Pyramids of Giza – Longitude at PI?

It is said, by some, that the latitude of the Great Pyramid of Giza matches the exact number sequence for the speed of light. But has anyone ever said something about the longitude? Was it once located at π?

Fig. 1: The numerical deviation of the longitude from PI is less than 0.9%. 

Longitude of Khufu = π?

This former article shows the probability that Khufu’s latitude represents the Speed of Light is very high: 99.9667%. There’s only 0.0333% left it can be coincidental. It is therefore most likely true, which has many consequences.

And let’s not forget the significant amount of mathematical facts encrypted in the pyramids of Giza itself, which increases the likelihood of this claim even more.

If Khufu’s latitude was most probably not coincidental, hiding an encrypted meaning, what about the longitude then? Did that number just drop from the sky or was there maybe more to it than meets the eye? What reasons had the builders to built it there and not somewhere else?

There is a distinct difference between latitude and longitude. Where latitude is a geological feature, because it relates to the spin axis of the Earth, is longitude much harder to define. While latitude can be calculated by observing the altitude of the sun above the horizon, is longitude undetermined because the Earth rotates non-stop around its axis.

Longitude is an artificially man chosen feature. A circle has no begin or end, unless one puts a marker on it. That marker is Greenwich. But who chose this specific position and why?

Fig. 2: On the left is latitude, on the right is longitude. Where latitude is easy because it relates to the altitude of the Sun, is longitude much harder. To define longitude unambiguously we need an artificial fixed position: the Prime Meridian.

An Intermezzo: Ley Lines

There are people who believe that ancient structures were built on ley lines, and that Giza was built on one of the major nodes. But if we look at how these ley lines are mapped out they don’t make much sense. The major nodes ignore most of the large and important ancient structures like Teotihuacan, Caral, the pyramids at Xi’an, and Stonehenge. Let’s not forget the immense pyramid of Cholula in Mexico, which is four times as large as the great pyramid of Khufu.

Ley lines are missing the most significant ancient structures, and therefore seriously untrue.

There might be arguments that some lines are running over them. But if you’ve drawn a dense web all over the globe you’ll always hit something close by.

Fig. 3: This ley line map shows how lines and the nodes are supposed to be running along the globe. Because one of the largest nodes is put on Giza, and the grid is systematically setup, the other large nodes don’t make any sense because they ignore other major ancient sites. We are in fact fooling ourselves. There are also many ley line maps that look completely different.
Fig. 4: The so called “ancient structure alignment”, which is related to the ley line ideas, would prove something of an alignment between ancient structures, pointing to a former geographic pole. But this research contains only 15 ancient structures, which is a whopping minority when we neglect the thousands of other ancient structures, and thus proving an enormous renunciation.

Why Would the Minority Rule?

Because most people haven’t got the faintest idea how many ancient structures there are, they think to have found a correlation when they’ve connected a few of them. While in fact they’ve ignored over 99% of the other structures which are telling a different story.

That’s basically what always goes wrong in most researches: ignoring the majority in order to make a theory work. In this respect can we classify this sort of research as a kind of dictatorship – ignoring the majority, and gratifying the minority.

So, what goes wrong in this sort of research?

Putting an assumptive grid on the globe with Giza as the reference does not automatically reflect any truth. Because the grid is purely mathematical of nature it is also merciless. That’s why only 10% of the major nodes hits something of importance.

We can think of countless stories around this grid, and why it would be true, the fact is that these stories are unverifiable, nor do they contain any truthfulness on a physical level.

Numerical Comparison PI and Longitude Khufu

Table 1: Comparison between PI and Longitude Khufu
Amount of Digits π Longitude Khufu Deviation
1 3 3 0%
2 31 31 0%
3 314 311 0.955%
4 3141 3113 0.891%
5 31415 31134 0.894%
6 314159 311341 0.897%
7 3141593 3113415 0.896%

A More Realistic Ley Line Map

Fig. 5: There are only five major nodes to be found when we connect all ancient structures to each other. These five nodes are former geographic poles with certainties higher than 99.99%.

The Prime Meridian

What many people don’t know is that the English crown is by far the largest landowner in the world. What has that to do with this subject? Because the Prime Meridian is artificial, and this artificiality was possible due to the enormous power of the crown, also worldwide. Otherwise it would have long ago moved to New York, Paris, Berlin or maybe even Beijing.

The crown owns a whopping 18.7 million km2, which is 12.5% of the land surface on Earth, in a way called Absolute Land Ownership. This ownership concerns Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Great-Britain, and Papua New Guinea. When a land owner hits a natural resource, like oil or gold, the resources are automatically owned by the crown. No matter how much you paid for that piece of land in one of these countries. That’s something to think about.

This dominant position of the crown influenced where the Prime Meridian would end up. This numerical angle between Giza and Greenwich is not very far away from one of the most important constants in mathematics and science: π. PI and the Speed of Light are the two most important constants in physics. So is it coincidence, is this a joke, or maybe a play of mother Nature?

One thing is for sure, the latitude of Khufu is very peculiar: it is numerically located at the speed of light with a probability of 99.9667%. What is there to say about the longitude?

Fig. 6: Was Khufu’s longitude once really located at PI? Or is it just coincidence it is less than 1% close to PI? Khufu’s latitude is numerically located at the speed of light (c).

Strange Coincidences Can Always Occur

Is it coincidental that the largest colonial power owns the prime meridian? No, of course that’s not coincidental. All time notations where ever you are on the Earth are related to Greenwich. No matter how you look at it, it means that stock exchanges are indirectly dependent of the time notations of Greenwich.

But that still doesn’t answer the question whether the distance between Giza and Greenwich reflects a magical number. Before we can answer that question, we have to be sure about the tectonic plate movements.

What About Tectonic Plate Movements?

Fig. 7: This map shows how the Eurasian and Nubian plates are moving today. They both move in approximately the same direction. There is no indication that the locations 1 and 2 differed significantly some 4,600 years ago. 4,600 years ago both location were, in the longitudinal direction, 90.6 meters closer to each other. 

Tectonic Plate Movements Do Not Close the Gap

When we look at the amount of movement between the two plates, there’s not enough differential movement between the plates to close the gap over a period of 4,600 years. The movement would be about 90.6 meters over a period of 4,600 years, by far not enough to settle down the numerical difference between Greenwich and Giza at 314159.

When we take in regard the plate movements over the last 4,600 on which iconic place do we end up then? You wouldn’t believe it when it wasn’t thoroughly calculated.

What is there to find at PI close to Greenwich?

Fig. 8: The angle between the center of Wembley and the center of Giza is 31.41°.

The Largest Contemporary Temple

It is the Wembley stadium. It is quite peculiar, because the Wembley stadium is regarded as the most important contemporary football temple. On top of that is Wembley also cardinally oriented.

Fig. 9: Wembley is among the largest and most important stadiums in the world. It is also cardinally oriented similar as Giza, and the angle between the two is numerically equal to PI.

Conclusion – What Does it Mean?

It could mean nothing, it could mean everything. It is for every individual reader to decide what it means. In your considerations you can regard these as facts:

  1. The longitudinal angle between Khufu and the Prime Meridian is close to PI, it deviates less than 1%,
  2. PI is regarded together with the Speed of Light as the two most important constants in science,
  3. The largest (former) colonial power owns the Prime Meridian,
  4. The English crown is the largest Absolute Land Owner in the world, and therefore very influential,
  5. The Prime Meridian is artificially constructed and the choice of the angle between the Prime Meridian and Khufu can vary between 0 and 180°. It nevertheless is numerically chosen to be very close to PI, while numerically spoken the latitude is already located on the Speed of Light,
  6. Khufu is cardinally oriented, and Wembley is cardinally oriented.
  7. The two buildings are one of the most important buildings in the world.

If you’re a conspiracist you can construct a wild conspiracy around these facts. If you are a scientist you can marvel over the strangeness of coincidences. Whatever you do, do it with all your heart.

© 2017 by Mario Buildreps

 

Pyramids of Giza – Orientation to Geo Pole

The pyramids of Giza are all three very precisely oriented to the cardinals, and therefore ultimately to the geographic North pole. Egyptologists have oversimplified methods to explain how the builders must have done this. But while doing so they overlooked a few crucial topics which makes their work more amateurish and unscientific than it appears at first hand.

 

How Did They Do It?

It might look simple, but to orient such a large structure within 0.06 degrees to the geographic pole is quite difficult, even for the standards of today.

There are in the mainstream circles two competing ideas as to how the builders of the pyramids of Giza might have aligned their tall structures so accurately, within 0.06° to True North.

The proposed methods are:

  • Indian Circle Method,
  • Pole Star Method.

The question of the precise orientation of the pyramids to the cardinals seems to be solved already long time ago. On top of that it is said that orienting that accurate is not such a big thing. So what’s the point of this article? The point is that the widely accepted theories are based on false assumptions and wrong ideas, and therefore must be labeled as the work of amateurs. It is this work of amateurs that has become the standard – a believe system.

The proposed methods by archaeologists are based on what the “Egyptians” were supposed to know about devices, instruments, methods, and mathematics. They lived in the Bronze age and there were no devices found, so archaeologists started to speculate wildly within their constrained paradigm. Many experiments are performed to “simulate” the Egyptians’ method with simple tools.

Achieving such high accuracies with large structures cannot be done with the simple proposed tools. This article will disprove the presented methods with facts.

Both methods will be discussed in this article. But we will first tackle the two most important starting positions which are wrong in the ruling theories.

The Indian Circle Method in Short

What is Wrong in the Ruling Theories?

There are basically two important issues neglected in the currently ruling theories, which are:

  • the original orientation of the pyramids at the time they were supposed to be built. The Nubian plate (African plate) on which the pyramids are built moves a little bit. It moves counterclockwise and the pyramids are slightly counterclockwise oriented. So, there’s clearly a point of correction. The question is only how much? Valuing these tiny movements is important because they add a significant portion to the current deviation of the pyramids.
  • archaeologists measure the specs of the pyramids as built but only after 4,500 years, and base their theories upon it without giving it a second thought. Any measuring device must be more accurate than the process requirements, at least by a factor of two. The general accepted international standard is a ratio of 4 to 1[1], meaning that the equipment must be 4 times as accurate as the manufacturing process requirements itself, in order to prevent out of spec errors in the end products. For gauges even counts a ratio of 10 to 1. We can easily see that archaeologists have insufficient knowledge of this subject while constructing their theories.

These are the two most important issues which are neglected when archaeologists reconstruct the builders’ surveying and building methods. We will examine how these two very important issues must have impacted the builders’ processes.

Nubian Plate Movements

We can estimate the amount of rotation the Nubian (African) plate has made since the time the pyramids were built. The results differ depending on which plate tectonics model we use. Note that the different models generate different results (!). After studying on this issue we’ve chosen to use HS2-NUVEL1 as the reference[2]. This model generates for the Nubian plate the following data:

  • Location of Interest: 29.979°, 31.134°
  • Location Euler Pole: -5.50°, 3.60°
  • Angular velocity: -13.0″/kyears
  • Direction = -48.9 degree

To understand how the African plate has moved relative to the geographic pole, and so the pyramids as well, you need absolute data. It is the best data we can get for this purpose[3].

The conclusion is that the Nubian plate rotated 59″ counterclockwise since the time the pyramids were built. The pyramids are nowadays aligned at -205″ relative to True North, the geographic pole. So, based on the calculated tectonic plate movement we can conclude that the pyramids were aligned within a range of error of: -205 + 59 = -146″ (or 0.041° West of North).

Like already mentioned before was their surveying instrument at least 2 to 4 times as accurate as the errors we observe in the building’s orientation. That means that the builders used an instrument able to detect True North within 0.01 to 0.02° (or 36″ to 72″), which is just beyond the angular resolution of the human eye. Compare it with a sniper hitting a basketball at a distance of 1 kilometer. Show us one ancient instrument able to do that. Not only that, you must reproduce that also three times.

How Plate Movements Affected the Current Orientation

This is how the Nubian plate is believed to have moved. The counterclockwise rotation adds a significant portion to the deviation of the pyramids of Giza.
This is how the Nubian plate is believed to have rotated. The counterclockwise rotation of the plate adds a significant portion to the contemporary deviation of the pyramids of Giza. | © 2017 Buildreps.

Theoretical Age of Pyramids at Breakeven Point

The pyramids of Giza were never reliably dated, so the first grandiose assumption was already made by pinpointing them at about 4560 years old. Because radiocarbon datings are pointing to an older age, it forced archaeologists to construct difficult theories how that could have happened, because it contradicts the time the alleged builder of the great pyramid, pharaoh Khufu (Cheops), reigned over Egypt.

What would you trust more, scripture or mathematics? Graffiti or Numbers?

By using the movement of the Nubian plate, we can calculate a theoretical breakeven point date at: 205 ÷ 13 ≈ 15,800 years. The age of the pyramids could be well around 15,800 years.

There is a good reason why we should take this date seriously, which is the following: if you are able to built something that withstood “4,500 years” of environmental influences like earthquakes and floods, and still stand that tall and accurately like it obviously still does, then what might have prevented them to built with almost 0 tolerance?

In a future article we will show the mathematical likelihood for this date to be accurate and true based on a set of converging data.

Indian Circle Method

The bar, to detect True North, is set at 0.02° or 72″. Without making too much fuzz about the Indian Circle Method, we can say this method is good for finding North during bush camping. When we use this method we accumulate in about 8 steps so much errors that we are able to find North within ±2°.  A well trained professional might be able to achieve outliers within ±1°. When we repeat this method 3 times we have to count with errors that lie between ±2-3°. It is simply impossible to orient within an accuracy of less than 0.02° with this primitive method.

It’s a troubling idea that archaeologists who regard themselves as objective scientists are not able to understand these basic principles.

This method is accurate enough to align just a building close to the cardinals or for finding your way in the wild. But to explain the orientation of the pyramids with this method is amateurish.

We accumulate at least 8 errors in the following procedures:

  1. levelness of surface,
  2. verticality of pole,
  3. registering 1st point,
  4. registering 2nd point,
  5. drawing line between two points,
  6. finding midst on line,
  7. drawing line between mid pole and mid line,
  8. copying the direction of that line to the actual building process.
The Indian Circle Method accumulates many errors which makes it inappropriate to build within ±2°. This method fails with a factor of 100! | © 2017 Buildreps.

Pole Star Method

The Pole Star Method is in principle the same as the Indian Circle Method only with the differences that it is performed at night and it is more accurate because it more directly aims at the virtual spin axis of the Earth, the geographic pole. Because the Pole Star is never exactly on top of the spin axis so to speak, are we also relying on a division step similar as with the Indian Circle Method (step #6).

The Pole Star Represents the Spin Axis

This method is about 2 times more accurate as the Indian Circle Method, because it cuts the first four steps. A well trained professional could be able to find North somewhere between ±0.25° to ±0.5°. But the difficulty is to displace that direction to the actual construction.

Let’s assume this last step takes place with 0 error, which in fact will never happen, we are still left in the best case with a method that’s even unable to measure the current orientation of the pyramids with a factor of 5 to 10, let alone to be able to serve as a master measuring device. According to the international standards the device must be able to measure within ±0.02°. Even if we don’t correct the Nubian plate movements, we will still end up close to the aforementioned ±0.02°. That is not something you can do with just sticks, stones, and some ropes. For that you will need something far more advanced.

On top of that, when archaeologists construct their theories they are accompanied with advanced theodolites which the “Egyptians” weren’t suppose to have to confirm their surveying.

Which device they might have used? That question is still open to any speculation. I know the answer to that. Do you?

 

© 2017 by Mario Buildreps

 

[1]: The standard for the uncertainty of measurements is defined as the root of the sum of the squares, for example √(a2+b2+c2+d2+e2). The sum as a whole determines the accuracy of the measuring process.This is the international standard as accepted by the BIPM.

For example, we want to measure the diameter of a aluminum disk which has the specifications ∅498±0.02 mm. We measure the disk with a micrometer which has the following specifications and influences: a. uncertainty micrometer 5μm; b. uncertainty calibration 6μm; c. temperature variations 10μm; d. placement errors 5μm; e. reading error 2μm. Sum = 190 ⇒ √190 = 13.8μm. Process = 13.8÷5 = 2.76 times less accurate as the instrument itself

This simple example shows why we are not dealing solely with the instrument itself but with the measuring process as a whole. The final result, which is the final orientation of the pyramids as built must be back-engineered by using this method.

[2]: The mentioned data are converted from relative data to absolute data. The alleged absolute methods like NNR-NUVEL-1, NNR-NUVEL-1A, HS3-NIVEL-1A, and NNR-MORVEL are absolute in relation to the so called hotspot frames, which are active volcanic areas, like Hawaii and Iceland. The reason why we don’t use these methods is because they make the assumption that these hotspot don’t move.

[3]: The location of Giza is close to a vault zone with the Arabian plate, which makes this part of the African plate less stable. The Egyptian Mountain Ranges are a result from the push of the vault zone between the African plate and Arabian plate.

Pyramids of Giza – Latitude at Speed of Light?

It is said, by some, that the location coordinates of the Great Pyramid of Giza matches the exact number sequence for the speed of light. Metabunk “debunks” it without making a real scientific analysis. Who is right and who is wrong?

Latitude of Khufu = Speed of Light?

This article explained why it is impossible to level the pyramids of Giza as accurately as it is done with only primitive tools like sticks, stones, ropes, water trenches, and so on.

Represents the latitude of Khufu the speed of light?

Egyptologists stick to the idea that the builders must have done it with only simple tools, hiding behind empty slogans and fixed ideas. They are entrapped in a preset paradigm. The real scientific facts are different though.

A measuring tool must be at least two times as accurate as the building specifications itself. By definition. It has always been known that measuring equipment must be more accurate than the manufacturing process requirements – this is a basic engineering principle.

It is important to understand that as a production process is evaluated, the variation of the gauge is inherently part of the variation observed in the process. Gauge makers apply as a general rule that a gauge must be 10 times as accurate as the product tolerances. So, we are very mild when we only apply a factor of two.

But that is not the only thing. Egyptologists also explain the building accuracy of the pyramids at the present day. They cannot seem to deal with the fact that the Nubian (African) plate on which the pyramids are located has moved since the time they were built. These tiny plate movements must be corrected in the contemporary data of both the levelness and the orientation to find the correct data at the time the pyramids were built.

After correcting the data in the right way we find astounding accuracies which cannot be explained with the proposed simple tools, not even by a factor of 10. So, be critical towards claims of Egyptologists about supposed methods. They are based on nothing more than unscientific ideas. They might have a monopoly on their “science” of the pyramids, they have no monopoly on mathematics and logic, and on top of that, they are no engineers.

The question is: how probable is the claim that Khufu is built at a latitude that matches the speed of light?

The Odds For 6 Digits to Match

The straight forward, uncorrected probability that the latitude of Giza actually represents the speed of light is very high. But that figure has to be corrected. | © 2016 Buildreps.

When we perform simple straightforward calculations there’s a probability of a whopping 1 to 900,000[1] that the claim is false. Does that mean that the odds for Khufu’s latitude to represent the speed of light is very high: 99.99989%? The answer is: NO. Why not? Because that is the straightforward chance that two seemingly unrelated things match to each other. The probability calculation needs to be corrected, and I will explain why.

Why This Probability Needs Correction

Probability calculations need often corrections, because we pick just one item of many other possible items. For example:

  1. there are three pyramids,
  2. there are more scientific constants,
  3. the Nubian plate shifted about 20 meters Northward since the pyramids were supposed to be built.

So, we must correct the outcome. In that outcome lie all the answers, the naked mathematical truth, kicking down all sacred cows. No matter if these sacred cows are from new age believers or from scientific materialists. Mathematics has no preferences for one of them, mathematics is neutral, but it has to be used correctly.

Why do we need to involve more scientific constants than only the speed of light? That’s because if the latitude would be equal with π (314159) we would say that the latitude would equal to that, wouldn’t we? So, we would pick that number, and that’s the reason why the probability calculations have to be corrected.

Scientific Constants

There are many more constants in physics and mathematics. Constants are numbers like π, φ, e, i2, speed of light (c), atomic mass (Mu), the gravitational constant (G), electron mass (me), the Planck constant (h), etc.

In physics there are about 400 of these constants. In mathematics there are about 50 constants. If we add them up together we find approximately 450 currently known scientific constants. But there are many trivial constants which are only known to the most adept experts. The list of really important constants is limited to only about 30 constants, from which the speed of light takes a prominent position. We will take only these constants into account.

So, we have an uncorrected coincidence of 1.111×10-6 which has to be downsized with the amount of pyramids (3) and the amount of constants (30). But we have to upgrade that outcome again with the amount of other constants we find in the pyramids, like π, φ, and e (3). Why? Because it reinforces the fact that the builders incorporated constants into their buildings.

Probability that the claim is coincidental = 1.111×10-6 × 3 × 30 ÷ 3 = 3.33×10-51 to 30,000.

The outcome is 1 to 30,000 that Khufu’s latitude is coincidental, hence 99.9967% certainty that the pyramids were meant to be built on a location that represents the speed of light.

Nubian Plate Movement

The Nubian plate moves today about 2 and 5 mm/yr Northward, depending on the plate tectonics model, and is doing that supposedly already for many thousands of years. So, that is over the last 4,500 years between 9 and 22.5 meters Northward. How does that changed the latitude? The most left 5 digits wouldn’t change, only the sixth digit from the left would change.

The correct calculation looks like this: plate movement [m] ÷ circumference Earth [m] × 360 [°] = 9 ÷ 40,075,000 × 360 = 0.000081° or 8.1*10-5°.

That part of the Nubian plate moved Northward, hence was the original latitude more to the South. The top of Khufu is now located at 29.9792°N. That movement in degrees needs to be corrected with -0.000081°, which results in 29.979°N. Many people will write the outcome as 29.979119, but we must neglect to write down the seventh and eighth digits because they’re in the margin of error. The sixth digit must be rounded down to 0, hence it falls away: 29.979119 becomes 29.979.

If the plate moved 22.5 meters North we would find the same value, 29.978997879 becomes 29.979.

Why only five digits? Because geology can only tell us between which boundaries the Nubian plate moved: between 5 and 22.5 meters. That’s why the 5 most left digits are rock solid: 29979. This changes the probability of 1 to 30,000 just mentioned above into 1 to 3,000.

The odds for the claim to be accurate and true is now reduced to 99.9667%. But this probability is as rock solid as it can get. And it is still a very high probability, especially because we’ve now incorporated many reductions like the amount of pyramids, the amount of constants, and the Nubian plate movement. The claim is therefore most likely true and correct.

If this was a stock market, where would you bet your money on: just stories or mathematics? Your choice is the difference between resp. poverty & bondage or richness & liberty. It’s your own free will what you prefer.

Did you spot the red dot in the middle? This is how 1 to 3,000 looks like. If this was a stock market, whose stocks would you buy?

Did You Know That Teotihuacan Was Giza’s Predecessor?

Teotihuacan and Giza have many similarities. They also have the similarity to be located at the same latitude, but since the crust was deformed is Teotihuacan now oriented to Greenland instead of to the former geographic pole. The pole of Teotihuacan is between 210,000 and 225,000 years old. That is the real age of Teotihuacan. The probability that this claim is correct is: >99.999%.

The Consequences

The claim has many consequences. The speed of light is defined in m/s. Location is defined in degrees. The exact way of positioning, up to a few meters, is believed to be just recently possible. Our historians have taught us these were inventions that came much later after the pyramids of Giza.

All these assertions listed below are probably wrong.

  • meter – officially defined in 1790 in Paris, France.
  • second – first coined by the Muslim scholar Al-Biruni in 1000 CE.
  • degree – first coined by the Greeks between 250 and 150 BC.
  • decimal system – probably originated in Iran around 3,500 BC.
  • the circumference of the earth – first known accurate calculations done by Persian Al-Biruni around 1000 CE.
  • speed of light in vacuum – first accurate estimate in 1728 done by James Bradley.
  • global positioning up to a precision of 5 meters – first possible since 1995.

What is more probable: that we are fooled by an elite or the probability calculation that Khufu’s latitude corresponds to the speed of light? The choice is yours to pick, which is Mythos (just stories) versus Logos (mathematics).

The Egyptian measure, the cubit for example, was defined as: π – φ2 = 0.52356 (m). But that also is regarded as coincidence by most scholars, because they were not supposed to know π or φ down to six or more digits, but they had.

Our paradigm is built on falsehood that everything always grows and everything’s getting better. That paradigm is obviously incorrect.

The pyramids of Giza are full with mathematical relations while Egyptologists keep persistently denying that fact.

Conclusion

The probability that Khufu was meant to be built at a latitude which represents the speed of light is very high: 99.9667%. There’s only 1 to 3,000 chance it’s a coincidental match.

To get a sense of proportion how small 1 to 3,000 is, you can perform this experiment for yourself:

  1. take a dice,
  2. pick a number you insist to throw and say it out loud, then throw,
  3. if this was successful, you’re on the level of 1 to 6,
  4. you still have to repeat that same experiment successfully 3 times in a row, so 4 times in total, to get on the level of 1 to 1,296.

The odds for Khufu to stand coincidentally at a latitude that matches five digits of a scientific constant is 1 to 3,000. The message is clear: it is very likely that Khufu’s latitude represents the speed of light, and that it was meant to be so. It’s all there, in the numbers. Whether we like it or not.

Since there are a few other, very important, constants incorporated into the pyramids it is very likely the claim is not only true, but also very accurate. Debunkers are unsuccessful in debunking the claim because they haven’t debunked anything on a scientific basis, which they should to be credible. Instead they just mindlessly repeat the stories everyone already knew. Where is the science? When it comes to ancient history, there is no science present in the mainstream circles. It’s a religion based on stories.

Remember also one other thing as well: the likelihood that the claim is true (you know which claim) grows with every failing, scientifically based, debunking attempt. Think twice when you’re debunker!

It also seems to be clear we can toss many history books into the trash can – they are based on twisted narratives. Everyone should make up their own minds about it, but if you base your believe on stories which are passed on, instead of basing it on mathematics, remember the story carousel and how a story changes while it passes on. Be careful where you base your believe system on, your whole perception is built on that.

The tall constructions are shouting out a crystal clear message that most of us still don’t seem to understand: they were built by a very advanced civilization, far more advanced than ours.

Only when you have understood the real message you can start to decode its code. Let’s get started!

 

© 2015-2017 by Mario Buildreps

[1]: The digit 9, the most left digit needs perhaps some explanation. The number we can invoke here is between 1 and 9, because when we invoke a 0, it drops away. The other numbers can vary between 0 and 9, and can therefore take 10 positions, hence the five tens. Back to the most left digit, it can flip from positive to negative, which represent respectively the Northern and Southern hemisphere. So, this digit can take in fact 18 positions. But if we look practical, we can built only something where there’s land. From South Africa whole the way up to Sweden, or from South India to Siberia, or from South America to Canada. From this perspective it is fair to keep a 9 there, instead of an 18. Some might argue you can replace it with a 10, 11, or even a higher number with the argument that alleged pyramids are found on Antarctica. That’s their choice, I prefer the more conservative probability calculations.

 

 

Pyramids of Giza – Leveling the Foundation

Every construction project begins with site preparation. Leveling a building terrain of the size of the great pyramid of Khufu was no job for amateurs. The foundation is leveled so precise that claiming it is done with primitive tools is unsustainable and even unscientific. The claims are induced by self-appointed experts who have no education nor any experience in construction principles and how errors accumulate in both measuring and construction processes. This series of articles will shed a new light on a long kept mystery.

The Levelness of the Foundation of Khufu

The levelness or horizontalness of the great pyramid of Khufu is so high that even after 4,500 years it still outmatches the highest ambitions of any construction engineer. | © 2017 by Buildreps.

Astounding Accuracy Even After Many Milleniums

We have thanks to Flinders Petrie, for his survey work on the pyramids of Giza around 1880, reliable data of the pyramids to work with. Besides surveying the pyramids had Petrie also ideas as to how the builders might have achieved such astounding high precisions. He suggested that the builders leveled the terrain by cutting a grid of trenches, flooded them with water, using the water surface as a guide for leveling.

This was an assumption based on speculation, since nothing of a kind of grid was found. Moreover, it is an assumption that water leveling could achieve such a precision. After all, archaeologists are no engineers, and since archaeologists are often too conceited to take professional advices from engineers, and since surveying the pyramids is a monopoly of archaeologists, none of the mysteries surrounding the pyramids are ever solved.

Only some hundred years later began Mark Lehner to produce a similar mapping of the pyramids, only with contemporary more precise equipment. Based on this measurements suggested Lehner that the builders only leveled a perimeter casing on the circumference of the pyramid.

Both, Petrie and Lehner, have measured the structure with increasing precision, leaving not a single doubt about the dazzling high accuracy with which the builders crafted their pyramids some 4,500 years ago.

Suggesting primitive means like water leveling, simple wooden tools, and cutting rock with copper chisels don’t seem to clarify the mysteries surrounding the pyramids. These simple explanations make the mystery only more complicated. Because the pyramids are dated some 2,500 BC, and the ruling paradigm insists a Stone age, Copper age, Iron age there seems no way to explain anything, except mindless propositions that fit the ruling paradigm.

Nubian Plate Movements

The plate on which the pyramids of Giza are built is called the Nubian plate. Every movement that this plate made after the pyramids were built in regard to the geographical pole (orientation) or to the center of the Earth (levelness) results in a deviation of the structure.

The precision with which the pyramids were built is baffling. But what everyone seems to forget is that the age of the structure adds a significant portion to its current deviations, while they are still standing with an admirable precision. To find out how precise the pyramids were built, before you can establish any measuring or building methodology at all, you need to be aware of the Nubian plate movements over the last 4,500 years. The original precision has to estimated by the plate movement corrections first.

There is little to no knowledge about the tilt movements of the Nubian plate over the last few thousand years, but the more about the drift and the Eulerian rotation of the plate. The term Eulerian rotation refers to a virtual point on the plate around which it seemingly rotates. We cannot correct the levelness or horizontalness of the pyramids by any accurate means, so we leave the levelness uncorrected. But we can correct the orientation of the pyramids.

Based upon several measurements over the last decades it is quite certain that the Nubian plate moves consistently counterclockwise about 13” (“=arc seconds) per thousand years. Assuming it is true that the pyramids are 4,500 years old we can assert that the Nubian plate has rotated around 59” counterclockwise, which is about 1′ or 0.0167°. If the pyramids are older, the grade of rotation was larger.

Break Even Point

The theoretical breakeven point is an age of 13,816 years BC – an age of 15,833 years. At this age are the pyramids theoretically spoken exactly oriented to the current geographic pole, which did not move anymore at about 26,000 years ago. But if we hold on to the official age of 4,500 years, the correct orientation of the pyramids at the time they were built, was approximately -0.041° or 0.041° West of North. Today it is -0.057°.

If you want to make the best estimate of the age of the pyramids, you must combine the above mentioned oriental breakeven point with the most likely star alignments, and not rely on star alignments alone. In the future we will publish proof for the correct age of the pyramids based on a set of converging data.

All theories based upon uncorrected data will be ipso facto wrong. One thing is for sure – the plate has moved. It has rotated, it has shifted, and it has tilted. The slightest changes have significant impact on the already very precise alignments of the pyramids. We cannot correct the tilt angle of the pyramids but we can correct the rotation angle up to a certain degree. We will pay attention to orientation in the next article.

Common Errors Made by Archaeologists and Historians

Scholars, historians, and scientists who try to reconstruct how the pyramids were built try to do this by reconstructing possible measuring principles with relative simple tools. They have no choice simply because the paradigm doesn’t allow any other more sophisticated methods. By not allowing themselves to think outside the box they make major errors in their approaches and assumptions.

  • Error #1: The pyramids were surveyed by Petrie and Lehner by using high-tech instruments. The produced outcomes are used to reconstruct possible measuring methods the builders could have been used. We are not talking about measuring methods they had used but a factual construction that is produced within this range of error. The measuring equipment the pyramid builders used was therefore more accurate, at least by a factor of two. All engineers agree with the fact that the instrument must be more accurate than the construction specs. The levelness of Khufu is about 0.2″. That is the kind of instrumentation we are dealing with here. In case of leveling the pyramid builders used an instrument capable of measuring with a tolerance of less than ±0.1”. Most modern surveying instruments like theodolites are able to measure within this kind of accuracy, typically less than 5” or even less than 2”. But to measure 0.1” requires the best available theodolite. How can we reproduce such modern instruments with simple means? The bar is set at a very high level.
  • Error #2: None of the official theories accounts for the accuracy of the original construction by correcting for geological movements of the area or the whole plate. They must when they want to be taken seriously.
  • Error #3: Solving questions with improper means, that is to say, the ruling paradigm dictates how questions must be solved instead of how they should be solved, which is scientifically. Leave any possibility open whether they had advanced equipment or whether they knew advanced mathematics. We shall see what is possible and what not. Cutting granite with copper tools is simply impossible while some Egyptologists keep persisting they did it this way. Who is irrational and who is to trust on their expertise? Archaeologists or engineers?

Leveling With Water Trenches

Using water trenches is accurate but far from accurate enough to explain the levelness of Giza’s pyramids.| © 2017 Buildreps.

Possible Techniques to Measure Levelness or Horizontalness

There are several proposed techniques with which the pyramid builders could have leveled the construction site. If that would be true, why do we need such costly equipment and academical trained engineers to do our contemporary surveying?

  • Method #1 – Water Trenches: When it comes to leveling the pyramids of Giza some Egyptologists tend to agree it could have been done by using a water trench close to the casing. The surface of the water in the trench surrounding the casing would serve as the level they had to plane away to get at the same level as the lowest point. Everyone can easily see this must be done in several stages from coarse to fine. The problem is that there is never any evidence found of such a method. Another problem is the accuracy which is not better than ±0.1% of the distance between the two sample points. In the case of Khufu are we dealing with a deviation of just 0.006%. So, that is still more than 16 times more accurate than we possibly can level with water trenches. And that levelness is even uncorrected because we’ve no data about the tilt movements of the Nubian plate. It’s easy to see how impossible this proposed technique is.
    Hydrostatic leveling is good at registering changes between two sample points.

     

  • Method #2 – Communicating Vessels: Also referred to as hydrostatic leveling is quite an accurate method. This method can be accurate to distinguish fluctuations within ±0.05% of the distance between the two levelers. It can be used as an instrument independent from the site, hence one of the possible reasons why no evidence of hydrostatic leveling is found. Due to the combination of robustness and accuracy is hydrostatic leveling even used in nuclear plants or particle accelerators to guard their stability. But hydrostatic leveling is especially good at registering variations between two positions, and not directly good as a measuring device itself.  If there is one method to level the great pyramids this could be the one, but there are some major problems with it, from which accuracy is the major one. With this method, the levelness of the great pyramid of Khufu would still deviate some ±115 mm, which is still around 8 times off the scale.
    This ridiculous, unscientific idea how the builders must have leveled the pyramids is proposed by Egyptologists. This method comes not even close.

     

  • Method #3 – Right-angled Isosceles Triangle: It is said by most established scientists that the Egyptians only had the isosceles triangle to their disposal to level the pyramids. If this device would be so accurate why don’t surveyors use it today? It would save a lot of money. In fact is this a laughable and completely unscientific attempt to explain something magnificent. The best achievable accuracy of this instrument is only about ±0.1% of the distance between two sample points. It can be accurate, yes, but not accurate enough. Not even by a factor of 15. The best achievable leveling of the pyramids would be not less than ±230 mm or ±3.6”.  A clear impossibility.
This Leica 500 is capable to level up to 0.05″ accurate. This is the kind of instrument we need to level the great pyramid of Khufu.

None of the three possible methods are accurate enough to explain the current observed level, let alone the level at the time the pyramids were built. That means we have to come up with some other methods that equals the capabilities of a modern Leica theodolite. Science is not about believes or generating mindless assumptions like Egyptologists like to do, it’s about explaining the facts without being bothered by paradigms.

Conclusion

It is said that the pyramid builders had no advanced instruments to their disposal but the fact is there is no way to explain the current found leveling with the methods #1 to #3, let alone if we correct the orientation or levelness with the movements of the Nubian plate over the last 4,500 years. Egyptologists have a problem with the proposed methods, a problem which isn’t even properly defined up to this day.

The used measuring and building methods are still wide open for all possible speculations. Whether alternative options are considered as ridiculous is an unscientific approach. The mystery of the pyramids of Giza are scientifically not solved yet, despite the ridiculous amateurish attempts of archaeologists and egypotologists. It’s time that engineers take their place and solve the questions as it should be done – unbiased and scientifically.

 

© 2017 by Mario Buildreps