Updated ideas of how the great pyramids were built

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
14,301
The movie referenced below (apologies only could find a french version but there are some very interesting animations) proposes several ideas, that seem interesting... I am not convinced though..

Key points (simplified)

1 - Stone blocks were "manufactured" using a "kind of cement".... Thus no ramp was necessary and no moving around of heavy objects (one piece of "evidence" is pieces of wood and other rock found partly inside stone blocks)

2 - Egyptians had devised a kind of metric system... They observed that a water drop was always 1 cm in diameter (is this true?) and used this as the base unit.... Then using a 100 cm diameter wheel and wrapping a rope around it it is easy to derive Pi ... plus a few other constants... this explains why Pi and other numbers are found in egyptian buildings

3. For harder stones, they melted them using a kind of lens.. making them easy to transport and remelt on the spot (aternatively pour the melted stuff in a cast and make any shape you need)

4. Tunnels and chambers beneath the pyramid were not carved out... Instead they were build in a depression, then the depression was filled over... (apparently it would be too difficult to carve out such tunnels at a constant angle, and there are issues with CO2, lack of light etc...)

What do people think of the above ?

I can think of a few objections to start with

  • There are claims that the stone blocks of the pyramids are different to each other... If they were manufactured they should be similar
  • If they had this kind of technology (cement, lenses etc...) how could it disappear ? thousands of workers were involved, so it is not like it was a secret
  • There are clear signs of digging and carving in various places inside tunnels (not consistent with manufactured blocks)
 
Last edited:
Jan 2015
966
England
I was under the impression that it was perfectly easy to test if stone has been melted, in which case, it should be easy to confirm or refute this idea.
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,614
Italy, Lago Maggiore
A drop of water with a diameter of 1cm is a monster ... rain for example shows drops between 1mm and 3mm ... only in equatorial regions they have observed drops around 8mm; anyway you can obtain similar drops. You need a tube and a water with a good surface tension [it depends on the chemichal substances and the minerals present in the water].

Ancient Egyptians didn't know the centimeter ... their most little measurement unit was the finger [about 1.88cm].

And it's not difficult to note that the limestone and the granite of the blocks had carved and we can see their stone mines around the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tomar
Mar 2018
984
UK
What do people think of the above ?
Absolute bullshit. I'd put it somewhere below "Aliens did it" in terms of plausibility. I also think that people who spread this crap are almost as bad as the people who come with it. Why did you spend the time writing this post rather than first googling "size of rain drop"? It takes about 8sec to see that the claim that they are all 1cm large is false. You even expressed doubt that this was true, but evidently made no effort at all to check. I'm genuinely curious, why did you write that sentence rather than checking if the doubtful and easy-to-check factual statement it contained was true?


Honestly, they carved big stones and dragged them on rollers around a winding ramp. It is technically easy but requires a lot of manpower. Ancient Eygpt had limited technical skills but lots of manpower. Without even considering all the evidence for this, just Occam's razor should tell us to stop looking for more absurd theories.
 

dreamregent

Ad Honorem
Feb 2013
4,410
Coastal Florida
1. ancient cement blocks --- if that was actually the case, why do ancient quarries thoroughly demonstrate the AEs were cutting whole stone blocks? And why aren't the blocks uniform?

2. pi --- we have extant cubit rods from Ancient Egypt and they're not based on the metric system. Of course, the AEs were aware of pi, as shown by one of the problems on the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, but there's no sign they needed centimeters or drops of water to derive it.

3. lenses ---- The most extant ancient lenses are far younger than the pyramids and are not sophisticated enough to melt anything. For example, see the Nimrud lens...it's opaque largely because it's not highly polished. It seems pretty far-fetched to imagine any potential earlier lenses were substantially better in terms of optical quality.

4. tunnels beneath the pyramid ---- Assuming we're talking about the Great Pyramid, we know the chambers in the bedrock were carved because the lowest chamber was never finished and the quarrying evidence is still there for anyone to see if they actually care to look.

So, I would say these theories can safely be dismissed as complete nonsense.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Davidius

MG1962a

Ad Honorem
Mar 2019
2,392
Kansas
4. tunnels beneath the pyramid ---- Assuming we're talking about the Great Pyramid, we know the chambers in the bedrock were carved because the lowest chamber was never finished and the quarrying evidence is still there for anyone to see if they actually care to look.
If I recall, there are tools and everything to be found down there. Almost as if the team knocked off Friday, expecting to be back on Monday, and it never happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tomar

Matthew Amt

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
3,074
MD, USA
Complete and utter garbage, I'm afraid, and not new at all. Every bit of this is something dreamed up by people who never looked at a pyramid, and scrupulously ignored the literal mountains of evidence that are freely available.

1 - Stone blocks were "manufactured" using a "kind of cement".... Thus no ramp was necessary and no moving around of heavy objects (one piece of "evidence" is pieces of wood and other rock found partly inside stone blocks)
All the blocks have visible chisel marks on them, plus painted (and/or carved?) quarry markings. No signs of anything cast in place. They don't even fit together like they were cast.

2 - Egyptians had devised a kind of metric system... They observed that a water drop was always 1 cm in diameter (is this true?) and used this as the base unit.... Then using a 100 cm diameter wheel and wrapping a rope around it it is easy to derive Pi ... plus a few other constants... this explains why Pi and other numbers are found in egyptian buildings
Because MATH!!! The angles and dimensions of the pyramids can be related to any beer can or bicycle wheel because that's how angles and circles work. Meaning you can get pi if you need it. (Plus, if you've never noticed that water drops can be different sizes, well...)

3. For harder stones, they melted them using a kind of lens.. making them easy to transport and remelt on the spot (aternatively pour the melted stuff in a cast and make any shape you need)
Except for the presence of tools and tool marks everywhere, and the tiny fact that lenses smaller than Arkansas won't melt stone.

4. Tunnels and chambers beneath the pyramid were not carved out... Instead they were build in a depression, then the depression was filled over... (apparently it would be too difficult to carve out such tunnels at a constant angle, and there are issues with CO2, lack of light etc...)
Except that we can see the cutting marks, and the stone above the tunnels is SOLID STONE.

As others have said, why even bother posting such pyramidiocy? Leave a string of blistering facts in the video comments rather than give any of this tripe a delusion of legitimacy. Sorry to be harsh, but hopefully I have directed the harshness at the video's ideas, not at the poster.

Matthew
 
  • Like
Reactions: tomar

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
14,301
1. ancient cement blocks --- if that was actually the case, why do ancient quarries thoroughly demonstrate the AEs were cutting whole stone blocks? And why aren't the blocks uniform?
On your first point I suppose they would answer that we still have quarries today even though we use cement extensively..... On uniformity they claim the stones have the same height...

More generally, the point is not whether the whole thing makes sense but whether any of the indivudal points they made could have some basis in fact (for example did the egyptians have any kind of cement?)
 

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
14,301
As others have said, why even bother posting such pyramidiocy? Leave a string of blistering facts in the video comments rather than give any of this tripe a delusion of legitimacy. Sorry to be harsh, but hopefully I have directed the harshness at the video's ideas, not at the poster.
As already noted, the point is more to understand whether any point(s) could actually have some basis in fact: like did egyptians circa 2500 BC have access to any kind of cement, did they have access to anything remotely like a lens (as I understand glass was invented circa 3500 BC) , did they actually know PI at the time, did they even have a normalized measuring system (e.g. feets and legs are not normalized) and if not how did they manage without it

edit: I am also amazed that they would do a whole 2 hour movie with lots of animations based on .... nothing..... seems like a whole lot of effort for no gain.... must have cost them a bundle
 
Last edited: