps were configured and used is still open for debate (I’m inclined to a combination of ramp architecture including internal ramps, but that’s just me), but my objections to your theory have nothing to do with whether ramps were used or not.

It doesn’t disturb you in the least that ramps are debunked (see post #152) and it’s Egyptologists trying to distract attention from this by proposing magical wet sand!

…but my objections to your theory have nothing to do with whether ramps were used or not

Of course it does. You know they mustta used ramps so everything else must be wrong. It’s simply no matter that the evidence says they pulled stones up one step at a time.

[simster]

@Peter_Morris

See footnote 7

Where it says -

[QUOTE=Footnote 7]
This may be a symbolical manner of expressing that they moved the large stones by mechanical powers which were descibed upon books or leaves, or it may allude to the quarry marks
[/QUOTE]

thats not “flying” in the sense I get that cladking means.

[Telemark]

@cladking

If they needed a pulley then they’d have made a pulley.

Well that certainly makes things easier. What if they’d needed a microprocessor?

[cladking]

@Czarcasm

So these huge slabs slid on paper 260 feet at a time when struck by…what, exactly? And did they slide up and out of the quarry in the manner?

They were pulled 300’ at a time by the cliff face counterweights. They looked like the fledglings of swallows.

The stones that arrived at the pyramid top looked like a falcon which flew up and alit. They were in a boat;

494a. bring this (boat) to N. Which boat shall I bring to thee, O N.?
494b. Bring to N. that which flies up and alights.

[Peter_Morris]

@simster

thats not “flying” in the sense I get that cladking means.

His reference to flying like swallows is stated to be in a different document, the Pyramid Texts.

[Fear_Itself]

@cladking

It doesn’t disturb you in the least that ramps are debunked… (see post #152)

Not in the least.

…and it’s Egyptologists trying to distract attention from this by proposing magical wet sand!

No more of a distraction than magical geysers.

[XT]

[QUOTE=cladking]
It doesn’t disturb you in the least that ramps are debunked (see post #152) and it’s Egyptologists trying to distract attention from this by proposing magical wet sand!
[/QUOTE]

It doesn’t bother me because it’s only been debunked in YOUR mind. I’ve seen stones moved by human power using ‘magical wet sand!’, so I know, for a fact, that it can and has been done that way. You, apparently, have never thought to actually try any of this stuff (and you obviously don’t get out much…no, I guess, understand how this whole internet thingy works to search out info on it), so to you it seems implausible.

Of course it does. You know they mustta used ramps so everything else must be wrong. It’s simply no matter that the evidence says they pulled stones up one step at a time.

Except that this is a strawman argument that you have tried, repeatedly, to make. It’s not working out for you.

This is Egyptological nonsense. Egyptologists are forever demeaning and marginalizing these people. The FACT is that the wheel goes back 1000 years before the great pyramids. If they needed a pulley then they’d have made a pulley. The FACT is they buried an “Overseer of the Metal Shop” right on site. These men must have neen busy making something out of metal. Evidence says they could cast objects up to about 200 lbs. I believe this was easy for them since the pullies were made in three parts and weghed in under 200 lbs.

Again, you have any evidence for this beyond your own assumptions, assertions and out of the ass guesses? A quick Google search seems to indicate that the first know examples were found around 1500 BC in Mesopotamia…that’s a thousand years after the fall of the Old Kingdom. This isn’t ‘Egyptologists’ saying this. So…what evidence do YOU have that they had pulleys? More obscure translations only you understand? Your assertion that they had the wheel so musta had pulleys??