> The northern most block is convex curved if the
> drawing is accurate. There's a short block at the
> southern end.
> Eight corbel flats at the southern end and seven
> at the northern end. I'm taking it as eight at the
> northern also, projected from the north end. The
> lower effective corbel flat being incorporated
> seamlessly into the sidewall.
> By the way all this stuff about them being angled
> to prevent "slippage" is nonsense.
> If that were the case they'd be anchored into the
> top side course which itself has zero "slippage
> prevention" measures.
> Totally pointless.
> Like attaching your safety harness to the tool bag
> you're carrying. LOL :)
Totally agree. Frankly, I'm surprised that was ever suggested by any prior investigator. There is no reason at all that those blocks couldn't interlock with the other blocks above and next to them, just like the ramped floors and wall blocks do, like the upper wall blocks that incorporate the serrations in which those ceiling blocks rest! Why would the designers need to use such a "ratcheting" to prevent an avalanche of the roof blocks but not employ that same method to the wall and floor blocks? And yet, that age-old and clearly wrong "prevent an avalanche" presumption has precluded any consideration of what the true nature of that ceiling might actually be.
I never understood why there was such a consensus behind that "avalanche" hypothesis, but then the logic behind the notion that the RCs relieved pressure from above never made any sense to me either. For that matter, neither did the security hypothesis about the Granite Plugs and Antechamber portcullis blocks, or the tomb hypothesis, or construction ramp hypothesis, or the "al Mamoun excavated into G1" hypothesis, or...
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?