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. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
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

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
The Accuracy of Measurements 190 Edward Nightingale 06-Mar-11 03:00
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 130 Scott Creighton 06-Mar-11 19:32
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 131 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 00:27
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 138 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 00:44
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 146 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 02:08
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 113 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 03:09
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 142 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 03:26
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 158 Dr. Troglodyte 07-Mar-11 16:48
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 130 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 17:10
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 138 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 17:37
History and Update 149 Dr. Troglodyte 10-Mar-11 19:00
Re: History and Update 129 Laird Scranton 10-Mar-11 19:56
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 132 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 10:23
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 101 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 15:25
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 131 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 15:44
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 145 lobo-hotei 07-Mar-11 16:11
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 96 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 17:59
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 94 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 18:16
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 94 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 19:08
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 137 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 21:31
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 134 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 23:43
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 134 Laird Scranton 08-Mar-11 02:39
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 131 lobo-hotei 08-Mar-11 00:19
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 121 Scott Creighton 08-Mar-11 23:38
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 145 lobo-hotei 09-Mar-11 14:58
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 129 Scott Creighton 09-Mar-11 15:00
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 97 lobo-hotei 09-Mar-11 16:10
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 135 Scott Creighton 09-Mar-11 16:33
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 133 Ahatmose 09-Mar-11 16:37
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 136 Scott Creighton 09-Mar-11 16:39
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 144 lobo-hotei 09-Mar-11 16:38
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 136 Scott Creighton 09-Mar-11 16:42
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 144 lobo-hotei 09-Mar-11 16:50
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 96 Ahatmose 09-Mar-11 16:53
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 97 lobo-hotei 09-Mar-11 17:18
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 138 Ahatmose 09-Mar-11 17:40
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 137 carolb 09-Mar-11 19:05
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 142 lobo-hotei 09-Mar-11 20:15
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 144 lobo-hotei 09-Mar-11 20:17
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 127 carolb 09-Mar-11 20:27
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 99 lobo-hotei 09-Mar-11 21:01
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 116 carolb 09-Mar-11 21:27
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 153 lobo-hotei 10-Mar-11 01:05
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 147 carolb 10-Mar-11 01:09
Mod Warning 204 lukehancock 10-Mar-11 07:51
Re: Mod Warning 142 lobo-hotei 10-Mar-11 15:11
Re: Mod Warning 159 lobo-hotei 10-Mar-11 15:14
Re: Mod Warning 200 lukehancock 10-Mar-11 16:59
Re: Mod Warning 105 lobo-hotei 10-Mar-11 19:35
earlier request also 123 lobo-hotei 10-Mar-11 19:46
Mod Note to Scott & Lobo 191 lukehancock 11-Mar-11 08:33
Re: Mod Note to Scott & Lobo 105 lobo-hotei 11-Mar-11 17:22
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 144 Lee Burton 07-Mar-11 19:07
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 161 Edward Nightingale 06-Mar-11 22:24
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 185 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 00:40
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 240 magisterchessmutt 07-Mar-11 17:54
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 164 Edward Nightingale 07-Mar-11 06:54
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 142 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 11:06
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 142 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 15:52
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 112 Laird Scranton 07-Mar-11 15:53
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 135 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 18:11
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 148 Edward Nightingale 07-Mar-11 15:48
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 166 Scott Creighton 07-Mar-11 19:05
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 90 magisterchessmutt 07-Mar-11 19:57
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 87 Edward Nightingale 07-Mar-11 16:02
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 137 Edward Nightingale 07-Mar-11 16:24
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 134 Edward Nightingale 08-Mar-11 03:22
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 135 Scott Creighton 08-Mar-11 16:08
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 135 Edward Nightingale 09-Mar-11 01:11
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 134 Scott Creighton 09-Mar-11 09:54
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 137 laughin 09-Mar-11 18:38
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 111 Scott Creighton 10-Mar-11 17:41
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 92 Scott Creighton 10-Mar-11 18:03
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 136 Edward Nightingale 10-Mar-11 23:46
Where or where did the erroneous images go ? 136 Ahatmose 11-Mar-11 00:31
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 144 Scott Creighton 11-Mar-11 00:33
Re: The Accuracy of Measurements 149 Edward Nightingale 11-Mar-11 03:11


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.