> Can you use Google Earth? Please answer me. I will
> show you the water source.
Yes I have it
> They drained the water back into the NIle down at
> the dock.
Where is the channel for this? Why wouldn't they simply unload it and store it for its use in the counterpart? How far apart were they?
This is also where they loaded the
> stones, and/or simply engaged the Barge/stones
> into the system.
Not clear here, are you saying they were bringing in the core stone by boat instead of the quarries right next to the pyramids?
The later has some additional
> benefit. It depends, it they were using the system
> for pulling stones up the Pyramid face, or using
> men to perform the lift. Both are possible.
Yes but that vastly increases the work and the need to have a ramp or track up the side
> You are no different than the majority of
> individuals, who do not fully grasp, how heavy
> water really is. I also once underestimated it.
No I'm fully aware of how heavy water is, which is why I asked you how they got it out of the ground and to your barge.
Do you have a diagram of how this worked and its position in regards to the pyramids? I'm particularly interested as to where you think the pivot was.
> I have illustrated, and provided links concerning
> the science behind this relationship, repeatably
> here on GH for many years. It is a workable
> physics model. I have no idea, if they knew and
> understood and used the environment the way I
> propose. I only show it is possible, and that
> there is another way to deliver stones up to
> higher levels, than by using ramps. Ramps were not
> necessary. At times, it seems I have attacked
> someones sacred cow...
Your counterweight would have run on a ramp and I look forward to seeing these diagram as fitted to the existing Giza ridge line topography. (like that map I showed you). Important question have you been to Giza and walked around it? Are you aware the site is on the side of a ridge line?
> Example: The average size 2.5 ton Pyramid stone
> measures approx. (127cm, 127cm x 71cm) or ( 50",
> 50" x 28"). That same volume in water weight =
> 40.51 cubic feet. Multiply 40.51 x 1 cubic foot of
> water ( 62.43lbs.) = 2,529 lbs. The water is
> actually 28 lbs. heavier than the stone. An
> barge being 10 feet wide and 30 feet long, and 8
> feet tall = 2,400 cubic feet. or 2,400 x 62.43lbs.
> = 149,832 lbs.
So about 75 tons of water were used? Again can you show the diagram of where the water came from and how it was placed into the barge.
That is equivalent to 60 stones in
> weight. And Yes, that is where they obtained the
> ability to lift stones, with very little effort.
'Little effort' moving 75 tons of water would take a great deal of effort along with moving the stones out of the quarry and moving them onto the stone barges then moving them off the stone barges to their place on the pyramid - where again was the 'station' where they were unloaded? This is unclear was at the base of the pyramid or up ON the pyramid?
> In fact, it is the only scenario that can achieve
> this rate, and higher if needed.
Are you using the older discredited 2.3 million number of one of the modern accepted number of around 590,000 stones?
> Now do you better understand? Would you like all
> my links, and pictures to qualify my statements
> above. So you see, and can prove my scenario works
> in the real world.
yes diagrams set in the actual terrain would be excellent
> Did they use it? They would have been really
> stupid, if they were unable to figure this out.
Yet the Romans, Greeks, Hans and others never used such a system and they were far better engineers.
An aside where is the first documented use of a counter-weight system in the ancient world?