Pyramid blocks
Simon Clennell
Most of the traditional theories explain that the blocks used to build
the pyramids were dragged over a surface that had been lubricated in
some way. There would appear to be no evidence that the Early Dynasty
Egyptians had the means to construct wheeled vehicles strong enough to
transport the blocks.
But what about using logs or poles as rollers (the time old system of
pushing a block picking up the last roller and putting in front
repeated).
I find it difficult to believe that they hadn't thought of this. Any
ideas ?
WrenofAln
>Simon Clennell <simon.c...@somi.be> wrote in article
><33E5F3...@somi.be>...
>> Most of the traditional theories explain that the blocks used to build
>> the pyramids were dragged over a surface that had been lubricated in
>> some way.
>On that narrow piece of land now, archaeologists have found a paved path,
>which is believed to be used in order to literaly carry ships, from one
>side of the Isthmos to the other, in the ancient years. And they did this
>by putting the ships on rolling loges.
Until the advent of modern hydraulically operated mobile lifts boatyards
hauled, launched and moved vessels around on land with relative ease on
greased boards. Thet lubricant used was "tallow" - rendered down animal
fats similar to old fashioned candle wax. It is melted in a ladel and
poured on the boards to harded and form a slippery high pressure
lubricant. The vessels are supported in a simple wood cradle with skids
that run over the tallow covered boards. The boards or logs do not turn or
roll but need recoating with tallow occasionally. A few men with blocks
and tackle can easilly move a 40 ton vessel - add a few hundered slaves
and you are in business !!!
This basic principle is still used to launch new ships and
move around large transformers and machinery. Wheeled equipment to carry
heavy loads is very complex and expensive even today. Boatyards now need
level paved surfaces with a good foundation and a special reinforced
concrete dock - with tallow covered logs you could haul a boat up a beach
and across any old field.
Anyone building a sizable vessel would have had to solve
this problem one way or another to be able to launch it - the Polynesians
are reported to have used the mangled bodies of their prisoners instead of
greased logs - makes a heck of a mess of a new paint job though !.
Doug N.
Jiri Mruzek
> Simon Clennell <simon.c...@somi.be> wrote in article
> > Most of the traditional theories explain that the blocks used to build
> > the pyramids were dragged over a surface that had been lubricated in
> > some way. There would appear to be no evidence that the Early Dynasty
> > Egyptians had the means to construct wheeled vehicles strong enough to
> > transport the blocks.
> > But what about using logs or poles as rollers (the time old system of
> > pushing a block picking up the last roller and putting in front
> > repeated).
> > I find it difficult to believe that they hadn't thought of this. Any
> > ideas ?
Chris Christoforides wrote:
> ... I do know that Greek historians
> used to travel to Egypt, and therefore there could be a link.
Only if they had used time machines. Greek historians travelled
to Egypt long after the pyramids were built..
> One thing is
> for sure, that the method was used by ancient civilizations to carry heavy
> objects, the question is who invented it first.
Another thing for sure is that they never used the method
to carry things up a steep slope, for safety reasons.
Imagine runaway logs and a 70-ton block, as they avalanche
down the steep face of the Great Pyramid. - Spectacular, eh?
The question would be:
How do you make mummies out of meat juice?
High-five,
Jiri Mr. - discoverer of the world's oldest image of a horseman
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/5586/index.html
Anu K M Kamunen
Just nitpicking, but... I don't think Egyptians used slaves during the
Old Kingdom when the pyramids in Giza were built. To me that's what
makes it so impressive: the people did it voluntarily, because they
really believed their king was important enough to need a monument like that.
Anu Kamunen DESPITE IT ALL,
Peltokyläntie 3 L 108 LIFE'S A PRETTY
00740 HKI GOOD THING!
09-351 55 96 / 050-520 46 56
James
Imagine if you will, a large channel or dike, being constructed from the
nile, to the contruction site. Now Imagine hundreds of brages floating the
large blocks to the site.
Yes?
email: mo...@concentric.net
James Morcos
Frank Joseph Yurco
--
Frank Joseph Yurco fjy...@midway.uchicago.edu
Michael Edelman
James wrote:
>
> > Imagine if you will, a large channel or dike, being constructed
> > from the nile, to the contruction site. Now Imagine hundreds of
> > brages floating the large blocks to the site.
> > Yes?
No. Turns out the blocks were mined locally after all. What was thought
to be an area where discarded stones were scapped nearby is actually an
old quarry. The stones weren't moved great distances after all. But
then, you'd only know tis if you read the anthropology journals. It
didn't make it to the UFO journals.
Jiri Mruzek
James wrote:
> Imagine if you will, a large channel or dike, being constructed
> from the nile, to the contruction site. Now Imagine hundreds of
> brages floating the large blocks to the site.
> Yes?
Yes! It's worth imagining, and the vistas I get are truly
mind-numbing. I just can't fathom, where the traces of such
a deep trench (a veritable Ole Suez Canal) might have gone to.
Well, there is no limit on what a PC adept of archaeology
will imagine in order to rationalize the job of building
the Pyramid with primitive technology.
These rationalisations are true masterpieces of half-wit
wisdom, and the degree to which they are willingly accepted
by academics only goes to prove their moral flakiness.
However, whilst you fantasise, you could be poring over
my proof of the s.c. Lost Science instead, and truly widen
your shrimpy mental horizons. You could still wear your
beloved blinds over your expanded mind all day long!
Jiri Mruzek, discoverer of the world's oldest image of a horseman
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/5586/index.html
> James Morcos
Pyramidal Sails Director, James Morcos, I presume?
Douglas Rockwell
I like Davidovit's hypothesis that the largest stones are actually cast in
place, using ground stone + chemicals from the Dead Sea to create a
"geopolymerization" reaction leading to a solid block.
Might no be right, but at least he's thinking in clever directions
--
Doug
The price of freedom is infernal vigilantes
Kurt Lochner
Michael Edelman wrote:
>
> James wrote:
> >
> > > Imagine if you will, a large channel or dike, being constructed
> > > from the nile, to the contruction site. Now Imagine hundreds of
> > > brages floating the large blocks to the site.
> > > Yes?
>
> to be an area where discarded stones were scapped nearby is actually an
> old quarry. The stones weren't moved great distances after all. But
> then, you'd only know tis if you read the anthropology journals. It
> didn't make it to the UFO journals.
Ignoring Jiri Mruzek's chattering, your post was right on the mark.
It is always refreshing to read someone supporting a prosaic answer
for a change..
Jiri Mruzek
Kurt Lochner
Shooty wrote:
>
> Jiri Mruzek wrote:
>
> Gosh, speechless at last
Yup, looks that way again, doesn't it...
Shooty
Jiri Mruzek wrote:
Gosh, speechless at last
Shooty
Jiri Mruzek
Kurt Lochner wrote:
> Michael Edelman wrote:
> > James wrote:
> > > > Imagine if you will, a large channel or dike, being constructed
> > > > from the nile, to the contruction site. Now Imagine hundreds of
> > > > brages floating the large blocks to the site.
> > > > Yes?
> > No. Turns out the blocks were mined locally after all. What was thought
> > to be an area where discarded stones were scapped nearby is actually an
> > old quarry.
An interesting conjecture. So you presume that this old
quarry supplied All the Giza pyramids, and so it must have
also supplied the Great Pyramid? Isn't that your logic?
The main improvement of the post-Khufu pyramids was
biodegradability achieved by using the inferior Giza
limestone. Eventually, the improved pyramids collapsed
of their own weight during earthquakes.
In contrast, the incomparably larger Greater Pyramid would
still look brand new if not for the ravages of men. Thusly,
it could not contain truly significant quantities of the
Giza limestone. This supports the observations that high
quality blocks from the large quarries down the far bank of
the Nile at Mokattam, Turah,and Maura predominate.
Definitely, the renowned mantle stones (let's say 300,000
tons in all)all came from across the river.
The 70-ton granite blocks came from Aswan, 500 miles upriver.
> > The stones weren't moved great distances after all.
Amusing, highly misinformed and disinforming PC words.
Besides, all the blocks still had to be elevated into
position, and that is the toughest part of the job for
us to figure out.
> > then, you'd only know tis if you read the anthropology
> > journals. It didn't make it to the UFO journals.
Score that one for the UFO-nauts over AJs. How, degrading!
> Ignoring Jiri Mruzek's chattering, your post was right on the mark.
Of course! The two of you are birds of the feather..
Apologies for making fun of the Giza canals idea, and
pointing out consequences of building from the inferior
Giza limestone, to you two, but it had to be done.
> It is always refreshing to read someone supporting
> a prosaic answer for a change..
You must have meant Prozac (answer).
Jiri Mr. - finder of the world's oldest image of a horseman
http://geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/5586/index.html
Kurt Lochner
Shooty wrote:
>
> Jiri Mruzek wrote:
> >
> lines and monkey. I don't think you will like it though, the new work
> is by academics who have formal qualifications. And here is the
> clincher. They have visited the sight and measured it.
>
> In addition they have looked at the surrounding landscape and the
> history of the people that lived in the area at the time the
> lines were created.
>
> What do you want to bet they don't think it was made with your
> forgotten science?
50 quaatluu's on the monkey-boy putting together another rationalization
as to why his pseudo-science doesn't even begin to approach the prosaic
answers, again..
Jiri Mruzek
Kurt Lochner wrote:
> Jiri Mruzek wrote:
> > Kurt Lochner wrote:
> > > Michael Edelman wrote:
> > > > James wrote:
> > > > > > Imagine if you will, a large channel or dike, being constructed
> > > > > > from the nile, to the contruction site. Now Imagine hundreds of
> > > > > > brages floating the large blocks to the site.
> > > > > > Yes?
Jir: Yes! It's worth imagining, and the vistas I get are truly
Jir: mind-numbing. I just can't fathom, where the traces of such
Jir: a deep trench (a veritable Ole Suez Canal) might have gone to.
Jir: Well, there is no limit on what a PC adept of archaeology
Jir: will imagine in order to rationalize the job of building
Jir: the Pyramid with primitive technology.
Jir: These rationalisations are true masterpieces of half-wit
Jir: wisdom..
> > > > No. Turns out the blocks were mined locally after all. What was thought
> > > > to be an area where discarded stones were scapped nearby is actually an
> > > > old quarry.
Jir: An interesting conjecture. So you presume that this old
Jir: quarry supplied All the Giza pyramids, and so it must have
Jir: also supplied the Great Pyramid? Isn't that your logic?
Jir: The main improvement of the post-Khufu pyramids was
Jir: biodegradability achieved by using the inferior Giza
Jir: limestone. Eventually, the improved pyramids collapsed
Jir: of their own weight during earthquakes.
Jir: In contrast, the incomparably larger Greater Pyramid would
Jir: still look brand new if not for the ravages of men. Thusly,
Jir: it could not contain truly significant quantities of the
Jir: Giza limestone. This supports the observations that high
Jir: quality blocks from the large quarries down the far bank of
Jir: the Nile at Mokattam, Turah,and Maura predominate.
Jir: Definitely, the renowned mantle stones (let's say 300,000
Jir: tons in all)all came from across the river.
Jir: The 70-ton granite blocks came from Aswan, 500 miles upriver.
> Yes, and it's supported by more evidence than you can compare
> your frivolous 'science-art' rubbish to, so you said..
But, you had to omit what I said in support of my words.
I fixed your omission for you.
> > In contrast, the incomparably larger Greater Pyramid would
> > still look brand new if not for the ravages of men.
> Yeah, never mind the elements like wind erosion and heat..
Superbly polished high quality limestone resists weathering
and erosion extremely well. Arab reports from the 13. century
say that the Pyramid was pefectly preserved on the outside.
Indeed, the casing stones discovered at the Pyramid's
base were as new.
> > > > The stones weren't moved great distances after all.
> > Amusing, highly misinformed and disinforming PC words.
> I know, you still prefer to believe that UFO's moved them..
You failed to consider what I said. If your every other word is
"UFO" - then you must be a UFO freak, Kurt.
> > > > then, you'd only know tis if you read the anthropology
> > > > journals. It didn't make it to the UFO journals.
> > Score that one for the UFO-nauts over AJs. How, degrading!
> Anthropologists seldom think of UFO's as anything more than
> silliness cubed. I guess we know where you stand on this now.
> You simply refuse any documented evidence that doesn't fit your
> "theories."
Lochner speaks in an endless procession of PC headlines.
I haven't seen him attempt a concrete fact since he had
assured everyone on Fidonet that PHI is 1.1618..
> > > Ignoring Jiri Mruzek's chattering, your post was right on the mark.
> > Of course! The two of you are birds of the feather..
> Guess again monkey-boy...
I'm also the boy, who cries wolf. f I saw you, I would cry MOO.
> > Apologies for making fun of the Giza canals idea, and
> > pointing out consequences of building from the inferior
> > Giza limestone, to you two, but it had to be done.
> You're convenient explanations will be ignored by time, and us..
Congrats, "ignored" nails the essence of it.
> > > It is always refreshing to read someone supporting
> > > a prosaic answer for a change..
> > You must have meant Prozac (answer).
> Interesting. Everytime you are completely wrong, it's someone
> else's fault.. Didn't you see a professional about your pathology?
> Nah, and that's probably someone else's fault also..
Yeh, I phoned for an appointment, but they said that they were
too busy with the Lochner clan - the Kook Loch's clan.
Cheerios,
Jiri Mruzek- finder of the world's oldest image of a horseman
http://geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/5586/index.html
Kurt Lochner
>
> > > Kurt Lochner wrote:
> > > > Michael Edelman wrote:
> > > > > James wrote:
Miles of worthless, unsupported speculations deleted...
> Jir: Definitely, the renowned mantle stones (let's say 300,000
> Jir: tons in all)all came from across the river.
> Jir: The 70-ton granite blocks came from Aswan, 500 miles upriver.
>
> > Yes, and it's supported by more evidence than you can compare
> > your frivolous 'science-art' rubbish to, so you said..
>
> But, you had to omit what I said in support of my words.
> I fixed your omission for you.
I've fixed your previous mental ejecta, no charge..
> > > In contrast, the incomparably larger Greater Pyramid would
> > > still look brand new if not for the ravages of men.
>
> > Yeah, never mind the elements like wind erosion and heat..
>
> Superbly polished high quality limestone resists weathering
> and erosion extremely well. Arab reports from the 13. century
> say that the Pyramid was pefectly preserved on the outside.
> Indeed, the casing stones discovered at the Pyramid's
> base were as new.
You neglect to mention that they were covered/protected from
the wind, as limestone isn't exactly a hard material to begin with.
So what happened to all the other casing stones, and how have they
weather the elelments Jiri? You don't mention that, do you?
> > > > > The stones weren't moved great distances after all.
>
> > > Amusing, highly misinformed and disinforming PC words.
>
> > I know, you still prefer to believe that UFO's moved them..
>
> You failed to consider what I said. If your every other word is
> "UFO" - then you must be a UFO freak, Kurt.
More specious pseudo-reasonings on your part, as that's about
the only time that I've mentioned UFO's in this thread..
> > > > > then, you'd only know tis if you read the anthropology
> > > > > journals. It didn't make it to the UFO journals.
>
> > > Score that one for the UFO-nauts over AJs. How, degrading!
>
> > Anthropologists seldom think of UFO's as anything more than
> > silliness cubed. I guess we know where you stand on this now.
> > You simply refuse any documented evidence that doesn't fit your
> > "theories."
>
> Lochner speaks in an endless procession of PC headlines.
Like I said, if it doesn't fit your "conclusions" you display
a deep pathological passion to either ignore or destroy it...
> I haven't seen him attempt a concrete fact since he had
> assured everyone on Fidonet that PHI is 1.1618..
The Golden Mean? Sheesh! And that like explains everything
that you believe in, spout regularly to any unsuspecting readers?
<wheezing laughter> Oh man, my ribs hurt ...
> > > > Ignoring Jiri Mruzek's chattering, your post was right on the mark.
>
> > > Of course! The two of you are birds of the feather..
>
> > Guess again monkey-boy...
>
> I'm also the boy, who cries wolf. f I saw you, I would cry MOO.
Oh, we're reduced to using ad hominems again, eh? BOO!
> > > Apologies for making fun of the Giza canals idea, and
> > > pointing out consequences of building from the inferior
> > > Giza limestone, to you two, but it had to be done.
>
> > You're convenient explanations will be ignored by time, and us..
>
> Congrats, "ignored" nails the essence of it.
And it's a suiting end to your nonsense Jiri..
> > > > It is always refreshing to read someone supporting
> > > > a prosaic answer for a change..
>
> > > You must have meant Prozac (answer).
>
> > Interesting. Everytime you are completely wrong, it's someone
> > else's fault.. Didn't you see a professional about your pathology?
> >
> > Nah, and that's probably someone else's fault also..
>
> Yeh, I phoned for an appointment, but they said that they were
> too busy with the Lochner clan - the Kook Loch's clan. Cheerios,
Well, thanks for affording us some more laughs at your expense..
See ya's..
Anu K M Kamunen
Athena2106 <athen...@aol.com> wrote:
: It was not slavery per se. It passed the time during the flood season and
: did serve to boost patriotism.
That's what I've understanded. In fact the huge construction projects
were an important source of income for the people during the times they
couldn't do farming. Distribution of wealth through taxes...
--
Martin Stower
Robert Porschka wrote:
>
> In article <5tsjsi$lal$1...@comet.tomco.net>, apo...@tomco.net (Gregory Resch) writes:
[. . .]
> Yeah right, all those generations of egyptologists were fools and YOU
> discovered the ULTIMATE ANSWER in a flash of imagination.
> I guess you won't tell the readers of this newsgroup what your idea
> is all about, am I right?
> Are you trying to sell us another Hancock-Bauval-Sensational nonsense
> book or are you afraid that some real experts (egyptologists or engineers)
> might blow your little theory out of the water?
> I have had enough of pyramidiology in this newsgroup already.
>
> Go ahead and tell us,
> --
> Robert Porschka
> email: irpo...@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Oh, come on. There was nothing in his post to suggest anything
like that - nothing about aliens, or Atlanteans, or hi-tech.
Serious specialists - such as Dieter Arnold - regard all
existing theories of pyramid construction as speculative,
lacking in adequate evidential support. It's not just a
wacko position.
Let's hear what he has to say, before jumping all over it.
Martin Stower