I have the exact same problem you do; I can't address all the questions. The most obvious one I can't address is why they built the pyramid. I have determined that it is highly improbable that it was a tomb. The builders left very little writing but that writing is adamant that the pyramids were not tombs. The "machine" ideas are all very attractive to me but there seems little evidence that they could master complex machines. Simple machines, yes, and they had far better command of machines with one moving part than we do. We always complicate things a lot. This hardly means it couldn't be a pump or nuclear reactor or anything else but it seems less likely.

Open mind Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> While religiously driven cultures have shown to do
> extraordinary things to celebrate and honour Gods,
> if you apply that to the great pyramid, it falls
> apart I think. Its just too advanced to be for
> ceremony.

It requires science and knowledge to build. Religion as we know it doesn't provide any such knowledge.

> If your wondering if I'm buying the concept of
> the plutonium production for their alien overlords
> space ships, I'm not a fan, but its beside the
> point. If I'm going to set the "WHY" part aside
> as something as yet undetermined, I accept the
> 'asterix' of that theory simply as a post it note
> entitled "Temporary idea for the underlying
> question". But really, it doesn't matter at this
> point, while we're trying to figure out what it
> is.

We're all doing the same thing except Egypotology that just jumped to the conclusion that the great pyramids are tombs dragged up ramps by changeless and superstitious bumpkins. I don't know why it was built so my theory is still an asterick as well.

> I'm comfortable putting that question aside
> as a 'distraction' from the focus which is the
> reverse engineering exercise.

The only way to understand this will be reverse engineering it. The supreme iorony is that it appears their language had to be reverse engineered as well but Egyptolpogists deconstructed it instead. It comes out a a kaleidoscopic view of ancient thinking because they attacked it incorrectly.

> But having said
> that, I do believe like any massive undertaking,
> it had to have a productive, profit based reason
> for being created.

I agree except I wager we have vastly different estimation of how much work was required to build it. The builders said the gods did all the work and this is exactly true in a sense. The actual work of cutting, shaping, and lifting the stone was done by natural processes.

> I could ask you the same question. Do you
> have a theory?

It's a rather infamous theory at that. I believe the Pyramid Texts are literally true and that "osiris" was a cool effervescent column of water that provided the weight that fell from 81' 3" to lift the stones using counterweights.

> Or, like me, are you comfortable
> continuing the exploration of the Machine as a
> purely scientific exercise, without the need to
> understand the "WHY".

For now I'm just trying to get people interested enough in usingf science to understand these structures that we can learn the truth about them. Until the testing is done, data gathered, and "experiments" performed we just aren't going to know anything at all and there will be endless speculation.

You might want to check out the "pyramid scan" thread on the first page; in only a few weeks of usimng actual scientific techniques it appears they've discovered the most important of all possible data that will essentially answer every single question to the degree we are able to understand the question.

> To me, that ability is our
> advantage over the Eqyptologists. Any digression
> into the archaeological context is a distraction.

Anyone who has his mind made up is blind to the reality. Once you assume the conclusion you will see everything in terms of that conclusion. It happens to us all and Egyptologists are no exceptions. We should always try to see new information and new observation in terms of our assumptions and metaphysics. Failing this we will simply become our beliefs.