...

As soon as I see Munck's data with the GP height at 480.34 feet,

I see no reason to look further, sorry.

When he is that far off, he's just plain old grossly incorrect.

I cannot see any way around that fact concerning the height.

I did of course.

That is square root 800 divided by 9.

When you align your uneven base lengths with a fixed height,

you get a variety of slope angles.

We use the standard slope tangent model for all slope possibilities:

{4 divided by pi value} = slope tangent

There are several primary ancient pi values that produce tangents and cubits,

through this system.

That sqrt 800 / 9 value is designated as another slope producing pi value,

augmenting modern square root two into the ancient cubit system,

because it operates the pure modern square root two,

into Khufu pyramid cubits.

That cubit for that "pi value" is 20.61923374.

the slope tangent

is sqrt 1.62.

I do not think that the Egyptians could calculate a "perfect pi", or any of the square roots.

They are endless decimals.

They certainly had convergent fractions for pi, and square roots,

and as such they had dozens of ancient pi values attached to a variety of math progressions.

Pi is far less important of a subject to advanced ancient cultures,

than the Earth measurements and the planetary astronomies.

First and foremost ancient man was an astronomer.

He watched the planetary movements and accounted for them.

In that accounting he discovered the harmonic cycles of planetary timelines.

From there the ancient cultural math became the spiritual harmonic codes.

Pi was a math tool, certainly recognized as important indeed,

but Pi wasn't the reason why they built the Khufu pyramid with that geometry.

The simplest quality form of Pi is the ancient pi value {355 / 113}.

Standard ancient basic model of the GP is a square base,

440 cubits base length, 280 cubit height.

That can only produce one slope tangent, and it's not {4 / pi}.

From there, it was a free for all in pyramid design,

with 4 uneven bases and 4 - 8 slopes.

I displayed in the last post with NASA data planetary timeline calendar convergence,

to indicate the accuracy of data I derived from a variety of ancient pyramid angle tangents.

No doubt,

astronomical data is just but one important facet of what is fully encoded in the Giza Pyramids.

Basic or standard models ...

Khafre --- 3 - 4 -5 triangle {side face}

Menkaure -- the Lehner style rectangular base is the basic model here.

That produces two side face slopes.

I use the Masonic Code tangent {21 / 17} for the 51 degree angle,

with the alternate slope as the Khufu pyramid.

Any rectangular base pyramid represents two side face slope angles,

thus represents two distinct square base pyramids,

in a hybrid pyramid.

Interesting that Lehner got the Khafre pyramid height almost spot on at 470.8 feet.

I set the primary slope, with base length 706.2 feet and that height, for slope tangent {4 / 3}.

From there I create {optimise} multiple uneven base lengths for 3 and 4 side face slope pyramids.

His Khufu pyramid slope is almost spot on ... arctangent sqrt 1.62

blah blah blah

My favorite image of the last couple of years was the study on the Lunar South Massif.

I noticed that the central latitude of the South Massif was spot on:

the Kabbalah 137 angle 19.98310652 degrees with tangent {36 / 99}.

That specific latitude centrally crosses the Massif and Bear mountain.

In working that angle with other important angle tangents,

I found a unique situation,

with the standard model of the Khafre pyramid.

So regardless of the implications of the South Massif,

the relationship of the two featured angles,

{one angle being subtracted from the other}

produces a resultant tangent --

that fractionally defines all the possible Khufu pyramid cuibts with possible pyramid heights.

The all important aspect of the Khafre pyramid of course ... is the corner angle

Note the equation with that Corner Angle

and tetrahedral 19.47122063

...

As soon as I see Munck's data with the GP height at 480.34 feet,

I see no reason to look further, sorry.

When he is that far off, he's just plain old grossly incorrect.

I cannot see any way around that fact concerning the height.

Quote:This week's question: Who ordered this Pi, and why?

3.1426968052735447

I did of course.

That is square root 800 divided by 9.

When you align your uneven base lengths with a fixed height,

you get a variety of slope angles.

We use the standard slope tangent model for all slope possibilities:

{4 divided by pi value} = slope tangent

There are several primary ancient pi values that produce tangents and cubits,

through this system.

That sqrt 800 / 9 value is designated as another slope producing pi value,

augmenting modern square root two into the ancient cubit system,

because it operates the pure modern square root two,

into Khufu pyramid cubits.

That cubit for that "pi value" is 20.61923374.

the slope tangent

is sqrt 1.62.

Quote:It looks to me like the original basic design for the Cheops is a perfect 2 Pi pyramid,

but that doesn't seem to stop it in the least from supporting your work.

I do not think that the Egyptians could calculate a "perfect pi", or any of the square roots.

They are endless decimals.

They certainly had convergent fractions for pi, and square roots,

and as such they had dozens of ancient pi values attached to a variety of math progressions.

Pi is far less important of a subject to advanced ancient cultures,

than the Earth measurements and the planetary astronomies.

First and foremost ancient man was an astronomer.

He watched the planetary movements and accounted for them.

In that accounting he discovered the harmonic cycles of planetary timelines.

From there the ancient cultural math became the spiritual harmonic codes.

Pi was a math tool, certainly recognized as important indeed,

but Pi wasn't the reason why they built the Khufu pyramid with that geometry.

The simplest quality form of Pi is the ancient pi value {355 / 113}.

Standard ancient basic model of the GP is a square base,

440 cubits base length, 280 cubit height.

That can only produce one slope tangent, and it's not {4 / pi}.

From there, it was a free for all in pyramid design,

with 4 uneven bases and 4 - 8 slopes.

I displayed in the last post with NASA data planetary timeline calendar convergence,

to indicate the accuracy of data I derived from a variety of ancient pyramid angle tangents.

No doubt,

astronomical data is just but one important facet of what is fully encoded in the Giza Pyramids.

Basic or standard models ...

Khafre --- 3 - 4 -5 triangle {side face}

Menkaure -- the Lehner style rectangular base is the basic model here.

That produces two side face slopes.

I use the Masonic Code tangent {21 / 17} for the 51 degree angle,

with the alternate slope as the Khufu pyramid.

Any rectangular base pyramid represents two side face slope angles,

thus represents two distinct square base pyramids,

in a hybrid pyramid.

Interesting that Lehner got the Khafre pyramid height almost spot on at 470.8 feet.

I set the primary slope, with base length 706.2 feet and that height, for slope tangent {4 / 3}.

From there I create {optimise} multiple uneven base lengths for 3 and 4 side face slope pyramids.

His Khufu pyramid slope is almost spot on ... arctangent sqrt 1.62

blah blah blah

My favorite image of the last couple of years was the study on the Lunar South Massif.

I noticed that the central latitude of the South Massif was spot on:

the Kabbalah 137 angle 19.98310652 degrees with tangent {36 / 99}.

That specific latitude centrally crosses the Massif and Bear mountain.

In working that angle with other important angle tangents,

I found a unique situation,

with the standard model of the Khafre pyramid.

So regardless of the implications of the South Massif,

the relationship of the two featured angles,

{one angle being subtracted from the other}

produces a resultant tangent --

that fractionally defines all the possible Khufu pyramid cuibts with possible pyramid heights.

The all important aspect of the Khafre pyramid of course ... is the corner angle

Note the equation with that Corner Angle

and tetrahedral 19.47122063

...