I just showed you how your pi derivation can easily be explained geometrically and I previoisly showed you the same for the chamber volume. Your burden of proof is to falsify the the much more plausible scenario involving the use of triangles as the first design priniciple and not mathematical constants or degrees of angle. My main concern is that you do not acknowledge that your findings could be incidental to the geometry. You cannot get around this Jimmy. The king chamber could have easily been put on paper by using a 2to1 right triangle and use half the base as the height. It could not be simpler and anyone could come 4500 years later armed with a calculator and extract the fourth power of π from the Indus foot out of that. That isn't proof of intent. It means you know how to use a calculator and that is it.
Really sorry to be so harsh about this. I know you can do better Jim.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23-Nov-18 23:10 by Manu.