Home › Forums › MGTOW Central › Egyptian Pyramids: Water Shaft Theory
Tagged: Construction
This topic contains 16 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by 
sidecar 4 years, 6 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
Just saw this video and had never heard this theory before. I never liked the ramp theory and using logs to roll giant blocks. Any engineers in the house to weigh in on this?
I bathe in the tears of single moms.
I find this hypothesis lacking. It rest on the Egyptians having the capacity to created a strong enough seal to handle the pressures involved. A small amount of spillage can ruin the entire vertical system in minutes. Heck the flotation method used will be destroyed with the sheer level of friction involved when contacting any surface.
This doesn’t hold water! HAHA, but this is a bit of an off shot on the ideal of how the limestone blocks were transported such long distances.
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
Abraham LincolnI believe the pyramids were made by an Alien Race and Korben Dallas will save us all WITH LOVE!
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
Abraham LincolnThe theory doesn’t seem very plausible, but that’s just my take. I can see all kinds of issues with all that water. First off, it’s a s~~~load of water and it has to come from somewhere, and keep coming. Evaporation alone would be a problem. Bringing in more and more water daily would become a major chore in and of itself. Then there are blockage and containment issues. You’d have to go through the tedious task of making sure all shafts, tubes, pipes, or whatever they used were sealed in such a way as to guarantee they wouldn’t leak or burst, because if they did, you’d be screwed. And then, the simple fact that all that water would begin to stagnate in short order and it wouldn’t be long until it became a mosquito infested disease pool.
As of now, I’ll continue to roll with traditional thinking. A s~~~load of manpower on the ground doing the grunt work, and a higher level of ingenuity directing traffic, specifically when it comes to the actual building and placement of the stones that will eventually form the pyramid. If you’re off just a little bit, the whole structure is off by quite a lot.
And it’s entirely possible, and from some of what I have read, likely, that the Egyptians didn’t even build a large portion of the pyramids, and if they did, they were likely attempting to copy what was already there.
It’s actually a very deep topic that can potentially wander off into a whole bunch of areas, including the supernatural. But in the end, we are simply looking too far back in history to have definitive knowledge. We are left to speculate.
Just another crackpot theory,
The Egyptians did use water in tiny channels to level the pyramid building site, but that’s about it as far as water and pyramids are concerned. And that leveling system was basically just the same thing they’d been doing for millennia leveling their fields for even irrigation, only in stone. And why were the Egyptians so good at leveling fields? Because they didn’t have any serious water lifting technology. Their fields had to be low and level or they would have been dry. The best they had was a bucket on a pole.
Then there’s the matter of buoyancy. In order to float a stone up to a height you must first lift an equivalent mass of water up to that height. Archimedes figured that one out. So they’d still be lifting tons and tons of weight, only in water form, which tends to drip and slosh and leak, unlike stone blocks. Even if they could somehow actually withstand the water pressure at the bottom (no f~~~ing way), and had a 100% efficient method of lifting water, this whole silly idea would require more work than just lifting the stones. And complicated systems that require more work than simple ones are a non-starter.
We know the Egyptians used big ramps. You can see the remnants of them in satellite pictures. We know they hauled the blocks on sledges, because we’ve found remnants of those too. We know they lubricated the sledges with Nile silt and oil because we have pictures on tomb walls showing the ancient Egyptians doing exactly that. And also because a bunch of elderly archaeologists decided to test that idea back in the ’70s and found that once the stones got moving on a nice layer of oily silt they would slide along like greased cats~~~ on glass such that a few old men could haul them around with ease.
We KNOW how the Egyptians built the pyramids. It’s no mystery.
The mystery is why people keep coming up with these crackpot hypotheses.
We KNOW how the Egyptians built the pyramids. It’s no mystery.
I wouldn’t make the argument that Egyptians didn’t build pyramids. I would make the argument that it’s entirely possible that they copied something that was already known to exist. There are ancient pyramids all over the world. There is a reason these sites are so guarded and secret. There’s a reason militaries seeks to gain control of these kinds of sites. It’s because it’s ALL a mystery. It all goes back to Mystery Babylon. Hidden knowledge.
Check out the scientific studies regarding pyramids being used as potential electrical conductors. Again, hidden knowledge that we are only beginning to understand.
Why is it that the mortar used on the Great Pyramid of Giza is stronger than anything we can replicate today despite being analyzed in depth by the most modern methods known to man? The mortar alone is stronger than the stone made to build the structure, and is the main reason that despite it being the largest (claimed) pyramid known to us, it stands while the rather large majority of the rest of them all corrode and fall apart. Again, hidden knowledge.
There are all kinds of places to go on this topic. It’s not cut and dry by any means when we are going this far back into history and some of it isn’t even documented, such as the hundreds of pyramids in China that they don’t allow anyone access to. Why? Because it’s hidden knowledge, that’s why. Whatever they find, they are going to keep and exploit.
This world is an illusion. People make claims. History is written by the victors, which means a lot of the time, you’re only getting one side. It’s deeper than what the surface shows you.
If I recall correctly, some archaeologists have excavated the remains of the ramp and the village where the construction workers lived. There was even a TV show about it on one of the science channels.
Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?
This world is an illusion. People make claims. History is written by the victors, which means a lot of the time, you’re only getting one side. It’s deeper than what the surface shows you.
I agree and also with the fact that there are things that are mysterious about how some of these civilisations were able to understand some laws that we don’t understand living in modern times and if someone tries to do it, they either get shut down or get bought.
Life consists of two days, one for you one against you. So when it's for you don't be proud or reckless, and when it's against you be patient, for both days are test for you.
Anonymous9Doesn’t account for the accuracy in geometric design.
The world has many pyramids, and many are along the same latitude.
I wouldn’t make the argument that Egyptians didn’t build pyramids. I would make the argument that it’s entirely possible that they copied something that was already known to exist. There are ancient pyramids all over the world.
Do you mean they didn’t invent pyramids? Well obviously they didn’t do it uniquely, but they did work them out all on their own. How do we know this? Because we can see their prototypes and failures and incomplete projects all up and down the Nile. From the step pyramid to the bent pyramid to the broken pyramid to the red pyramid and in between until they finally got it all together at Giza.
Of course other primitive societies also built pyramids or pyramid like buildings. None of them copied any others though. Why? Because if you want to build tall, but only have primitive technology, you can’t build anything but a pyramid. You have to make it narrow as you go up or it will collapse. A pyramid is basically a pile of rock with a tiny bit of added geometry. It’s actual towers that are rare in ancient cultures, not pyramids.
There is a reason these sites are so guarded and secret.
Two reasons, actually. Firstly so that tourists and vandals don’t f~~~ them up as they so often have in the past. Khufu’s sarcophagus used to be a wonder of precision stone carving until the tourists got at it. Now it’s just a dull, busted up rock. And the second reason they’re guarded is to charge admission. Can’t let anyone see without paying first.
Check out the scientific studies regarding pyramids being used as potential electrical conductors.
None of those studies are very scientific. More crackpottery.
Why is it that the mortar used on the Great Pyramid of Giza is stronger than anything we can replicate today despite being analyzed in depth by the most modern methods known to man?
It isn’t. Seriously where are you getting this stuff? What mortar they used is barely worthy of the term “mortar”. It’s crumbly worthless s~~~; basically mud, limestone dust, and sand. At best. And they didn’t even know to burn the limestone to make lime. It’s actually a little difficult to find any mortar in the pyramids because most of the exposed mortar that would be visible has largely washed away long since. Because it’s so s~~~ty. The pyramids are held together by gravity, not mortar, hence their pyramid shape as I mentioned above.
despite it being the largest (claimed) pyramid known to us, it stands while the rather large majority of the rest of them all corrode and fall apart.
In the Nile Valley at least it’s because Khufu’s pyramid was the first one where they finally worked out how to do it. Most of the collapsed pyramids are earlier attempts where they hadn’t worked everything out yet or were never completed. And it’s the largest because it essentially bankrupted the country. Later attempts were smaller because they couldn’t afford to make them big anymore. Khufu’s successor Jeffrey (f~~~ if I can remember how to spell his name) built a much smaller pyramid than his father, but tried to cheat by starting it on a much higher plateau. Even with his less ambitious project he couldn’t afford to complete it before he died. It took quite a while for the country to build up grain stores to where Khafre could attempt anything like as big as Khufu. After that pyramids only got smaller as later pharaoh’s found they had better uses for what little grain stores they had or tried to conserve resources by experimenting with easier building techniques.
It’s not cut and dry by any means when we are going this far back into history and some of it isn’t even documented, such as the hundreds of pyramids in China that they don’t allow anyone access to. Why? Because it’s hidden knowledge, that’s why.
But it is cut and dry, at least for Egypt. Again we KNOW how the pyramids were built. And why don’t the Chinese allow access to their pyramids? Well partly for the reasons I stated above, protection and admission fees, but mostly because, well, it’s China. And China is communist. They don’t have the archaeological resources the west does, so they aren’t really in much of a position to excavate properly themselves, but they sure as f~~~ don’t want any credit for any discoveries going to anyone who isn’t Chinese, and more importantly approved by the party, so they keep western archaeologists the f~~~ out for the most part. They also don’t want any potentially embarrassing discoveries getting out without strict party censure. They were extremely unhappy when the world learned that ancient Chinese dynasties practiced human sacrifice as part of their funeral rites. The Chinese government has an official state history / archeology they like to promote and something as barbaric as human sacrifice was not part of it.
The Chinese aren’t dragging their feet on archeology because they’re afraid something like alien technology or ancient secrets might get out. They’re simply worried about any more uncomfortable truths being discovered.
Doesn’t account for the accuracy in geometric design.
We know how they managed that, too. The ancient Egyptians were very VERY good at laying out the geometry of their fields. And they had a lot of practice what with the Nile floods wiping out the markers every year, forcing them to start over. Laying out the pyramids was simple in comparison. And we know they didn’t use any complicated technology or maths to do that, because we’ve found where they laid out the plan view of the Great Pyramid in one to one scale, and with a small mirror we can look between the stones to see the layout lines and notes used during construction to make sure everything was as it should be.
It’s amazing what can be done with just some sighting poles and tight strings and a wheel or two. Oh, and a lot of patience to follow a star as it transits across the sky.
There’s nothing strange or mysterious about how they built the pyramids. The real story is why they would do such a damn fool thing in the first place. The various Egyptian religions were odd, to say the least.
The world has many pyramids, and many are along the same latitude.
Only because the climate in those latitudes allows for primitive cultures to grow the crop surpluses necessary to fund such things. The people in higher latitudes have enough trouble just keeping themselves warm and fed through the winter, and those nearer the equator have things like malaria to worry about.
You’ve clearly got a fair bit of knowledge here. If your mind is set, then it’s set.
I’d have you take a look a Adoption Theory and then tell me that it’s entirely false and that you can prove it at every point (a hard task considering even Egyptologists admit some of these anomalies can’t be proven or disproven as of yet). I’d then have you look deeper into the engineering as well as the chemical composition of the materials present in some pyramids. The layers, the levels, the shafts, the openings, the narrowing. They all have a purpose. They are conductive to generating electricity specifically because of how they were built. Then, we have to look at what is known as “Dendera Lighting” and compare it with the Baghdad battery. Clearly these people had knowledge far beyond what is described to us. If they could produce one kind of electricity and understand it thousands of years ago, why not others as well? One MAJOR area of contention in Adoption Theory is that there is NO soot in any of the Great Pyramids chambers. We already know for fact that the standard oil and candle wick lamps used during these times interact with the oxygen in the air in enclosed spaces and would cause soot to form on the walls. Yet we find NONE. Why? For sure they would have spent thousands of hours burning lamps if that was their method, which in turn would mean significant traces of soot. Is it possible they had electricity? It’s definitely been suggested, and not by crackpots, but by people who are simply seeking the truth and finding anomalies along the way.
Nope. My mind isn’t as cut and dry as yours is. I question history and it’s claims to legitimacy. I don’t claim to “know” any of this stuff since to me it would be naïve to claim to. I’m so far removed and have such little tangible evidence to peruse, all I can do is use what I have and make an educated guess. My worldview is different than most peoples. People generally assume that the further we go back in time, the more ignorant man was. I do not make this assumption and rather go the opposite way, assuming that man has always had a high level of ingenuity and that a great many ancient mysteries have yet to be discovered and perhaps never will be.
But this topic does range all over. I’ll give you an example using the same quote I used in the first response…
We KNOW how the Egyptians built the pyramids. It’s no mystery.
Now, for sure you’ll tell me all about what history tells us. You’ll give me all kinds of technical references on how it was done and explain at length. And that’s great. You have the foundational knowledge and that’s a good thing. But let’s go beyond it for a minute.
If we are to take the stories that directly relate to this, then the Great Pyramids were the result of magical sorcery. Why do I say that? Because that is the claim of the man who allegedly built the damn thing! Not a mystery? Do you know the story of the magician known as “Djedi”? As the story goes, this guy ate 500 loves of bread, the thigh of a bull, and 500 cups of beer every day. He could make a lion follow him without his leash and could reattach a severed head. So after summoning him to advise him on the building of his temple, and upon meeting him for the first time, Khufu put him to the test by bringing first a human, but Djedi declined and said he wouldn’t perform his magic on a human. So Khufu had a goose brought in and cut it’s head off. Djedi said some magic words and poof…the head starts floating around the room only to rejoin with the body, the goose fully alive again and acting as if nothing happened. This went on for the rest of the evening to the enjoyment of Khufu and his court.
After proving himself, Khufu began to ask Djedi about his temple and burial chambers of which was Khufu’s goal to make it the most secret and elaborate of all. Djedi then makes several prophecies about Khufu and his sons, and these prophecies are said to have come true.
This is documented in the Westcar Papyrus (also known as the Khufu and the magician papyrus) housed in the Berlin Museum.
Now. Is any of that real?
What is history telling you? You’re conflicted right? Your bulls~~~ detector is going through the roof with that story, right? But with that in mind, is it cut and dry, or is there some mystery here? That’s all I’m getting at really. That this stuff is very mysterious and history will always have both a physical, and a spiritual connection.
To quote Blade “The world you live in is just a sugar coated topping. There is a another world beneath it”.
I’d have you take a look a Adoption Theory and then tell me that it’s entirely false and that you can prove it at every point
I can prove its primary tenet, namely that Khufu and Khafre merely applied their names to existing structures, is entirely false. Laughably so. After that the rest of “Adoption Theory” (which isn’t even a theory – see below) is not worth examining.
Here’s how we know: Remember how I mentioned sticking little mirrors between the stones in the pyramids? Well archaeologists have been doing just that for hundreds of years, since at least Napoleon’s expeditions, up to the present, though these days they use little fiberoptic gizmos adapted from robotic surgical tools. And what did they find? Well among other things the names of the various work gangs written on the stones in old kingdom hieroglyphs. You see each gang had their name written on each stone they hauled to make certain credit went where it was due. One of those names, buried between multi ton stones deep in the pyramid in an area never intended to see the light of day and only accessible by a tomb robber’s tunnel clearly names one gang “The Hounds of Khufu”. Other work gangs called themselves “The Boaters”, “The King’s Best Craftsmen”, “The Vigorous Ones”, “The Falcons of Dawn”, and “The Big Scepters” (which may have been a phallic joke) and all sorts of things. And the “Falcons of Dawn” might just as well have called themselves in modern parlance “The Morning Woods”.
Now if Khufu really had gone around merely putting his name on the great pyramid, how did he manage to write it way up inside the structure a few thousand years before tomb robbers exposed the gap it was written in? That’s quite an impressive trick. It would have been easier for him to just build the damn thing.
some of these anomalies can’t be proven or disproven as of yet
Things that cannot be proved or disproved have nothing to do with science. They are the stuff of fantasy. Or religion.
I’d then have you look deeper into the engineering as well as the chemical composition of the materials present in some pyramids.
What materials? Seriously, where are you getting this stuff? We know what the pyramids were made of. In fact some of the stones have been thin sectioned and spectrographed and had other tests done on them such that we know the very quarries they came from.
The layers, the levels, the shafts, the openings, the narrowing. They all have a purpose.
Yes, and that purpose was building the pyramids as high as they could afford without them collapsing under their own weight. The Egyptians were not always successful at this.
They are conductive to generating electricity specifically because of how they were built.
Again, where are you getting this?
How they were built and their desired form was specifically the result of the technology the Egyptians had at the time. There’s a reason why the base circumference is 2π times the height, and it isn’t because the Egyptians understood π. If they rolled a wheel around the perimeter of any layer of the pyramid and counted the number of times it turns it would tell them how much higher they had to go in diameters. It’s a very consistent way of measuring large things and is still used in surveying today. And you don’t need to understand π to use it; π is built right in.
Then, we have to look at what is known as “Dendera Lighting”
Which is nothing more than a stylistic combination of images found elsewhere in Egyptian reliefs, namely the Djed pillar glyph and the snake being born from a lotus flower, even within the same temple of Hathor. That they get combined together in three places in one temple is proof of nothing, and doesn’t even meet Occam’s Razor. Given the Egyptian penchant for documenting every f~~~ing thing on their walls down to the number of onions a certain village ate in a particular month, had they actually had something as wonderful as electric lights in any form, don’t you think they would have explicitly mentioned it in more than just three reliefs in one temple?
and compare it with the Baghdad battery. Clearly these people had knowledge far beyond what is described to us. If they could produce one kind of electricity and understand it thousands of years ago, why not others as well?
The Baghdad Battery comes from the first millennium AD, not “thousands of years ago”, and a good thousand plus years after the temple of Hathor was built at Dendara.
One MAJOR area of contention in Adoption Theory is that there is NO soot in any of the Great Pyramids chambers.
Which is a base lie. There’s soot residue all over in the temples and tombs and even the pyramids, especially in the subterranean chambers. Admittedly there less in the upper chambers of the pyramids than you’d expect to see in, say, a mastaba tomb, but that’s easily explained, and also proof that it was the Egyptians themselves who built the pyramids. When they were building those chambers they were at the current working level of the pyramid, and so were exposed to the sky… and to daylight. It’s only after those rooms were completed that the pyramid was continued above them, leaving those chambers in darkness. But while they were working on them they didn’t need lighting of any sort. They had the sun.
People generally assume that the further we go back in time, the more ignorant man was.
But not archaeologists. Proper archaeologists KNOW that ancient people were very very clever indeed, and there’s plenty of evidence to support this. The Baghdad battery is one such, but an even better is the Antikythera Mechanism. Look into it sometime. It’s fascinating. It shows both the extent and the limits of Mediterranean technology and astronomy in the second century BC. But for all that it doesn’t exhibit any knowledge that we lack today.
Ancient people were lacking in certain technologies and concepts we have today, but they were not lacking in intelligence. Going back to the pyramids their construction represents a simple technology, especially compared to what we have today, but a level of social complexity that we today find inconceivable. The ancient Egyptians had a simple technology, but that doesn’t mean they were a simple people. Their society was unbelievably sophisticated, especially compared to the relatively primitive societies we live in today (not helped in any way by feminism). Quite frankly I think inventing fantasy technologies like “pyramid power” and the like is actually insulting to the true ancient Egyptians and their real accomplishments. We should understand and respect their social sophistication for the amazing accomplishment it actually was, not invent fantasy “secret knowledge” technologies to compensate for our failure to comprehend it.
Now, for sure you’ll tell me all about what history tells us. You’ll give me all kinds of technical references on how it was done and explain at length. And that’s great. You have the foundational knowledge and that’s a good thing. But let’s go beyond it for a minute.
If we are to take the stories that directly relate to this, then the Great Pyramids were the result of magical sorcery. Why do I say that? Because that is the claim of the man who allegedly built the damn thing! Not a mystery? Do you know the story of the magician known as “Djedi”?
Actually yes. And the Westcar scroll dates from around a thousand years after the Giza pyramids were built, during a period of social collapse when Egypt was under the rule of foreigners, and with another period of social collapse in between them. It is a work of historical fancy, not actual history, from a time and people who likely knew even less about the Old Kingdom than we do today. In other words apart from a few names and whatnot it’s about as valid a historical source as the 12th century French songs about Lancelot and King Arthur.
More to the point, the story of Djedi has nothing to do with the building of the pyramids. It’s about establishing Djedi’s bona fides as a magician and seer and prognosticator to give weight to his future kings prophecy, which was itself just a story to establish the legitimacy of the Fifth Dynasty. In other words it’s historical propaganda, not history. Once you understand that it’s a much more fascinating document, especially from the perspective of ancient political science, than any mere magician fable.
As I said, I’m not really claiming anything here. Just bringing up points of contention. I don’t “know” any of this stuff. How could I when I haven’t experienced it?
What materials? Seriously, where are you getting this stuff? We know what the pyramids were made of. In fact some of the stones have been thin sectioned and spectrographed and had other tests done on them such that we know the very quarries they came from.
There are some who have given examples of how the pyramids structures are serving more than one purpose. Once again, I don’t claim to know any of this. Just that it’s being claimed. It’s about the pyramids acting as an electrodynamic tether. It has to do with interacting with the ionosphere to gather charge. The types of stone (limestone, granite, quartz…etc) used act as certain types of grounders or conductors depending on where they are used and to what extent, and certain metals mixed in with some of the mortar in certain areas contribute to the effect. As well the specific designs of the shafts and where they lead to all have more than just one purpose. But this is all beyond my areas of study, so I can only go by what I read. There are plenty of articles written on this with full explanations as to what is being eluded to with diagrams and comparisons to some of Tesla’s works regarding the plausability…etc. I’m surprised to think someone who appears to have good background and ready knowledge on the topic wouldn’t already know these theories, and perhaps even see them as potentially viable considering that if they were to be true, they still wouldn’t interfere in any way with anything you have claimed so far, but would simply add to the magnificence in the designs of the Great Pyramids.
The Baghdad Battery comes from the first millennium AD, not “thousands of years ago”, and a good thousand plus years after the temple of Hathor was built at Dendara.
Right. It’s a couple thousand years old. I never implied it was from the same era. My point is that if this was already known a couple thousand years ago, then the knowledge came from somewhere, right? It’s evidence that ancient civilizations had a high level of ingenuity despite not having the discoveries we have. Who is to say similar knowledge wasn’t there prior?
Things that cannot be proved or disproved have nothing to do with science. They are the stuff of fantasy. Or religion.
And this is really the impasse. I don’t see it this way at all. Every scientific theory seeks to prove something that is yet to be proven, yet due to lack of existing criteria as well cannot be disproven, but you just told me that’s unscientific despite the very definition being “scientific” theory. That’s why it’s still a theory supported with facts. The supporting facts may be solid, but the idea is still just an idea. And this would lead into other areas where science makes contradictory claims that can only lead to religious or philosophical discussions. If I ask what dark energy is, I get nothing. It’s immaterial and unobservable, yet science will suggest that this entirely hypothetical entity/force comprises some 68% of the universe. If you can’t measure it, observe it, or repeat it, how can you build a scientific theory around it when to do so would violate the scientific method which demands measurable, observable, and repeatable criteria in order to function? Isn’t this a fantasy now? It’s got to be, right? And then we’d have to consider that the scientific method presupposes pre-existing and constant universal laws that cause all things to conform to them. While the observation of the effect of these universal laws is observable and repeatable, the source of these laws must be operating beyond space and time since the entire universe conforms to them and has since the very beginning. But can science provide a source? Nope. Guess it’s a fairy tale fantasy then. It can’t be proven or disproven by science, and therefor the universe and everything in it doesn’t exist. It’s nonsensical.
But, don’t hold any of this against me Sidecar. I have a different take on this world. I see things from a different angle. I look beyond the surface.
There are some who have given examples of how the pyramids structures are serving more than one purpose.
Of course they served more than one purpose. But none of those purposes involved any sort of hidden, secret, or lost technology. The pyramids were used to fulfill certain odd religious beliefs. They were used to aggrandize the pharaoh. They were used to protect his corpse. Badly. They were used to organize an entire nation from a rabble of barely out of the stone age farmers. They were used to give thousands those same of out of work farmers something to do during the flood season to keep them occupied and fed instead of making trouble. All these purposes and more were fulfilled by the pyramids, but note that they are all social purposes, not technological ones.
The types of stone (limestone, granite, quartz…etc) used act as certain types of grounders or conductors depending on where they are used and to what extent,
But a simpler, and more accurate, explanation for the choice of stones in the pyramids comes from their relative ease of carving, the location of the quarries, and their appearance.
Transporting stones is always expensive, so the Egyptians got their building materials from as close as possible. Soft local limestone was used for the majority of the infill stones because it’s easy to work and was readily available from a quarry right next door. You can see the remains of the quarry on google earth. It’s almost directly south of Khufu’s pyramid and east of the Sphinx. Khafre’s causeway runs through it, and it contains a few tombs, also from Khafre’s reign, but it’s pretty obvious once you spot it.
For the outer casing stones they chose a finer grained, highly bright limestone from Tura across the Nile. They didn’t choose it for any supposed “electrical properties” but simply because it was the nearest, cleanest, whitest, most readily polished limestone available. They wanted their finished pyramid to look good.
For the inner chambers they chose granite. Again they weren’t choosing it for any mysterious properties, but simply because granite is very hard. How is that mysterious? Because granite is so hard it was very difficult to work with the primitive tools the Egyptians had. It was just about the hardest stone the Egyptians could work in any quantity at the time, and it was expensive to work, what with them having to bash away at it with dolerite hammer stones because their copper chisels were useless on it. The king’s chamber was built like a bank vault using granite, and for about the same reason. They knew there was no way of keeping the Pharaoh’s burial a secret, so they figured using a stone that was at the limits of their technology would keep thieves out by being all but impossible for them to cut through. They were obviously mistaken, but they didn’t know that at the time. And they used as little granite in the pyramid as possible, only where structurally needed.
So there you have it. The simplest explanation for why the Egyptians used the stone they did where they did. No “electrical properties” needed.
and certain metals mixed in with some of the mortar in certain areas contribute to the effect.
I still wish you’d say where you’re getting this from, and what these “certain metals” are supposed to be, because the Old Kingdom Egyptians hardly had any metals to speak of. What they did have was fairly impure, easy to smelt, and generally quite soft. They had copper. They had gold. They had silver. They had lead. They had a little bit of bronze, which they made using native copper and imported tin. And that’s pretty much it. Iron wouldn’t show up until the Middle Kingdom, nor would mass produced bronze, which they also imported.
So given the soft, impure state of First Kingdom metallurgy it’s no surprise trace elements of metals are found on the stones of the pyramids. They used soft impure copper chisels to carve the stone blocks, and it’s only to be expected that the soft copper would smear on the stone as they chipped away at it. Try it yourself with a length of copper tubing from the hardware store and a hunk of limestone. Some copper scrapings would also get mixed up in the quarry dust they used to make their incredibly s~~~ty excuse for mortar. So the real mystery here is why anyone would come up with a crackpot conjecture about “conducting electricity” when the real reason is so stupidly obvious once you understand the state of Egyptian metal and stone carving technology?
There are plenty of articles written on this
I’ve read several. None of them are any good. Quantity is no substitute for quality.
and comparisons to some of Tesla’s works
Which, quite frankly, is a sure sign of utter bunkum. Most people citing Tesla have even less knowledge of his work than they do of whatever they are speculating on. I’m sure Tesla would be appalled by the way his name is so often invoked to give a patina of wonder and mystery to things that are patently dismissable.
Right. It’s a couple thousand years old.
Fifteen hundred years ago, give or take, not a couple thousand. It’s Sasanid.
My point is that if this was already known a couple thousand years ago,
Fifteen hundred years ago.
then the knowledge came from somewhere, right?
Here’s the thing about the Baghdad Battery: It’s a really s~~~ty battery. It’s not even a battery at all. The electrodes are iron and copper, which even in the best of circumstances produce well under a single volt. The Sasanids had much better electrodes available to them had they been trying to make batteries. Even worse the rolled copper sheet was completely enclosed by the “battery”, leaving no place to connect to it to close an electric circuit, making the Baghdad Battery impossible to use as a battery.
The most likely explanation for the Baghdad Battery was that it was a scroll storage jar. It’s all but identical to other jars known to have contained papyrus and parchment scrolls. The rolled up copper inside was probably a copper scroll as had been used for millenia in the Middle East for holding particularly important writings, one example being an Israeli list of treasure hunt clues. The iron rod was likely inserted as an attempt to stave off corrosion of the copper, which would be slightly effective as iron has a slightly lower electronegative potential than copper, but clearly wasn’t enough to preserve whatever was inscribed on the copper.
And where did that knowledge come from? Well all it takes is for someone with a bit of iron and a bit of copper to observe that their copper in the proximity of their iron didn’t corrode as much as copper away from the iron. And ancient people were nothing if not observant.
So we have a simple explanation for the specifics of the Baghdad Battery that don’t require its maker to have any knowledge of electricity or batteries or circuits or such things. Where does that leave conjecture about “hidden knowledge”? Right out the window.
And this is really the impasse. I don’t see it this way at all.
No offense, but how you see it doesn’t matter. Science deals only with things that are testable. Things that are not testable have nothing to do with science.
Every scientific theory seeks to prove something that is yet to be proven,
That’s sort of correct, but not in the way you think it is. Proving something does not mean confirming it. Proving simply means testing. And it is scientific hypotheses that are yet to be proven (tested), not theories. Hypotheses only become theories once they have been proven (tested). So every proper scientific theory has already been proven (tested). People mistakenly conflate “proven” with “confirmed” because those hypotheses that prove false are, with a very few notable exceptions, generally discarded as theories because they are false. And if something cannot be tested, if it cannot be proven, even with any conceivable future testing methodology, it’s not even a hypothesis. At best it’s speculation and conjecture. It’s not science.
If I ask what dark energy is, I get nothing.
That depends on who you ask. For the most part dark energy / matter is just a fudge factor to make certain astrophysics calculations balance out.
It’s immaterial and unobservable, yet science will suggest that this entirely hypothetical entity/force comprises some 68% of the universe.
Well energy is immaterial. Because it’s energy. If it were material it would be matter. Einstein worked that one out.
But here’s the deal with dark matter / dark energy: because it’s called (oooh spooky) dark certain pop-sci outlets have gone a little gaga about it. But there’s nothing really special about darkness, in an astronomical sense. It simply means it’s not illuminated in any way that we can see it. It’s things like black holes and interstellar crud (also intergalactic crud) that’s either way too big, in the case of black holes, or too small, in the case of interstellar crud, to light up so we can see it.
So how do we know about it if we can’t see it? Because we can see the effect it has on the things we can see. Take black holes, for example. They are the darkest of matter. No light can escape the event horizon of a black hole because it’s gravitational pull is just too damn strong, making it impossible to directly observe one. But we can see the way black holes warp the motion of the stars nearby them. There’s one big bastard of a black hole in the constellation Sagittarius that has stars orbiting around it. We can’t see it directly, but we know it has to be there because those stars have to be orbiting around something.
We indirectly observe the existence of interstellar crud in the way that galaxies don’t rotate the way they should if their mass was only made up of the bright bits we can see, and also from the way the observable mass of some galaxies bends light around them more sharply than their bright mass would allow. And we know dark energy is a thing because galaxies are traveling away from each other much faster than they really should be if all they had to go on was the momentum of the Big Bang and the visible energy we can see.
So in other words, we know there is something out there jiggering things up, and dark matter / energy are the best explanations so far for saying we don’t precisely know just what the f~~~ it is. But whatever the f~~~ it is, it’s definitely out there.
Consider it this way: We first knew about the existence of Neptune long before anyone actually saw it. How did we know it existed? Because something was buggering with the orbit of Uranus. Between that discovery and the first observation of Neptune the planet was effectively “dark matter”. The same is true for Pluto: Neptune didn’t explain all the oddness seen in Uranus’ orbit prompting the search for another planet. And now we see that the Kuiper Belt is full of little dwarf planets and other masses. So there’s quite a bit more mass up there past Neptune in the Kuiper Belt and Oort Coud and environs than anyone ever at first suspected, all of it up until recently “dark”.
I look beyond the surface.
But what you’re seeing “beyond the surface” is mostly laughably dismissable and cannot stand against much simpler explanations based on known facts. And most of the rest is simply based on lies: Egyptian mortar being strong, no soot, and so on. None of that was true. The Baghdad Battery wasn’t even a battery.
For the life of me I cannot understand why anyone would choose to accept a complicated, fantasy explanation when simpler ones are more readily available. Especially when the simple explanations are far FAR more fascinating.
F~~~ the wizards and magicians and space aliens. A bunch of bored, idle farmers with nothing more than sticks, copper chisels, rocks, wheels, and some string up and doing something as f~~~win amazing as building giant goddamn pyramids because they had nothing better to do while their fields were flooded is a hell of a lot cooler.
Those guys were f~~~ing awesome. And they didn’t need magic to be awesome.
Of course they served more than one purpose. But none of those purposes involved any sort of hidden, secret, or lost technology. The pyramids were used to fulfill certain odd religious beliefs.
So 5,000 years ago there was a group of pagan men who had “odd religious beliefs” that caused them to erect massive structures that we still marvel at today for their engineering and ingenuity, and you don’t think there is any lost, secret, or hidden knowledge? What would lead you to make such an assumption?
I still wish you’d say where you’re getting this from, and what these “certain metals” are supposed to be, because the Old Kingdom Egyptians hardly had any metals to speak of.
If you’ve read the theories and seen the claims then I’m not sure why you don’t know what I’m referring to.
Here’s the thing about the Baghdad Battery: It’s a really s~~~ty battery. It’s not even a battery at all. The electrodes are iron and copper, which even in the best of circumstances produce well under a single volt.
I’ve read anywhere from 1 to 2 volts and anything in between. And to me it’s not relevant how strong or efficient it is. It shows an understanding of chemical action and reaction and an ability to harness it. With it, I could power a single volt bulb if I harnessed it, right?
The most likely explanation for the Baghdad Battery was that it was a scroll storage jar. It’s all but identical to other jars known to have contained papyrus and parchment scrolls.
If I go looking, I find both claims present. One group including historians and scientists says it’s a battery outright and that this is the leading and generally agreed upon line of thought. The other group of the same criteria says it’s a storage jar and that this is the leading and generally agreed upon line of thought. So who is right? Both claims are well within reason, yet neither is definitive.
No offense, but how you see it doesn’t matter. Science deals only with things that are testable. Things that are not testable have nothing to do with science.
This is because science is extremely limited and vastly incomplete. Science can’t really answer for much in the end. Let’s observe the statement. Can you test a mans thoughts? And obviously this is not referring to brain function. Yes, you can observe my brain function and see it generating a thought, but the thought itself is unable to be tested. You can’t read thoughts. But yet, it’s our thoughts that gave birth to science, and yet you are telling me that my thoughts are not scientific. How do you solve this dilemma? And I can go all kinds of places with this. Since science cannot test a source, this means that the source is not limited to scientific understanding and isn’t acting within the laws of science. Of course, this is God we are talking about here, and as you said, science has nothing to do with it since it’s a spiritual matter and therefor science can’t recognize it or perceive it. It has to fill in the blanks with s~~~ like dark energy, which itself is entirely unscientific in application aside from, as you would say, crackpot theory. Or as you put it, a fantasy.
That’s sort of correct, but not in the way you think it is. Proving something does not mean confirming it. Proving simply means testing.
A theory is an idea. A scientific theory is an idea supported by facts. The idea isn’t a fact. That clear enough? There are no factual scientific theories because once they become a fact they cease to be a scientific theory and become a scientific fact. The supporting criteria isn’t in question since it’s all factual and not theoretical. It’s the idea that’s in question and not factual until proven to be true and without possibility of being in error. Once again, science is vastly limited and can’t fill enough gaps without making s~~~ up or just saying that we don’t know and throwing out ideas based on what we do know, which isn’t much. Based on what we do know, we’ve accomplished a lot. But it amounts to very little when we look beyond our own puny little planet and ask big questions.
That depends on who you ask. For the most part dark energy / matter is just a fudge factor to make certain astrophysics calculations balance out.
Is fudge factor your way of saying it’s made up bulls~~~? Part of the fantasy? The Big Bang is nothing without these hypotheticals which have no scientific foundation aside from being inserted as pure speculation based on a necessary gap to fill. It’s a total bankruptcy when pressed for anything practical or tangible aside from showing me that it’s necessary for the equation to balance out. You told me in plain terms that things that cannot be tested have nothing to do with science. So why is an untestable entity one driving factors holding the Big Bang Theory together, which is sold daily to the general public as a scientific fact despite the fact that science goes against science in order to give answers. How scientific is that? God of the gaps they say? More like science of canyons.
Well energy is immaterial. Because it’s energy. If it were material it would be matter. Einstein worked that one out.
Ahhh….but energy can be measured can’t it? Energy can be observed can’t it? Energy can be harnessed can’t it? Dark energy is not only immaterial, but unobservable. Crackpot, right? I mean there’s no possible way that we could ever perceive something that is immaterial and unobservable is there? Because if you can perceive this, then you can perceive God who also is immaterial and unobservable. You just have to tune into the right frequency. You see, God is present in the Big Bang Theory whether atheists and doubters like it or not.
And we know dark energy is a thing because galaxies are traveling away from each other much faster than they really should be if all they had to go on was the momentum of the Big Bang and the visible energy we can see.
How can you “know” something that is untestable is definitely a thing? You keep telling me that things that can’t be tested aren’t scientific. I don’t really care if you show me a theory and then tell me your hypothetical entity fits and fills the gaps and even has reasoning behind it. I don’t have issue with the idea being an idea. But this s~~~ is in no way factual nor does it have any supporting evidence of existence. You don’t see it, but you’re on the edge of the spiritual when making these claims. You can’t make a knowledge claim here based on your very own criteria. A hypothetical entity that cannot be tested or proven isn’t even scientific according to you. So why is it now a thing and how do you claim to “know it”? You’re showing a lot of presupposition here while taking a contradictory stance by your own criteria.
And most of the rest is simply based on lies: Egyptian mortar being strong, no soot, and so on. None of that was true. The Baghdad Battery wasn’t even a battery.
No problem bro. I haven’t visited this particular topic in a long time. I’ll keep digging on these specifics and see what I can find. You may well be exactly right on these.
For the life of me I cannot understand why anyone would choose to accept a complicated, fantasy explanation when simpler ones are more readily available. Especially when the simple explanations are far FAR more fascinating.
Scientific theory is often fantasy. Big Bang Theory is a fantasy according to some of the criteria laid out by you. And it’s far from simple, even without it’s hypothetical and unproven constructs. According to you, God is a much better answer because it’s simpler, and I’d agree, MUCH more fascinating!
My understanding is that the Great Pyramid was built first. All of the subsequent Pyramids were poorer and poorer in design and construction methods. This really makes one wonder who actually started the construction. Some researchers think the Sphynx is over 10,000 years old, based on water erosion and the lack of rainfall in Egypt. Keep in mind that for most of recorded history it has been buried up to it’s neck in sand.
Also the Great Pyramid did not contain any writing inside. No evidence of it being constructed by egyptians.
My understanding is that the Great Pyramid was built first.
Nope. The Great Pyramid of Khufu was the first completely successful true pyramid to be built, but it wasn’t the first attempted or built. There were a lot of earlier efforts.
The first was Djoser’s step pyramid which kicked the whole craze off. Then they f~~~ed around for a bit with a few more attempts at step pyramids that ended up being more like giant mastabas until either Huni or Sneferu attempted the ambitious Collapsed Pyramid at Meidum. That one was the first attempt to turn a step pyramid into a smooth sided true pyramid. It failed. Badly. Hence the name: Collapsed Pyramid. Then Sneferu started the Bent Pyramid at Dahshur, but it began to have problems about halfway up forcing the builders to flatten the slope of the top half to lighten the weight, leaving it looking decidedly gimpy. Unhappy with his derpy Bent Pyramid, Sneferu started another one. This was the flattish Red Pyramid at Dahshur, which held to a shallow angle all the way to the top. It wasn’t as tall or as steep as they obviously wanted to build from earlier attempts, but at least it was the first complete true pyramid.
Only then did Khufu, Sneferu’s successor, finally get everything they’d learned so far together in the Great Pyramid at Giza. And bankrupted the country doing so.
This is how we not only know how the pyramids were built, but how the Egyptians learned how to build them. They did it the hard way through expensive trial and error. No aliens or wizards needed (or they wouldn’t have kept f~~~ing up over and over and over).
Also the Great Pyramid did not contain any writing inside. No evidence of it being constructed by egyptians.
There’s Egyptian writing all over inside the Great Pyramid on the stones and in between the stones. Everywhere. In fact it’s far more difficult to find a stone without hieroglyphs on it than ones with because each individual stone was labeled with the name of the work gang that handled it. The labels are not always easy to spot, largely thanks to millenia of tomb robbers and other tourists damaging the most accessible and visible examples, but they are definitely there.
It doesn’t have the traditional funerary texts in the burial chamber, but that’s because the burial chamber was made of granite instead of limestone, which is very difficult to carve or even paint. And besides, the traditional funerary texts were painted all up and down the outside of the pyramid on the casing stones. Most of them have been stolen and are scattered in the walls of mosques and other buildings throughout Cairo, but remnants of the texts on the remaining casing stones can still be seen.
Seriously where do people get this “no evidence the Egyptians blah blah blah” stuff from? It’s a straight up lie.
We KNOW how the pyramids were built and who built them. It’s no mystery. Nor could it be what with the pyramids being the single most comprehensively researched buildings on the entire planet, under examination for thousands of years.
The biggest mystery is why people keep making up silly, patently false lies like: “There is no writing inside the pyramid.”
- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
