Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 3.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Great Pyramid
Sorry to throw Teddy and run, but I have no use for trying to pour over thousands of pages of archaeological literature if Vi's new hobby is going to be making ad homimen attacks on everything I post, I really don't. I'm going to go find somewhere else to take my musings so that Vi doesn't have to feel threatened by them anymore.

Apparently the one thread I tried to restrict myself to here so I don't haven't to listen to him and Wook's paranoid ravings about how I came here to be a "disruptive influence" (apparently because I won't prostrate myself, kiss their arses, and agree with every word they say) was too much sandbox to ask for?

Fortunately, I already put up most of my links, and since Vi is THE One and Only True Prophet of Ancient Mathematics, that makes it His job to sort out that data and tell us how the ancient Maya did math, being He is the Only One even remotely capable.

By all means, Vic - show us how to do it. Your faithful flock is waiting, and we expect Great Things from THE One and Only human who will ever be worthy of the task according to you. You owe it to all of humanity, because surely all that ancient wisdom will be lost forever if You don't get right on it, right away. Best of luck to ya, big fella - it's all Yours, just the way You wanted it apparently.
"Work and pray, live on hay, you'll get Pie In The Sky when you die." - Joe Hill, "The Preacher and the Slave" 1911
Alternatively you could adopt some of his work and refine yours.

I don't think anyone is trying to "run you off..." the forum either.

In the intervening decade that you have been absent Vic has been consistently approaching a tenable theory of what may actually be the basis for sum of the monumental works we see on and off Earth.

Watching the progression of his work I can only fathom a bit more than half of his output and what I don't understand he is patient enough to explain it and expand upon what he expounds.

Before you go off on a tangent and throw in the towel: all the vowels are trowels and some times Why(sum X y?)
Quote:But that at least interests me.
So it's time to make angle tangent magic with ancient numbers.

The "control tangent" for all angles is simply 45 degrees.

This is because this unique angle -- 45 degrees,
has a tangent of exactly ----- ONE,
and the sine and cosines,
are tetrahedral tangents <-----

So you can test virtually any angle tangent,
by adding or subtracting ---> 45 degrees ---> and observing the resulting angle tangent,
and compiling that data.

So we go to ... ancient calendar counts ;

260  days  the mayan tzolkin
365  days  the earth year

we make them a ratio {or fraction} and ---> assign that as an angle tangent <---

365             equals decimal  0.712328767 --- assign as an angle tangent

the above ratio of calendar counts thus yields the angle 35.46336424 degrees

now add the control angle of 45 degrees <----

45  +   35.46336424  =  80.46336424 degrees -----> what is the new angle tangent <---- ?

that new angle 80.46336424 degrees 
has tangent 
5.952380 952380 {replicating sequence}

well ... w t f ?

test the angle tangent with ... the MILE in feet,
multiply that new angle tangent by 5280 <----

and the angle tangent magic is completed:

31428. 571428 571428 ~ 
the ancient Egyptian Pi progression fraction {22 / 7}  x 10,000 ... where {22 / 7} = aPi
{4 / aPiis the correct formula for the GP pyramid Side Face slope angle tangent,
mathematically aligned 
to the exact ancient pyramid formula:
280 cubit height
440 cubit base length

This ancient culturally cosmological "Pi value" 3.142857 142857 ~ {22 / 7}
is the basic founding progenitor of the ancient Pi progressions,
creating a series of descending Pi values which lead to 10 decimal accuracy Pi.
It aligns planetary timelines in ancient calendar count also as one of it's functions.

For instance:
The true Venus sidereal is 224.7 days <---> then  times aPi  =  706.2 ---> a Khafre pyramid base length.
And yes,
all four Khafre pyramid base lengths are uneven just like in the Khufu pyramid.

One could select four ancient pi values,
from the ancient pi progressions {to include true Pi},
and attain the 4 base lengths as a distinct possibility from that method.

That first length yields a Khafre pyramid height of 470.8 feet.

Cement the red script into your tool-kit.

Quote:THANK YOU for acting like a civilized human being toward to me, that is MUCH appreciated!
Not your friend.
Not your enemy.

My only small issue with you is that I don't know your name.  Cry

You could be ten different people Sheep for all I know...

Otherwise your horse-shoes are clanging around the Pin while Vic is getting "Ringers".

Vic and Gerald are real people like me with names...just like Keith.


Cloaks Ninja  aren't for real folks.
Along the vines of the Vineyard.
With a forked tongue the snake singsss...

Quote:Vi's new hobby is going to be making ad homimen attacks on everything I post, 

My new hobby is  Rofl  at you making silly statements like that.

You have posted a particularly huge volume of nonsense without interference from me.

Accuracy is something that you refuse to understand.
Historical documented pyramid measurements mean nothing to you. 
The mathematical case has been quite easy to summarize against your nonsense.

You believe that you have used "holographic memories"   Assimilated
of an ancient Egyptian experience Gangup  in cultural pyramid geometry,
yet you couldn't understand a pittance of their ancient pi progressions,
which are actually quite versatile and highly efficient, yet easy to follow.

Quote:Apparently the one thread I tried to restrict myself to here,
so I don't haven't to listen to him and Wook's paranoid ravings 


plenty of threads here at HM for you to enjoy where you have nobody bothering you 

Epic   Pennywise    

I seem to remember your endless posts on health issues,
were an enormous compendium of paranoid data dump ravings,
and that you had odd paranoia issues with your wife and her whip.  Lol

"data dump" 
were your exact own words ... as to your volume of material in that thread.
Everything you data dump here is your nonsense from another forum where you posted it in the past.

And I will post my material here when I damn well please, by the ways.
You didn't get chastised or harrased,
you got educated in what accuracy really looks like ... with real math.

But I did see the Aztec calendar there a few posts back.
I have excellent images of it.
Found a book at the university in the oversize section with a huge image of it,
and then took a huge photo of that.
{but we will use a net image for now}

Interestingly in the very top of the artifact, is the box between two triangles pointing at it,
and it has the 13 dots.
The inner most circle of boxes has 20 boxes, and the next circle has 36 boxes total {with 5 dots each}.
But curiously,
if you look at that inner circle of twenty boxes --- or a circle with twenty points,
{thus 20 sections of 18 degrees}
you can do this:
you can draw 20 perfect pentagons within that circle,
with the pentagon apex at each point.
And if you look even closer inside that circle of points,
and at the interior alignments of the larger box motif alignments, 
it becomes clear that pentagonal geometry is one intended function of expression.

[Image: 34633_orig.jpg]

[Image: 34633_orig.jpg]


The Dots
on the outer left edge are intriguing
kinda reminds me of some of the "holes"
we see at Nazca Lines .

[Image: qy563742ad.jpg]
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply Arrow

Venus Radius: Estimate of the Builders
Doug Keenan | See:
Published 29th May 2017 - 7 Comments

[Image: keenand2-2-1024x576-1024x576.jpg]
In his book Magicians of the Gods, Graham Hancock suggests that an advanced civilisation existed in prehistory.
This civilisation had accurate knowledge regarding the size of our planet, and encoded this knowledge into the design of the Great Pyramid.
Their method of encoding is summarised in the article here.
A sphere can store one value, in its radius. A pyramid can store two values, in its base and in its height.
The Great Pyramid stores the value of the radius of the Earth redundantly in both base and height.
This highlights the accuracy found in the value and also specifies the constant of proportion to be used (in this case, K=43200).
The next planet towards the sun is Earth’s closest planetary neighbour, our sister world Venus.
When considering the second pyramid to represent the planet Venus, the same constant of proportion can be used.
The base of the Venus pyramid is 215.3m (411.2 cubits). The height of the Venus pyramid is 143.5m (274.1 cubits).
Using the formula for the volume of a pyramid these values yield a volume of 2.217×106m3. The volume of the Great Pyramid – the Earth pyramid – can be similarly calculated as 2.594×106m3.
The ratio of these values, [Image: keenand2-1.png] is [Image: keenand2-2.png] = 0.855.
According to Wikipedia, the volume of the Earth is 1.083×1021m3 and the volume of Venus is 9.284×1020m3.
The ratio of these values, [Image: keenand2-3.png] is [Image: keenand2-4.png] = 0.857.
These two ratios are remarkably close, less than half of one percent apart.
The Venus pyramid stands in volumetric proportion to the Earth pyramid, as planet Venus does to the planet Earth.
The upscaled version of the radius of Venus using the height would be K × HVENUS = 43200 × 143.5m = 6200km.
The upscaled version of the radius of Venus using the base would be K × [Image: keenand2-5.png] = 43200 × [Image: keenand2-6.png] = 5920km.
These two values represent the outer bounds of the estimate: 6200km-5920km = 280km.
The average of these two values is (6200km+5920km)/2 = 6060km. The error range is divided evenly, resolving to 140km above or below the estimated value.
With the same method of encoding the Great Pyramid applied to the second pyramid, the builders declare the radius of Venus as being 6060±140km.
Our current estimate based on space age technology is 6052±1km.


Fixing Figure 59: The Great Pyramid Models the Earth
Doug Keenan | See:
Published 27th September 2016 - 6 Comments

In the otherwise excellent [i]Magicians of the Gods, a significant error exists that can use attention. By kind invitation of the author this article aims to expand and detail this claim.
Specifically, while the text of Figure 59 makes mathematical sense, the illustration taken as a whole does not.
[Image: keenand1-1.jpg]
This diagram scanned from Magicians of the Gods does not depict the correct proportions of the Great Pyramid with respect to a globe. Incorrect parts are crossed out in red.
First a few facts presented as uncontroversial. The Great Pyramid stands H = 280 cubits (builder cubits) high and B = 440 cubits along each side.
If this height were to be interpreted as the radius of a circle, the circumference of that circle would be
2 pi H = 2 pi 280 = 1760 cubits.
Note that the sum of all four sides of the Great Pyramid also equals this value.
4 * B = 4*440 = 1760 cubits.
Further note the Great Pyramid has a base/height ratio of pi/2.
4 * B = 2 pi H
B/H = pi/2
Multiplying these values by the constant scale factor K = 43200 gives a remarkably good approximation to the physical dimensions of our planet. This observation is of course spelled out in the text that accompanies Figure 59 and thus is also presented as relatively uncontroversial.
However in the illustration of Figure 59 one side of a pyramid is shown, inscribed in a circle in which the height equals a radius (X) and the base equals a diameter (Y). This is a trivial identification since Y = 2X always for every circle. And since there are four sides per pyramid, the entire perimeter would be eight times the radius.
Such a pyramid would have a base/height ratio of 2, markedly different from our Great Pyramid. Such a pyramid could be made, with its base in proper proportion to the scaled earth model, but not its height. Similarly another pyramid could be made with its height in proper proportion, but not its base.
A Figure 59 pyramid with the same base as ours (440cubits) would have a height of 220 cubits, different from the height of ours (280cubits). A Figure 59 pyramid with the same height as ours would be much larger along the base, 560 cubits.
No doubt the builders could have created any of these alternatives had they so chosen. They had to make choices about how best to model a globe, about how to encode specific physical data using the specifications of the Great Pyramid they were to actualize.
Modeled to first order as a sphere with uniform radius, only one variable – that radius – needs encoding for later retrieval.
A pyramid offers two immediate physical measurements to encode information, base (side) and height. Used to model a scaled sphere, either variable – height or base – could be used.
Note that a higher base/height ratio is easier to construct, using less stone. With its higher base/height ratio a Figure 59 pyramid could encode using the base only, and save a sizeable fraction of stonework elevating the structure to a shorter height.
Instead the builders took a more difficult path, since the actual Great Pyramid would be harder to build than a Figure 59 pyramid. All things equal, therefore, had it been an option to the builders, they could have and would have chosen it. They did not.
By building up, taking the difficult path, they could encode the radius using both the base and the height. This improves transmission efficiency with “magicians” yet to come, as the encoded variable can be duplicated, scaled accordingly, into both pyramid variables.

[Image: keenand1-2.jpg]
The correct proportions of the Great Pyramid with the Northern Hemisphere mapped to its surface. This unique proportion “circles the square” in three dimensions. ©Keenan. Source:
Using whatever method is convenient later, measuring either the height or the base would allow the magician to extract the desired value. Measuring both allows cross-referencing.
In addition, understanding the unnecessary difficulty makes the globe modelling even more obvious. This was not a coincidental choice.
In conclusion, the builders had good reasons for their decision. Those reasons – knowing the structure as it was meant to be – is the best motive for highlighting the issue with Figure 59, and making a request to correct it.
It mattered to the builders so it should matter to us.


[i]Doug Keenan was born in Indiana and received his degree in electrical engineering from the Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. For more than twenty years he enjoyed a career in the consumer electronics field and holds several patents including the multi-brand universal remote control. Doug is a computer programmer, botanist and entrepreneur, whose work now focuses on pyramids.[/i]
Along the vines of the Vineyard.
With a forked tongue the snake singsss...
[Image: pyramids.jpg?format=750w]

Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner

Hancock's "venus pyramid" is the Khafre Pyramid.
His Earth pyramid would be the Khufu pyramid.
He immediately uses approximations on base and height from Lehner styled data.
I can say this right away:
he states correctly:

Quote:First a few facts presented as uncontroversial. 
The Great Pyramid stands H = 280 cubits (builder cubits) high 
and B = 440 cubits along each side.


[i]Further note the Great Pyramid has a base/height ratio of pi/2.


what Hancock misses immrediately is this:
With the above formula for height and base,
there can only be on mathematical conclusion. <---

The mathematics of that formula AUTOMATICALLY dictates a base height ratio of {aPi / 2}.
aPi = {22 / 7} = 3.142857 142857 {replicating sevenths decimal}

A pyramid with a 280 cubit height and 440 cubit base,
can only have one mathematical outcome.

To attain a pyramid slope and it's geometry tangent:
the formula is:
divided by
HALF the base length. --- there cannot be any variation from the math.

So height = 280 cubits,
half the base = 220 cubits

280 / 220 = {14 / 11} = {4 / aPi} = 1.27 27 27 27 27~ for 51.84277341 degrees

That is the math.

Now what you can obviously have are 4 different base lengths.

In this regard one of the Side Face slopes can be aligned to {4 / Pi} for slope tangent,
by virtue of one of the shorter base lengths,
which is the same thing as Hancock's:

Quote:Further note the Great Pyramid has a base/height ratio of pi/2.

Here is his problem:
You cannot have a Base / Height ratio of {pi / 2} or slope tangent {4 / Pi} {same thing},
with a 
280 cubit height and 440 cubit base.

The height base ratio {pi/ 2} or the exact same thing is a slope tangent  of {4 / pi},
has this value
for a slope tangent:

{4 / Pi } = 1.273239545  for 51.85397401 degrees
... does not equal ... 
the automatic math for 280 cubit  and 440 cubit slope tangent = 1. 27 27 27 27~

That is the math, you cannot have it both ways.

A {4 / Pi} pyramid slope tangent 
cannot have the formula of 280 cubit height and 440 cubit base length.
this is one reason why there are so many pre eminent cubits for varied base lengths.

No doubt that the {4 / Pi} slope tangent is incorporated into ONE of the 4 to 8 possible pyramid slopes.
the ancient formula DICTATES the primary slope in consideration as {4 / aPi}.

For Hancock's formula to be correct it would have to be this:
280 cubit height
439.8229716 cubits base

now try the math with those numbers for base and height and you will get Hancock's numbers.

I also wanted to post an update to the Aztec calendar.
the 4 inner rectangular boxes are quite possibly Golden Rectangles. 
They would have to be measured at the artifact itself,
but the rest of the pentagonal math is correct.
{that is all the energy I have today for this effort}

each box or point equals 18 degrees on the center, of 20 points total
18 x 20 = 360 -- remember, it is primarily a calendar -- the 360 day calendar count

[Image: stLg3qO.jpg]

Could the Dots be a Mathematic Code ?
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Memoirs of a Pi Jedi
Chapter 12.98787879
...Pouring Their Derision Upon Anything We Did...

Sorry, forgot Teddy... I think he's over there by the wall...

Oh, what's this? Viablowhard in face-saving mode having at me when I'm not around? Yeah, that seems to be the usual attack mode. Well, tell ya what, I talked with my ancestors and they showed me how to do math like Vi (actually they didn't need to, they just said "Don't take shit off that pissy little poser and his sycophantic troll of a moderator") so I'm going to show off my new found math skills here, because the last two things on earth you should get away with is running me out of here with Michael L. Morton's Royal Cubit or using it in vain.

After all of his equations, it's about all Morton has to be remembered for doing right, because he just had to go off and make all kinds of funky fruity salads out of numbers instead of looking at archaeological data and then sit around telling everyone how cool they were (reminds me a little of someone else). What an absolute assclown you are for trying to tell us you know this number better than I do, Vic! Also for taking all of my accuracy figures pertaining to all sorts of data, and lumping them together completely out of context so you can piss on them. 

So let's have a look at YOUR math for once, Vic. It's what you're really afraid of, might as well face your fears. 

1. Be arrogant, boasting, and abusive of other persons. Tell them their work is complete crap.

Okay, Vi - what is this shit here? Seriously?

18980 x Pi x Lunar Month 29.53059 = Tropical Year x 365.2423036 x 4281
18980 x Pi x Lunar Month 29.53059 = Royal Cubit 20.62648062 x 853676

Really? First of all, as I already said, 18980 is NOT an accurate number. It's an approximation. A symbol. A decoration. An ornament. Comes with as much bragging rights as the color of paint someone used on an ancient building.

Secondly, what are you doing mixing low and high accuracy numbers together in the first place, let alone trying to frame it as the whole equation that's been polluted with that low accuracy, still being accurate overall? You're a joke, Vic - a tutti fruity f--cking JOKE!

Thirdly, you're multiplying a number (18980) by another number you would ordinarily divide it by (29.53059). Does this gesture have a particular meaning to the Mayan Calendar Round you claim to have mastered with a single equation? I do this a lot with the understanding that's still an unusual gesture, and you and Chewy rave about how that's an invalid gesture. Why is valid for You to do it, Vic? Do you have a reason besides sheer hypocrisy?

So pull up a chair, son, and I'll try to explain a few things here...

This is the same kind of fancy assed tutti fruity mathematical fruit salad that Morton wasted his life trying to defend. PLEASE be careful not to do what he did.

You want to rant and rave at me about Petrie? You know what I'd like to see is you convince Lehner that you had no business name-dropping in the first place, that his data supports your fruity little theories. Now, out there in the real world, Vic, where you're afraid to stick your toe, they have something called academia where have these strange little ideas like Occam's razor, which they use to attempt to cut through fanciful BULLSHIT like yours, and it tells us the least complicated, convoluted explanation for something might just be the best.

Now surely you don't mean to tell us that you think these equations are the ORIGIN of the Royal Cubit, or that your fanciest equations are examples of the EARLIEST math that mankind came up with? It's a good thing Morton isn't here to defend his cubit, because I think he, I, Occam, and academia might have to agree that the simplest and most elegant origin for this unit is to do a Vi and inappropriately multiply a number by a divisor (you know, just like your 18980 x Pi) x Lunar Month) instead of making an elaborate tutti fruity fruit salad to explain it.

360 / 57.29577951 = 2 Pi; 360 x 57.29577951 = 20.62648062 - It's just that simple!!!

I have already explained that in my opinion, the most likely origin of several of our constants may lie in the first efforts to divide the year into months

365 / 31 = 11.774199355 = ~11.77245771 Alternate Pi 
365 / 30 = 12.166666666 = ~12.16733603 The Sacred Remen
365 / 27 = 13.518151852 = ~13.51926227 Reciprocal of the Squared Munck Megalithic Yard

From here, the shortest route to representation of the lunar month would be

4 / 13.51926227 = 29.587413320, which is not only 360 / The Remen, but 4 Squared Munck Megalithic Yards

Enter Venus

365 / 225 = 1.622222222 = ~1.62231147 Alternate Phi

And there they are - to this day those are the four sharpest tools in my shed after Pi.

Now again, when you go try to convince the real world you've got something here, they're going to bring up that Occam fella, and what are you going to say? You've never heard of him? That he's an idiot compared to you? Good, then YOUR book can go over in the crackpot section with all the books with people Photoshopping ETs into ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic panels, instead of the academic/science section, then you can complete your transformation into High Priest Munck by crying in your little cloister about tragically ignored you are by the mainstream.

I'd give you the accuracy on those but why bother when you're just going to abuse it again, Vic. There is a time to be uber accurate and there is a time not to be. Yoda can't figure that out, he cannot figure out when to relax his absolute standards of accuracy so for thirty years it's kept him from even having a clue what the Great Pyramid's slope height, edge length, or diagonal length might be. There is CLEARLY such a thing as overdoing accuracy, and all you really have to do is pick the wrong time to do so.

Anyway, you must have some goddamned gall to pontificate to me about accuracy when 90% of the time my tolerance for error within the equations (that is NOT the same as the tolerance on the data sources!) is ZERO, Vic. You also have a lot of likewise to take your squeaky assed standards and misapply to them things that are APPROXIMATIONS. SYMBOLS. THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO BE ACCURATE, VIC. You'd LIKE them to be so you can criticize their accuracy, but they were never meant to be that accurate.

In my humble opinion, the next things that might have happened are that somebody created the foot, then used it to create the Remen and the Reciprocal of the Squared Munck Megalithic Yard by taking these primitive calendar divisions and expressing them in feet. Next we discover sacred geometry, where (e' / sqrt 5) or ((Pi / 2) / sqrt 3) / sqrt 5) provide us with an exact value of 1.216733603, which in turn provides us with a precise but SYMBOLIC (so please kindly go shove your accuracy check) calendar year of 1.216733603 x 3 = 365.0200808 / 100 - FOR ARCHITECTURAL DISPLAY, NOT ASTRONOMICAL CALCULATIONS, you f-cking IDIOT.

We know from here that the diagonal of a square one Remen x one Remen is ~the Royal Cubit, only it isn't, which may be when and where the square root of 2 got kicked out of the system (along with sqrt 3, sqrt 5, sqrt 6, sqrt 7, sqrt 8...), for disservice to both the Sacred Remen and the Sacred Cubit, and instead the system decided it was better off working with the higher square roots sqrt 15, sqrt 60, sqrt 135, sqrt 240, sqrt 375, sqrt 2160, sqrt 4860, sqrt 8640, sqrt 77760, sqrt 17490 and etc that are actually agreeable to that kind of service...

Now, I would agree that the ancients probably noticed and even revered these equations of yours (and I hate to inform your massively swollen head, but that means you didn't discover shit, we are RE-discoverers, and that is ALL we are), but like me, they may well have considered them A FLUKE. They don't serve as a good origin, they don't serve as a useful way to actually DO the math (who in their right mind would actually do math the way you're showing us, Vic, accurate or not?), and

18980 x Pi x Lunar Month 29.53059 = Tropical Year x 365.2423036 x 4281
18980 x Pi x Lunar Month 29.53059 = Royal Cubit 20.62648062 x 853676

By the way, what the hell are "4281" and "853676"? Did you see these in a pyramid somewhere, or a papyrus? I sort of suspect you pulled them straight out of your ass, because bookending them like that is drawing attention to the fact that the ratio between 18980 and 855676 is a SHITTY APPROXIMATION of double Venus Orbital Period

853676/18980 = 44.97766070 = 224.8883035 / 10 / 2.

And that is an even worse APPROXIMATION of the 224.701 day Venus Orbital Period than my standard APPROXIMATION 224.83738803. 

MINE isn't supposed to BE accurate, but I take it yours is certainly supposed to be? Where's your high accuracy now, big fella? You just traded away a date with the warm-blooded Queen Venus Herself so you could court the sock puppet 18980, apparently.

Now SHAME ON YOU, VIC! You didn't even know you had SHITTY VENUS lurking in your own equations, or you knew and DIDN'T BOTHER TO TELL US? I'm not sure this should be a proud moment for you either way.

So in summation, I'm not going to tell you anymore your work retains some validity, I'm going to do things Viablowhard style - YOUR WORK IS COMPLETE SHIT, VI - FIVE YEARS OF YOUR PRECIOUS LIFE YOU WILL NEVER GET BACK THAT YOU PISSED RIGHT STRAIGHT INTO THE WIND CLUTCHING AT STRAWS, YOU GIGANTIC F-CKING LOSER!!!

Maybe this fruity equation that makes you think you're Sole Master of the Mayan Calendar is nothing but a fluke - a very interesting one, but a fluke nonetheless. Why would I dare utter such blasphemy? Well let's move on to an actual example of doing math like Viaknowitall...

2. Get really lucky once and Lord it over everyone

Okay, I'm going to do just what you did, Vic... I'm going to take the HIGHLY INACCURATE SYMBOL 18980, and INAPPROPRIATELY MULTIPLY IT by a different famous calendrical number, the first one to come to mind being the Mayan Tzolkin of 260 days, then I'm going to throw in a little fresh fruit

(18980 x 260) / the 4 of Clubs = 1233700, VIola! (pronounced "Waaaaaah alot")

And what is that? Why it's 125 x Pi^2 to an accuracy of Smegma Six! Hey everybody, watch me use elitist terms for accuracy! Everyone drop to your knees and worship my accuracy, and hey while you're down there could you blow me because my name is Viablowme and nobody's paid me much hummage homage in a really long time, since yesterday in fact...

But see, that's a slippery slope, Vic, because then Yoda's going to want everybody to blow him because  125 x Pi^2 is the reciprocal of the square of the tangent of the base angle of a 2 Pi pyramid (perimeter/height), which in fact is probably the only trig function Yoda ever got right on the Great Pyramid because it applies to any and all 2 Pi Pyramids but watch him talk about it like it's really super special because he's almost half the charlatan you are. (Do you really need to ask now why I'm a little suspicious of and disinterested in sines, cosines, and tangents?)

And then I'm going to want everyone to blow me, because 1233700 is the ratio between Munck's calendar year and my Lunar Month (don't bother accuracy checking it, Vic, it's just a REPRESENTATION, like 18980)

365.0200808 / 29.58741332 = 1.23370055 = 18980 x 260 accuracy .9999995541

And then Yoda is going to want more lip service on his wrinkly green weenie because that's HIS figure for the year, and by the time everyone is through bowing and giving out blowjobs for Smegma Six accuracy, they're going to be worn out, Vic.

You know what, I don't want anyone to kiss my ass for coming up with that one, that's probably a fluke too - another really interesting one, but a fluke - not a crown, you pompous ass.

3. Avoid the real issues

Now about that PAVEMENT, Vic. Why do you keep dodging that subject? The ancient Egyptians apparently thought your fruit salad supreme model of the Great Pyramid was so impressive that they paved right over it. I'm not surprised you don't want to touch THAT one with a ten-foot pole, but please do - after all, that came to light in the first place because you just wouldn't stop harassing me about Munck's pyramid height.

So tell us, Vic - how thick was the pavement? You obviously can't stand the thought of there being ANYTHING you don't know, how thick was the pavement and what became of your bragging rights? Is this just too hard for you because you can't nail it down to one height?

I also think you've got a lot of damned gall going off about whose pyramid doesn't exist not only because of THAT, but because may I remind you, all somebody has to do is find the Great Pyramid's pyramidion and discover that it has a different slope angle, and you're REALLY got yourself a pyramid that never existed. Question: will that actually matter?

4. Just keep pulling stuff out of your ass

Okay, Vic what have you got there, this Isoceles Triangle with angles of 54.53663576* and 70.92672848*, where did you get THOSE? Did you find a real-life example of a triangle like, or did you just pull ANOTHER abstraction straight out of your ass? Looks like another set infested with Shitty Venus...

Tan 70.92672848 = 2.892190476, which is (260 / 224.7431507) / 10 / 4 

Which looks a lot like you pissing away Venus Herself again for a cheap date with the MERE APPROMATION, sock puppet 18980. (What is it with you and these muppets, Vic? Are you one of those Plushie people? OMG! Teddy! Did they hurt you? Show me where the bad man touched you).

Are you SURE the ancient who put that triangle in your ass so you could pull it out and wave it menacingly at us didn't mean the real deal (260 / 224.701) / 10 / 4 = 2.892733010?

You want to explain to us why you let all that Smegma Accuracy leak right out of your Venus? Surely, you Vic, of all people, being undisputed Master of the Mayan calendar - who I haven't seen decode ONE MAYAN MONUMENT, you just want us to believe anything you say based entirely on the fruit salad you made in Egypt - know how goddamned important Venus was to the ancients.

So what did you do back there, put the name Uxmal in blue to draw attention to the fact that the tiny tiny amount of work on that I've done on the site is still a thousands times more work than YOU seem to have done on the site? You know where the data is.

HOW DO YOU AND YOUR SHIT-COVERED VENUS KNOW that it wasn't a Venus Orbital Period that ISN'T covered in shit, or any one of TWENTY extremely similar numbers, that were ACTUALLY intended there, if the ancients intended you to do that in the first place? You found this triangle and instructions for its use WHERE again?

Seriously, I can tell you're just spoiling for a fight that I really don't want to give you or you'd be a lot busier doing something CONSTRUCTIVE like looking at the El Tajin data, it's pretty tempting because those diagonals are close to Phi, and the four sides appear to be uneven, so at least that's a weak vote of confidence for your unfounded claims of the Great Pyramid having intentionally unequal sides as opposed to some other way of expressing the very same thing.

Can I remind you that YOU ARE NOT SPECIAL, VIC, because there's a whole Internet full of ET-Photoshopping wingnuts insisting that Phi has something to with the Great Pyramid, and nobody actually needs you and your arrogant tutti fruity boasting.

Google Search: Pyramid + phi = Google Hits ~1,350,000
Google Search: Pyramid + 1.622311470 = Google Hits ~6, five of them being Morton's work because I rebuilt his crashed site onto Tripod once upon a time.

You might as well have let me continue because you're not going to read it elsewhere, Vic... but no, you have to take your shitty numbers and rub them in my face. Very well, let's go back to your little potpourri that you have the audacity to call mathematics

18980 x Pi x Lunar Month 29.53059 = Tropical Year x 365.2423036 x 4281
18980 x Pi x Lunar Month 29.53059 = Royal Cubit 20.62648062 x 853676

Now if I take Morton's cubit of 20.62648062 inches and swap in my usual SYMBOLIC, INTENTIONALLY INACCURATE values for the terrestrial Year and the Lunar Month and make my own fruit salad (I'm going to just ignore this 4281 and 853676 that you seemingly pulled out of your ass) and write the operations backwards

20.62648062 / Lunar Month 29.58741332 = 69.7137002 (sqrt 4860) / Year 365.0200808 = 1.909859316 / 10

And what is that (besides fruit salad)? Well,

Remember that I said (of course you don't, the only thing you can remember is how High and Mighty you think you are) the ancients may have favored 1.622311470 because 2 x (1.622311470) = 1 / Mayan Calendar Round x 10^n (INTENTIONALLY INACCURATE SYMBOLIC VALUE)

Which is NOT a thing you can do with Phi Proper 1.618033989... 2 x (1.618033989^2) = 1 / 1.909830056

Which makes it sort of an amazing thing that you cannot seem to get your head around values of 365.0200808 or (3600 / Pi^2) = 364.7562611 as INTENTIONALLY INACCURATE SYMBOLIC representations of the year...

What kind of High Priest of Phi are you anyway, that you would draw such a blank trying to recognize something so wonderfully reminiscent of the reciprocals of 2 (Phi^2) and (6 / Pi), and their squares 1.909830056^2 = 364.7450843 and 19.09859317 = 364.7562611? Surely that is nothing so foreign to a Phi Master like yourself? Or do you just think that's what you are?

But surely even these fruit salads of mine are less complicated and full of inexplicable numbers than your own which are SO MUCH BETTER according to you, or at least they are until we try to make your case to academia with this Occam fellow watching. I wonder if you'd even last five minutes on Hancock's message board, let alone a conference on ancient metrology, even if I wish you did.

5. Make extravagant, out-of-context scientific claims

Which brings us to another point, which is WHAT KIND OF SCIENCE SHOULD WE EXPECT TO FIND IN THE PYRAMIDS? The fine structure constant? Yeah Morton used to find his own version of the fine structure constant in there too not that anyone cares now probably including him. You want me to believe that Mesoamericans who DELIBERATELY TURNED DOWN THE WHEEL got all hot and bothered about particle physics and quantum mechanics, or it that the mathematical equivalent of photoshopping ETs into a cartouche?

Go see if you can find Schroedinger's equations in the GP so I can remind you what every cat owner including myself and the ancient Egyptians both knows, which is that Schroedinger deserves to be taken with a BIG grain of salt due the fact that although we do not watch the cat shit (therefore it exists in a state of quantum uncertainty) the cat can nontheless take a very certain and very nasty shit in the liter box in spite of the quantum uncertainty of the feline in question -  go figure. We could look for the speed of light, but which papyrus makes you think they would have agreed with Einstein?

Digging up the Bagdad battery is a FAR cry from showing us what they used to perform the Morley-Michaelson experiment, isn't it Vic? Besides, what's to stop anyone and everyone from pointing to the number two anywhere and everywhere and declaring it indicates a quantum spin number? It's not exactly firm footing even here, let alone in the real world .

So, no, you don't really get to whip out Planck's constant or anything of the kind and ask us all to blow you over it, until you get through with that lots of explaining you have left to do.

6. After making a personal attack on somebody, say you didn't mean them to take it as a personal attack, you were just politely correcting their mistakes. LIKE HELL you didn't mean it as personal attack, you f--king liar, that is precisely what you meant and that is precisely what you did, repeatedly.

Now would you like me to keep going through your equations one by one and giving you my less-generous-than-your-own opinion of them, or would you like me to stop while there's still a chance you can con anyone into thinking you're some kind of great mathematician just because you got lucky once while making a rooty-tooty-fruit salad out of apples and oranges?

Not much chance anyone still thinks you're a mature adult, but as the lady said, maybe shouldn't throw your Teddy at the wall when someone is kind enough to point out your (many) mistakes to you.

You were better off to leave it at "maybe we're both right" than to keep trying to ram your swollen head down people's throats, but you just don't know when to quit, do you?

Me, personally? You're no threat to me, and I'd say you've probably got some damned fine equations, but you MIGHT just have a couple of things you want to fine tune there? - but the Vianova School of Mathematics requires that I tell you've got nothing at all, you've just wasted your life, dude. Our bylaws also require me to inform you that you will never amount to anything until you learn to do things my way. No idea why, that actually sounds pretty assholish, but that's what's written here in the charter.

Would you like to GET THE F-CK OUT OF MY FACE now and let me work in peace (and please take your little pet with you, it must embarrass you greatly to need the likes of he who is not even an actual part of this discussion, to come hold your hand and pat your back while you put your foot further in your mouth?) - because if you're not going to let me do my work, I'm going to keep doing yours, and then I'm going to keep asking why you didn't do it yourself before you anoited yourself High Priest of the last school of pyramidiocy on earth that needs any more High Priests.

PS: Sorry to hear you're recovering from an illness - aren't we all? And do you know why? Because of ARROGANT F-CKS in the Medical Profession who do the very same thing with medicine that you do with mathematics, Vic - clutch the first handful of straws they can get their grubby, ignorant little hands on, and then declare themselves some kind of "expert". There is no end to the bullshit I get handed because some doctor got all KNOW IT ALL over TWO PARAGRAPHS they read at the Mayo Clinic Website, there just isn't. I have absolutely no patience left for anything that even remotely resembles a know-it-all, sorry.

(08-18-2017, 07:27 PM)EA Wrote:
Quote:THANK YOU for acting like a civilized human being toward to me, that is MUCH appreciated!
Not your friend.
Not your enemy.

My only small issue with you is that I don't know your name.  Cry

You could be ten different people Sheep for all I know...

I didn't say we were friends - that would probably be presumptious of me - I just said thanks for behaving like a human being. That's sort of refreshing around here. If my name really matters to you, you can ask Keith. You can also ask Bob Williams (or Keith) what can happen when career trolls like the Krupps (whose internet behaviors and attitudes so resemble Vi's) get ahold of your personal info like name or address or place of work, which is one reason I try to be careful with it. 

Unless you think Keith is some kind of complete idiot for letting me back on here, why worry who I am? :)
"Work and pray, live on hay, you'll get Pie In The Sky when you die." - Joe Hill, "The Preacher and the Slave" 1911
seek help
lol .
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
(08-20-2017, 06:15 PM)Wook Wrote: seek help
lol .

^YES, WOOK, WE KNOW this is the quality of discourse we can expect from you. That's exactly WHY you are not even part of this discussion.
"Work and pray, live on hay, you'll get Pie In The Sky when you die." - Joe Hill, "The Preacher and the Slave" 1911
lmao .
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Pi Whole will do just fine then,because I shouldn't have to ask Keith your name when you are present to account for yourself.

So PW ,with the caveat: Moderate yourself.

Quote:Arrow the Krupps... Doh

I can understand that Krapp.
A litigation threat was made so I removed all satirical and improvisational mention of that confirmed Troll & Co. in my posts. Tp

I let bygones be bygones.

By gons  Arrow

Conversion of common angles
Turns Radians Degree Gradians (Gons)

1/12          π/6                30°        33 1/3g
1/6            π/3                60°              66 2/3g
1/4            π/2                90°              100g

Use this chart above for the videos below...

Using base TEN metrics You get a Nice Rule of thumb for any ancient Civil-eyes'd person to derive the length of a year in days to within ~6 hours.

Subtract a slice of pi equivalent to The axial tilt of the earth from BaseTen/100 Gons (a.k.a. 90 degrees/either hemisphere)

According to the chord:
In plane geometry, a chord is the line segment joining two points on a curve. The term is often used to describe a line segment whose ends lie on a circle.

Chord -- from Wolfram MathWorld   [Image: ChordDiagram_1000.gif][Image: CircularSector_1000.gif] 

By gons >>>

Conversion of common angles

Turns Radians Degree Gradians (Gons)

1/12          π/6                30°        33 1/3g

1/6            π/3                60°              66 2/3g
1/4            π/2                90°              100g

[Image: 4583991933_525x416.jpg]Figure 5: The Zero Prime Meridian of the Earth, running through Giza aligned with the River Nile, which resembles a serpent entwinned around a staff.
[Image: 4583991353_525x652.jpg]
Copyright © Gary Osborn 2005. All Rights Reserved.

Figure 4: Great Pyramid at the Apex of the Nile Delta. 
The two North corners of the Great Pyramid define the natural boundary edges of the Delta and all within a perfect quadrant of 90º. 
As we can see the Great Pyramid also marks the Giza Meridian - once the Zero Prime Meridian.

However, as we have already seen in the third presentation in this series, The Earth's Obliquity Angle in Art, within this type of cross there is a secret hiding in plain view.
Until now, it was not known that this type of cross has also been used as a symbol of the Earth – a ‘before and after’ picture regarding the 23.5-degree tilt of the Earth’s axis.

[Image: 4587819064_359x323.jpg]
Copyright © Gary Osborn 2005. All Rights Reserved.
Figure 6: The Maltese/Templar Cross (16th century), as a Symbol of the Earth. 
The Cross is really a ‘before and after’ picture of the Earth’s axis. 
I found that the angle of the arms in some versions of the cross measure 23.5º – being the same as the present obliquity of the Earth’s polar axis. Note that the other points on the vertical arms would mark the cones of the precessional cycle – both North and South – and especially as drawn in space around the North Pole of the Ecliptic. Emphasis is on the centre – the ninth point, which would represent the god at the core-centre of the Earth .

Again, there is further evidence to show that this same information about the Earth’s axis as contained in the St John’s Maltese and Templar Crosses, is also linked to the Great Pyramid – which also contains information about the Earth’s axis as I reveal here in the presentation Sacred Pyramid-Earth Geometry.
It is a well-known fact that the sides of the Great Pyramid are concaved; that they bow inwards slightly – just like the sides of the Templar Cross, which are slightly or greatly inverted in its different variations. So in reality, the Great Pyramid has eight sides or faces. The Great Pyramid is only one of two pyramids in the world that has this concave feature, the other being the third smaller pyramid at Giza (said to belong to Pharoah Menkaure or “G3” as it is called today).
The amazing thing is, that the Templar Cross when opened out flat, transforms into the Great Pyramid with its slightly concaved sides; but instead of opening outwards from the apex, and each of the sides falling backward, think of the sides as having been cut along each of the corners, so that when we push down on the apex, the base of the sides move outward and squash flat into a Templar Cross.

[Image: 4578792206_525x272.jpg]
Artwork Copyright © G Osborn. 2005. All Rights Reserved
Figure 7: The Pyramid and the Templar Cross
We can see then, the Templar cross is really formed from a three-dimensional pyramid which seems to have been cut down the edges and opened outwards into a flat, two-dimensional image.
That the Templar Cross design was based on the pyramid is again confirmed by 32nd Degree Mason, Frank C. Higgins, from his book, Ancient Freemasonry (1919), which I had already quoted in a previous presentation and shall quote again:

“The characteristic crosses of the Knights Templar, which are faithfully reproduced by the modern Masonic fraternity, are not Calvary crosses, or the type signifying the supreme drama of Christian faith, but four-fold triangles joined at the apexes, the same being identical with a form highly symbolic throughout the ancient East from a period as remote as several thousand years before Christ. They are shown in company with representations of the sun, moon and stars and various zodiacal signs suspended from the necks of the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian monarchs. They are in fact, flattened pyramids and possess the same significance.” (My emphasis).
Ancient Freemasonry: An Introduction to Masonic Archeology by Frank C. Higgins (1919). p.105.
(08-20-2017, 12:06 PM)Wook Wrote: [Image: 34633_orig.jpg]


The Dots
on the outer left edge are intriguing
kinda reminds me of some of the "holes"
we see at Nazca Lines .

[Image: qy563742ad.jpg]

And Add This
As the Code or Code Breaker

"Quipus, also known as khipos or talking knots,[1] were recording devices historically used in a number of cultures and particularly in the region of Andean South America.[2] Similar systems were used by the ancient Chinese and native Hawaiians,[3] though this article specifically deals with the most familiar Inca system, and knotted string records are often generically referred to in English as quipus after the Inca term. A quipu usually consisted of colored, spun, and plied thread or strings made from cotton or camelid fiber. For the Inca, the system aided in collecting data and keeping records, ranging from monitoring tax obligations, properly collecting census records, calendrical information, and military organization.[4] The cords contained numeric and other values encoded by knots in a base ten positional system. A quipu could have only a few or up to 2,000 cords.[5] The configuration of the quipus have also been "compared to string mops."[6] Archaeological evidence has also shown a use of finely carved wood as a supplemental, and perhaps more sturdy, base on which the color-coordinated cords would be attached.[7] A relatively small number have survived"

"Some of the knots, as well as other features, such as color, are thought to represent non-numeric information, which has not been deciphered. It is generally thought that the system did not include phonetic symbols analogous to letters of the alphabet. However Gary Urton has suggested that the quipus used a binary system which could record phonological or logographic data.
To date, no link has yet been found between a quipu and Quechua, the native language of the Peruvian Andes. This suggests that quipus are not a glottographic writing system and have no phonetic referent. Frank Salomon at the University of Wisconsin has argued that quipus are actually a semasiographic language, a system of representative symbols—such as music notation or numerals—that relay information but are not directly related to the speech sounds of a particular language. The Khipu Database Project (KDP), begun by Gary Urton, may have already decoded the first word from a quipu—the name of a village, Puruchuco, which Urton believes was represented by a three-number sequence, similar to a ZIP code. If this conjecture is correct, quipus are the only known example of a complex language recorded in a 3-D system.[12]"

[Image: Inca_Quipu.jpg]


and there is the Inca encryption code .

Cryptography is the discipline of using codes and ciphers to encrypt a message and make it unreadable unless the recipient knows the secret to decrypt it. Encryption has been used for many thousands of years. The following codes and ciphers can be learned and used to encrypt and decrypt messages by hand.

noun: vector; plural noun: vectors
1. MathematicsPhysics
a quantity having direction as well as magnitude, especially as determining the position of one point in space relative to another.
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Holy Look Victor  Sheep Vector Wook Wholly

 Wooly like a lamb or a llama  That might be a clue???

Not to  quipu in  suspense Arrow

[Image: Inca_Quipu.jpg]
The cords contained numeric and other values encoded by knots in a base ten positional system. 
quipu could have only a few or up to 2,000 cords.[5] 

[Image: aten.jpg]

A very simple definition of ontology is that it is the examination of what is meant, in context, by the word 'thing'.
[Image: b67e521951b544ac1bb7f66e6384c6bd--ancien...-egypt.jpg]

You guys might be onto-sum-thing-logical.

Frank Salomon at the University of Wisconsin has argued that quipus are actually a semasiographic language, a system of representative symbols—such as music notation or numerals—that relay information but are not directly related to the speech sounds of a particular language.

[Image: 36326574390_7b41a8abf4_z.jpg]

Although reduced to it's smallest component in whole numbers... as a 3 : 4 : 5 Triangle.

What if they utilised it in itz decimal form for scalability, all Ma'at @ that?

[Image: sine4.gif]

Any triangle whose sides are in the ratio 3:4:5 is a right triangle. Such triangles that have their sides in the ratio of whole numbers are called Pythagorean Triples. There are an infinite number of them, and this is just the smallest. See pythagorean triples for more information.
If you multiply the sides by any number, the result will still be a right triangle whose sides are in the ratio 3:4:5. For example 6, 8, and 10.
Interior Angles
Because it is a right triangle one angle is obviously 90°. The other two are approximately 36.87° and 53.13°.

Using the base 10 hypotenuse if Eye put in use might be easier to understand in relation to other base ten units.
Along the vines of the Vineyard.
With a forked tongue the snake singsss...
LOL, you announced that you packed your bags from this forum,  Hi
and then went nowhere, 
which is everywhere that go with your math,
absolutely nowhere.

the Grand Vizoo nowhere man:

Quote:Well, tell ya what, I talked with my ancestors and they showed me how to do math


Grand Vizier = Epic  Pennywise

Your ancestors were Monkey See and Monkey Poo Whip

Quote:Really? First of all, as I already said, 18980 is NOT an accurate number. It's an approximation.

and your  365.02wtfwtf  value is accurate ????  Rofl
Mayans used simple count systems.
52 x 365 earth year = 18980
32.5 x 584 venus synod = 18980
those are quite well known ancient values in ancient CALENDAR COUNT systems.
365 and 584 as a fraction 365 / 584 = 0.625  initiates the ancient PHI progressions,
which you obviously know nothing about either.

If you did,
you would know that the progressions produce the fraction 75025 / 46368 = Phi.
You completely ignore that 18980 x 7 Pi = 417392 at over ten decimal accuracy.
You never looked at the data in the ancient Egyptian pi progressions.

The final closest Pi value those progressions attain is:
417392 / 132860 ... where ... 132860 = 364 x 365

A Knucklehead in Blunderland is what you are.

You display your ignorance of HOW the Mayans adjusted their LONG COUNTS,
and if you had ever read anything on the Mayan Calendar Round or Mayan Long Count,
you would know that they had very distinct methods,
of using the 187200 MLC and 18980 MCR,
by adding or subtracting simple multiples of designated units using the numbers 5 and 1,
{stackings and balancing mathematically of designated numbered chips}
to balance the Long Counts.
they understood that 2000 years of 365 days = 730000 days, 
and that was short.
All they had to do then for that particular point in Long Count was add ... 100 units of 5,
and they had 730500 for ---> 365.25 x 2000 <--- for long count balancing,
and from there,
for precision accuracy
they added what was necessary to get close enough to 365.25636 x 2000.
That is how they did it.

The math operations I displayed were clearly defined as --- accuracy testing,
you have NO ACCURACY in your works,
as has been clearly displayed by you.

You need lots of accuracy lessons Grand Vizoo with Monkey See Monkey Poo ancestry.


I wanted to address the Hancock work that was displayed earlier,
which is much better material than the Vizooburger's monkey pie mumbo jumbo,
but it needs clarification.
 Top row 3 pyramids:
The correct 280 cubit height,
and 440 cubit base math,
with two Pi cubits,
and the ancient cubit 20.618 18 18~.

The ancient Egyptians could not enumerate Pi any more than we can,
with it's infinite decimals.
However they could attain 10 decimal accuracy,
with the Pi progression final Pi value fraction {417392 / 132860}.

NOTE: The Pi cubits seen only display ten decimals.
When using  TRUE  Pi,
those cubits also have infifnite decimals.
If you do the math shown be sure to use the supplied formulas for the cubits,
cubit 20.61670179 = 6.5625 Pi

Bottom row of pyramids: 
uses Hancock's {2 / Pi} equation,
and shows how his approximation errors produces differing cubits in height and base.
Bottom row pyramid 1:
height cubit 20.625 produces Pi cubit 20.61670179 as the base length cubit,
making the math work properly.
That is very interesting indeed.

Bottom row pyramid 2:
height uses Pi cubit 20.62648062 ... and the base length result  is 756  feet <----
with ancient cubit 20.618 18 18~ <----
Yes indeed.

Bottom row pyramid 3:
uses the averaged Petrie and Cole base lengths <---
as the fixed base length dimension.
Two heights are produced using the equations {2 / Pi} and {2 / aPi},
so the original Hancock math operation reverses.
Note the dynamic results.

huge image link
[Image: EH8X8Ar.jpg]
It is entirely hilarious when intelligent people go at each other. Don't let it throw anyone from the forum however, because there is no place better for it BUT here.
once the readers see past the little vitriol there's a lot of knowledge being slung about.
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Along the vines of the Vineyard.
With a forked tongue the snake singsss...

here is a very interesting coincidence Whip

Petrie's North Side measure is 9069.4 inches.

slide the decimal

90694  Hmm2

90694 = 662 x Kabbalah 137   Hi

It is also Cole's average, if you can find his data in feet and inches.
{meter measures seen on the net are rounded off from the foot measures}

nice coincidence.


Along the vines of the Vineyard.
With a forked tongue the snake singsss...

Quote:I don't see a lot in your posts I disagree with, and I agree very much with your basic philosophies about the matter. I think the data EA posted supports your view and your calculations, and I think it's good data because it also support mine. I'm having to come up with words and probably not very good ones to describe the pyramids. They are "polypyramids" in that you can 

probably get multiple separate pyramid models out of the variance in the sides (as you mentioned); they are "hyperpyramids" in as much as the Cheops pyramid your calculations describe appears to be in there and so does the pyramid that Munck's calculations (and mine) describe, impossible as this sounds at first glance.

Those last three vids I just posted basically amalgamated the thread in general terms.

Now, eye think we all can see merit in our maths.

By ours,I mean ours  The stuff we independantly arrived @ without Munck or Lehner.

I am going to watch these Videos again to let this all sink in.

Now I have the answer to this:


PS>>>(to EA)

Quote: Wrote:33.30 gons=
33.3 grads=
29.97 degrees=
29 degrees 58 arc minutes = ~33.30 GONS

30 degrees
equals  33.333333333333333333333~ Gons
[Image: 36719713026_d7ebf094d9_z.jpg]

[Image: smoke.gif]

Monday, May 23rd, 2016, 08:30 pm

The question then would be? (Vic)
What IS @ 30 degrees???

Osirus' Tomb?
33.333333333333333333333~ Gons
Horus' Tomb???

A Hall of Records?

Holycowsmile  The answer is!!!   LilD 

A rogues gallery of Who-dunnitz

Arrow  ~3.14 KM 
[Image: 36370172850_865607f825_z.jpg]
It Writes itself.
It Rights itself.
Itza Rite itself.
Along the vines of the Vineyard.
With a forked tongue the snake singsss...
royal cubits ...

This math below on cubits is worth following through, and well explained as possible.

that video image with:
Pi / 6 = 0.523599 meters as the royal cubit is also nonsense.
I did not watch it.
because all I had to do was the math.

0.523599 meters is 20.61413389 inches Nonono

It is close however to the cubit that supplies an exact 481 foot height or 5772 inch height
-- 20.614 285714 285714 ~.{x 280} 
a very important cubit --

The problem most modern people have is that they think too much in terms of modern western math.

Egyptians applied their own brand of cultural cosmology to their pyramid geometry and cubit systems. 

If you believe that Pi is the foremost character for the royal cubit,
you have two predominant choices:

20.62648062 = {4 / Pi} x 16.2

20.61670179 = 6.5625 x Pi

Now look back to my last image with the 6 pyramids.
Look to row two, <----
and the first two pyramids.

What do you see?
In using the Pi cubits --- TWO other cubits emerge,
that are ancient and well studied by all who know how to view cubit systems.

In a base length using Pi cubit 20.61670179,
the height uses -----> cubit 20.625.

Cubit 20.625 was the favorite of the Petrie focused pyramid people while he was in action.
It is also a predominant cubit that emerges from square root two dynamics,
emerging from the Cydonia tetrahedral hexad mound formations.

take Horace Crater's defined 
tetrahedral oriented electron spin angle -- {90 - 19.47122~} = 70.528--- or ---> arctan sqrt 8

Subtract the Khafre pyramid base corner angle {Khafre pyramid is modeled from 3-4-5 triangle,
{with Side Face angle arctan {4/3}  }

Subtract the Khafre pyramid corner angle from the "electron spin angle"

arctan sqrt 8 = 70.52877937  
{corner angle Khafre pyramid} arctan sqrt {8 / 9} = 43.31385666 degrees

70.52877937 - 43.31385666 = 27.21492271 degrees
tangent --- {72 / by 99xsqrt2} for 27.21492271 degrees 

multiply that resultant tangent by:

cubit {20.625 / 10} ---> x  {72 / by 99xsqrt2}  
=  sqrt 1.125 
= tangent for 46.68614334 degrees 
= {90 - Khafre pyramid base corner angle 43.31385666 degrees}
cubit 20.625
is the conversion factor between the base corner angle and the apex corner angle Whip
of the 4 full Khafre pyramid corner triangles,
composing the cross section of the Khafre pyramid corner angles.

Most of the Khafre pyramid dynamics are in the Aptitude thread posted by EA by the ways.


In the other pyramid in question featured in my image, <------
the pyramid using Pi cubit 20.62648062, <-----
as the height,
reveals the excellent base length of ---- 756 feet <----> 9072 inches 

9072 inches <----> 440 x cubit 20.618 18 18~ = {1134 / 55}.

so what is the Royal Cubit?  Hi

If you want to use modern Pi you have the choices:

they mathematically defined themselves in the diagrams with the well studied ancient cubits
20.618 18 18~

A most interesting aspect of these four cubits is this:

20.62648062  x  20.61670179 = 425.25
20.625  x 20.618 18 18~        = 425.25  ----> 42525 = 175 x 243 {venus solar day}

the two "square root two cubits"
20.61923374  =  29.16 / sqrt 2
20.62394778  =  262.5 / {9 xsqrt 2}

20.61923374  x  20.62394778  =  425.25

these can labeled or defined as complimentary or mirror cubits to eachother

so we still have not defined the Royal Cubit Whip

If you want to think like an Egyptian,
you should read Petrie's comments on modern Pi and the cubit systems in the King's Chamber.

Quote:Petrie defines the Royal Cubit as between 20.615 and 20.625 inches <-----
from King's chamber measurements.

These three cubits predominate the choices in the ancient context:

20.625 = 165 / 8  =  6.5625 x aPi --- aPi = 22 / 7   {756.25 base length} 440 cubits
20.618 18 18~  = 1134 / 55  =  6.5625 x {1728 / 550}  {756 foot base length} 440 cubits
20.61675 = 6.5625 x 3.1416 for {755.9475 base length}

Those above three cubits are inseparable in the ancient context.

20.61675 x 20.62643239 = 425.25
they work with pi value 3.1416 and the 17 multiples {119 ... 187 ... etc}

In the modern context Whip the Pi cubits probably outweigh the square root two cubits.

It is a virtual tie between the three ancient cubits shown together above for Royal cubit IMO.
The Pi cubits,
could only be attained by Egyptians, 
{they had no number for Pi to calculate with -- Khufu did not have a hand calculator}
with the fraction:
417392 / 132860 = Pi with ten decimal accuarcy = 104348 / 33215 {reduced}
as the best Pi fraction to use that had high accuracy.

They could also use 355 / 113 = 3.14159292
84823 / 27000 = 3.141592593 
if they wanted to use excruciating accuracy they used the Pi progression finale {417392 / 132860}.
The ancient Pi progression is also in the Aptitude thread.

I look at the pyramids as encoding many perspectives.
One important aspect of which would be important planetary timeline cycles,
which were very important to ancient cultures -- 
especially the Lunar Month and the synods and sidereal of the planets.

In that regard,
the 756 foot base length becomes paramount in those evidences.
Clue: look to the Lunar Month 29.53059 days.

as such,
the pyramid I posted in row two of my last image,
the height ... 280 cubits x Pi cubit 20.62648062
base length 756 feet = 9072 inches = 440 cubits 20.618 18 18~ gains high relevance.

emerge from cubits,
and planetary timelines,
and dimensions and angles Whip

Look at the 756 foot base length = 9072 inches.
There are 4 full base lengths in a pyarmid,
thus the 4 full base lengths
36288 inches = 4 x 9072.

from a pure number perspective alone,
look at this math operation:

9 x 8 x 7 x 6 x 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 

so at 756 feet = 9072 inch base length
four Khufu pyramid base lengths = 36288

9 x 8 x 7 x 6 x 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1       = 362880

not a coincidence Nonono
and offers weight to the pyramid with height using cubit 20.62648062
and base with cubit 20.618 18 18

So in that regard,
there is evidence pointing to these 4 cubits as having some predominance in Royal Cubit choice:
pi cubits

ancient cubits
20.618 18 18~
but you cannot disregard the cubits from ancient Pi value 3.1416 either

I choose the two ancient cubits from the pyramid design as equally viable,
and inseparable,
in the ancient context,
and in the case of square root two or tetrahedral dynamics,
cubit 20.625 takes the edge.

I personally have studied V's pyramid formulas and have found them to be of absolute accuracy - and his grasp of them almost omniscient. Might pay to heed what he's saying, regardless of vitriolic exchange.
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
royal cubits ...

This math below on cubits is worth following through, and well explained as possible.

that video image with:
Pi / 6 = 0.523599 meters as the royal cubit is also nonsense.
I did not watch it.
because all I had to do was the math.

0.523599 meters is 20.61413389 inches 

The whole video is worth watching but I chose that specific screen-capture to show that my pondering about:
Then what the hell IS @ 33.3333333333 gons ???

I now have my answer.  LilD

In compendium with the pendulum it only took One Second for my eureka to illume.  Holycowsmile

Once it dawned on me I am satisfied that no matter where you are inside or on the base-plan bedrock before it was even cornerstoned that exactly transcendental within the blueprint sum-where?

Is the 10 sigma length of  Pi KM irregardless of cubits and I Am happy. Reefer

I also suggest that pendulum video.

Because now I understand the plumbbob more proficiently when viewed as a length(Metre) of Time.
[Image: plumb-line.jpg]
plumb bob, or plummet, is a weight, usually with a pointed tip on the bottom, suspended from a string and used as a vertical reference line, or plumb-line. It is essentially the vertical equivalent of a "water level".
Tick Tock Talk: @ metre tool of the ancients.
Second Time use is a Second of Time muse
The instrument has been used since at least the time of ancient Egypt[1] to ensure that constructions are "plumb", or vertical. It is also used in surveying, to establish the nadir with respect to gravity of a point in space. It is used with a variety of instruments (including levels, theodolites, and steel tapes) to set the instrument exactly over a fixed survey marker or to transcribe positions onto the ground for placing a marker.[2]---

Pi   Sheep  KM 

~3.14 km works for me.
Eye work for you.

[Image: 36370172850_865607f825_z.jpg]

The Video Author used Google Earth and the setting was meters on the measuring tool.

It was to demonstrate 33.3333333333 grads is ~3.14 Kilometers.
That being said wether he is incorrect on cubits per se...he was using google earth METRICS in this specific instance.

Google Earth itself is impartial to anybodies theory and just gives you the distance read out and as a redoubt...


  1. a temporary or supplementary fortification, typically square or polygonal and without flanking defenses

Distance must be as ancient as THE SECOND itself.

Second sight is as metre was.

(08-24-2017, 04:50 PM)Keith Wrote: I personally have studied V's pyramid formulas and have found them to be of absolute accuracy - and his grasp of them almost omniscient. Might pay to heed what he's saying, regardless of vitriolic exchange.

I agree,wich is just astounding that anyone would ever think this was a Crypt for a Pharaoh.

Itza Encrypt .

The biblical account of Babylon where one language was broken into the many spoken.

The Gist of the Tale is there was ONE language. Eh?

They NEVER intoned that the ONE Language was INVENTED at the tower site?

Therefore itza zep tepi no-brainer Doh  where the prime meridian and the second was RE:"Invented"

Reinvented @ Gizah...from a post cataclysmic ice-age and comet stricken past .

Ancient is as update was.

This is Write,Right,Rite up our sleeve!.


Mathematical mystery of ancient Babylonian clay tablet solved
August 24, 2017

[Image: 8-mathematical.jpg]
The 3,700-year-old Babylonian tablet Plimpton 322 at the Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Columbia University in New York. Credit: UNSW/Andrew Kelly
UNSW Sydney scientists have discovered the purpose of a famous 3700-year old Babylonian clay tablet, revealing it is the world's oldest and most accurate trigonometric table, possibly used by ancient mathematical scribes to calculate how to construct palaces and temples and build canals.

The new research shows the Babylonians beat the Greeks to the invention of trigonometry - the study of triangles - by more than 1000 years, and reveals an ancient mathematical sophistication that had been hidden until now.
Known as Plimpton 322, the small tablet was discovered in the early 1900s in what is now southern Iraq by archaeologist, academic, diplomat and antiquities dealer Edgar Banks, the person on whom the fictional character Indiana Jones was based.
It has four columns and 15 rows of numbers written on it in the cuneiform script of the time using a base 60, or sexagesimal, system.
"Plimpton 322 has puzzled mathematicians for more than 70 years, since it was realised it contains a special pattern of numbers called Pythagorean triples," says Dr Daniel Mansfield of the School of Mathematics and Statistics in the UNSW Faculty of Science.
"The huge mystery, until now, was its purpose - why the ancient scribes carried out the complex task of generating and sorting the numbers on the tablet.
"Our research reveals that Plimpton 322 describes the shapes of right-angle triangles using a novel kind of trigonometry based on ratios, not angles and circles. It is a fascinating mathematical work that demonstrates undoubted genius.
"The tablet not only contains the world's oldest trigonometric table; it is also the only completely accurate trigonometric table, because of the very different Babylonian approach to arithmetic and geometry.
"This means it has great relevance for our modern world. Babylonian mathematics may have been out of fashion for more than 3000 years, but it has possible practical applications in surveying, computer graphics and education.
"This is a rare example of the ancient world teaching us something new," he says.
The new study by Dr Mansfield and UNSW Associate Professor Norman Wildberger is published in Historia Mathematica, the official journal of the International Commission on the History of Mathematics.
A trigonometric table allows you to use one known ratio of the sides of a right-angle triangle to determine the other two unknown ratios.

The Greek astronomer Hipparchus, who lived about 120 years BC, has long been regarded as the father of trigonometry, with his "table of chords" on a circle considered the oldest trigonometric table.

"Plimpton 322 predates Hipparchus by more than 1000 years," says Dr Wildberger. "It opens up new possibilities not just for modern mathematics research, but also for mathematics education. With Plimpton 322 we see a simpler, more accurate trigonometry that has clear advantages over our own."
"A treasure-trove of Babylonian tablets exists, but only a fraction of them have been studied yet. The mathematical world is only waking up to the fact that this ancient but very sophisticated mathematical culture has much to teach us."
Dr Mansfield read about Plimpton 322 by chance when preparing material for first year mathematics students at UNSW. He and Dr Wildberger decided to study Babylonian mathematics and examine the different historical interpretations of the tablet's meaning after realizing that it had parallels with the rational trigonometry of Dr Wildberger's book Divine Proportions: Rational Trigonometry to Universal Geometry.
The 15 rows on the tablet describe a sequence of 15 right-angle triangles, which are steadily decreasing in inclination.
The left-hand edge of the tablet is broken and the UNSW researchers build on previous research to present new mathematical evidence that there were originally 6 columns and that the tablet was meant to be completed with 38 rows.
They also demonstrate how the ancient scribes, who used a base 60 numerical arithmetic similar to our time clock, rather than the base 10 number system we use, could have generated the numbers on the tablet using their mathematical techniques.
The UNSW Science mathematicians also provide evidence that discounts the widely-accepted view that the tablet was simply a teacher's aid for checking students' solutions of quadratic problems.
"Plimpton 322 was a powerful tool that could have been used for surveying fields or making architectural calculations to build palaces, temples or step pyramids," says Dr Mansfield.
The tablet, which is thought to have come from the ancient Sumerian city of Larsa, has been dated to between 1822 and 1762 BC. It is now in the Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Columbia University in New York.
A Pythagorean triple consists of three, positive whole numbers a, b and c such that a2 + b2 = c2. The integers 3, 4 and 5 are a well-known example of a Pythagorean triple, but the values on Plimpton 322 are often considerably larger with, for example, the first row referencing the triple 119, 120 and 169.
The name is derived from Pythagoras' theorem of right-angle triangles which states that the square of the hypotenuse (the diagonal side opposite the right angle) is the sum of the squares of the other two sides.
[Image: 1x1.gif] Explore further: New trigonometry is a sign of the times
Provided by: University of New South Wales

Read more at:[/url][url=]
Along the vines of the Vineyard.
With a forked tongue the snake singsss...
I would look more closely at that math in the video perhaps before ... Hmm2
If all that is that close to Pi ... it's probably Pi, 
but I don't like the glaring approximations presented from step one.
maybe this helps

0.523664225 meters gives you Pi cubit 20.61670179

0.532912607 meters gives you Pi cubit 20.62648062

this is how you achieve that with any cubit

cubit / 12 = A

divided by
metric conversion factor
the meter value.


I felt that I had to produce an image that supported that long explanation in my last post,
of Khafre Pyramid Corner Angles
and how they convert to tetrahedral 19.47122063 and {90 - 19.47122063} = 70.528--- electron spin angle

Then later I will supply, 
a Cubit System Model,  
with multiple base lengths and slopes for the Khafre Pyramid,
what Hancock called the Venus Pyramid -- which I agree with,
and I can only show one facet of that,
but it is quite viable.

imgur over magnifies, you have to click the image to get normal size

Khafre Pyramid 3-4-5 triangle geometry

[Image: qpmnTuA.jpg]

by unique alignment the foot measures transfer to near perfect meter measures.

That never happens.

215.25 meters = 706.2007885 feet
143.5 meters =   470.8005257 feet

height in feet is off by 0.0005257 feet = about 63 /10,000 of an inch off

224.7 days is the ancient Egyptian exact count for the Venus sidereal.
this aligns the sidereal into the cultural count systems as a multiple of 7 --- 3 x 7 x 107 = 2247

NASA Venus sidereal = 224.701 days

Quote:That never happens.

If Itza not in the Script.
[Image: gp-kc98a.jpg]
Then that's not a crypt.

Eye've got to post this vid again...

How awe-sum is that while we are on the topic now.

listen to the money talk @ dollar/3=33.3...  LilD

Triggered an update on the books in the outdated textbooks

tablet babble 
Along the vines of the Vineyard.
With a forked tongue the snake singsss...

Quote:That never happens ...

was meant ... as in ... it just happened ... 
when you almost never see it happen,
in all other foot - metric conversions.
Sorry that I was not clear and trippin'.

Khafre Pyramid 3-4-5 triangle geometry can be completely assembled with tetrahedral rectangles Whip

[Image: or25R2v.jpg]
Cubit system models.
Conversion from Khafre to Khufu Pyramids and back is a piece of cake.

The first cubit multiple may be a bit odd to you at 410.88  x cubit = base length

the 41088 sequence is a prime number 107 multiple = 384 x 107
Thus aligned with the Venus sidereal 2247 = 21 x 107,
makes this cubit system math work. 

To accomodate with a more simple and straight forward multiple,
I chose:
Kabbalah 137 Whip

Kabbalah 137  x 3 = 411 ----> 411 x cubit = base length

Both cubit systems convert between the two pyramids with factors shown.

[Image: UzWc4Mb.jpg]

before the cafuffle with Munck-ey Pie,
there was material concerning WATER at pyramid or ancient sites.

There is a local Bellingham fellow here that has used interior Khufu pyramid dynamics,
and known designs from therein,
to offer a theory,
on how water was worked through the base {or below it},
to create:
a repetitive Heart Beat  Luv emanating from the pyramid itself.
His ideas are quite interesting, though some of his math assumptions are off.

None the less,
he replicated ths scale of the interior design,
and set up a scale model of the water flow in a small creek in his property.

I visited him, and witnessed the operation.
It is very unique in that as the water is flowed through the template,
it automatically gives off Applause
a nice pleasant
Heart Beat.  Luv
The Pyramid would be placed over the top of the template {which is subterranean to the pyramid}

His pitch is that the water was purposely flowed through the subterranean matrix,
such that,
at Giza,
the occupants would hear a repetitive heart beat in the back ground.
His method works.
You sit there and you hear the water flow with ... a heart beat type sound.
His water flow matrix design is copied from images of subterranean caverns {something like that}
below the pyramid.

His idea has good merit.
I will try and get his material here at some point. 

I would imagine that if water flow increased or decreased, the sound would vary.
It's his design, and it works.

In the meantime,
back to the Khufu Pyramid.

I threw in Cubit System models of the Khafre Pyramid,
to show how cubits Whip
and the associated base lengths,
can be transferred from pyramid to pyramid quite easily via a simple fraction.

below is the three slope Khufu pyramid I posted a few weeks ago.

one can take each base length seen
{2 x the half base lengths seen ... such as 2 x 378}
and simply 
use this formula:

Khufu pyramid base length   x  {411 / 440}
that will give you the same cubit into the base length in the Khafre Pyramid,
designating the Khafre Pyramid
in base lengths with 411 cubits of each cubit entertained.

411 = 3 x Kabbalah 137
So, you can transfer directly all cubits from this three slope Khufu pyramid,
into a three slope Khafre pyramid,
then set your height there ... I have used 470.8 feet = 143.5 meters.

440 x pi cubit 20.62648062 = 9075.651473 inches = 756.3042894  
{designated khufu pyramid base length with that cubit}

use conversion factor {411 / 440}

{411 / 440}  x  756.3042894  
706.4569612 feet = 8477.483535 inches {khafre pyramid base length}

[b]8477.483535 inches = 411 Pi cubits 20.62648062 inches ---- 411 = 3 x 137 Kabbalah[/b]

Three slope Khufu Pyramid.
displays Petrie, Cole and Dorner style uneven base lengths as they evidenced in measurements.
the pyramid apex and base center point have merely shifted.
This is not an approximation or a close design.
It works and is 100% viable as a geometric design that can be constructed.
I can also design 4-6 slope pyramids from this criteria, but it gets complicated.

[Image: kE7x5ms.jpg]
You have to design the Khafre pyramid along the same parameters in the above design,
for a three slope Khafre pyramid .
In the diagram you see that I have used:
Half Base lengths <---
So you replicate the image design above,
and use HALF the conversion factor of {411 / 440} = {205.5 / 220}
locate half base length 377.8488
conversion factor
{205.5 / 220}

So the transferrable base length would be:
377.8488 x {205.5 / 220} = 352.9451291 feet <---
and you place that length dimension,
in the same position 
that you see the base length 377.8488 in the above image design,
and you can erect the converted Khufu into Khafre pyramid.

To attain the 706.2 foot = 8474.4 inches base length of the Khafre Pyramid,
you would use 
cubit 20.6189781 
in both pyramids {440 x cubit and 411 x cubit} 
or half that {205.5 / 220},
for half lengths when transferring from khufu to khafre pyramids.

(08-24-2017, 04:50 PM)Keith Wrote: I personally have studied V's pyramid formulas and have found them to be of absolute accuracy - and his grasp of them almost omniscient. Might pay to heed what he's saying, regardless of vitriolic exchange.

"Omniscient" might be risking a change in his hat size (he seems to have been terribly prone to that until several days ago), but certainly. "Absolute" might also be a slight overstatement if according to Vic, the max accuracy of some of his equations is 6 sigma. Those pyramid formulas are certainly near to or probably at the top of the list of the most brilliant interpretations I have ever seen of the available data, even if they are simply only one possible interpretation and the data may still be loose enough to invite MANY possible interpretations.

I have previously tendered support for Vi's models and may continue to do so, but you DO understand that when it comes to timekeeping (i.e., calendars) with which, for example, ancient Mayan mathematics appears to me to be TREMENDOUSLY preoccupied, the classic canonical formulas do NOT have this accuracy and should NOT be judged by the same standard of accuracy?

You also realize that if we are able to demonstrate apparent origins for metrological units in what are presumably some of the earliest astronomical calculations, that it may not be appropriate to take after them with those same standards at that point in time?

Technically, what Vi may have done on this account is put emphasis on almost fanatically accurate and unnecessarily complex equations that tend to look like the origins of some of the numbers in question, when they may not actually be.

We may not only have to contend with the idea that some of what we are looking at may be HEIRLOOM mathematics that's handed down generation to generation until it looks like we have cultures that are virtually stagnant to the outside observer (very same goes for the ancient Egyptians, same-old, same-old century after century), but we may also have to contend with the idea that the available language for mathematics may not afford us much else.

For example, Vi is fond of these complex fractions - I'm just going to make one up here - 58322 / 1256 - but how is someone going to WRITE that? 58322 peck marks on this side of a boulder and 1256 on the other side? 58322 bricks on the north side of a pyramid and 1265 on the south side? Things like this may be completely without precedent in the archaeological remains. What we may get instead is hints at various numbers using smaller and less accurate fractions. To use a really poor but more realistic example, say an ancient relic with 13 circular features and 8 square features, where someone may have used to mean 13 / 8 = 1.625 as shorthand for 1.622311470, 1.622222222, or even 1.618033989 although Phi proper doesn't appear to me to be that handy in canonical formulas, even if there are lots of webpages that like to try to tell us that Phi is "encoded" in existing planetary mathematics.

Keep in mind there's a REASON that certain whole numbers were completely omitted from Munck's "Pyramid Matrix" system. Part of this is because his main premise is that monuments tell us "why they are where they are" - that they represent equations that give us (in his sometimes less than eminently logical mind) their geographic coordinates. That means we are trying to use ACTUAL numbers of existing features in ancient monuments, and if you pay close attention to that premise, right or wrong, it underscores that there are certain numbers we may not be able to expect to see very often, and numbers that we cannot construct from multiplication of the numbers that do tend to exist. 7, 13, 17, 31 are just a few of these numbers that are hard to find and can't be made by multiplying likelier numbers to find in ancient monuments - if and when we DO see them in any ancient architecture or artifacts, they may be used in these situations to generate imprecise "shorthand" numbers that point to more precise ones, as illustrated in the previous paragraph.

You realize of course what this does for the resulting mathematics' abilities to accurately generate some numbers with 100% or even 99.99% accuracy if the most accurate expressions numbers are not even part of the system in question - yet it may still prove to be that in many cases we are literally instructed to use math in exactly that way in the assessment of a monument - The Kukulkan at Chicken Itza borders on this at the very least, its blatantly obvious there what happens if we assess the structural features in what is for intents and purposes the very same way that Munck would (give or take absolute accuracy) and the very same may be true for the Pyramid of the Niches. 

These are only some of the reasons that maybe it isn't always all about the accuracy. In most later cases, the ancients seem to have been trying to say much more than is actually possible to say with absolute accuracy. All of us know the value of storage capacity to data even if there may be trade-offs, it's sort of a lot like .bmp vs .jpg here, the later being inferior but perfectly serviceable for general purposes.

To return to the theme of the possible ORIGINS of some of these numbers in the earliest attempts to break down 365 days into smaller and more manageable units, Vic has an equation that attempts to look like the origin of the Royal Cubit, the Lunar Synodic Cycle, the Terrestrial year, and the Mayan Calendar Round all in one... but again, that's a little complex to be some of the first math that mankind came up with.

It might be misleading of me to point to the first acknowledgements of the Venus orbital period as the likeliest origin of Munck's version of Phi. Of course, as shown, 365 / 225 = 1.622222222, which to use Munck terms comes out precisely 16.22311470, but if we take a look at the Lunar Year and ponder the obvious as the first attempts to break it down into more manageable units but by the time we taking note of Venus' cycles, a number even more in need of breaking down into more manageable units is the Venus Synodic Period, which is but one of the inaccurate but allegedly historical numbers that has been employed canonically by "Mayanist" scholars this whole time.

So far I haven't experimented with breaking up any of the cycles (earth Solar Year, earth Lunar Year, Venus Orbital Period, Venus Synodic Cycle) by whole numbers larger than those in our modern Julian calendar (28-31 days max), but it may be of interest that the canonical Venus Synodic Period of "584" days divides like so

584 / 30 = 19.46666666 (NOT 19.47122063!; 260 / 225 = 225 / 194.7115385 but I'm not sure any 260 (x 10^x) day cycles has been invented yet as early in the game as we may be talking about here)
584 / 26 = 22.46153846 (i.e., the Venus Orbital Period of canonically "225" days / 10, man's earliest "decimal harmonic"?)
584 / 24 = 24.33333333 to compare 24.33467205 feet, which is 20 remens using my primary refined value for the remen (Hoagland and Torun would probably like a piece of this action since it is CENTRAL to their "Message of Cydonia" paper, and they are welcome to it as far as I'm concerned. The present proposition is of course completely independent of their work, but I'm not sure I believe anyone ever invalidated their work, which was MESSAGE RECEIVED by a Viking Orbiter. I'm just reciting some history of numbers here).

So we can obtain 12.166666666 as a possible early remen value from Venus' canonical Synodic Period of 584 days as 584 / 24 / 2 about as easily as from its canonical orbital period of 225 days as 365 / 225 = 12.166666666 and thus could have come from either, and might have got extra points for coming so readily from both.

As to the origins of the Royal Cubit, perhaps the likelier and more elegantly simply origin scenarios are something like either the division of a canonical earth Lunar Year during early attempts to break it down into smaller periods like months or weeks

354 / 17 = 1.717647059 x 2, compare 1.717647059 to Morton Royal Cubit of 1.718873385 ft

Or, alternately...

Well, I've already shown this essentially as Munck's (calendar) year 365.02008081 days / my best proposal for a Lunar Year 353.9334578 days (canonically 354 and currently given by Wikipedia as 354.367056 days, approximated for the purposes of my sytematics as Radian 57.29577951 / "Not Phi" 16.18829140 = 353.9334578)...

365.02008081 days / 353.9334578 days =  1.031324031, and while I probably referred to it as a "decimal harmonic" of the exact, more significantly in comparison to Vi's equations, that's 1/10 of 1/2 of the Morton Royal Cubit in Inches, precisely

Canonically speaking, 365 / 354 = 1.031073446 (as a measurement --> 1.718455743 ft) - more strictly speaking, 365.25 / 354.36 = 1.030731460 (as a measurement --> 1.717885767 ft) so it's really splitting hairs in the worst way in metrological terms to try to argue over these, except that you'll notice the canonical values, and the ones that the earliest man most likely used while counting out piles of pebbles, is even closer to Morton's cubit value if anyone still wants to argue about it.

Now, hopefully you've studied my math 1/10 as carefully as you've studied Vi's, Keith, because you may recall that in honor of his math, I invented the Cubit-O-Matic to make sure that he might have whatever cubit he requires for it to remain true that the Great Pyramid is "440 x 280 cubits" regardless of the hot-potato subject of pavement surrounding the Great Pyramid and probably compromising its height value as we know it from contemporary measurements, and this is based on the fact that we can approximate the Lunar Synodic Period (canonically 29.5 days) by dividing a 360 degree circle by remen, and that the Royal Cubit is approximately the square root of that.

The Lunar Synodic Period is among astronomical cycles that as previously pointed out, are NOT fixed values. Wikipedia currently gives that Lunar Synodic Month as AVERAGING out as 29.530587 days (sqrt of (29.530587 x 10) = 17.18446595, because the square root of a number can change when you move the decimal so we multiply 29.540587 x 10 before taking its square root).

Eventually, mankind may derive a closer approximation of a hypothetical earlier mathematical discovery, 354 / 17 = 1.717647059, because to employ the Cubit-O-Matic, a putative corrected Stecchini Cubit of 1.722570927 ft (for you Freemasons out there, that's the implied height of the Washington Monument 555.555555 ft x (Pi^3) / 10^n) is the "pair partner" in the main "Cubit-O-Matic" scheme of

(360 / 1.216733603) / 1.722570927 = 1.717631063, compare to 354 / 17 = 1.71764705
And what that may be, is a later, revised and more precise way to represent what may be an ancient mathematical heirloom - which is exactly what Vic's equation using the Mayan Long Count (Calendar Round), the terrestrial year, the Lunar Month, and the Royal Cubit may be - eventually someone found equations that made them think their ancient numbers were even cooler than they previously realized, and that could go into more complex equations like Vic's that might have made it worth mixing apples and oranges, even if doing so turned out to be the exception rather than the rule.

I don't like to discuss the proposed Stecchini Cubit at present because it's been such a long time since I've actually looked at Stecchini's work. I was personally fairly impressed with him if I recall correctly, which is probably only reasonable since I tried to adapt his proposal, and hopefully Hancock and Shoch might vouch for Stecchini in the event everyone else might be determined to make psuedoscience of him, but at present I don't even recall how close my proposal for his cubit value came to his own. I have tons of material (literally thousands of pages) left to locate. At any rate, he may be someone else who may more or less have a correct answer without invalidating the work of others.

One might wish to bear in mind exactly why the word canonical is used throughout this message (Vi's MCR of 18980 is built out of canonical numbers via multiple formulas), and that is because those blunt and imprecise numbers are those for which archaeologists may be able to boast physical and historical evidence, whereas actual physical evidence for what both Vi and I propose regarding figures of higher accuracy may be pretty much non-existent in terms of physical measurements. I'm gravitating toward some of the smallest architecture I can find, such as doorways, because almost all of our available data appears to be accurate only to the centimeter - an error of just one centimeter can change the picture considerably and there are discrepancies between my two data sources for Tikal, even if rare, that are enough that I've about had to beat the truth out of those measurements with a pocket calculator, involving pages and pages of experimental equations. 

Consider then what it means for Lehner's Great Pyramid data to have an accuracy rating of about +/- 1/2 of a FOOT. (Hint: .5 foot = ~15.24 centimeters).

I think Vi has no better evidence than his equations themselves (he might not be the only one), and I think that every time he tries to needlessly reach any further than that for proof, he comes up empty-handed (and probably understandably frustrated as a result).

As for my work, it is admittedly a work in progress. Appraising it too critically at present may be a little like critiquing a half-finished sculpture. Maybe the very same consideration should also be extended to Vi's work.

I should probably apologize for any and all unpleasantries that originated in my direction in the previous exchange (gimme minnit, occasional puffs of steam are still coming out of my ears), and I apologize if I sound like I'm putting on any pious airs by trying to address the "sacred" nature of anything I'm proposing, but I'm finding my present work IMMENSELY gratifying if it can really shed light on the origins of some of mankind's sacred celebrations. For going on 20 years, my wife has been a program coordinator for non-denominational solstice gatherings, and in all that time I've never really understood why they started taking place, and why they were worth preserving or handing down, or why anyone got that excited about them, until I took my 365 or 354 or 225 or 584 beans and started trying to sort them into smaller more manageable piles as I can only imagine it was in the beginning.

As for the sacred heirloom stories of mankind, I really see very little difference between ancient Mesoamerican mythology (and the way it may support some of the basic mathematical operations) and the view derived from lengthy studies of ancient Greek mythology, even though the later peoples may not be given credit nearly as generously as fathering civilization amid rumors of ritual bloodletting. (Some years back Patheon republished some of Donald MacKenzie's work, there are some sections full of comparative notes between Greek and Mesoamerican mythology that I think are just brilliant, like the "mugwort goddesses" that are something else that could have come to both the Americas and the Mediterranean from Asia where they are also represented). I find that immensely gratifying also to think I can understand the thinking of my own ancestors better by studying the ways of any other ancient people because they may have been (demonstrably) simply different branches of the same root culture, whether it started in Africa, India, Asia, or elsewhere.

So I will share one final thought that still troubles me - the point of heirloom culture may be that you try to keep your culture the way it is so that what is ancient retains its meaning and its value, and that you traffic in cultural expressions that are going to be highly predictable to future generations so that they don't escape the grasp of your descendants, even at the peril of having modern archaeologists barking about how your civilization made zero progress in 1000 years - whereas Vi's pyramid may come as quite a shock even to many of the more open-minded. Would that be curiously uncharacteristic of the ancients, or would it simply mean that the usually large proportions of the main Giza pyramids represent something important enough to surprise us with? That is still not a question that I can answer, although to be fair I was quite surprised when I got to Tikal at all the stuff I never learned from Giza.

So the latest installment in the story of what can happen when we try to get numbers to do far more than they are actually capable of with 100% accuracy (depending somewhat on how you define and apply accuracy - I often use 2 Pi with 100% accuracy to construct useful figures of 99.99 accuracy), is that 224.6131181 may have been an an anciently accepted approximation of the "224.701" (canonically 225) day Venus cycle (whereas I had hoped maybe they'd keep it down to five of them in honor of the number 5 being "sacred" to Venus and her representative "deities"), and if you play with the numbers just a little it should become rapidly obvious why this might be so - it concerns the Eclipse Year. Iindeed, the ancient Maya are credited with being able to accurately predict eclipses, even if this may not actually turn out to be something easily done with canonical figures. 

I'm not sure why they would want to do this, since it's not the same thing as more practical traditional purposes such s when to plant this or hunt that or harvest this other thing - in fact, I've seen it alleged that Columbus tried to convince gullible natives he was a God-Thing by predicting an eclipse and I just have such a hard time to believe the natives were that gullible - but they do seem to have been fond of trying to come up with all kinds of things pertaining to planetary cycles, and probably of flexing their mathematical muscles when the opportunity arose.

Maybe the search for truth continue...
"Work and pray, live on hay, you'll get Pie In The Sky when you die." - Joe Hill, "The Preacher and the Slave" 1911
and Aimless Pisser is back .
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
(08-25-2017, 04:27 PM)Wook Wrote: and Aimless Pisser is back .

Might want to check your ears for wax. Did I not SAY I was not going to be chased off with Morton's Royal Cubit?
"Work and pray, live on hay, you'll get Pie In The Sky when you die." - Joe Hill, "The Preacher and the Slave" 1911
Piss on .

and Everything here is in PRINT
not audible .
Might want to check your Brain also .
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)