Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Hi, Jacob

Sirfiroth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> From the vagueness of your post I can only assume
> you are asking me to answer my own question
> regarding which survey best reflects the intent of
> the Ancient Egyptian builders.
>
> Surveys of this sort only reflect the ‘as
> built’ dimensions, not intended dimensions. If
> you disagree, please provide what irrefutable
> evidence that exist which would lead anyone to
> assume any surveyed dimension of G1 are the exact
> intended dimensions of the Ancient Egyptian
> builders? That any survey does is an assumption
> with no irrefutable evidence addressing this
> conundrum. Therefore the correct answer can only
> be 'None of them'!

Well, that's brave of you to volunteer that the pyramids are so hard to measure that they're not going to support anyone's premises including your own, lol - and I do agree, everyone's measurements describe the GP as having unequal sides but the troubling thing is that no two may agree what the longest or shortest sides are.

However, I do have some experience working with the mean values provided by Petrie and others and don't recall having that much occasion to second-guess them, at least if we're still at the scale of things the size of pyramids or less.

> So Jim, without knowing the intent of the Ancient
> Egyptians you, like everyone else, are just
> guessing and guessing is not science. Fact: No one
> has yet provided any evidence, let alone
> irrefutable evidence. supporting the Ancient
> Egyptians use of pi, phi, √2, √3 or √5.
> There is no evidence other than yours and others
> training and ability to find these modern
> mathematical operators which occur naturally in
> the mathematics of structures by our current
> system. As stated many times before: [i[ If one
> draws a square, the √2 is an inherent value of
> the diagonal within the square, similarly if one
> draws a circle then л is the inherent value
> within the circle relating the diameter to
> circumference. Is foreknowledge of either of these
> factors is necessary for the completion of either
> task.[/i]

Well, wait a minute here, ok? It's one thing to draw a circle and automatically have the circumference and perimeter ratio be Pi, or take the diagonal of a square and automatically have it be sqrt 2, but if someone makes the perimeter of their circle 360 feet and the radius 57.29577951 ft, that's something different. If someone makes the diagonal of their square roughly 1.414213562 ft, that's something different as well.

If in lieu of a 360 foot circular perimeter, someone makes a circle out whatever they please as long as it's highly interactive with the 2 Pi circumference / radius ratio of any circle, that's something different too.

We can do the same thing with ancient metrology as well. We can say the AEs had no idea what the modern foot was so they had no idea just how brilliant Remens and Royal Cubits are mathematically when expressed in modern feet, they just knew them as 1 of either, but when you start finding the Remen value or Royal Cubit in feet as a ratio between parts, that's again something different.

All of that and much more is capable of talking to anyone who will listen, and I do think it might just be trying to say something.

> A couple of years ago I quit looking for what
> couldn't be prove and started looking for what
> could be proved regarding the Ancient Egyptians
> mathematics. Here is a hint: It doesn't reside in
> our modern mathematical operators like pi, phi,
> √2, √3 or √5 since they are naturally
> occurring factors within our current system. As
> Corinna Rossi determined, from a perspective based
> on the available evidence strongly indicates the
> Ancient Egyptians were not aware of our concepts
> nor did they employ these factors. But I do wish
> you good luck on your quest to prove otherwise.

That seems almost an odd thing to say - I mean, it isn't that Rossi is my source for sqrt 3-riddled equilateral pyramidia because I know what you'd say, they had no idea what sqrt 3 was they just wanted pyramids with edges equal to the base, but where does one really get the opportunity to put things to the test with sqrt 3 or sqrt 5 outside of things like the Vesica Piscis? Sure, every square thing in creation has diagonal of sqrt 2, but how about the rest of it?

If you even have any examples of sqrt 3 or sqrt 5 for this discussion, it would seem like they must quite likely be out of a native context such as the ones you describe that allows their use without understanding them.

Yes, I'd like to see some papyrus for proof too, sigh, and you probably don't want to get me started again on the ephemeral nature of data even in the here and now, but I try to be realistic enough to know that that may not be likely that I get to see the papyrus even if such items had once existed in some number.

Maybe the math we're talking about would have consumed so much papyrus that no one even bothered to write it out - literally. That is NOT some mere glib remark, you should see how much contemporary papyrus I've gone through over this stuff and my mentor is said to have occupied whole rooms with his handwritten calculations prior to the availability of pocket calculators.

As always, I try to put as many demands on architecture as I can possibly think of to try to rule out coincidences - things should multiply, divide, add, and subtract within established parameters, which may take careful choices to achieve, and that's just for starters. That we should see frequent references to what may be established common themes like astronomy and geodesy is an additional rigorous criteria that I've stacked on top of all that.

Not content with all that, I like to further try to rule out coincidence by demanding in addition that I not only see metrological units in modern feet expressed as ratios to help corroborate their validity, but that should often work as mathematical constants that unlock data with exponential use.

Anything you'd like to add to my list of stringent criteria there?

See, using fractions or rounding numbers is all well and good, but there may come a time when doing that is going to affect not just the way one interprets something, but the way someone designs something. If someone else says, "Oh, 162 is close enough" and I'd say "No it isn't, we should be more exacting", they'd pick it and I wouldn't, see? I wouldn't pick a different interpretation, I would pick a different proportion if a particular grouping of proportions is at risk of causing too much confusion about their nature and intent.

If I see all these rigorous criteria met again and again, if I see numbers that looked they were grouped as if someone were designing architecture in the way they would if they were thinking of numbers to at least ten places after the decimal, then hopefully I'm right in reigning in just how much I want to attribute to coincidence.

That may be hard for you to appreciate because like Rossi or Petrie you probably have a seked for every occasion, but that doesn't stop others from describing the very same thing in terms of slope angles, trigonometric functions, precise perimeter/height ratios and other more sophisticated things that have nothing to do with sekeds, and so forth. Getting sekeds to stick has nothing to with the possible actual state of the art, anymore than does rounding Pi to the second or third decimal place.

The question is always just how accurately is something being described by the textbook description, and how accurately is it being described by any unfounded unorthodox theory, on its own terms?

If the GP isn't 440 cubits wide, many may be in a bit of trouble, you know. Mine isn't. Mine's about 439 and a half, show me how to make a seked out of that?

The biggest action in my pyramid model with the Royal Cubit is really that the pyramidion is modelled on the whole thing with 10 Royal Cubits in modern feet as the ratio between pyramid and pyramidion.

Before we consider the evidence, let's give it the chance to accumulate some more. This was originally determined from scattered reports of the GP's current height and "Wow, I bet Munck will be so happy if 452.3894321 ft turns out to be how high it us up to where the pyramidion sat" because he had profound reverence for 452.3893421".

That pyramidion height and 10 Royal Cubit ratio is locked in by that.

Not yet content that the absurd has already been asked of it, given a model that truncates the sides in order to make the apothem 1 stadium in accordance with classic authors, we find the apothem with the pyramidion missing to be the radian in feet, which outrageous demand it meets to an accuracy of .9999726682, the formula giving 572.9734555 for 572.9577951 even after just suffering from the ravages of addition and subtraction. 10 Royal Cubit ratio locked in, again.

Now think about this, proof of modern feet, we'd all like to see the papyrus, I know -- but what I just described to you with its multiple built-in backup checks, is a Royal Cubit to Modern Foot Converter. I think I'm going to stop asking to see the papyrus, ok?

Not content with that, I recycled one of Davidson's and determined that at the altitude where the Great Pyramid's perimeter expresses the Calendar Year in feet, the length of a side is equal to the concave apothem, but I probably wasn't contented with that either. More! - more outrageous demands to try to filter out coincidences.

I should mention that this is after the placing of the hypothetical pavement, not that I have any of that to show you either, but there seems to be circumstantial evidence for it ranging from the state of surrounding features to the equations themselves.

Let's see, what else did I demand? Oh, yeah - I circumscribed and inscribed all three big pyramids in the vertical plane both through the middle and the diagonal, and for Cheop's pyramidion (or missing section) too, and demanded that it should all be fairly impressive as completely unreasonable as the concept may be, and for Cheop's pyramid I also did this with the pyramid before and after paving.

Not that I'm finished describing the model, but that's how I think I might know how tall the GP might be, and how wide. Because I demand the impossible, and the pyramids oblige, although I'm not sure they're doing it for the likes o' me. Probably not.

Did you want to add something to list of evidence I should want to see before resting confidence in a set of Great Pyramid proportions?

I could still be quite wrong of course, but I hope you can tell how hard I try not to be?

Cheers!



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 06-Jan-20 06:28 by thinkitover.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 3085 Sirfiroth 06-Feb-18 03:26
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 493 drew 06-Feb-18 04:18
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 455 Sirfiroth 06-Feb-18 17:37
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 359 drew 06-Feb-18 23:32
Re: Pi or no Pi ???????????????? 419 Dr. Troglodyte 07-Feb-18 14:44
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 337 molder 08-Feb-18 05:09
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 344 Sirfiroth 08-Feb-18 06:43
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 339 DavidK 08-Feb-18 10:48
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 334 molder 08-Feb-18 11:56
linking egyptian Pi to imperial Pi 283 DavidK 08-Feb-18 15:10
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 287 DavidK 08-Feb-18 13:58
cubit of 20.25? 249 DavidK 08-Feb-18 14:12
where does Fibonacci Pi come from? 274 DavidK 08-Feb-18 14:49
Re: cubit of 20.25? 339 Sirfiroth 08-Feb-18 15:08
Re: cubit of 20.25? 298 DavidK 08-Feb-18 15:15
Re: cubit of 20.25? 296 molder 09-Feb-18 03:58
Mod Note > Off-Topic Posts 318 Dr. Troglodyte 09-Feb-18 16:38
Re: cubit of 20.25? 444 Sirfiroth 09-Feb-18 21:02
Oh...what a shame... 330 drew 09-Feb-18 00:33
Re: Oh...what a shame... 331 Sirfiroth 09-Feb-18 04:47
Re: Oh...what a shame... 354 drew 09-Feb-18 06:02
Re: Oh...what a shame... 343 Sirfiroth 09-Feb-18 13:28
Re: Oh...what a shame... 333 DavidK 22-Jun-18 05:58
Re: Oh...what a shame... 277 drew 22-Jun-18 09:54
Re: Oh...what a shame... 339 Sirfiroth 22-Jun-18 13:32
Re: Oh...what a shame... 315 drew 22-Jun-18 22:27
Re: Oh...what a shame... 302 Sirfiroth 23-Jun-18 01:48
Re: well put 276 drew 23-Jun-18 08:08
To put it bluntly! 314 Sirfiroth 23-Jun-18 12:40
Re: well put 299 Manu 23-Jun-18 18:33
Re: extensions of numbers 250 drew 24-Jun-18 00:40
Re: extensions of numbers 306 Sirfiroth 24-Jun-18 04:50
Re: extensions of numbers 254 drew 24-Jun-18 08:36
Re: extensions of numbers 248 Sirfiroth 24-Jun-18 12:22
Re: extensions of numbers 257 drew 24-Jun-18 20:53
Re: extensions of numbers 254 Sirfiroth 25-Jun-18 16:06
Re: extensions of numbers 238 DavidK 25-Jun-18 16:13
Re: extensions of numbers 243 Sirfiroth 25-Jun-18 16:46
the primitive calculator 242 drew 25-Jun-18 23:23
Re: the primitive calculator 291 Sirfiroth 26-Jun-18 02:24
Re: the primitive calculator 224 drew 26-Jun-18 07:06
Mod Note > Duplicate Post Removed 255 Dr. Troglodyte 26-Jun-18 12:45
Newton's problem solved(the relation between the Roman foot and the Egyptian foot ) 273 rodz111 26-Jun-18 13:55
Re: Newton's problem solved(the relation between the Roman foot and the Egyptian foot ) 203 drew 27-Jun-18 05:18
Re: the primitive calculator 262 Sirfiroth 26-Jun-18 17:00
Re: the primitive calculator 259 drew 27-Jun-18 00:01
Re: the primitive calculator 246 Sirfiroth 27-Jun-18 00:18
Re: the primitive calculator 225 drew 27-Jun-18 01:56
Re: well put 222 cloister 24-Jun-18 09:43
Re: well put 253 Manu 24-Jun-18 12:59
Re: well put 247 cloister 24-Jun-18 18:14
Re: well put 296 cloister 29-Jun-18 08:48
Re: well put 231 drew 27-Jun-18 05:11
Re: Oh...what a shame... 298 Sirfiroth 22-Jun-18 12:21
Re: Oh...what a shame... 321 molder 23-Jun-18 00:24
Re: Oh...what a shame... 306 DavidK 23-Jun-18 21:06
Re: Oh...what a shame... 259 DavidK 24-Jun-18 07:41
Understanding the differences! 255 Sirfiroth 24-Jun-18 12:50
No pie for jacob 302 DavidK 24-Jun-18 08:54
Re: No pie for jacob 249 Sirfiroth 25-Jun-18 16:44
Re: No pie for jacob 269 DavidK 25-Jun-18 20:21
Re: No pie for jacob 251 Sirfiroth 25-Jun-18 23:19
Re: 5 values for pi in GP here are 3 235 molder 26-Jun-18 00:51
Re: what value for pi? 233 drew 26-Jun-18 14:11
Re: what value for pi? 272 molder 26-Jun-18 21:30
Re: what value for pi? 225 drew 26-Jun-18 23:42
Re: 5 values for pi in GP here are 3 224 Sirfiroth 26-Jun-18 14:55
Re: 5 values for pi in GP here are 3 271 molder 26-Jun-18 21:18
Re: No pie for jacob 261 DavidK 26-Jun-18 10:34
Re: No pie for jacob 228 Sirfiroth 26-Jun-18 15:02
Re: No pie for jacob 226 DavidK 26-Jun-18 16:46
Re: No pie for jacob 232 Sirfiroth 26-Jun-18 17:12
Re: No pie for jacob 248 DavidK 26-Jun-18 18:58
Re: No pie for jacob 270 Sirfiroth 26-Jun-18 22:59
Re: No pie for jacob 226 DUNE 26-Jun-18 19:52
Re: No pie for jacob 218 DavidK 26-Jun-18 21:18
Re: No pie for jacob 232 Sirfiroth 26-Jun-18 23:10
Hard evidence for base 100 using egyptian maths 241 DavidK 27-Jun-18 05:37
Re: Hard evidence for base 100 using egyptian maths 268 drew 27-Jun-18 06:16
Re: Hard evidence for base 100 using egyptian maths 246 DavidK 27-Jun-18 10:25
Re: Hard evidence for base 100 using egyptian maths 250 drew 27-Jun-18 21:18
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 276 rodz111 25-Jun-18 17:48
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 275 Sirfiroth 25-Jun-18 19:54
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 231 rodz111 26-Jun-18 03:13
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 265 molder 26-Jun-18 03:19
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 254 rodz111 26-Jun-18 03:30
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 249 molder 26-Jun-18 21:52
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 308 rodz111 28-Jun-18 07:44
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 244 drew 28-Jun-18 09:56
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 279 rodz111 28-Jun-18 11:09
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 262 drew 28-Jun-18 17:13
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 278 DavidK 28-Jun-18 20:00
Tripping over museum rods 269 drew 28-Jun-18 23:52
Museum rods 245 drew 29-Jun-18 00:20
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 266 rodz111 29-Jun-18 00:37
You're as much as a complainer as anyone but you're not... 255 drew 29-Jun-18 01:24
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 321 rodz111 30-Jun-18 01:21
You down and dirty so-n-so 266 drew 27-Jun-18 05:29
Re: You down and dirty so-n-so 210 Sirfiroth 27-Jun-18 08:17
Re: You down and dirty so-n-so 214 drew 27-Jun-18 09:49
Re: You down and dirty so-n-so 330 Sirfiroth 27-Jun-18 17:12
The math or the pyramid? 282 drew 27-Jun-18 20:46
Re: You down and dirty so-n-so 201 DavidK 17-Jul-18 23:04
Re: You down and dirty so-n-so 228 Sirfiroth 17-Jul-18 23:16
Re: You down and dirty so-n-so 222 DavidK 17-Jul-18 23:20
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 316 spaceyhippie 19-Jul-18 10:32
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 245 molder 19-Jul-18 11:21
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 291 Sirfiroth 19-Jul-18 12:05
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 399 spaceyhippie 19-Jul-18 23:57
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 253 DavidK 20-Jul-18 08:20
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 316 spaceyhippie 20-Jul-18 21:58
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 210 DavidK 22-Jul-18 09:41
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 304 spaceyhippie 23-Jul-18 02:15
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 245 DavidK 23-Jul-18 08:09
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 260 Sirfiroth 23-Jul-18 13:49
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 237 DavidK 23-Jul-18 22:23
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 261 Sirfiroth 23-Jul-18 23:52
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 248 DavidK 24-Jul-18 09:11
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 207 Sirfiroth 24-Jul-18 13:11
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 190 DavidK 27-Jul-18 06:13
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 231 Sirfiroth 27-Jul-18 15:45
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 297 spaceyhippie 24-Jul-18 02:44
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 291 DavidK 24-Jul-18 17:10
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 336 spaceyhippie 27-Jul-18 00:51
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 274 spaceyhippie 27-Jul-18 14:36
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 374 spaceyhippie 29-Jul-18 11:01
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 262 DavidK 06-Aug-18 19:15
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 241 DavidK 07-Aug-18 05:16
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 249 spaceyhippie 08-Aug-18 09:20
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 249 DavidK 08-Aug-18 09:39
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 289 spaceyhippie 09-Aug-18 02:32
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 304 DavidK 09-Aug-18 08:00
ROTFLMAO! 206 Sirfiroth 09-Aug-18 13:22
Re: ROTFLMAO! 205 DavidK 09-Aug-18 14:12
Re: ROTFLMAO! 228 Sirfiroth 09-Aug-18 14:28
Re: ROTFLMAO! 196 DavidK 09-Aug-18 14:49
Re: ROTFLMAO! 202 Sirfiroth 09-Aug-18 15:03
Re: ROTFLMAO! 221 DavidK 09-Aug-18 21:39
Re: ROTFLMAO! 238 Sirfiroth 10-Aug-18 02:06
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 249 spaceyhippie 09-Aug-18 20:40
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 310 DavidK 10-Aug-18 07:59
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 315 Steve Clayton 12-Aug-18 18:16
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 106 DavidK 27-Dec-19 23:13
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 97 Sirfiroth 28-Dec-19 03:46
Pi. All Pi. All The Time. 106 thinkitover 28-Dec-19 04:59
Re: Pi. All Pi. All The Time. 86 molder 28-Dec-19 10:35
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 83 DavidK 28-Dec-19 10:20
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 95 Sirfiroth 28-Dec-19 15:13
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 107 Thanos5150 28-Dec-19 16:30
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 96 thinkitover 28-Dec-19 21:49
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 92 Thanos5150 29-Dec-19 04:35
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 94 Sirfiroth 29-Dec-19 02:17
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 85 molder 29-Dec-19 04:14
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 94 Sirfiroth 29-Dec-19 12:51
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 79 molder 29-Dec-19 22:31
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 82 Sirfiroth 30-Dec-19 14:11
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 114 magisterchessmutt 30-Dec-19 15:16
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 82 Sirfiroth 31-Dec-19 03:33
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 116 magisterchessmutt 31-Dec-19 04:33
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 95 Sirfiroth 31-Dec-19 15:04
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 97 spaceyhippie 31-Dec-19 23:37
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 98 Thanos5150 29-Dec-19 04:29
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 91 DavidK 29-Dec-19 09:32
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 97 Sirfiroth 29-Dec-19 14:09
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 86 spaceyhippie 01-Jan-20 23:18
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 105 Sirfiroth 02-Jan-20 01:33
Pi vs Pudding 101 thinkitover 02-Jan-20 21:45
Re: Pi vs Pudding 83 spaceyhippie 03-Jan-20 00:06
Re: Pi vs Pudding 91 seasmith 03-Jan-20 00:24
Re: Pi vs Pudding 87 spaceyhippie 07-Jan-20 23:06
Re: Pi vs Pudding 123 seasmith 08-Jan-20 02:54
Re: Pi vs Pudding 91 Sirfiroth 03-Jan-20 03:36
Re: Pi vs Pudding 88 molder 03-Jan-20 06:56
Re: Pi vs Pudding 93 Sirfiroth 03-Jan-20 18:25
Re: Pi vs Pudding 85 spaceyhippie 04-Jan-20 00:02
LOL, now that was hilarious ! 85 Sirfiroth 04-Jan-20 05:51
Re: LOL, now that was hilarious ! 104 hendrik dirker 04-Jan-20 09:32
Re: LOL, now that was hilarious ! 77 spaceyhippie 04-Jan-20 23:37
Re: LOL, now that was hilarious ! 87 spaceyhippie 04-Jan-20 23:39
Re: Pi vs Pudding 105 molder 04-Jan-20 11:03
Re: Pi vs Pudding 94 Sirfiroth 05-Jan-20 20:11
Re: Pi vs Pudding 79 molder 06-Jan-20 02:55
Re: Pi vs Pudding 111 magisterchessmutt 06-Jan-20 02:58
Re: Pi vs Pudding 79 molder 06-Jan-20 05:26
Re: Pi vs Pudding 86 spaceyhippie 07-Jan-20 01:32
Re: Pi vs Pudding 75 DavidK 07-Jan-20 02:02
Re: Pi vs Pudding 93 thinkitover 06-Jan-20 06:13
Re: Pi vs Pudding 99 Sirfiroth 07-Jan-20 02:18
Re: Pi vs Pudding 74 DavidK 07-Jan-20 14:25
Re: Pi vs Pudding 83 Sirfiroth 07-Jan-20 15:16
Re: Pi vs Pudding 86 DavidK 07-Jan-20 19:03
Re: Pi vs Pudding 76 Sirfiroth 07-Jan-20 20:08
Re: Pi vs Pudding 79 DavidK 07-Jan-20 20:11
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 103 DavidK 28-Dec-19 11:21
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 99 engbren 28-Dec-19 12:34
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 104 Sirfiroth 28-Dec-19 15:55
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 91 engbren 29-Dec-19 01:14
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 91 Sirfiroth 30-Dec-19 16:52
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 91 engbren 30-Dec-19 22:23
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 140 magisterchessmutt 30-Dec-19 23:24
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 108 engbren 31-Dec-19 11:31
Re: Pi or no Pi ?????????????? 97 spaceyhippie 04-Jan-20 00:42


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.