> Steve Clayton wrote:
> > Reaching the top work surface of the Pyramid, is no different
> > than reaching the base, where the mortuary temple is. They
> > require enough power to pull weight along an incline
> > The Causeway incline is approx. 4.6 degrees, and the Pyramids
> > incline surface is approx. 62 degrees. It makes no difference
> > to the system, as long as, it has sufficient (water weight)
> > power to overcome both inclines and the (stones) weights
> > involved. For me this concept is easy. Maybe for others it is
> > not. The Funicular system will overcome a 90 degree angle,
> > straight up into the air. As long as the Counterbalance
> > Funicular System has sufficient water weight, it doesn't care
> > if there is 4.6, 58, 62, or 90 degree angle. It will overcome
> > them all. It is only limited by the size of the vessel
> > the water, the causeway strength to endure the weight, and
> > strength of the ropes. Gravity does the rest.
> I've long tried to come up with a means to use mechanical
> advantage to lift stones to greater height. ie- use ten tons
> of water to lift a five ton stone twice as high. There doesn't
> seem to be a means within their capabilities to do this on the
> pyramid. There are ways to do it through "intermediaries" but
> these all result in significant efficiency loss. Chris Jordan
> used to have some good ideas along these lines but none seemed
> wholly plausible for their technology. Of course Kunkel had
> great ideas but there is the problem with evidence in this
> I believe this is important if they had a limited amount of
> water at 81' 3". Perhaps Steven Myers is right that they had
> ample water and then it wouldn't matter.
> I believe identifying the water source is absolutely criticalk
> to getting a fast solution to how they built and where exactly
> funiculars operated. I would start at the most obvious place
> where water is strill percolating up today and has created a
> ben ben sitting on a tiny primeval mound in the walls of the
> Sphinx Temple. I hope they just don't destroy it.
The Funicular system only requires water at the base of the Pyramid, and not any higher...
No need for water locks, and bucket brigades. No need for pumps.
KISS "Keep it Simple Stupid" is my motto. I enjoy Steve Myers books and artwork, though we only have water in common. He is floating stones, and I am not doing that, unless it is on the Nile.
I must have not done a very good job demonstrating how you can achieve lifting stones up the Pyramid face, and onto the top, using only water on the Giza Plateau. I will readdress this issue. You also don't need artisan wells or geysers, though I would welcome that. Using Google Earth, measure the area behind the Pyramids, that could have supplied runoff in the form of rain. Give me the square footage, and I will show you how much stone could be lifted from the Harbor to the top of the Pyramid. Simple Enough?
Do I believe their could have been Geysers? Yes, I do. Having a reservoir of water on top of the Giza Plataea, water would seep through the bedrock, collecting salt and other minerals. It likely came out in unpredictable locations, like at the base of the Sphinx. I also believe the raise and fall of the Nile hydraulically changed pressures in the water fissures, which exist under the Pyramids.
Occam's Razor: The principle states that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed.