How were the Giza pyramids built?

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by charles brough

The forming of the blocks theory is well over 20 years old and while it is valid and may well be true, it makes little if any difference. Either way involves about the same amount of labour. Instead of hauling blocks up, they had to haul cement and forms up or make the cement blocks or make them below and haul them up. Did it save all that cutting and chipping? Well, consider where they got the polymere cement? They had to grind it up into powder. That would not save much labour!

The casting ideas of Joe Davidovits is quite old, and his geo-polymers constitute more than what we now call cement and concrete. I agree about grinding up the ingredients, but this can even be done stone on stone at the quarry. One of the 'mysteries' of the building is how did they move/lift the large blocks, and the problem is moot if one only needs individuals carrying baskets/buckets of mix to the level where the casting is going on. Neighboring blocks 'form up' 3 sides of a new casting and 2 sides are formed with wood. Pour, cure, remove form, move over, repeat.

Originally Posted by charles brough

What is amazing about the pyramids is that they represent a patriotic enthusiams and nationalism of such exhuberance that we cannot even imagine it. The builders of those early pyrmaids volunteered their labour. The pride the Egypitians had in their immense and powerful state was something new to human civilization. They had created a most powerful nation unlike anywhere else on Earth. It was efficiently run. Their leaders were believed to be gods. They loved their society.

Some kind of amazing enthusiasm at any rate.

Originally Posted by charles brough

Of course, things change and the Old Empire period finally did come to an end in an age of lawlessness and decline. People were robbing the very pyramids they had formerly volunteered to build. Change does happen to civilizations. Nations like the U.S. that rise to the top, just fall the harder when they do decline.

That does seem to be the case, although natural disasters have also historically precipitated a decline which led to lawlessnes, which led to an end of an age, which led to robbing, all in the house that Jack built. Those who fail to recognize the failings of the past are doomed to repeat them...warn your grandchildren.

[Jay-qu]

If the stones where indeed quarried, has anyone found a candidate for one of these quarries?

[TheBigDog]

Originally Posted by Jay-qu

If the stones where indeed quarried, has anyone found a candidate for one of these quarries?

I have seen candidates for the quarries, but as I recall there have never been any tools recovered that are reputed to have been used in building the pyramids.

Bill

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by TheBigDog

I believe that the structures at Giza, and some other structures within a few hundred miles, date back to far earlier than the Egyptian Pharaohs credited with their construction. Two things have lead me to that conclusion. First was a documentary that showed how the pyramids were laid out on the ground to mirror stars, and in fact whole constellations. But it was not just location, but the relative size of each pyramid was proportional to the brightness of the associated star. I would often chalk this up to coincidence, but the scope of the coincidence was just too great. Now it is perfectly logical for this to have been done by the Egyptian Pharaohs, but when you look at the arrangement of the pyramids, and the alignment of the stars, if the two are analogous then the pyramids were built around 10,000 BC, not 2600 BC as currently stated. Second was a documentary on the Sphinx. It investigated the erosion in the rocks surrounding the sphinx, and came to the conclusion that it was several thousand years older than currently claimed, about the same age as the star dating of the pyramids.

To the best of my knowledge, the hypothesis that the Giza pyramids and related structures are about 12,000, rather than about 4,600 years old, conflicts with radiocarbon dating of wood particles in their mortar. This research was performed in 1984 and 1995 by the David H. Koch Pyramids Radiocarbon Project. I’m unaware of any other similar research of the structures at Giza. Interestingly, this research was funded by the Edgar Cayce Foundation, which sought to support the claim of its namesake founder that the the Sphinx and Khufu's Great Pyramid were built around 10,500 B.C. (sources: many, including ”Dating the Pyramids”, Archeology magazine, September/October 1999).

Although controversy remains about the precise age of these structures, the uncertainty is no greater than a few centuries. Although problematical to historians, this uncertainty is small enough to rule out the hypothesis that these structures are more than 7,000 year older than most archeologists believe.

It’s possible that the Giza and other Egyptian structures were built much earlier using some technique that produced very little carbon from living sources, and that the radiocarbon dating is misleadingly dating the mortar used in much later modification or restoration projects. However, this possibility is, I think, very unlikely.

[TheBigDog]

Originally Posted by CraigD

To the best of my knowledge, the hypothesis that the Giza pyramids and related structures are about 12,000, rather than about 4,600 years old, conflicts with radiocarbon dating of wood particles in their mortar. This research was performed in 1984 and 1995 by the David H. Koch Pyramids Radiocarbon Project. I’m unaware of any other similar research of the structures at Giza. Interestingly, this research was funded by the Edgar Cayce Foundation, which sought to support the claim of its namesake founder that the the Sphinx and Khufu's Great Pyramid were built around 10,500 B.C. (sources: many, including ”Dating the Pyramids”, Archeology magazine, September/October 1999).

Although controversy remains about the precise age of these structures, the uncertainty is no greater than a few centuries. Although problematical to historians, this uncertainty is small enough to rule out the hypothesis that these structures are more than 7,000 year older than most archeologists believe.

It’s possible that the Giza and other Egyptian structures were built much earlier using some technique that produced very little carbon from living sources, and that the radiocarbon dating is misleadingly dating the mortar used in much later modification or restoration projects. However, this possibility is, I think, very unlikely.

My reading on the matter indicates that the radio carbon dating has focused on the outermost layer of the pyramid, which according to the Inventory Stele was redone by Khufu, and should show that age. But without going deeper into the pyramid, or doing at least a partial disassembly, that may never be answered with certainty. I don't think it is going too happen because the mystery is a big part of what keeps the pyramids so popular.

I would rather focus on the 20-30 year estimates for assembly of the pyramid. For me that is demonstratively false.

Bill

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by TheBigDog

My reading on the matter indicates that the radio carbon dating has focused on the outermost layer of the pyramid, which according to the Inventory Stele was redone by Khufu, and should show that age.

This appears true. A complete inventory of all the sample collection sites can be found in this document. The greatest number of samples were taken from the smallest of the 3 Giza pyramids, the Pyramid of Menkaure. 3 samples were taken from the Sphinx.

Importantly, note that many samples were taken not from the monuments themselves, but from the preparation and staging areas where mortar and other materials were prepared. If the pyramids were constructed using these areas more than 12,000 years ago, rather than the accepted 4,500, there should be large deposits of charcoal dating from that period, which would have been detected by the Wenke et. al. study, which was financed by a group that wished to find the 12,000 year result, not the 4,500 one.

But without going deeper into the pyramid, or doing at least a partial disassembly, that may never be answered with certainty. I don't think it is going too happen because the mystery is a big part of what keeps the pyramids so popular.

It would certainly be satisfying, and settle the dating issue definitively, to actually excavate a few small, deep tunnels into the pyramids, radiocarbon dating mortar deeper than any possible restoration could have reached. I agree, however, that this is unlikely to be allowed by Egyptian authorities, not only for pure conservation reasons, but because, as TBD suggests, these authorities have a vested interest in preserving elements of mystery, even those unsupported by scientific evidence, such as Cayce’s psychic visions dating them at 10,500 BC. Sound science and good tourism promotion, it seems, do not necessarily coincide.

A large enough payment to Egypt would likely be able to obtain permission for such an excavation, but as with so many experiment necessary to conclusively prove or disprove fringe scientific hypotheses, it seems unlikely that that sort of money will be available. Though though-provoking, increasing the certainty of estimates of the age of the pyramids appears to have little practical or financial value. Were it not for the funding of the Cayce foundation – an unlikely-seeming “friend of science” – we might not have even what high-quality scientific research we have now.

I would rather focus on the 20-30 year estimates for assembly of the pyramid. For me that is demonstratively false.

According to a 1999 detailed study described in this wikipedia article, it’s been demonstrated that the Great Pyramid could have been built using modern techniques and equipment in about 10 years, with a workforce varying during construction from 15,000 to 40,000. The question, then, is if ancient techniques and workforces could have done it in about 3 times that time.

Even if allowed to sample from the deepest part of the pyramids, radiocarbon dating would not be of use in determining if the construction could have been completed in several decades, having 1-sigma margins of error of 50 to several hundred years.

[charles brough]

Originally Posted by TheBigDog

My reading on the matter indicates that the radio carbon dating has focused on the outermost layer of the pyramid, which according to the Inventory Stele was redone by Khufu, and should show that age. But without going deeper into the pyramid, or doing at least a partial disassembly, that may never be answered with certainty. I don't think it is going too happen because the mystery is a big part of what keeps the pyramids so popular.

I would rather focus on the 20-30 year estimates for assembly of the pyramid. For me that is demonstratively false.

Bill

I have seen diagrams of the pyramids that show there are shafts that do deep into it.

[TheBigDog]

Originally Posted by charles brough

I have seen diagrams of the pyramids that show there are shafts that do deep into it.

Yes, and there is actually a wooden handle in one of the shafts that must have been there since it was built. This was found by one of the robots that crawled in and photographed the shafts. Trouble is that the Egyptian government won't allow scientific investigation that is in any way destructive. Oh well.

Bill

[Godspeed2012]

I find that the question should not be how, but why?

They are finding pyramids and alike structures on each continent, it would be fair to say that at one point in civilization most cultures were following a common building practice as we do today. Most countries have like wise houses and similar building tactics today in 2007. It seems that in sometime before the flood of 8000b.c great cultures built great things.

The egyptians are saying that they built it for Kufu, but i have to ask, If they built it dont you think they would have improved over millenia? Why dont we see anything resembling the ancient technology and style today?
Why are they finding pyramids in China, MExico,South America?

Would it be fair to say that these ancient structures were built properly and to last, and if they were built to last, you have to ask why. What did we want to tell our future selves, That another great earth catacalysm was underway? or, this is where we came from.

From what I researched, the pyramid size and location, all dimension were relative to the earth such as; the walls were not flat but concave, and if you were to multiply it with the pyrmid pi you would get the percentage of arc corresponding to the curvature of the earth, the area times pi equals the circumference of the earth at the equator, the average temprature in the king's chamber is the average temprature of earth, the height of the great pyramid x pi equals the average land height of earth ect ect....
Why would the Pyramids house so much information in its creation about the earth?
If they felt that we were all going to progress and live without skipping a beat why go to such great lengths?
Now with that knowledge you have to ask why?

Would it be fair to say that mabey the pyramids are much older than first thought and that the builders were aware that all of mankind might be wiped off the face of the earth(again) and built the pyramids housing all the ancient records and information about the earth for the potential survivors.

Now some will say nothing was found in the pyramid. I will have to say we cannot know that because the pyramids were visited thousands of times in thousands of years and it should be taken into account the eachtime something was taken and also the pyramids itself could very well be the lost records of our history.

Interesting is the theories behind the sphinx. Its been noted that the head on the sphinx is not the original one also the body is that of a lion. In the old testament people worshiped the image of the Bull it is believed that it represented the constellation Taurus which was around 2500b.c. Now that we are in the age of Pieces it is interesting to note that we use the FIsh to represent Jesus in this age. The next is the water bearer Aquarius. Is he going to empty his bucket on the world again?
The last Age of Leo (lion) occurred between 10,970 and 8810 BC, suggesting that the construction date of the Great Sphinx fell somewhere within this time-frame. This is not a new idea by any stretch of the imagination. As far as I am aware, this theory was first put forward by British astro-mythologist Gerald Massey in 1907. In an extraordinary work entitled Ancient Egypt - The Light of the World he boldly concluded that "... we may date the Sphinx as a monument which was reared by these great (Egyptian) builders and thinkers, who lived so largely out of themselves, some thirteen thousand years ago (i.e. in the age of Leo, its astronomical counterpart)."

[charles brough]

Godspeed asks a lot of qustions!

The concept of building a stone tomb for the dead seems to trace from the European megalithic age when they built mounds on stone domens. The Sumerians and Creteians picked up the idea and modiefied it as it spread to Egypt and then India. It continued to spread around the world and lingers on in the headstones we still put over graves and the moseleiums we fill with the ashes of the dead.

That some other cultures have pyramid-like tombs also is natural. There are only so many shapes a tomb can take!