cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jon Ellison Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Blueprints that by necessity would have to be
> > something like this. Minimum.
> >
> >
>
> Funny that I spend lot of time trying to deduce
> their "blueprints". I suspect most were far
> simpler than we imagine and were contained more
> within language than drawing. Many complex things
> can result from a few simple rules that govern
> their construction. Even the pyramid itself is
> simply a four sided structure that comes to a
> point.

These aren't simple shapes and every shape has to be pre designed in order to fit with it's neighbour. Not possible by trial and error.

>
> Ancient people didn't think or communicate like we
> do so this completely changes how each individual
> on the pyramid operated. If you simply assume the
> architect didn't care how these stones were
> emplaced but merely cared that the resultant had
> some specific property then drawing this all out
> in advance simply wasn't necessary.

Someone thought it necessary, even if it were the mason on the job, he would have had to accurately design each individual block. I don't know of any other means than drawing as a planning and communication tool. Even a model has to be pre drawn.
I doubt it were designed by the work crew they would have taken the path of least resistance and least work for themselves, which is of course regular cuboid block work.


It was easier
> for the masons who could actually see the shapes
> they were working with to cut them to follow the
> rules laid down in language. When I see what
> looks like scientific depictions from ancient
> Egypt there is actually quite a bit of room for
> interpretation and, obviously, there is no room
> for interpretation in building a pyramid. Hence I
> believe that workers saw these scientific
> depictions and received verbal instruction in
> them.

Verbal instruction is impossible to communicate and resolve in complex three dimensional forms. That's why we have drawings. Visual language.


If a worker still didn't comprehend then a
> vulgar depiction (blueprint) was made for the
> specific aspect he didn't comprehend. For the
> main part if anyone needed what we'd call a proper
> blueprint then he was carving stone out of the
> quarry and was considered incapable of following
> direction.

As above, communicating these multiple, complex intersecting angles by any means other than a drawing/ visualisation is impossible.


There was no mindless work, no grunt
> work, on the pyramid. Each man had to understand
> his place and function and how it tied in to the
> overall job. There was some repetitive hard work
> but very little and I would assume men cycled
> through this work rather than having the same
> individual doing the same task day in and day
> out.

The plan, overall and for each block would have to be communicated to each man in order for him to do his job.
In the case of this level of complexity drawings are the only communication medium in which this is possible.

>
> The concept that people slaved away to build these
> and lift the stones is in our imagination and
> there is no evidence whatsoever it existed in
> reality. People (men, women, and children) wanted
> to come here to work and there were a very limited
> number of jobs for them.

What we see here is the result of craftsmen accurately following a plan.
A very complex plan. A blueprint. There's no alternative. The image speaks for itself.
If it is an ancient language, then it's an ancient visual language without parallel today.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 09-Mar-17 16:21 by Jon Ellison.