How did the Egyptians build the pyramids?

[shunyadragon]

No Egyptologist agrees with me.

That should be more than hint of the problems with your beliefs concerning science.

Neither do the thousands of scientists and hundreds of years of discoveries and research on the sciences of evolution. I will side with scientists, Egyptologists and archeologists that have done the hard work and research over history of the Egyptians, pyramids and the history of life, It also considers the mythology and superstitions in the proper context of the beliefs of ancient cultures,

They all believe in changeless savages dragging tombs up ramps so there are no possible points of agreement.

No the scientists and Egyptologists do not remotely believe in this foolishness,

 

[cladking]

and consider the history of your posts and your attitudr toward evolution I have absolutely no trust in you.

My disbelief in Evolution is irrelevant to how the pyramids were built.

I've never believed in Evolution and it never rang true to me. it's become something of an interest to me in recent years because the pyramid builders obviously didn't believe in Evolution" or "survival of the fittest" either! They apparently believed all changes in life were sudden and began with awareness;

232b. the second moment after he saw N., the second moment after he perceived N.

They invented agriculture through the imposition of artificial bottlenecks rather than "survival of the fittest".


I don't care. I don't even care how the pyramids were built but I'll continue the research until I can prove it again and again and again.

I only care about knowing how they were built and how species change.

 

[cladking]

That should be more than hint of the problems with your beliefs concerning science.

Show me evidence Egyptology is "science"! It is a pseudoscience or as I used to say it is the science based on the assumptions the pyramid builders were changeless savages who dragged tombs up ramps. The assumptions are wrong so it's not a real "science".

 

[shunyadragon]

There is no "research". Science has not systematically been applied to studying the pyramids and other artefacts since the 19th century when Petrie did it.

Hawass won't even allow publication of the infrared data that prove my theory. Not even Egyptologists can see it.

You can present and publish this on the internet if you wish

Though I believe the data is available and published,

Egyptian pyramids found by infra-red satellite images

Seventeen lost pyramids are among buildings identified from new infra-red images in a satellite survey of Egypt.

www.bbc.com

Archaeology: The wonder of the pyramids - Nature

Andrew Robinson enjoys a volume rounding up research on the complex at Giza, Egypt.

www.nature.com

 

[cladking]

Neither do the thousands of scientists and hundreds of years of discoveries and research on the sciences of evolution. I will side with scientists, Egyptologists and archeologists that have done the hard work and research over history of the Egyptians, pyramids and the history of life, It also considers the mythology and superstitions in the proper context of the beliefs of ancient cultures,

I have never sided with any scientist or philosopher. I side only with experiment and reason. Show me an experiment that supports the use of ramps. Show me evidence. Show me data. Show me reason. Respond to my posts.

What is this modern notion that saying nuh uh is a rebuttal? You have nothing at all.

 

[shunyadragon]

My disbelief in Evolution is irrelevant to how the pyramids were built.

It is extremely relevant considering your irrational attifude toward science, The basic academic science used in the sciences of evolution and Egyptology are the same.

I've never believed in Evolution and it never rang true to me. it's become something of an interest to me in recent years because the pyramid builders obviously didn't believe in Evolution" or "survival of the fittest" either! They apparently believed all changes in life were sudden and began with awareness;

232b. the second moment after he saw N., the second moment after he perceived N.

They invented agriculture through the imposition of artificial bottlenecks rather than "survival of the fittest".


I don't care. I don't even care how the pyramids were built but I'll continue the research until I can prove it again and again and again.

I only care about knowing how they were built and how species change.

The above confirms the problem of your belief in ancient mythology ad religion is the basis for your rejection of evolution. The problems are related in your rejection of science as science.

 

[cladking]

No the scientists and Egyptologists do not remotely believe in this foolishness,

REALLY!

Then why have they invented so many ways to say "they mustta used ramps"?

Address the point.

Now I'll look at your last point and see more ways they have said "they mustta used ramps".

 

[shunyadragon]

I have never sided with any scientist or philosopher. I side only with experiment and reason. Show me an experiment that supports the use of ramps. Show me evidence. Show me data. Show me reason. Respond to my posts.

I have responded to your posts for years. Your problem is clinging to ancient mythology and religion, and rejecting science.

The issue of philosophers is another matter they often do not agree on their "subjective thinking."

It is extremely relevant considering your irrational attifude toward science, The basic academic science used in the sciences of evolution and Egyptology are the same.

The above confirms the problem of your belief in ancient mythology ad religion is the basis for your rejection of evolution. The problems are related in your rejection of science as science

What is this modern notion that saying nuh uh is a rebuttal? You have nothing at all.

Hundreds of years of academic discoveries and research.

 

[shunyadragon]

REALLY!

Really!!!!!

Then why have they invented so many ways to say "they mustta used ramps"?

They did not invent anything, They go by the evidence Egyptians did use ramps.

Address the point.

NO!

Now I'll look at your last point and see more ways they have said "they mustta used ramps".

More nonsense,. There is objective evidence they did use ramps.

 

[cladking]

You can present and publish this on the internet if you wish

Though I believe the data is available and published,

Egyptian pyramids found by infra-red satellite images

Seventeen lost pyramids are among buildings identified from new infra-red images in a satellite survey of Egypt.

www.bbc.com

Archaeology: The wonder of the pyramids - Nature

Andrew Robinson enjoys a volume rounding up research on the complex at Giza, Egypt.

www.nature.com

Thank you, but no.

They took thousands of pictures of G1 on or about October 8th 2015 and have never released these pictures. They released one of an anomaly on the east side I had predicted and one at the entrance I had also predicted. These anomalies perplexed Egyptologists so badly that Hawass issued an urgent plea for all Egyptologists to proffer hypotheses about how they came about. I had predicted them but he didn't call me and ask. Engineers and scientists deal in these things but he called upon Egyptologists. He never got a single sensible hypothesis though any engineer at a glance could tell him there is a heat sink and conduit behind the anomaly. THIS IS HOW I KNEW IT WOULD BE THERE and why I campaigned for years to get them to look or allow a real scientist to look. I knew there was a heat sink the builders called the "Mafdet Mongoose" and a conduit they called the "Cool is the Crown Path". The conduit at the entrance was called the Nurse canal.

This can't be more simple. I'm sorry it's hard to get used to.

All these photos are missing but at that time I suggested they do a long term study and process the data through computers so even the most subtle details will appear. They did this in 2016 and this is the data that's so secret not even Egyptologists can see it. It's secret because it supports my theory. I know how to access this area and it might have been a mistake to tell them and they might already be in. They don't need any more of my help to solve the language because there are lots of people far smarter than me and they might have the data I need to reinvent ancient science. This will take decades because it was so far advanced and alien to the way we think. The ramifications of this knowledge are extreme and will have significant impact on ALL branches of government and ALL industry including every real science. It will even affect alchemy if anyone even cares any longer.

I don't know for a fact that Hawass isn't still stuck in the 19th century or if he's ahead of me. He doesn't talk as much as he used to and I need data. But one thing is certain, he is sitting on data that cost the world billions of dollars to find. It also required hundreds of years of science and reason to find it and this job was made more difficult by the inactions of Egyptologists for several decades. There probably isn't a great deal known because Egyptology needs a ten year lead time to blow their nose. Keeping a lid on the "book of Thot" is impossible because too many people would have to know. It will require many people many years to really understand it.

I'm just rambling for lack of any data because Egyptology doesn't do science.

 

[cladking]

It is extremely relevant considering your irrational attifude toward science, The basic academic science used in the sciences of evolution and Egyptology are the same.

All life is individual. All life is conscious.

All science is individual.

If you don't like my science then show me where I'm wrong just like I keep showing you where you're wrong.

I'm sure you can't because it would never occur to you to investigate something for yourself and all you have is a gigantic monolith you mistake for "science".

 

[cladking]

The basic academic science used in the sciences of evolution and Egyptology are the same.

Noted.

 

[Dimi95]

I can say stones of this size and larger have been used in other cultures in ancient history in building megalithic structures,
Stone Hinge stones are between 20 an 30 tons and they were a more primitive culture,

The atones used in the trilithon at Baalbek, Lebanon were 700 to 900 tons

They were not moved by magic.

Yeah , i am aware of that.
There are other examples of such stones in China and India.

I did not say otherwise , i don't believe in magic myself.

I just asked for opinion on how they would be placed there,nothing more.

 

[cladking]

Yeah , i am aware of that

Nowhere else in the world is a stone of any significant size lifted to any significant height where there is no ground on which to lift it.

They lifted large amounts of stone at Machu Pichu but these were small stones and they used a linear funicular here as well.

Imagine standing in a desert and telling someone you want them to lift dozens of 50t + stones 60' upward!!!!

Egyptologists can't even differentiate between pyramids and piles of rubble so of course they can't see the difficulty in building a pyramid.


I can't imagine why anyone would put them in charge especially after proving their reluctance to do any science for 130 years.

 

[cladking]

They go by the evidence Egyptians did use ramps.

There is no evidence of any kind direct or indirect that any stone was ever lifted on any great pyramid using ramps. Indeed, the word "ramp" isn't even attested from the great pyramid building age!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As far as that goes there is also only indirect evidence any great pyramid was a tomb.

There is no direct or indirect evidence the builders were superstitious except the PT from 2 centuries after the great pyramids feel like incantation when solved in terms of the "book of the dead".

Meanwhile I present huge amounts of evidence direct and indirect including making accurate predictions that they used linear funiculars.

Future historians will get a belly laugh out of ramps and the 20 years they were disproven with no effect.

And you're still ignoring every fact. go back and look at the pictures then tell me about the ramps they mussta used.

 

[cladking]

More nonsense,. There is objective evidence they did use ramps.

Can you put any of your evidence in your own words? All I see in every post is "they mustta used ramps. If you like we can parse one of these convoluted and complex sentences that say "they mustta used ramps.". You can gussy this up and put it in any terms but it still says "they mustta used ramps" and our job is to figure out ancient superstitions. Lehner calls it "studying the pyramids with your back to them". Dr Lehner is one of the most famous and powerful Egyptologists.

Ramps have been debunked. The word "ramp" isn't even attested. The Theory of Linear Funiculars has made many accurate predictions. Now's the time to use reason.

 

[cladking]

All great pyramids were built in steps because the steps were the means by which stones were raised.

This is dozens of times more efficient than ramps.

It's just this simple I debunked ramps long ago.

Every stone on every great pyramid was lifted from the step tops. All the words needed to do this are not only attested but actually appear in the writing organized to say this. "Tefnut by means of her arms makes the earth high under the sky.". It consistently says this and it never says that shu by means of stinky feet on a ramp makes the earth high under the sky.

You are wrong and you are not addressing my points. Citation of Egyptologists who eschew science and aren't allowed to see the data is not an argument at all. There is still no evidence direct or indirect for ramps.

I could make a far better argument for ramps than you. Of course the evidence would be very thin.

 

[wellwisher]

The problem is the men have to lift their own weight too. May as well jump in the counterweight with their bag of sand.

That could work. The main idea was to not have men straining over each block of stone, but rather create a work effort that can last over the days shift. Carrying a 50 pound pack up a ramp and then a rest as they walk downhill. When it is time to lift the empty sand container back up, the slaves coming down can help pull the rope.

Two other considerations are when moving a weight W up a ramp, the force needed is W* sin(alpha) or a fraction of the weight. This allow the container to be smaller. If the ramp was 20 degrees the weight becomes 0.34W needing less sand.

The real gain is to lower the friction between the stone and the ramp. This can be done with rollers; logs, as show below.

 

[Pogo]

There is no evidence of any kind direct or indirect that any stone was ever lifted on any great pyramid using ramps. Indeed, the word "ramp" isn't even attested from the great pyramid building age!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As far as that goes there is also only indirect evidence any great pyramid was a tomb.

There is no direct or indirect evidence the builders were superstitious except the PT from 2 centuries after the great pyramids feel like incantation when solved in terms of the "book of the dead".

Meanwhile I present huge amounts of evidence direct and indirect including making accurate predictions that they used linear funiculars.

Future historians will get a belly laugh out of ramps and the 20 years they were disproven with no effect.

And you're still ignoring every fact. go back and look at the pictures then tell me about the ramps they mussta used.

In physics, a ramp refers to an inclined surface or sloped plane that connects two different heights. It is a simple machine that allows an object to be moved between these heights with less force than would be required to lift it directly. A ramp changes the direction and magnitude of the applied force, offering a mechanical advantage.

Key Concepts of a Ramp in Physics:​

1. Inclined Plane: A ramp is essentially a type of inclined plane, one of the six classical simple machines. An inclined plane is a flat surface that is tilted at an angle to the horizontal.
2. Force Distribution:
   • When an object moves up a ramp, the force required to move it is reduced compared to lifting it straight upward. This is because the force is distributed over a longer distance.
   • The input force required to move the object up the ramp is less than the force required to lift it vertically, but the distance the object moves is greater.
3. Mechanical Advantage:
   • The mechanical advantage (MA) of a ramp is given by the ratio of the length of the ramp to its height: MA=Length of RampHeight\text{MA} = \frac{\text{Length of Ramp}}{\text{Height}}MA=HeightLength of Ramp
   • A longer ramp provides a greater mechanical advantage, requiring less force to move an object upwards, but the trade-off is that the object will travel a longer distance.
4. Work and Energy:
   • Work is done when a force is applied to move an object through a distance. For a ramp, the work done to move an object up the ramp is equal to the work done to lift the object vertically (ignoring friction). This means that the energy required to move the object is conserved.
   • The formula for work (W) is: W=F×dW = F \times dW=F×d where FFF is the force applied and ddd is the distance moved.
5. Friction:
   • The friction between the object and the surface of the ramp can reduce the efficiency of the system. If friction is significant, more force will be required to move the object up the ramp.
   • The frictional force depends on the normal force (the force perpendicular to the ramp's surface) and the coefficient of friction between the object and the ramp.
6. Angle of Incline:
   • The angle of inclination (θ\thetaθ) of the ramp affects the force required to move an object. The steeper the ramp, the greater the force needed to overcome the component of the object's weight acting down the ramp. The relationship between the angle and the force required is given by: Fparallel=mgsin⁡(θ)F_{\text{parallel}} = mg \sin(\theta)Fparallel=mgsin(θ) where mmm is the mass of the object, ggg is the acceleration due to gravity, and θ\thetaθ is the angle of the ramp.

Summary:​

A ramp in physics is an inclined plane that reduces the amount of force needed to lift an object by spreading the required work over a greater distance. It is a simple machine that uses the concepts of mechanical advantage, force distribution, and energy conservation to help in moving objects between different heights with less effort.


This is also the basis of a funicular, the only difference is how the motive force is applied to the load being lifted. I really don't care what word you want to use, but unless they had Skyhooks* they used ramps.




*A hypothetical device that uses a long cable to lift an object from the sky

 

[Pogo]

That could work. The main idea was to not have men straining over each block of stone, but rather create a work effort that can last over the days shift. Carrying a 50 pound pack up a ramp and then a rest as they walk downhill. When it is time to lift the empty sand container back up, the slaves coming down can help pull the rope.

Two other considerations are when moving a weight W up a ramp, the force needed is W* sin(alpha) or a fraction of the weight. This allow the container to be smaller. If the ramp was 20 degrees the weight becomes 0.34W needing less sand.

The real gain is to lower the friction between the stone and the ramp. This can be done with rollers; logs, as show below.

Rollers unfortunately won't work up the side of an unclad pyramid, but a stoneboat would reduce friction losses.