...

Khafre Pyramid Base measures -- Petrie

When you look at the ancient Phi progressions - fibonacci in essence,

you see

Step Two:

the step which produces the ancient cultural math science Pi value -- 22 / 7 = aPi.

The fibonacci selection of fractions, -- and corresponding decimals

in that step,

are the fractions that associate 3 planetary timelines to be represented in the progression Step,

13 / 21 -- occupies the -- inverse phi position. -- in that step.

34 / 21 -- occupies the --- phi position.

55 / 21 -- occupies the -- phi squared position.

Each of those fractions will produce a fraction:

for the planetary Calendar Counts:

Saturn synod -- 378 days

Jupiter synod -- 399 days

Venus sidereal -- 224.7 days

So when you take -- the Phi squared position -- fraction,

and align it to the Venus sidereal -- 224.7 days <---

that fraction is now:

588.5 / 224.7

to attain the ---> associated ancient Pi value ---> you simply multiply by 12 = 10Pi ... or by 1.2 = Pi value.

{588.5 / 224.7} --- x --- 1.2 = 706.2 / 224.7 = aPi = 22 / 7 <----

and right there is the premier Khafre Pyramid base length---> 706.2 feet <--- = aPi x 224.7 Venus.

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

What is in question,

is the correct height to attribute to the Khafre Pyramid.

Petrie was consistent with his base measures,

but his heights,

are all over the map with huge spreads of plus or minus inches,

in both the Khufu and Khafre pyramids.

Petrie allows a ---> 26 inch spread <--- for the height of the Khafre pyramid.

His average heights are all in excess of the true heights in the pyrammids,

but encompass such a wide spread of possibility -- such that he covers all the potential possible heights,

indicating that Petrie,

did have problems with height calculations.

Lehner on the other hand,

was very close to Petrie in base measure on the Khufu pyramid,

but was completely off the base measures to Petrie,

on the Menkaure and Khafre pyramids.

His measures on the Menkaure Pyramid are highly suspect to be errant,

and on the Khafre pyramid,

he simply gave up due to sand inundation,

and offered a silly estimate of exactly --- 215 meters.

There is no such thing as an EXACT -- 215 meter base, ... anybody knows that.

Lehner's heights however,

were not calculated using base length criteria,

and as such he did offer better heights than Petrie.

Lehner's height of the Khafre Pyramid is spot on the money <---

143.5 meters

is:

470.8 005257 feet

employ the Side Face angle tangent {4 / 3}

and

your base length is EXACTLY ---> 706.2 feet <---> for 215.25 meters.

The only other real competition for a Khafre Pyramid height,

would be the 411 cubits base,

and,

274 cubits height,

of 20.625 inches,

for

5651.25 inches = 470.9375 feet -- height.

I do not believe that the Royal Cubit is 20.618 18 18~ --- for the Khafre Pyramid.

I believe that the Royal Cubit in the Khafre Pyramid is 20.625 inches,

and this is born out,

in the math displayed by the Corner Angle tangent,

that associates itself into tetrahedral geometry,

as shown in all my geometry diagrams.

So as distatsteful as it is,

I use Lehner's height ---- 470.8 feet -- and that height ---

I came up with completely independently <---> of Lehner's calculated height and data.

I was quite surprised with near disbelief,

that the height that I chose --- from my own calculations and extensive research,

was absolutely spot on,

to Lehner's height for the Khafre Pyramid,

when I finally saw Lehner's data years ago.

What it is .. is what it is,

the 470.8 foot height is the best choice of all possible heights --- importantly associated to:

the 3-4-5 triangle geometry and angle tangent of the Side Faces:

tangent = {4 / 3} -- Side Faces.

Petrie data and writings:

Petrie:

the 4 / 3 --- Side Face angle tangent produces a --- 53 degree and 8 minute slope, {rounded}

and that sits well within the Petrie slope definition.

So now the best choice selection process of base lengths to use can be assembled.

Numero Uno -- 706.2 feet = 706 feet and 2.4 inches -- piece of cake.

Next:

the south side:

S. side 8476.9 ---------------> cubit 20.625 x 3 x 137 Kabbalah = 8476.875 inches <---

411 cubits x 20.625 inches <----

Now note base lengths :

8475.2

8475.5

and

average

base length

8474.875

inches.

The common value seen there is simply ---> 8475 inches <---

The beauty of the 8475 inch base length is this:

8475 = 75 x 113 <----> 113 being the all important ancient Egyptian Pi fraction denominator.

Ancient Egyptain Pi value ---> 355 / 113 <--- equals 3.14159292

Is the simplest -- most convergent -- Pi fraction -- used in human history <---

to elaborate on the 8475 inch base lenght,

NOTE:

Noting the multiple --- 410.88

Now,

look at the 8475 inch --- proposed base length <----

410.88 x Pi cubit 20.62648062 = 8475.00 8357 inches !!!

So it is safe to choose these three base lengths as valid choices of predominance

8474.4 inches -- 706.2 feet -- 215.25 meters

8475 inches -- 706.25 feet -- 215.265 meters

8476.875 inches -- 706.4025 feet -- no valid meter count that simplifies as the above.

The oddball length is the last selection, in that above set of choices,

and could be errant,

though it is spot on the South Side -- Petrie measure.

Now look at my choice -- 706.2 feet -- 8474.4 inches.

compare to:

411 x Khufu Pyramid base cubit 20.618 18 18~ = 8474.0 72 72 72~ inches

We have a 0.4 inch differential.

Either choice is valid and the final measurement scheme may incorporate BOTH lengths,

especially if the FULL length is subdivided into TWO half lenghts,

which promotes the:

multi slope,

or 3 to 4 slope pyramid -- resultant from UNEVEN base lengths <---

That is enough for now to ponder

and then soon to offer other criteria for base lengths.

These two are a lock and key

as far as I am concerned:

8474.4 inches

and

8475 inches

...

Khafre Pyramid Base measures -- Petrie

When you look at the ancient Phi progressions - fibonacci in essence,

you see

Step Two:

the step which produces the ancient cultural math science Pi value -- 22 / 7 = aPi.

The fibonacci selection of fractions, -- and corresponding decimals

in that step,

are the fractions that associate 3 planetary timelines to be represented in the progression Step,

13 / 21 -- occupies the -- inverse phi position. -- in that step.

34 / 21 -- occupies the --- phi position.

55 / 21 -- occupies the -- phi squared position.

Each of those fractions will produce a fraction:

for the planetary Calendar Counts:

Saturn synod -- 378 days

Jupiter synod -- 399 days

Venus sidereal -- 224.7 days

So when you take -- the Phi squared position -- fraction,

and align it to the Venus sidereal -- 224.7 days <---

that fraction is now:

588.5 / 224.7

to attain the ---> associated ancient Pi value ---> you simply multiply by 12 = 10Pi ... or by 1.2 = Pi value.

{588.5 / 224.7} --- x --- 1.2 = 706.2 / 224.7 = aPi = 22 / 7 <----

and right there is the premier Khafre Pyramid base length---> 706.2 feet <--- = aPi x 224.7 Venus.

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

What is in question,

is the correct height to attribute to the Khafre Pyramid.

Petrie was consistent with his base measures,

but his heights,

are all over the map with huge spreads of plus or minus inches,

in both the Khufu and Khafre pyramids.

Petrie allows a ---> 26 inch spread <--- for the height of the Khafre pyramid.

His average heights are all in excess of the true heights in the pyrammids,

but encompass such a wide spread of possibility -- such that he covers all the potential possible heights,

indicating that Petrie,

did have problems with height calculations.

Lehner on the other hand,

was very close to Petrie in base measure on the Khufu pyramid,

but was completely off the base measures to Petrie,

on the Menkaure and Khafre pyramids.

His measures on the Menkaure Pyramid are highly suspect to be errant,

and on the Khafre pyramid,

he simply gave up due to sand inundation,

and offered a silly estimate of exactly --- 215 meters.

There is no such thing as an EXACT -- 215 meter base, ... anybody knows that.

Lehner's heights however,

were not calculated using base length criteria,

and as such he did offer better heights than Petrie.

Lehner's height of the Khafre Pyramid is spot on the money <---

143.5 meters

is:

470.8 005257 feet

employ the Side Face angle tangent {4 / 3}

and

your base length is EXACTLY ---> 706.2 feet <---> for 215.25 meters.

The only other real competition for a Khafre Pyramid height,

would be the 411 cubits base,

and,

274 cubits height,

of 20.625 inches,

for

5651.25 inches = 470.9375 feet -- height.

I do not believe that the Royal Cubit is 20.618 18 18~ --- for the Khafre Pyramid.

I believe that the Royal Cubit in the Khafre Pyramid is 20.625 inches,

and this is born out,

in the math displayed by the Corner Angle tangent,

that associates itself into tetrahedral geometry,

as shown in all my geometry diagrams.

So as distatsteful as it is,

I use Lehner's height ---- 470.8 feet -- and that height ---

I came up with completely independently <---> of Lehner's calculated height and data.

I was quite surprised with near disbelief,

that the height that I chose --- from my own calculations and extensive research,

was absolutely spot on,

to Lehner's height for the Khafre Pyramid,

when I finally saw Lehner's data years ago.

What it is .. is what it is,

the 470.8 foot height is the best choice of all possible heights --- importantly associated to:

the 3-4-5 triangle geometry and angle tangent of the Side Faces:

tangent = {4 / 3} -- Side Faces.

Petrie data and writings:

Petrie:

Quote:67. For the angle of slope of the faces, the direct measures by goniometer

and level on the granite in situ gave 53º 12' ± 2',

but by measurement from plumb line 53º 2';

the block has been slightly shifted,

but the top surface only varies 1' from level, being high on the outer edge.

By goniometer measures of p 98 24 blocks, both of granite and limestone, lying around the Pyramid,

the mean is 53º 14' ± 5'; and though this involves the assumption of horizontal courses,

if this be taken as the angle of slope,

yet it agrees so closely with the casing

in that probably 53º 10' ± 4' will be the best statement. <--------------------- Petrie

the 4 / 3 --- Side Face angle tangent produces a --- 53 degree and 8 minute slope, {rounded}

and that sits well within the Petrie slope definition.

Quote:66. Having, then, found and fixed twelve points of the sides,

the actual corners of the square were adopted as being probably the most accurately executed points,

to define the intended size;

and they (with the points near the N.W. corner) yield a square of the following size:—

INCHES

N. side 8471.9

E. side 8475.2

S. side 8476.9 ---------------> cubit 20.625 x 3 x 137 = 8476.875 <---

W. side 8475.5

my notes:

average ---> 8474.875 inches <---

average cubit 20.62013382 using the 411 cubit factor.

So now the best choice selection process of base lengths to use can be assembled.

Numero Uno -- 706.2 feet = 706 feet and 2.4 inches -- piece of cake.

Next:

the south side:

S. side 8476.9 ---------------> cubit 20.625 x 3 x 137 Kabbalah = 8476.875 inches <---

411 cubits x 20.625 inches <----

Now note base lengths :

8475.2

8475.5

and

average

base length

8474.875

inches.

The common value seen there is simply ---> 8475 inches <---

The beauty of the 8475 inch base length is this:

8475 = 75 x 113 <----> 113 being the all important ancient Egyptian Pi fraction denominator.

Ancient Egyptain Pi value ---> 355 / 113 <--- equals 3.14159292

Is the simplest -- most convergent -- Pi fraction -- used in human history <---

to elaborate on the 8475 inch base lenght,

NOTE:

Quote:In the 706.2 foot base, -- 8474.4 inches,

TWO

cubit multiples are seen ---> 411 and 410.88 cubits.

411 x Royal Venus Kabbalah cubit 20.6189781 inches = 8474.4 inches

AND

410.88 x 20.625 inches = 8474.4 inches.

Noting the multiple --- 410.88

Now,

look at the 8475 inch --- proposed base length <----

410.88 x Pi cubit 20.62648062 = 8475.00 8357 inches !!!

So it is safe to choose these three base lengths as valid choices of predominance

8474.4 inches -- 706.2 feet -- 215.25 meters

8475 inches -- 706.25 feet -- 215.265 meters

8476.875 inches -- 706.4025 feet -- no valid meter count that simplifies as the above.

The oddball length is the last selection, in that above set of choices,

and could be errant,

though it is spot on the South Side -- Petrie measure.

Now look at my choice -- 706.2 feet -- 8474.4 inches.

compare to:

411 x Khufu Pyramid base cubit 20.618 18 18~ = 8474.0 72 72 72~ inches

We have a 0.4 inch differential.

Either choice is valid and the final measurement scheme may incorporate BOTH lengths,

especially if the FULL length is subdivided into TWO half lenghts,

which promotes the:

multi slope,

or 3 to 4 slope pyramid -- resultant from UNEVEN base lengths <---

That is enough for now to ponder

and then soon to offer other criteria for base lengths.

These two are a lock and key

as far as I am concerned:

8474.4 inches

and

8475 inches

...