How did the Egyptians build the pyramids?

[shunyadragon]

I'm sorry the world is so complex and I can't spoon feed you every single one of the millions of steps I required to solve how the pyramids were built. It would be wonderful if I could. Maybe I could just do a two way vulcan mind meld and dump everything in. Do you realize I've done more than 100,000 google searches? I've done reems of computations. Just because the computations are simple and the searches were often dead ends doesn't make the task easy or easy to relay to those who can't imagine metaphysical language or ancient people who didn't believe in intelligence but were still a lot smarter than most Egyptologists. I just don't know what to say. I can tell you what's there even before the real scientists find it whether Zahi Hawass allows its publication or not. I can tell you exactly how I solved it and how Egyptological methodology is so bad they got everything wrong. But I can't understand it for you. I can tell you what the big picture is but that picture not be reduced to anything that fits your models.

There were no bumpkins, no gods, no ramps, and no means to directly understand the builders. We can only understand their consciousness through making models.

They found the quarries, ramps, villages of skilled craftsmen, writings describing the construction. By the way the crafts carved their testimony on some of the blocks.

The Egyptians built the pyramids and no bumpkins

 

[Pogo]

Always read a source for yourself. @shunyadragon conveniently left out the following from his source.

Lime from fireplace ash and salt were mixed in with it. The water evaporated, leaving a moist, clay-like mixture. This wet “concrete” would have been carried to the site and packed into wooden moulds where it would set hard in a few days. Mr Davidovits and his team at the Geopolymer Institute at Saint-Quentin tested the method recently, producing a large block of concrete limestone in ten days.

New support for their case came from Guy Demortier, a materials scientist at Namur University in Belgium. Originally a sceptic, he told the French magazine that a decade of study had made him a convert: “The three majestic Pyramids of Cheops, Khephren and Mykerinos are well and truly made from concrete stones.”

The concrete theorists also point out differences in density of the pyramid stones, which have a higher mass near the bottom and bubbles near the top, like old-style cement blocks.

Opponents of the theory dispute the scientific evidence. They also say that the diverse shapes of the stones show that moulds were not used. They add that a huge amount of limestone chalk and burnt wood would have been needed to make the concrete, while the Egyptians had the manpower to hoist all the natural stone they wanted.

The concrete theorists say that they will be unable to prove their theory conclusively until the Egyptian authorities give them access to substantial samples.

So you have nothing except for some sort of conspiracy theory that they could not move blocks but could produce some sort of faux blocks using a method that there is no evidence they used or even knew about.

You also have no evidence that the stone was not natural as apparently nobody will let you waste their time, or more likely they already know it is out to lunch.

Ok. Google tells me that some of the tops of some of the pyramids may have been built of concrete, but you are also saying it is not concrete but reconstituted limestone.

Sorry this is just silly and pathetic. Maybe they did come up with some faux limestone, but it isn't limestone and your argument and justification do not call into question whether blocks were quarried and transported. I'm sorry, but the idea of lost technology just doesn't fly.

 

[Pogo]

I'm sorry the world is so complex and I can't spoon feed you every single one of the millions of steps I required to solve how the pyramids were built. It would be wonderful if I could. Maybe I could just do a two way vulcan mind meld and dump everything in. Do you realize I've done more than 100,000 google searches? I've done reems of computations. Just because the computations are simple and the searches were often dead ends doesn't make the task easy or easy to relay to those who can't imagine metaphysical language or ancient people who didn't believe in intelligence but were still a lot smarter than most Egyptologists. I just don't know what to say. I can tell you what's there even before the real scientists find it whether Zahi Hawass allows its publication or not. I can tell you exactly how I solved it and how Egyptological methodology is so bad they got everything wrong. But I can't understand it for you. I can tell you what the big picture is but that picture not be reduced to anything that fits your models.

There were no bumpkins, no gods, no ramps, and no means to directly understand the builders. We can only understand their consciousness through making models.

Yeah, the usual cop out. It is too complex and only I as one of 8 billion humans can understand it. Sorry not buying the odds, I would rather bet on pathogenesis for humans.

 

[GoodAttention]

So you have nothing except for some sort of conspiracy theory that they could not move blocks but could produce some sort of faux blocks using a method that there is no evidence they used or even knew about.

What are you on about? This was @shunyadragon source???

Until recently it was hard for geologists to distinguish between natural limestone and the kind that would have been made by reconstituting liquefied lime.
But according to Professor Gilles Hug, of the French National Aerospace Research Agency (Onera), and Professor Michel Barsoum, of Drexel University in Philadelphia, the covering of the great Pyramids at Giza consists of two types of stone: one from the quarries and one man-made.
“There’s no way around it. The chemistry is well and truly different,” Professor Hug told Science et Vie magazine. Their study is being published this month in the Journal of the American Ceramic Society.
The pair used X-rays, a plasma torch and electron microscopes to compare small fragments from pyramids with stone from the Toura and Maadi quarries.
They found “traces of a rapid chemical reaction which did not allow natural crystalisation . . . The reaction would be inexplicable if the stones were quarried, but perfectly comprehensible if one accepts that they were cast like concrete.”
The pair believe that the concrete method was used only for the stones on the higher levels of the Pyramids. There are some 2.5 million stone blocks on the Cheops Pyramid. The 10-tonne granite blocks at their heart were also natural, they say. The professors agree with the “Davidovits theory” that soft limestone was quarried on the damp south side of the Giza Plateau. This was then dissolved in large, Nile-fed pools until it became a watery slurry.

You also have no evidence that the stone was not natural as apparently nobody will let you waste their time, or more likely they already know it is out to lunch.

Ok. Google tells me that some of the tops of some of the pyramids may have been built of concrete, but you are also saying it is not concrete but reconstituted limestone.

Sorry this is just silly and pathetic. Maybe they did come up with some faux limestone, but it isn't limestone and your argument and justification do not call into question whether blocks were quarried and transported. I'm sorry, but the idea of lost technology just doesn't fly.

Who cares if it is limestone or faux limestone? The point is that it needs to be assessed, and that’s from experts in the field! The process to make reconstituted limestone is NOT highly technical, and the opposition to this view isn’t valid, since different moulds could have been used, and the components required sourced over time.

You keep thinking there is a HUGE difference between natural limestone and reconstituted limestone, but there isn’t. Your lack of understanding is comical, since you ignore the opinion of experts, and lack simple understanding of what limestone even is.

As I said initially, the consideration of moving a 2 tonne block across land and water and then lifted up is imbecilic. If you want to keep considering that go ahead, since it suits you.

 

[cladking]

The pyramid builders were drawn to Giza from all over Egypt. It appears that there was a permanent workforce of skilled laborers, who lived with their families in an established village. It is not known exactly how many skilled workers lived in this village, but one estimate places the number at approximately 5,000.

Yes. The entire village would hold about 5000 people but many of these were support staff and administrative. It held equal numbers of men, women, and children suggest half of the work was women's work. This leaves only about 2000 workers. Every single one of these would be needed in the quarries the first several years. Where was the army of stone draggers and ramp builders? 5000 people is barely enough to take care of such an army much less cut the stones too.

Egyptological ideas are highly unrealistic. Men sleeping on ramps would perish in bad weather and still need thousands of people to care for them. Speaking of perishing can you imagine how many would die of heat exhaustion dragging stones on a hot day in the blistering sun a mile up a long ramp with no hope of first aid. How many stones would fall off the flimsy ramps onto workers below even triggering cascade failures. The pyramid would be a murder machine but there are few bodies in the workers cemeteries and they each show excellent medical care including bones expertly set and brain surgery.

Egyptological theory is not supported by any evidence at all. Their reaction to the low number of workers has in the past to say stones are smaller at the top of the pyramid and this somehow was supposed to make it easier. Ironically stone size follows a pattern that is not "smaller at the top" anyway.

 

[Pogo]

What are you on about? This was @shunyadragon source???

Until recently it was hard for geologists to distinguish between natural limestone and the kind that would have been made by reconstituting liquefied lime.
But according to Professor Gilles Hug, of the French National Aerospace Research Agency (Onera), and Professor Michel Barsoum, of Drexel University in Philadelphia, the covering of the great Pyramids at Giza consists of two types of stone: one from the quarries and one man-made.
“There’s no way around it. The chemistry is well and truly different,” Professor Hug told Science et Vie magazine. Their study is being published this month in the Journal of the American Ceramic Society.
The pair used X-rays, a plasma torch and electron microscopes to compare small fragments from pyramids with stone from the Toura and Maadi quarries.
They found “traces of a rapid chemical reaction which did not allow natural crystalisation . . . The reaction would be inexplicable if the stones were quarried, but perfectly comprehensible if one accepts that they were cast like concrete.”
The pair believe that the concrete method was used only for the stones on the higher levels of the Pyramids. There are some 2.5 million stone blocks on the Cheops Pyramid. The 10-tonne granite blocks at their heart were also natural, they say. The professors agree with the “Davidovits theory” that soft limestone was quarried on the damp south side of the Giza Plateau. This was then dissolved in large, Nile-fed pools until it became a watery slurry.




Who cares if it is limestone or faux limestone? The point is that it needs to be assessed, and that’s from experts in the field! The process to make reconstituted limestone is NOT highly technical, and the opposition to this view isn’t valid, since different moulds could have been used, and the components required sourced over time.

You keep thinking there is a HUGE difference between natural limestone and reconstituted limestone, but there isn’t. Your lack of understanding is comical, since you ignore the opinion of experts, and lack simple understanding of what limestone even is.

As I said initially, the consideration of moving a 2 tonne block across land and water and then lifted up is imbecilic. If you want to keep considering that go ahead, since it suits you.

So you end up with ancient aliens, humans could not move 2 ton blocks so the pyramids must have been built out of some lost technology.
This is the engineer conclusion, the scientist says hmm that didn't entirely explain it but I still have no evidence of magic so I will keep looking.

If they were just going to crush the stuff, why even quarry it in blocks?

I'm sorry but as long as the pyramids have been known about and looted, to complain that we can't provide evidence for our hypothesis lacks credibility.

 

[cladking]

Work on Khufu’s Pyramid is thought to have taken about 20 years.

Yes.

But it took ten years of preparation and this was construction of the water retention system around the pyramid as well as the rest of the infrastructure. It involved building using ten years of production of the Turah Mines because they couldn't supply the material with no lead time.

 

[GoodAttention]

So you end up with ancient aliens, humans could not move 2 ton blocks so the pyramids must have been built out of some lost technology.

What do you mean lost technology? We have an excellent understanding as to what they did because we do it today and it isn’t complicated.

This is the engineer conclusion, the scientist says hmm that didn't entirely explain it but I still have no evidence of magic so I will keep looking.

If they were just going to crush the stuff, why even quarry it in blocks?

I asked if “blocks” was a confirmed understanding, after which you the expressed interest in this theory!?

Remember? 40 men with 50-60kg of crushed limestone? Kharfu’s Lake was where they poured the limestone?

A block would have just been smashed up as soon as it was quarried out.

I'm sorry but as long as the pyramids have been known about and looted, to complain that we can't provide evidence for our hypothesis lacks credibility.

Egyptologists are against the theory, and they obviously have the political clout. It is certainly conceivable. Unsolved “mystery” = ongoing funding.

At this point are you still in the natural limestone cut and “transported” and then lifted up theory??

 

[Pogo]

Yes. The entire village would hold about 5000 people but many of these were support staff and administrative. It held equal numbers of men, women, and children suggest half of the work was women's work. This leaves only about 2000 workers. Every single one of these would be needed in the quarries the first several years. Where was the army of stone draggers and ramp builders? 5000 people is barely enough to take care of such an army much less cut the stones too.

Egyptological ideas are highly unrealistic. Men sleeping on ramps would perish in bad weather and still need thousands of people to care for them. Speaking of perishing can you imagine how many would die of heat exhaustion dragging stones on a hot day in the blistering sun a mile up a long ramp with no hope of first aid. How many stones would fall off the flimsy ramps onto workers below even triggering cascade failures. The pyramid would be a murder machine but there are few bodies in the workers cemeteries and they each show excellent medical care including bones expertly set and brain surgery.

Egyptological theory is not supported by any evidence at all. Their reaction to the low number of workers has in the past to say stones are smaller at the top of the pyramid and this somehow was supposed to make it easier. Ironically stone size follows a pattern that is not "smaller at the top" anyway.

 

[cladking]

Sure it wasn't aliens, or are they equivalent to gods in their ability to fly limestone blocks? Just how was it done, and who and what methods did they use?
we are not looking for your mental understanding but something that does not equate to magic that we might understand. If not this then understand, we will have to class you with the delusional. Sorry but it appears you are comfortable with that position.

I keep telling you that all the evidence points straight to linear funiculars, literally. And figuratively, and every other way. I can tell you exactly where each operated and point to their ruins. I can tell you the sequence of events and use all this knowledge to make predictions that Egyptology can not make.

There were two primary funiculars to start; the east and west cliff face counterweights. The western was a real workhorse that pulled stones up the eastern edge of the main quarry right up onto the growing structure. The eastern started slowly and gained in importance as the pork progressed. It was fed by the NNE Trench and went straight down the cliff about 100' east of the NE corner. It pulled stone between the queens pyramids and the first row of mastabas right up to near the causeway where the trial passages flipped the stones and set them on the causeway for the western main counterweight. There were three funiculars on the north side with the western lifting stones from the base, the eastern from the quarry and the center smaller one was used for supplies and men. They also used numerous small funiculars for specialized lifts. Some of these might lift only a few hundred stones before they were taken apart and reassembled elsewhere. Those that did very little work were likely powered by manpower but no ramps. The Grand gallery was used for lifting water to save having to rig loads as many times. Since stones only went up 81' at a time they often had to be rerigged and carrying all this rope was a lot of work. For some stones it was easier to lift them 162' at a time and to start from 81'. These people were very efficient.

The step were filled in as the funicular capacity was available. In out of the way places they installed casing stones. The pyramid was finished from the top down. The top step was installed from the bottom up and then the second to the top from the bottom up. The 21' gaps between steps were filled in with partial stones and lots of mortar. Some of these partial stones were as light as one ton and installed by men hanging from the apex. The m3.t-wt.t which stood north of the pyramid was the last thing cannibalized to fill in the area below the entrance. When they were done no tura limestone was left because it was all recut for use as cladding stones.

No, they didn't mustta used ramps. No ramps were involved.

You can actually see most of these funicular routes if you know what to look for.

 

[cladking]

Maybe you could actually explain why ship transport was not possible and then present your more rational solution since all the evidence is that the blocks were transported.?

I said you can't load 500 boats a year in the dry season. It's crazy to suggest it.

 

[cladking]

Clarify?

The Pyramid Texts seem to imply the stones quarried at Giza for G1 were inverted right before they flew up the side of the pyramid so that they were all installed upside down to their orientation in the ground. There's some possibility that they weren't referring to G1 or that this applied to all the stone. It doesn't seem to make sense since stones would tend to be wider on the bottom so more stable right side up. But on this basis I suspect the "trial passages" were used by some means to flip stones. Perhaps wind power was used to make the water oscillate from side to side. I just don't know and would like to.

I could be wrong about the stones being wider at the bottom since the men would need room to drive wedges under the blocks.

 

[Pogo]

While we are on this silliness about lifting 2.5 ton blocks, a medium SUV at this point, I used to deliver pianos including grand and old uprights up stairs.
Roughly 500 lbs or more for many, up stairs of up to 40 degrees or so in order houses, comparable to 42 for pyramids if you want to see a rainbow. It took 2 of us only and couldn't use more due to the width of the stairs. It really was not that difficult for two 150 lb people except when you had to actually lift the piano vertically to get around a corner and then each of us had to lift the 250 lbs each. Anyhow, for a bunch of so so Merikans it was not a question of if we could get it up the stairs but if it would actually fit without hitting a ceiling or whatnot. 2.5 tons is 5000 lbs or 10 pianos and so a crew of 20 would be able to haul a block up the side of a pyramid as easily as we hauled pianos up stairs. This does not require aliens.

 

[cladking]

They found the quarries, ramps, villages of skilled craftsmen, writings describing the construction.

No.

There are no ramps except in the eyes of Egyptologists. There is no writing at all of any nature from the great pyramid building age. Not one single sentence exists unless Merrer's Diary has them and this was unknown until just ten years ago. There are no drawings either. This is all nonsense dreamed up by Egyptologists. They took the Pyramid Texts which is actually from three centuries later and solved it in terms of the "book of the dead" from 13 centuries later. Then they pronounced it "incantation" and use it as proof the builders were ignorant and superstitious.

No writing. No ramps (the word "ramp" is unattested), no drawings and no place for an army of stone draggers to live. It's all nonsense.

They refuse to use science and justify their refusal by saying it doesn't even matter how it was built since they could only have used ramps. Understanding a book of incantation is more important than understanding how the pyramids were built.

I can't even express the level of nonsense involved or the level of their methodology by which they reached their erroneous "conclusions"

 

[cladking]

While we are on this silliness about lifting 2.5 ton blocks, a medium SUV at this point, I used to deliver pianos including grand and old uprights up stairs.
Roughly 500 lbs or more for many, up stairs of up to 40 degrees or so in order houses, comparable to 42 for pyramids if you want to see a rainbow. It took 2 of us only and couldn't use more due to the width of the stairs. It really was not that difficult for two 150 lb people except when you had to actually lift the piano vertically to get around a corner and then each of us had to lift the 250 lbs each. Anyhow, for a bunch of so so Merikans it was not a question of if we could get it up the stairs but if it would actually fit without hitting a ceiling or whatnot. 2.5 tons is 5000 lbs or 10 pianos and so a crew of 20 would be able to haul a block up the side of a pyramid as easily as we hauled pianos up stairs. This does not require aliens.

 

[GoodAttention]

While we are on this silliness about lifting 2.5 ton blocks, a medium SUV at this point, I used to deliver pianos including grand and old uprights up stairs.
Roughly 500 lbs or more for many, up stairs of up to 40 degrees or so in order houses, comparable to 42 for pyramids if you want to see a rainbow. It took 2 of us only and couldn't use more due to the width of the stairs. It really was not that difficult for two 150 lb people except when you had to actually lift the piano vertically to get around a corner and then each of us had to lift the 250 lbs each. Anyhow, for a bunch of so so Merikans it was not a question of if we could get it up the stairs but if it would actually fit without hitting a ceiling or whatnot. 2.5 tons is 5000 lbs or 10 pianos and so a crew of 20 would be able to haul a block up the side of a pyramid as easily as we hauled pianos up stairs. This does not require aliens.

Haul a block hey? As an engineer please explain how this would happen.

 

[cladking]

I worked in a cement plant where I could move 20,000 tons of material in a day. Trying to get co-workers to help clean up a 500 lb spill was so hard it was easier to shovel it up myself. Working with one other man you know how hard he's working. It can be seen. You can tell how much material each man in a ditch digging party is moving. Experience tells me no stone would even move up any ramp unless you had so many many men leaning forward would do it.

People today have no idea what 6 1/2 million tons even means. They have no idea that in order to do all this work you have to get the men to the site but then there's no room anyone can work. Poncho Vila once derailed his getaway rail hand car. He had twenty men try to get it on the track and they couldn't budge it. So he had ten stand down and they still couldn't budge it. He had five more stand down and the remaining men easily rerailed the car. Trying to build a pyramid with ramps is about the same as trying to rerail a handcar with 10,000 men. You may as well run from the law.

No ramps. No evidence for ramps.

 

[Pogo]

I keep telling you that all the evidence points straight to linear funiculars, literally. And figuratively, and every other way. I can tell you exactly where each operated and point to their ruins. I can tell you the sequence of events and use all this knowledge to make predictions that Egyptology can not make.

There were two primary funiculars to start; the east and west cliff face counterweights. The western was a real workhorse that pulled stones up the eastern edge of the main quarry right up onto the growing structure. The eastern started slowly and gained in importance as the pork progressed. It was fed by the NNE Trench and went straight down the cliff about 100' east of the NE corner. It pulled stone between the queens pyramids and the first row of mastabas right up to near the causeway where the trial passages flipped the stones and set them on the causeway for the western main counterweight. There were three funiculars on the north side with the western lifting stones from the base, the eastern from the quarry and the center smaller one was used for supplies and men. They also used numerous small funiculars for specialized lifts. Some of these might lift only a few hundred stones before they were taken apart and reassembled elsewhere. Those that did very little work were likely powered by manpower but no ramps. The Grand gallery was used for lifting water to save having to rig loads as many times. Since stones only went up 81' at a time they often had to be rerigged and carrying all this rope was a lot of work. For some stones it was easier to lift them 162' at a time and to start from 81'. These people were very efficient.

The step were filled in as the funicular capacity was available. In out of the way places they installed casing stones. The pyramid was finished from the top down. The top step was installed from the bottom up and then the second to the top from the bottom up. The 21' gaps between steps were filled in with partial stones and lots of mortar. Some of these partial stones were as light as one ton and installed by men hanging from the apex. The m3.t-wt.t which stood north of the pyramid was the last thing cannibalized to fill in the area below the entrance. When they were done no tura limestone was left because it was all recut for use as cladding stones.

No, they didn't mustta used ramps. No ramps were involved.

You can actually see most of these funicular routes if you know what to look for.

So they weren't funiculars but now we have lots of them or was it that they weren't ramps? Are they pyramids just an example of basic engineering and simple machines or not?

What is the significance of the building of the pyramids beyond a powerful ruler who could amass a workforce and some people with some mathematical and geometric understanding at maybe a high school level today?

 

[Pogo]

Haul a block hey? As an engineer please explain how this would happen.

seriously, wrap a sling around it and pull that, a little better as the Egyptians did, drill some holes to insert handles for more force points and for basic pulling put the block on a sledge to reduce the frictional area. Not to mention using rollers if convenient.
But seriously.

 

[blü 2]

Of course it sounds absurd. It's runs counter to dozens of your core beliefs.

Indeed it does. Especially that one of my core beliefs that says that conclusions are best drawn from impartial assessment of facts.

(And just to be clear, by 'fact' I mean an accurate statement about a real state of affairs. And by 'real' I mean, found in the world external to the self, which we know about through our senses.)