TIL: Today I Learned

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Pyramid of Khafre was built to appear taller than the Great Pyramid of Khufu. Along with the steeper sides, the pyramid is built on ground 10 metres higher than the base of the Great Pyramid. Earlier pyramid designs did experiment with steeper angles, but because of the size and mass of the pyramids, the steeper angles made the pyramids unstable.
Here's one of their builds that they had to alter after making some progress:
330px-Snefru%27s_Bent_Pyramid_in_Dahshur.jpg

The Bent Pyramid

I believe the pyramids built by the cultures to the south were much steeper than your stereotypical Egyptian one but much smaller.
 
In a related trivia point, there are more pyramids in Sudan than there are in Egypt.
 
Now all we need is for someone to say that's pure coincidence, just like the ratio of the height and perimeter "just happening" to come out to 2*pi most be just coincidence since the ancient Egyptians were unfamiliar with the concept.

Or, is it possible that the historians who said they were unfamiliar with the concept might have been wrong? Nahhhh, of course not.

https://www.ladbible.com/more/inter...mid-of-giza-has-eight-sides-not-four-20160610

And apparently its unique... One of those pictures shows it as a big sundial. I wonder if anyone has excavated sites where the tip sits on the equinoxes and solstices. Thats strange, according to current research the Great Pyramid was built by Khufu/Cheops and his sons built the other two, but they didn't incorporate this feature into their pyramids. Maybe they didn't know, they didn't seem to know about the interior design of Dad's or had some other reason for burial pits below ground level with no upper chambers.

Another thing I didn't know, the 2nd pyramid is actually steeper (53 13') than the Great pyramid (51 50' 24") and the 3rd (51 20'). I gotta believe those angles are astronomically significant.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Comparison_of_pyramids_SMIL.svg

Here's a cool feature comparing some pyramids. Run the cursor over the superimposed pyramids to see how they stack up against each other.
When you look at the second link and see the 1940s photo showing the 8 sides, that does not look like the great pyramid. The GP has several rows of casing stones at the top. You can see those in the top photo. So what happened o the casing stones? The surrounding buildings look similar to the GP site. Photoshopped? There is a disconnect of some sort. Are there more recent photos replicating the one from 1940s.
 
When you look at the second link and see the 1940s photo showing the 8 sides, that does not look like the great pyramid. The GP has several rows of casing stones at the top. You can see those in the top photo. So what happened o the casing stones? The surrounding buildings look similar to the GP site. Photoshopped? There is a disconnect of some sort. Are there more recent photos replicating the one from 1940s.

For the record, I was neither here nor there on the inflected sides business...but the perimeter to height ratio is the commonly used approximation 22:7 and it does seem odd that it would "just happen" to match circumference:diameter.
 
For the record, I was neither here nor there on the inflected sides business...but the perimeter to height ratio is the commonly used approximation 22:7 and it does seem odd that it would "just happen" to match circumference:diameter.
We should perhaps consult a numerologist, and engineer and a mathematician. What results would we get if we did the same math on all the other pyramids? It may be a question of engineering aesthetics. That design just looked better than others.
 
When you look at the second link and see the 1940s photo showing the 8 sides, that does not look like the great pyramid. The GP has several rows of casing stones at the top. You can see those in the top photo. So what happened o the casing stones? The surrounding buildings look similar to the GP site. Photoshopped? There is a disconnect of some sort. Are there more recent photos replicating the one from 1940s.
It seemed fishy to me as well. Google turns up very little information on this, except the same 2 or 3 photos over and over. The websites that talk about the inflected sides/concavity thing mostly have names like "themindunleashed" and "acient-code.com", so I instinctively find them dubious. As far as I can tell, the Wikipedia article for the Great Pyramid makes no mention of 8 sides, inflections, concavity, or special lighting effects on the equinoxes. For such an interesting design feature, you'd think there'd be plenty of information about it, no? In comparison, Chichen Itza has those cool snake lighting effects on the balustrades on equinoxes, which you can read about everywhere.
 
I would think that such a subtle inflection, if it were there, would have been lost when the casing stones were removed.
 
It seemed fishy to me as well. Google turns up very little information on this, except the same 2 or 3 photos over and over. The websites that talk about the inflected sides/concavity thing mostly have names like "themindunleashed" and "acient-code.com", so I instinctively find them dubious. As far as I can tell, the Wikipedia article for the Great Pyramid makes no mention of 8 sides, inflections, concavity, or special lighting effects on the equinoxes. For such an interesting design feature, you'd think there'd be plenty of information about it, no? In comparison, Chichen Itza has those cool snake lighting effects on the balustrades on equinoxes, which you can read about everywhere.
I'm pretty sure that there have been lots of top down views of the great pyramid since the end of WW2. Even satellite shots. The missing casing stones tells me it is bogus.

I would think that such a subtle inflection, if it were there, would have been lost when the casing stones were removed.
Yes. Without the casing stones all the measurements are imprecise. Those stones have been gone for a few hundred years.
 
TIL that 2/3rd's of all men in China smoke! (China Population: 1386 million people)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_in_China#cite_note-Lancet101015-35
As of 2014, two thirds of Chinese men smoked.
And the same seems to be true in India! (India Population: 1339 million people)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_in_India

There are approximately 120 million smokers in India. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), India is home to 12% of the world’s smokers. More than 10 million die each year due to tobacco in India.[8] According to a 2002 WHO estimate, 70% of adult males in India smoke.
Jeez, the people who edit Wikipedia can't do math!
None of those numbers for India seem remotely consistent with reality. :hmm:
Half of 1339 is 670 million of which 70% would be 469 million male smokers.

Anyway, the yearly death toll from a billion men smoking must be insane.

How can people treat fresh air as the enemy?
I choke to death with air spray fresheners.
 
We should perhaps consult a numerologist, and engineer and a mathematician. What results would we get if we did the same math on all the other pyramids? It may be a question of engineering aesthetics. That design just looked better than others.
One thing is if, for aesthetic reasons, they tried to incorporate the golden ratio like this:
Spoiler :
golden-triangle-pyramid.jpg

they'd get height/perimeter ratio of about 2pi
 
One thing is if, for aesthetic reasons, they tried to incorporate the golden ratio like this:
Spoiler :
golden-triangle-pyramid.jpg

they'd get height/perimeter ratio of about 2pi

I wonder if the historians who said they had no concept of pi would allow for them understanding the golden ratio.
 
I wonder if the historians who said they had no concept of pi would allow for them understanding the golden ratio.
I was wondering that too. It seems pretty reasonable to me to think they knew of both and had approximations of both.

After all, they did build the Great Pyramid on a latitude that encodes the speed of light :p
 
Afaik, civs like the Babylonians and Egypt knew that in practice tied stuff exist (eg the pythagorean theorem) but had no use (and apparently nor concept) of a geometrical proof (no closed system supported by axioms, and no method of arriving to a proof from axioms; both are historically attributed to Thales, who also was the first to calculate the height of the Great Pyramid, by using another of his theorems).
So it isn't out of the question that they'd try to incorporate pi in the building. But one has to keep in mind that the golden ratio is heavily used in aesthetic in the first place, cause it just looks good.

Going by ancient-era historians, it should also be noted that in such cultures only special, small groups had access to math or other orders. In the case of Egypt, it would be the priest class.
 
I was wondering that too. It seems pretty reasonable to me to think they knew of both and had approximations of both.

After all, they did build the Great Pyramid on a latitude that encodes the speed of light :p

At this late point in the conversation it occurs to me to be really curious what said historians based their statements on...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom