Thanos5150 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are you guys using 26.5 for the angle of the DP?
> You quoted Lehner from the previous thread:
>

Quote

"It is reached by the Descending Passage,
> which slopes at an angle of 26d 34' 23" for 28.8m
> (92ft 6in) through the pyramid masonry, and then
> 30.3m (99ft 5in) through the natural rock without
> deviating more than a centimetre in angle or
> orientation."

>
> If you use the 26.34.23 angle does this make a difference?

No.

26.34.23 is the coordinate equivalent using degrees.minutes.seconds. 30 minutes = 0.5 degrees, therefore, 26.34.23 is approximately 26.5 degrees. It's actually closer to 26.57 degrees, thereby adding a total of another 0.07 degrees, or 0.035 degrees to the upper and lower range of the DP FOV. This increases the upper FOV to 26.87 degrees (vs. my rough estimate of 26.835 degrees) which is still significantly lower than Thuban's minimum which would still be greater than 28 degrees. As I said, it was a rough estimate, but even when reconciling the small estimation error in precision, the calculation still arrives at the same result: Thuban would not be visible from the bottom of the DP in 2550BC. Considering that 28-26.87 = 1.13 degrees, G1 construction would need to have been about 300 years earlier, and that's just for Thuban to barely be seen at the upper edge of DP. For it to be in the middle of the DP, add another 160 years for a total of 460 years earlier than 2550BC.

Meanwhile, Petrie reports an average angle of the entire DP to be at 26.31.23 (D.M.S) which is more like 26.52 degrees which is why I used the rough estimate of 26.5 and which is about 0.05 degrees tighter than Lehner's data, making it that much harder to align with Thuban.

Of course, this assumes everything was kumbaya with planet Earth, including its precessional and celestial tilt angles, which, depending on how long ago Giza was developed, is anyone's guess regarding what terrestrial or extraterrestrial event(s) might have altered the Earth's rotation significantly enough to allow a Thuban alignment. I'll leave it to the claimant to provide the relevant historic evidence and calculations.




Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 23-Feb-17 04:09 by Origyptian.