M. J. Thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I (Robin/MJT) wrote, ‘If, like me, you believe
> the Great Pyramid is an AE tomb, then it's worth
> noting that the entrance to the King's Chamber is
> at the east end of the Chamber and its sarcophagus
> is at the western end.
>
> Origyptian wrote, ‘While the granite box was
> found toward the west end of the KC by early
> explorers, it likely was not found in its original
> position. It was crooked on the floor by about 3"
> with respect to the west wall, and Petrie observed
> that the south end of the box was propped up with
> a flint stone. Petrie made a point of questioning
> why a flint stone was inside G1 at all since many
> other stones of rubble found all around the
> passages and chambers could have been used to prop
> up that box and that the nearest known source of
> flint was outside the GP. Petrie reported that
> there was no marks on the floor that indicated its
> original position.’
>
> I have discovered that the sarcophagus is very
> close to where the architect intended it to be.
>
> Its south-west corner was intended to be
> 2.761rc/56.97” from the Chamber’s west wall
> (actual 56.54” – differ 0.43”). The
> north-west corner was intended to be
> 2.589rc/53.42” from the west wall (actual
> 53.32” – differ 0.1”).
>
> This means that:
> a) the skew in the sarcophagus’ position was
> intended to be 0.172rc/3.55” (actual 3.22” –
> differ 0.33”).
> b) the intended mean distance between the west
> wall of the King’s Chamber and the west side of
> the sarcophagus was 2.675rc/55.19” (actual
> 54.98” – differ 0.21”).
>
> The sarcophagus was intended to be
> 1.875rc/38.69” wide (actual mean 38.5” –
> differ 0.19”).
> This means that the east side of the sarcophagus
> was intended to be a mean 4.55rc/93.88” from the
> Chamber’s west wall (actual 93.48” – differ
> 0.4”).
> The length of the King’s Chamber was intended to
> be 20rc/412.64” (actual mean floor 412.66” –
> differ .02”).
> This means that the intended mean distance between
> the east wall of the Chamber and the east side of
> the sarcophagus was 15.45rc/318.76” (actual
> 319.18” – differ 0.42”)
>
> All this places the sarcophagus intentionally and
> pointedly at the western end of the King’s
> Chamber.
> I should mention that the design and dimensions of
> the sarcophagus are all derived from the design
> and dimensions of the chamber in which it stands
> (note only using simple arithmetic and basic
> rectilinear geometry).
>
> Incidentally but perhaps still
> interestingly/intriguingly, the pebble under the
> south-west corner of the sarcophagus is, according
> to Piazzi Smyth, about 1.5” high.
> The skew in the sarcophagus’ position is 3.22”
> – half of which is 1.61”.
> The ledge running around the top of the
> sarcophagus is about 1.7” wide and the same deep
> (after Piazzi Smyth).
> The intended ledge width and depth was
> 0.086rc/1.77”.
>
> Robin (MJT)

So are you saying the tilt caused by a mere flint pebble under one corner was also part of the builder's design? Why flint? What's the point of the tilt and skew?

I realize this is coming from your own model which you have not published, so please understand that it can only be taken as your opinion and not an establishment of anything that can be construed as factual.