Author of the Month :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums

Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world.

Hi Scott,

I did not have much time to go over your work as I am way behind on my own trying answer questions here on the board, I'll check it thoroughly when I have more time, but I did a brief review and made a few notes that you might want to consider when reviewing your theory as well as others.

With all due respect,

Ed

English notes:

almost |ôlˈmōst; ˈôlˌmōst|

adverb

not quite; very nearly :

exactly |igˈzak(t)lē|

adverb

1 without discrepancy (used to emphasize the accuracy of a figure or description

2 in exact terms; without vagueness

oxymoron |ˌäksəˈmôrˌän|

noun

a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction

A Personal Note:

PEOPLE IN GLASS HOUSES SHOULDN'T THROW STONES - "Those who are vulnerable should not attack others. The proverb has been traced back to Geoffrey Chaucer's 'Troilus and Criseyde' . George Herbert wrote in 1651: 'Whose house is of glass, must not throw stones at another.' This saying is first cited in the United States in 'William & Mary College Quarterly' . Twenty-six years later Benjamin Franklin wrote, 'Don't throw stones at your neighbors', if your own windows are glass.'

From your article “The Gravity Cubit”

the Royal Cubit - may also have originally been derived from this hitherto unknown ancient science. (NOTE: E.N. I agree)

the scaling up - of any such architectural plan(s) could have been achieved without having first developed a standard unit of linear measure. (NOTE: E.N. that plan then could have only been done using geometric proportions, "exactly” like my geometric proportions. From page 1 The Geometry of Giza “The solution to the reconciliation of arcs and lines must therefore be governed by proportion”. “These ideal expressions may be used for convenient approximations that are easily committed to memory, the tools of metrology, or number system are then available to correct the figures to any degree of accuracy”.

You still need to come up with the tools of metrology and a number system to build it accurately and a more complete and accurate one than 1 cubit based on gravity of 20.61, where is the rest of the measuring system? Read my explanation below and check it with a calculator)

"There exists not in nature, as far as has been hitherto observed, a single subject or species of subject, accessible to man, which presents one constant and uniform dimension." - Thomas Jefferson

(NOTE E.N. I love Thomas Jefferson but he failed to consider two things in nature on Earth that are consistent 1. 186282 The exact speed of light, and 2. The length of a 1 Hz (C Note 7 octaves down from 128 Hz, the beginning of the musical scale) sound frequency wave, therefore the ONLY real constant and uniform dimension must be taken into account for an exact measuring system.

432 from the musical scale

432 (Hz) x 432 (Hz) = 186624 Root speed of light

432÷21(3 7s)= 20.57142 Root Cubit

Root speed of light 186624÷Root Cubit 1.714282=108864.001

108864.001÷Royal 20.61818=5280.000)

(E.N. an extra nugget,

1Hz frequency wave length = 186363.636 miles

186363.636 – 186282 (exact speed of light)= 81.63

81.63 can be seen as 9 x 9 = 81 and 9 x 7= 63 we can discuss those two after I publish it)

Quite incredibly, on the autumn equinox at Giza it takes the sun precisely 147.757 seconds to set from when the lower rim of the solar disc of the sun first touches the horizon until the upper rim of the solar disc fully sets below it. Naturally it would make sense for the ancient designers to round up this sunset duration to 148 (NOTE: E.N. off by .243 “almost exactly?" 147.757) seconds since it is inconceivable that they would have been able to measure precisely a fraction of one second; a fraction of one swing of a pendulum

By simply adding the height and width of the Great Pyramid together we find the value of 14,839 inches. (NOTE: E.N. 756 x 12= 9072, 481 x 12 = 5772 + 9072 = 14844 inches ,off by 5 inches,“almost exactly?”)This is an interesting figure in its own right simply by virtue of the fact that it demonstrates the key values of 148 and 39! We have found through the use of time (148 seconds) that we can define the height of the Great Pyramid. If we simply extend this idea of time and use the number of minutes in half of 1 solar day (720 minutes) we find the ancient Egyptian Royal Cubit 14839 ÷ 720 = 20.61 inches. (NOTE:E.N. 14839 ÷ 720 = 20.6097 "almost exactly?" 20.61)The Royal Cubit then may well have been based upon the dimensions of the Great Pyramid divided by the number of minutes in half of one solar day. And given that the average length of a man's forearm also approximates this length, this glyph may have been used to symbolise the measure.

If this wasn't curious enough, we then find that the 365 day year x 16 (feet) = 5,840 x 720 minutes (half of 1 solar day) = 4,204,800 inches = (350,400 feet). This figure just happens to be almost exactly (NOTE: E.N. "almost exactly?") the sum of the Great Pyramid's perimeter of 3,024 feet + its height of 481 feet = 3,505 feet (x 100) = (350,500 feet.)

(NOTE: E.N. Off by 100 ft)

Before finally leaving the Gravity Cubit it is also worth noting that the height of the Great Pyramid (5,772 inches) (NOTE: E.N. Off by .516 inches) when divided by Phi (1.618034) reduces this height to almost exactly (NOTE E.N. almost exactly?) 1 inch after 18 divisional iterations, thus:

Of course, critics of the "Gravity Cubit" hypothesis will undoubtedly point to the fact that the ancient Egyptian Royal Cubit was in use hundreds of years before the Great Pyramid at Giza was built therefore it would have been impossible for its dimensions to have influenced the unit of measure in the manner proposed. The simple fact is, however, there is no need to physically build the Great Pyramid in order to have determined what its eventual dimensions would be. A scaled plan for the Great Pyramid (along with the other Giza pyramids) could have been devised long before a single block of any pyramid was ever set in place. The plan's scale would naturally have been based upon the "Gravity Cubit" and incorporated into any plan. In this regard it is interesting that the Great Pyramid's height consists of 280 Royal Cubits with the cubit measure itself divided into 28 equal parts thus perhaps demonstrating a 1:10 scale. (NOTE E.N. 1:10 Scale would make the granite tablet that Khufu’s plans were on 75.6 ft x 48.1 ft ? interesting)

"They [the temples] were built according to an architectural plan which was supposed to have been revealed in a codex that fell from the heavens at Saqqara in the days of Imhotep." - Aldred, "The Egyptians" 3rd Edition, p.32

(NOTE E.N. you asked me who do I think knew the speed of light, I think we should let the Egyptians speak for themselves)

Assuming that such architectural plans were indeed passed down through generations of the ancient Egyptian civilisation in some form, it seems somewhat improbable that the implementation of any such architectural plans by the AEs would have occurred immediately. Further assuming that the plan or "codex" was a three-dimensional model of the Giza Pyramids (perhaps crafted in durable granite), (E.N. perhaps a 1:10 scale model, out of granite again interesting, let’s see that would be how big, almost exactly?) then it is logical to consider that the builders would first have to familiarise themselves with the craft of constructing the pyramid form before even attempting to make manifest their "sacred plan".

( NOTE: E.N. On The Gravity Cubit) :

With all that being said I don't doubt your theory has a place, it seems they very well could have known what you are theorizing with the Gravity Cubit because as I see it whoever left the plans for the temples knew the speed of light and it would be logical that they would have an understanding of gravity. Your figures are not "exact" but as I stated trying to defend my own theory these numbers do not always have to be exact to be understood, just as in the visible light spectrum red does not turn to green on an exact frequency.

I hope we can discuss all theories here with honesty, sincerity and respect for one another.

Ed

PS I'll try to get to your other questions tomorrow

I did not have much time to go over your work as I am way behind on my own trying answer questions here on the board, I'll check it thoroughly when I have more time, but I did a brief review and made a few notes that you might want to consider when reviewing your theory as well as others.

With all due respect,

Ed

English notes:

almost |ôlˈmōst; ˈôlˌmōst|

adverb

not quite; very nearly :

exactly |igˈzak(t)lē|

adverb

1 without discrepancy (used to emphasize the accuracy of a figure or description

2 in exact terms; without vagueness

oxymoron |ˌäksəˈmôrˌän|

noun

a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction

A Personal Note:

PEOPLE IN GLASS HOUSES SHOULDN'T THROW STONES - "Those who are vulnerable should not attack others. The proverb has been traced back to Geoffrey Chaucer's 'Troilus and Criseyde' . George Herbert wrote in 1651: 'Whose house is of glass, must not throw stones at another.' This saying is first cited in the United States in 'William & Mary College Quarterly' . Twenty-six years later Benjamin Franklin wrote, 'Don't throw stones at your neighbors', if your own windows are glass.'

From your article “The Gravity Cubit”

the Royal Cubit - may also have originally been derived from this hitherto unknown ancient science. (NOTE: E.N. I agree)

the scaling up - of any such architectural plan(s) could have been achieved without having first developed a standard unit of linear measure. (NOTE: E.N. that plan then could have only been done using geometric proportions, "exactly” like my geometric proportions. From page 1 The Geometry of Giza “The solution to the reconciliation of arcs and lines must therefore be governed by proportion”. “These ideal expressions may be used for convenient approximations that are easily committed to memory, the tools of metrology, or number system are then available to correct the figures to any degree of accuracy”.

You still need to come up with the tools of metrology and a number system to build it accurately and a more complete and accurate one than 1 cubit based on gravity of 20.61, where is the rest of the measuring system? Read my explanation below and check it with a calculator)

"There exists not in nature, as far as has been hitherto observed, a single subject or species of subject, accessible to man, which presents one constant and uniform dimension." - Thomas Jefferson

(NOTE E.N. I love Thomas Jefferson but he failed to consider two things in nature on Earth that are consistent 1. 186282 The exact speed of light, and 2. The length of a 1 Hz (C Note 7 octaves down from 128 Hz, the beginning of the musical scale) sound frequency wave, therefore the ONLY real constant and uniform dimension must be taken into account for an exact measuring system.

432 from the musical scale

432 (Hz) x 432 (Hz) = 186624 Root speed of light

432÷21(3 7s)= 20.57142 Root Cubit

Root speed of light 186624÷Root Cubit 1.714282=108864.001

108864.001÷Royal 20.61818=5280.000)

(E.N. an extra nugget,

1Hz frequency wave length = 186363.636 miles

186363.636 – 186282 (exact speed of light)= 81.63

81.63 can be seen as 9 x 9 = 81 and 9 x 7= 63 we can discuss those two after I publish it)

Quite incredibly, on the autumn equinox at Giza it takes the sun precisely 147.757 seconds to set from when the lower rim of the solar disc of the sun first touches the horizon until the upper rim of the solar disc fully sets below it. Naturally it would make sense for the ancient designers to round up this sunset duration to 148 (NOTE: E.N. off by .243 “almost exactly?" 147.757) seconds since it is inconceivable that they would have been able to measure precisely a fraction of one second; a fraction of one swing of a pendulum

By simply adding the height and width of the Great Pyramid together we find the value of 14,839 inches. (NOTE: E.N. 756 x 12= 9072, 481 x 12 = 5772 + 9072 = 14844 inches ,off by 5 inches,“almost exactly?”)This is an interesting figure in its own right simply by virtue of the fact that it demonstrates the key values of 148 and 39! We have found through the use of time (148 seconds) that we can define the height of the Great Pyramid. If we simply extend this idea of time and use the number of minutes in half of 1 solar day (720 minutes) we find the ancient Egyptian Royal Cubit 14839 ÷ 720 = 20.61 inches. (NOTE:E.N. 14839 ÷ 720 = 20.6097 "almost exactly?" 20.61)The Royal Cubit then may well have been based upon the dimensions of the Great Pyramid divided by the number of minutes in half of one solar day. And given that the average length of a man's forearm also approximates this length, this glyph may have been used to symbolise the measure.

If this wasn't curious enough, we then find that the 365 day year x 16 (feet) = 5,840 x 720 minutes (half of 1 solar day) = 4,204,800 inches = (350,400 feet). This figure just happens to be almost exactly (NOTE: E.N. "almost exactly?") the sum of the Great Pyramid's perimeter of 3,024 feet + its height of 481 feet = 3,505 feet (x 100) = (350,500 feet.)

(NOTE: E.N. Off by 100 ft)

Before finally leaving the Gravity Cubit it is also worth noting that the height of the Great Pyramid (5,772 inches) (NOTE: E.N. Off by .516 inches) when divided by Phi (1.618034) reduces this height to almost exactly (NOTE E.N. almost exactly?) 1 inch after 18 divisional iterations, thus:

Of course, critics of the "Gravity Cubit" hypothesis will undoubtedly point to the fact that the ancient Egyptian Royal Cubit was in use hundreds of years before the Great Pyramid at Giza was built therefore it would have been impossible for its dimensions to have influenced the unit of measure in the manner proposed. The simple fact is, however, there is no need to physically build the Great Pyramid in order to have determined what its eventual dimensions would be. A scaled plan for the Great Pyramid (along with the other Giza pyramids) could have been devised long before a single block of any pyramid was ever set in place. The plan's scale would naturally have been based upon the "Gravity Cubit" and incorporated into any plan. In this regard it is interesting that the Great Pyramid's height consists of 280 Royal Cubits with the cubit measure itself divided into 28 equal parts thus perhaps demonstrating a 1:10 scale. (NOTE E.N. 1:10 Scale would make the granite tablet that Khufu’s plans were on 75.6 ft x 48.1 ft ? interesting)

"They [the temples] were built according to an architectural plan which was supposed to have been revealed in a codex that fell from the heavens at Saqqara in the days of Imhotep." - Aldred, "The Egyptians" 3rd Edition, p.32

(NOTE E.N. you asked me who do I think knew the speed of light, I think we should let the Egyptians speak for themselves)

Assuming that such architectural plans were indeed passed down through generations of the ancient Egyptian civilisation in some form, it seems somewhat improbable that the implementation of any such architectural plans by the AEs would have occurred immediately. Further assuming that the plan or "codex" was a three-dimensional model of the Giza Pyramids (perhaps crafted in durable granite), (E.N. perhaps a 1:10 scale model, out of granite again interesting, let’s see that would be how big, almost exactly?) then it is logical to consider that the builders would first have to familiarise themselves with the craft of constructing the pyramid form before even attempting to make manifest their "sacred plan".

( NOTE: E.N. On The Gravity Cubit) :

With all that being said I don't doubt your theory has a place, it seems they very well could have known what you are theorizing with the Gravity Cubit because as I see it whoever left the plans for the temples knew the speed of light and it would be logical that they would have an understanding of gravity. Your figures are not "exact" but as I stated trying to defend my own theory these numbers do not always have to be exact to be understood, just as in the visible light spectrum red does not turn to green on an exact frequency.

I hope we can discuss all theories here with honesty, sincerity and respect for one another.

Ed

PS I'll try to get to your other questions tomorrow

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.