> Well they are a fair bit away from Petries
> determination of the Giza site 52" , 19" & 19" ,
> again im kinda tied into Petries findings so for
> your figures to work as intended then you would
> have to give a good reason for why Petrie was so
> far out from your suggestion.
I think you're really missing the point! What's so wrong with suggesting that the AEs made mistakes in their measurements, not Petrie? Petrie got it right, the Egyptians got it wrong. You've already agreed they could make mistakes, but now you're saying they couldn't have done so here! This is the argument of precision versus accuracy, and the recognition of potential error. Aren't we talking here about an error of 19 inches in almost three quarters of a mile?!! And you're not prepared to accept that this could happen? You're claiming to know that they could get measurements of this magnitude right to a fraction of an inch! How can you possibly know this? People are fallible. We all make mistakes at some time, but you're declaring that the AEs couldn't have. This all seems to me a very shaky foundation for an argument.
> It really does get complex, and i feel others who
> see worth in my findings would be better equipt to
> take it further as i feel ive reached my limit in
> this venture.
So, some thoughts for those future investigators.
What’s nagging at me is that it’s probably acceptable to suggest that the AEs were aware of the square root of three, but how would they have measured out a line 1732.1 cubits long? It’s the 0.1 cubits that’s the first problem, either in inches of in digits (fingers). Decimal fractions of cubits would have to have been rounded to the nearest inch, or digit. Second, we’re not aware that they were using a decimal system, so why might they have multiplied sqrt3 by 1000?
Also, wouldn’t we expect a relationship between the digit, palm, or remen, and the inch? At what point do the two systems coincide, particularly to people accustomed to counting in 28s or 64s?
It’s just my view, but if sqrt3 is present in AE ritual and landscape architecture then wouldn’t it be sensible to look for ratio and proportion (integer lengths of known units) to represent the value rather than decimal notation?