> First of all, although you are happy to quote Petrie's maximum
> and minimum length of those walls you fail to take his
> suggestion that after correcting for the open joints the mean
> measurement , comes to 412.4" , and i would imagine most would
> run with that advice on the basis of being of sound logic, and
> therefor closer to the intended length.
1) I wrote, ‘Min. length 412.53” x 3.143 = 1296.52”’ and ‘Max. length 412.78” x 3.143 = 1297.37”’
This should, of course, have read: ‘south wall length 412.53” x 3.143 = 1296.52”’ and ‘north wall length 412.78” x 3.143 = 1297.37”’
2) Perhaps I should have mentioned that these two measurements were taken near the floor of the Chamber as being closest to the intended measurements.
3) The readings in the chart (that I used) are the corrected results of Petrie’s measurements.
Immediately above the chart, Petrie wrote: ‘Applying, then, these corrections of the opened joints to the lengths of the lower course . . .’
4) Thus the mean length of the Chamber near its floor is 412.655” +/0.125”.
> Then you infer that I and Ori are making a mistake in using the
> present floor level as the base to measure the height of the
> chamber from.
No, Dune, I am not inferring that you and Origyptian ‘are making a mistake in using the present floor level as the base to measure the height of the chamber from’; I am stating it as a fact.
The point is that the pi ratio involves the height of the Chamber’s walls not, repeat not the height of the Chamber from the surface of its floor.
Jon asked you how many times you had found pi in the GP, and you replied ‘1’.
I pointed out to you that the pi ratio appears also in the north and south walls of the King’s Chamber.
> Your use of the phrase "raised floor" is wrong, i have never
> read any other works on the Great pyramid using that phrase for
> the Kings chamber, please direct me to any professional
> published papers or books that use it in describing the kings
> chamber floor.
Petrie: ‘Raised floor. Kings Cha.’
See ‘The Pyramids and Temples of Giza’ 1883. Section 47.
> In fact you can clearly see by this borrowed pic that loveritas
> posted yesterday that the floor level is continuous from the
> previous passage.
In fact the flooring extends from inside the KC right through to the Great Step; and there is a gap 3.3” to 5.2” deep between the sides of the floor blocks and the walls of the passages and the Antechamber.
At the doorway, the KC floor is 3.5” above the base of the KC walls, and the end of the passage floor slab (which protrudes slightly into the KC) is 4.3” above the base of the same walls – a difference in levels of 0.8”
At the Great Step its surface (on east side) is 5.2” above the base of the KC walls.
> So no, there is no raised floor, and 1 would suggest , "with
> respect", it is you that is in error to claim otherwise .
I do not believe this, Dune, I really do not believe this!
The raised floors in the KC and the passages and the Antechamber are real!
Inside the KC the floor is tilted, varying in height/rise by around 2”.
It is utterly preposterous for you to assert ‘there is no raised floor’.
> Yes the walls continue on past the floor level,
You say ‘there is no raised floor’, and then in total contradiction say ‘the walls continue on past the floor level’.
For goodness sake, man, make up your mind which it is!
> but why bother
> to ascertain that value ?
I am bothering, Dune, because you were asked by Jon how many times pi appeared in the Pyramid, and you said ‘1’.
I merely point out to you that there are 2 (well known).
I'm now beginning to regret it.
> , so for now i will stick with 230.4"
> or 19.2 ft for the chambers mean height.
Even though it is clearly wrong to do so?
So few answers - and not one of them mine.