3. Comparison between the Dimensions of the Giza Pyramids and the Magnitudes of the Stars of the Orion Belt
The situation considerably changed when we considered, instead of the intrinsic height of each pyramid, the one that can be called “observed” height, h’; the latter is the height of the pyramid vertex evaluated with respect to a common reference level, the same for the three pyramids, such as the lowest among the base levels of the three pyramids (see Table 1). This quantity (which, unlike the volume, is directly evaluable by only one measurement, also simply by eye) is exactly the one we take into consideration, for example, when we compare the heights of the mountains.
The question that thus arises is:
"What if the Giza pyramids do not represent stars. What if they represent mountains that represent stars."
I have shown that the horizontal placement of the Giza pyramid better agrees with mountains in Greece than it does with the observed distances and angles of the Orion Belt stars.
So what about star magnitude. It turns out these mountains have the exact required altitude so as to accurately represent the the Belt stars of Orion, Alnitak, Alnilam, and Mintaka.
Proof of this is easy:
(mount Parnassus altitude)/(mount Giona altitude) = (2,457 m) / (2,510 m) = 0.979
(Alnilam minimum apparent magnitude)/(Alnitak minimum apparent magnitude) = (1.74) / (1.77) = 0.983
(mount Kokkinia altitude)/(mount Giona altitude) = (1,831 m) / (2,510 m) = 0.729
(Alnilam maximum apparent magnitude)/(Mintaka maximum apparent magnitude) = (1.64) / (2.25) = 0.729
When looking at the pyramids we notice that anyway you slice it(height, apex altitude above sea level, apex altitude above lowest common pyramid base), the Menkaure pyramid is too short to accurately depict the brightness of Mintaka.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 16-Feb-19 16:32 by Spiros.
|Orion Belt star magnitude||470||Spiros||16-Feb-19 15:49|
|Re: Orion Belt star magnitude||104||graceingram||06-Mar-19 20:47|