Thanks for that Chris.
I wasn't aware of the number 309 other than in the papyrus in the Manchester Library.
The ratio model of the QC is related to KC because the KC Circle with a radius of 10 cubits has an equal area square with sides of 365 x 34/25 digits as calculated for the pi approximation 22/7 so the perimeter of the square may be regarded as a cycle of 4 years of 365 days.
This is only a cycle if 4 calendar years of 365 days was seen as 1 day short of 4 solar years, so 40 calendar years would have been seen as an Egyptian week of 10 days short of 40 solar years. It follows that 36.5 x 40 calendar years, or 1460 calendar years, would have been seen as 36.5 weeks of 10 days (365 days) short of 1460 solar years.
Taking the King's Chamber cubic diagonal of 25 cubits as a symbolic multiplier results in a circle with a radius of 25 x 10 cubits which has an equal area square with a side length of 25 x 365 x 34/25 digits. The virtual square then represents 100 years with each side representing 25 years, but the lunar cycle of 25 years was just one side, so only one side needed to be represented in the east side of the foundation corner sockets.
If a length of 34/25 digits was regarded as a day then a length of 34 digits may have been regarded as a solar year so the virtual square projected by the King's Chamber may also be regarded as a cycle of 1460 solar years with a side length of 365 solar years of 365.25 days.
The area of the SE corner socket beyond the the true base square is equal to the area of a circle with a radius of 45 digits with the symbolic length of the east side of the corner sockets equal to 440 cubits plus 2 x 45 digits. Each semi-circle is equal to the area of a rectangle beyond the true base square as drawn in my 2006 model mentioned previously.
The distance along the arris edge from the corner of the south-east corner socket to the intended peak of the pyramid as 280 cubits above the base square with a side length of 440 cubits is equal to the arris edge of a pyramid with a base side length of 365 x 34 digits.
The large N.E. corner socket was cut first then built up to the level of the true base square with S.E. corner socket then cut out of the bedrock to precisely the required depth in relation to the base square with the corner of the corner sockets on the diagonals of the true base square. The east side of the corner sockets has a polar alignment even though there was no pole star so close to the pole at the time the pyramid was built.
The N.W Corner socket was then fixed at a near perfect right angle, but the north side of the true base square has a less perfect right angle indicating an east-west solar alignment, as for the south side of the pyramid.
The west side of the true base square has near perfect right angles connecting the north and south sides. The west side is then more closely aligned than the east side to true north as a consequence of 90 degrees to the east-west solar alignment. There was no need for a south-west corner socket in this model. Maragioglio and Rinaldi regarded the disputed position of the SW corner socket as actually 'non-existant'.
The east side should be regarded as precisely 440 cubits at the level of the true base square. Following round anticlockwise at 440 cubits means the south side must be longer than 440 cubits to return to the start position because the east side is several arc minutes west of due north, so it is skewed out to the east in relation to the parallel north and south sides with the length of the east side very close to the length of the west side.
Maragioglio and Rinaldi regarded the east side as having been built first. The line connecting the the corners of the corner sockets is parallel to the true base square and both are incredibly close to parallel with the Entrance Passage.
The pyramid might have been built when the Alpha Draconis was at its closest to the pole of the night sky, but not according to radiocarbon dating. The most precisely built pyramid of Egypt is the most precisely aligned to N, S, E, and W. so I don't think the alignment was helped by a fortuitous alignment of stars.
The true angle of the shafts can be calculated by taking into account that any divergence from true north or true south results in a less steep slope than the measured slope, and this is significant. There are two slightly different slopes in the model of the Entrance Passage, and I have found a connection to the number 25,920.
I have shown that slopes of passages or shafts must be within 2 arc minutes 44 seconds of the intended slope if the build standard on the rise and run was accurate to 1 part in 1000 assuming correct modern measurement and no movement since built - om page 69 of my monograph, and potentially somewhat closer due to compensation of errors or a higher build standard than 1 part in 1000. The entrance passage was built very precisely indeed.
Mark
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2020 08:14PM by Mark Heaton.