> Hi Corpuscles,
> Fabio had to take his mother to the hospital. He
> seems upset with me for telling him in his double
> incline that I asked him for Mass B (incline) to
> be pulled up by Mass A (Pyramid Face incline). I
> looked through the emails and couldn't find where
> I asked this. It doesn't even make any sense. Why
> would we want a stone traveling down the Pyramid,
> to pull up stone(s) on the Causeway. That would be
> dismantling the Pyramid.
It would be a great pity ,after all that has been exchanged in the recent month or so, let alone all your previous efforts, that you do not persist patiently with Fabio (being careful to be as clear and concise as possible, and not be arrogant or create distress) and achieve satisfactory understanding of the implications and pitfalls your hypothesis and get clear unbiased professional facts and detailed unbiased reputable criticism.
You do not and should not accept what I say on GHMB or anyone else. However this is meant as an attempt at honest constructive assistance in this quest.
It does not surprise me, AT ALL, that Fabio might have inferred, that the above scenario, is what you meant.
Particularly, if you forwarded some of those original calculator screenshots, that I challenged as being inappropriate, in the other thread.
Even the little you have provided from Fabio so far I feel like I can sense what Fabio is thinking, mainly because I have been through it myself, in contemplating your hypothesis. I mean beyond the basics.
See if this helps your understanding and perhaps might help you communicate with Fabio when his Mum
has hopefully recovered. Sorry if this is starting out too simplistic, but to be grounded / thorough back to the very basics.
The fundamental principle of counterweight or funiculars is the conversion of Potential Energy ( in case, potential ability to do work by a weight at height under the influence of gravity) TO Kinetic energy (moving mass, developing momentum and hauling force)
This is a strange way to express it, BUT if the Ancient Egyptians (or whoever you think built pyramids?) had mastered the art of funiculars, then the ideal design would be to create a somewhat parabolic curve or stepped degrading decline. Starting at a relatively steep slope (pull side) and tapering off to a shallower incline (load side).
They would not aim, or likely even tolerate a steady, even slight or shallow incline particularly for transport of very heavy loads. Certainly nothing like 4.6 degrees!
The reason for this was partially related to my comment picked up by, with (argued) Origyptian about the acceleration value. You want those rail cars eg at the top of some Swiss Alp to start rapidly accelerating to gain lots of kinetic energy to pull the roughly equivalent but lower weight bottom rail carriage slowly gently up a shallower (bottom) initial incline, thus experiencing less resistance. Then be able to control the velocity via progressive manipulation ,or design/construction, of the progressive relative two gradients.
The Origyptian 'hocus-pocus synchronicity' Bullsh!t about the CoF matching the 4.6 d slope is so inappropriate it is ridiculous advice or comment! Even without hauling anything it is the ingredients of disaster and extremely poor design. It starting as a very slow snail crawling painfully slow (or non moving !!! in your case with any significant relative to pull side load) gaining momentum to eventually becomes a (not so fast but uncontrollable ) run away train without brakes . All on "very special magic grease lubricant" which if that fails or if Cu on Cu touches (heat stress uneven rail wear etc etc) you have an almost certain planned multi-ton out of control train wreck.
If I was project manager of the imaginary "Khafre causeway funicular" tasked with the job of hauling stones up the causeway. I would use the slope of the partially complete pyramid too (JUST HAS Fabio seems to have incorrectly assumed ) or build a causeway (ramp) as described above.
I previously provided two relatively clear examples of questions (trying to approximate your language) for Fabio. If you release him from any obligation to be later named or quoted as authoritative (ie off the record and forget the complications and unreal nature of it) He will answer both in minutes!
However, he is seeing all the complications which are you yet nowhere near close to understanding ! You are basically only asking him to perform basic trigonometry vector math. (You could join a one of the many popular physics internet forums and get answers immediately as well)
But he is acting as a proper serious professional engineer would on a serious proposal! Stick with HIM.
> I have had my Mother in the Hospital, and it is a
> very stressful time. I hope she is alright. I will
> just wait for him to get back to me. We need to
> take another look at this situation, just to be
> sure. If it doesn't work out for me, I have plenty
> of other projects to keep me busy.
Again I admire your creativity and enthusiasm. Get to the bottom of all this and you will have learned a great deal and then move on to better things.
> Watch the new TV movie "Secrets of the Lost".
> Google it. Let me know if Mark Lehners effort to
> pull a skid, up a slight incline, works for you.
> Otherwise, you may want to consider another
> option. :)
I will try to look it up when time permits. But I am not really a fan of Mark Lehner (particularly in documentaries)
I am interested in any later advice you obtain. Best if you start a separate "Funicular update" thread?