...

Don't belabor these questions with a whole lotta Munck extrapolations.

I have simple questions.

you have Muncks height at 480.34 feet,

what

is his average base length,

and his royal cubit?

Once I know that, then I know his slope angle.

Then you can show me,

how the Egyptians used modern Pi. <----

Are you saying they simply stopped at 10 decimal placements,

and used that?

I am saying that the Egyptians tried to find Pi and the square roots,

and realized that they couldn't do it due to the infinite RANDOM decimals,

{any more than modern man could}

and as such they used convergence dynamics to create convergent fractions.

They certainly didn't have a symbol for Pi, that would calculate,

they needed a NUMBER.

By the ways, the three most important scientists that actually measured the GP,

Petrie, Cole, and Lehner all have heights far above that framework you posted by Munck.

Like I said,

when you bundle up---- e, and pi, and other constants,

you can find a multitude of pathways when your target is loose like Munck's.

{see extrapolation below}

These three "ancient P" values are all you need to work the ancient pi progressions.

22 / 7

355 / 113

377 / 120 ---- fibonacci based

The first two will create a progression that isolates pi value 104348 / 33215 = 3.141592654

Let's look at two ancient pi values,

that actually approach Pi.

-----------------------------------------

355 / 113 = 3.14159292

and

3927 / 1250 = 3.1416

-----------------------------------------

When using fractions your slope tangents will also be in fractions.

using the slope formula

{4 / pi} = 1.273239545 --- no fraction -- endless decimal

slope tangent

4 / by {355 / 113} = 1.273239437 = ---- 452 / 355 ---- aligns to cubit 20.61670354

cubit 20.61670354 --- {105 x 355} ---> / by {16 x 113}

----------------------------------------------------------------

4 / by {3927 / 1250} = 1.273236567 = --- 5000 / 3927 --- aligns to cubit 20.61675

cubit 20.61675 --- {21 x 3927} / by 4000

----------------------------------------------------------------

immediately we see functionally easy to apply fractions.

Let's look at pi value 3.1416 = 3927 / 1250

This pi value has excellent beauty because it incorporates the primes 7, 11, and 17,

31416 = {7 x 11 x 17} x ... 24 ---- = --- 7 x 24 x 187 <---

Highly competent and valid extrapolations offer this pi value with cubit 20.61675,

as the royal cubit. Not my choice, but highly valid.

this pi value 3.1416 produces progressional phi values:

0.618 ---- 1.618 ---- 2.618 --- x 1.2 = 3.1416

now look at the value 187 in the earlier equation 5 lines up.

{100 Pi x phi} divided by e = 187.0006134 e = 2.718281828, pi = pi, phi = phi

now backtrack that

7 x 24 x 187 = 31416

7 x 24 x 187.0006134 = 31416.10305 ---- has exactly 6 sigma accuracy to 31416

so using pure pi, phi and e,

a new but superfluous pi value is accomplished.

Cutting to the chase,

the new cubit for that pi value using true pi, phi and e, is:

20.61681753

using the standard 280 cubits for the height

that height would be:

5772.708935 inches = 481.059078 feet <----

point being,

that is how easy it is to throw constants together like pi, phi and e, etc etc

and arrive at a plethora of pyramid heights.

Like I said, the three predominant scientists that measured the GP,

all had heights that far exceed Munck's.

Lehner claimes to use satellite data to verify slope on the GP,

and his satellite slope angle data posted,

is almost spot on --- tangent ---- sqrt 1.62 <---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably best at this point to offer a MODEL that shows the FIRST STEP <---

in evolving a square base pyramid to a slightly rectangular base pyramid.

since

we have all uneven base lengths in historic measurements.

fixed heights

the first model uses the height 481.25 feet --- cubit 20.625 = 165 / 8

the second model uses height 5292 / 11 feet --- cubit 20.618 18 18 = 1134 / 55

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

{these two cubits emerge in steps 2 and 3 of the ancient phi progressions,

with the specific "ancient cultural cosmolgical pi values"

and these pi values will also emerge directly from the ancient pi progressions}

From the rectangular base with dual side face slopes,

one can construct pyramids with 3,4,6,

and possibly 8 slopes {if you use the indentations positions and offset pyramid peak}

PS

when you have 4 uneven base lengths --

you automatically have an offset pyramid peak <---

Note that in the second pyramid model -- base length 755.7500823

using cubits 20.625 and 20.6181818

is

9069.000988 inches

9068.8 ------------------Petrie average

9069.4 ------------------Cole average

These are SIDE FACE slopes, they do not include the corner angles slopes.

Don't belabor these questions with a whole lotta Munck extrapolations.

I have simple questions.

you have Muncks height at 480.34 feet,

what

is his average base length,

and his royal cubit?

Once I know that, then I know his slope angle.

Then you can show me,

how the Egyptians used modern Pi. <----

Are you saying they simply stopped at 10 decimal placements,

and used that?

I am saying that the Egyptians tried to find Pi and the square roots,

and realized that they couldn't do it due to the infinite RANDOM decimals,

{any more than modern man could}

and as such they used convergence dynamics to create convergent fractions.

They certainly didn't have a symbol for Pi, that would calculate,

they needed a NUMBER.

By the ways, the three most important scientists that actually measured the GP,

Petrie, Cole, and Lehner all have heights far above that framework you posted by Munck.

Like I said,

when you bundle up---- e, and pi, and other constants,

you can find a multitude of pathways when your target is loose like Munck's.

{see extrapolation below}

These three "ancient P" values are all you need to work the ancient pi progressions.

22 / 7

355 / 113

377 / 120 ---- fibonacci based

The first two will create a progression that isolates pi value 104348 / 33215 = 3.141592654

Let's look at two ancient pi values,

that actually approach Pi.

-----------------------------------------

355 / 113 = 3.14159292

and

3927 / 1250 = 3.1416

-----------------------------------------

When using fractions your slope tangents will also be in fractions.

using the slope formula

{4 / pi} = 1.273239545 --- no fraction -- endless decimal

slope tangent

4 / by {355 / 113} = 1.273239437 = ---- 452 / 355 ---- aligns to cubit 20.61670354

cubit 20.61670354 --- {105 x 355} ---> / by {16 x 113}

----------------------------------------------------------------

4 / by {3927 / 1250} = 1.273236567 = --- 5000 / 3927 --- aligns to cubit 20.61675

cubit 20.61675 --- {21 x 3927} / by 4000

----------------------------------------------------------------

immediately we see functionally easy to apply fractions.

Let's look at pi value 3.1416 = 3927 / 1250

This pi value has excellent beauty because it incorporates the primes 7, 11, and 17,

31416 = {7 x 11 x 17} x ... 24 ---- = --- 7 x 24 x 187 <---

Highly competent and valid extrapolations offer this pi value with cubit 20.61675,

as the royal cubit. Not my choice, but highly valid.

this pi value 3.1416 produces progressional phi values:

0.618 ---- 1.618 ---- 2.618 --- x 1.2 = 3.1416

now look at the value 187 in the earlier equation 5 lines up.

{100 Pi x phi} divided by e = 187.0006134 e = 2.718281828, pi = pi, phi = phi

now backtrack that

7 x 24 x 187 = 31416

7 x 24 x 187.0006134 = 31416.10305 ---- has exactly 6 sigma accuracy to 31416

so using pure pi, phi and e,

a new but superfluous pi value is accomplished.

Cutting to the chase,

the new cubit for that pi value using true pi, phi and e, is:

20.61681753

using the standard 280 cubits for the height

that height would be:

5772.708935 inches = 481.059078 feet <----

point being,

that is how easy it is to throw constants together like pi, phi and e, etc etc

and arrive at a plethora of pyramid heights.

Like I said, the three predominant scientists that measured the GP,

all had heights that far exceed Munck's.

Lehner claimes to use satellite data to verify slope on the GP,

and his satellite slope angle data posted,

is almost spot on --- tangent ---- sqrt 1.62 <---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably best at this point to offer a MODEL that shows the FIRST STEP <---

in evolving a square base pyramid to a slightly rectangular base pyramid.

since

we have all uneven base lengths in historic measurements.

fixed heights

the first model uses the height 481.25 feet --- cubit 20.625 = 165 / 8

the second model uses height 5292 / 11 feet --- cubit 20.618 18 18 = 1134 / 55

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

{these two cubits emerge in steps 2 and 3 of the ancient phi progressions,

with the specific "ancient cultural cosmolgical pi values"

and these pi values will also emerge directly from the ancient pi progressions}

From the rectangular base with dual side face slopes,

one can construct pyramids with 3,4,6,

and possibly 8 slopes {if you use the indentations positions and offset pyramid peak}

PS

when you have 4 uneven base lengths --

you automatically have an offset pyramid peak <---

Note that in the second pyramid model -- base length 755.7500823

using cubits 20.625 and 20.6181818

is

9069.000988 inches

9068.8 ------------------Petrie average

9069.4 ------------------Cole average

These are SIDE FACE slopes, they do not include the corner angles slopes.