Home of the The Hall of Ma'at on the Internet
Home
Discussion Forums
Papers
Authors

December 9, 2019, 3:54 pm UTC    
September 16, 2009 06:26PM
Warwick L Nixon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Please explain the difference between raising
> approximately 80 % of the total mass 200 feet
> ..and the remaining 20% ,comprised of on average
> smaller blocks, and not including any massive key
> stones, the rest of the way.


The amount of work required to lift a stone is directly proportional
to the height it's lifted. Ek=Ep. This, of course, assumes equal
efficiency at each step and there are some confounding factors but
the work efficient work represented in a stone at 500' is exactly
five times the same work in a stone at 100'. A weight at 500' does
5 times as much work falling down as a stone from 100'. This is an
immutable fact of gravity so far as anyone knows. Of course we still
don't know what gravuty is so some day this might be overturned in
part or in whole.

But we have to operate in the real world. In the real world an ant
can pick up massive loads and climb trees with them. We could have
built the pyramids like this if not for a few real world things get-
ting in the way. As things become more massive like bones and muscle
they require increasing strenght just to support their own weight. We
can lift far more than an ant but far less proportionately.

These same considerations apply to everything. You can't build a 500'
crane because no metal known can support its own weight. You couldn't
lift a large load of stone with a helicopter because the blades would
have to spin so fast they'd fly apart or there would be no air left to
chop. Yes, you can build bigger and bigger copters and there are some
that could pick up one stone now but the Egyptians moved several at a
time. In the real world men take up real space. You can't just throw
more men at a stone to carry it since at some point not enough men can
even get close to the stone; they are in each others way. The same ap-
plies to dragging them up ramps, when they get to a corner there's no
where from whence to pull. It takes a certain number of men to do a
certain amount of work and if they can't all fit in the work area then
the job is impossible.

But the real world problems of lifting stones to 500' don't stop here.
This is where they get extremely intractible. The height to which some-
thing gets very difficult to lift is highly dependent on the means used.
A single straight on ramp as Petrie proposed for instance gets exponent-
ially more massive as it grows. Even modern machinery would be limited
to about 600' making a pile of anything using this method. Power consump-
tion would be enormous and the last 2 1/2 tons could require as much energy
as was needed to build the Great Pyramid.

You might think spiral ramps wouldn't gat all that much more energy inten-
sive as they rose but they present an increasing number of corners. If
the ramp dips to help get around the corner on the shorter legs near the
top there would be no altitude gained and the whole thing would be so lit-
tered with ramps you couldn't tell the spots without ramps from those with.
Of course spiral ramps have to be ruled out anyway since there is evidence
that they were not used.

If you pry stones up the side the odds of them falling rises as they do.
the speed at which they fall increases as does the damage they can do.

In the case of the Great Pyramid (as well as the earlier ones) the real
problem is getting enough men on the job to get the work done. Sure, they
could use long ropes and pull the stones from the opposite side just as
I'm suggesting and they'd have enough room. This would make the height
limitations more in line with the exponential increase in the weight of
the rope. If the rope is too massive the men can't pick it up and pull it.

If we built this today we'd would most definitely use the same method that
the ancients most probably did; counterweights. We'd pump water up to fill
them. There aren't any major limitations here since water can be relayed
by pumps and electricity flows just fine uphill (go figure).

The limitations are a characteristic of the beast. We don't know what beast
was used to raise them but ramp limitations are pretty much far lower than
500'. The fact that the stones were huge is clear indication that a very
robust beast was at play. If men dragged these up they would have been cut
in two, or more likely four, or even more likely eight. They were huge be-
cause lifting massive stones was so easy they moved them 8 or 10 at a time!
If they didn't need to push and pull them around on top the pyramid they
might have been even bigger yet.




____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.
Subject Author Posted

Arris angle

RLH July 03, 2009 10:03AM

Re: Arris angle

RLH July 05, 2009 07:31AM

Re: Arris angle

cladking July 13, 2009 09:21PM

Re: Arris angle

Greg Reeder July 14, 2009 11:08AM

Re: Arris angle

cladking July 14, 2009 01:48PM

Re: Arris angle

Greg Reeder July 14, 2009 02:52PM

Re: Arris angle

cladking July 14, 2009 05:48PM

Re: Arris angle

cladking July 14, 2009 08:25PM

Maybe you are on to something?

Greg Reeder July 14, 2009 10:34PM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

cladking July 16, 2009 11:42PM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

cladking July 21, 2009 12:39AM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

Greg Reeder July 21, 2009 10:41AM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

cladking July 21, 2009 01:57PM

imho CK, you are being too literal again

Jammer July 22, 2009 07:45AM

Re: imho CK, you are being too literal again

cladking July 23, 2009 08:05PM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

Ogygos July 22, 2009 11:45AM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

Jammer July 23, 2009 01:05PM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

Ogygos July 23, 2009 05:41PM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

Jammer July 24, 2009 09:47AM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

cladking July 28, 2009 11:17PM

No rainbow here but careful of the angle.

cladking August 09, 2009 02:07PM

Re: No rainbow here but careful of the angle.

cladking August 09, 2009 02:21PM

It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 03, 2009 12:14AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 03, 2009 07:37PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 04, 2009 01:15PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 04, 2009 08:57PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 06, 2009 10:20AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 06, 2009 12:44PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Greg Reeder September 06, 2009 12:57PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 06, 2009 02:49PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Greg Reeder September 06, 2009 03:11PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 06, 2009 05:42PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Hermione September 07, 2009 08:18AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 07, 2009 11:09AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Hermione September 07, 2009 11:50AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Greg Reeder September 07, 2009 12:44PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 07, 2009 08:19PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 09, 2009 12:00PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 09, 2009 12:44PM

Paradigm shift alert

Warwick L Nixon September 09, 2009 01:43PM

Re: Paradigm shift alert

cladking September 09, 2009 04:26PM

Re: Paradigm shift alert

Warwick L Nixon September 10, 2009 09:51AM

Re: Paradigm shift alert

Don Barone September 10, 2009 11:15AM

Re: Paradigm shift alert

Warwick L Nixon September 10, 2009 11:56AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 07, 2009 08:06PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Hermione September 08, 2009 04:32AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 08, 2009 11:09AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 07, 2009 08:45PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 09, 2009 12:00PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 09, 2009 12:17PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 09, 2009 12:48PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 09, 2009 01:37PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 09, 2009 04:42PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Tommi Huhtamaki September 09, 2009 05:03PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 09, 2009 05:50PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 10, 2009 10:02AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 10, 2009 10:33AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 10, 2009 10:41AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 10, 2009 11:12AM

Okay

Warwick L Nixon September 10, 2009 12:09PM

Re: Okay

cladking September 10, 2009 08:05PM

Re: Okay

Warwick L Nixon September 11, 2009 12:25PM

Re: Okay

cladking September 11, 2009 01:00PM

Re: Okay

Warwick L Nixon September 11, 2009 01:27PM

Re: Okay

cladking September 11, 2009 03:39PM

Re: Okay

Warwick L Nixon September 12, 2009 12:23PM

Re: Okay

cladking September 13, 2009 12:41PM

Re: Okay

Warwick L Nixon September 13, 2009 02:51PM

Re: Okay

cladking September 13, 2009 04:27PM

Re: Okay

Warwick L Nixon September 14, 2009 11:45AM

Re: Okay

cladking September 14, 2009 03:55PM

Re: Okay

Warwick L Nixon September 16, 2009 10:02AM

Re: Okay

cladking September 16, 2009 06:26PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking April 28, 2010 12:34PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Hermione September 09, 2009 02:40PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 09, 2009 05:00PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Tommi Huhtamaki September 09, 2009 05:25PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking March 25, 2016 01:01PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 15, 2009 08:33PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 16, 2009 10:32AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 16, 2009 04:51PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 17, 2009 09:35AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 17, 2009 01:32PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 17, 2009 01:55PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 18, 2009 09:48AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking September 18, 2009 10:22AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Warwick L Nixon September 18, 2009 11:14AM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

cladking March 10, 2010 11:53PM

Re: It ascends from earth and orders the lights above.

Hermione May 26, 2010 01:18AM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

cladking September 09, 2009 12:13PM

Re: Maybe you are on to something?

cladking October 08, 2009 11:41PM

Re: Arris angle

Warwick L Nixon July 15, 2009 10:55AM

Re: Arris angle

cladking August 01, 2009 08:29PM

Lord of the Rainbows.

cladking August 12, 2009 11:07PM

Re: Lord of the Rainbows.

cladking February 13, 2010 08:42PM

Re: Lord of the Rainbows.

Warwick L Nixon February 15, 2010 01:47PM

Re: Lord of the Rainbows.

cladking February 15, 2010 05:56PM

Re: Lord of the Rainbows.

Jammer February 22, 2010 11:24AM

Re: Lord of the Rainbows.

cladking February 22, 2010 04:03PM

perhaps I wasn't clear enough

Warwick L Nixon February 22, 2010 01:07PM

Re: perhaps I wasn't clear enough

cladking February 22, 2010 03:43PM

nuff said

Warwick L Nixon February 24, 2010 12:09PM

Re: Arris angle

cladking March 10, 2016 08:26PM

Re: Arris angle

cladking March 20, 2016 10:00AM

Re: Arris angle

Byrd March 23, 2016 06:46PM

Re: Arris angle

cladking March 23, 2016 07:53PM

Re: Arris angle

cladking March 28, 2016 10:35AM

Re: Arris angle

cladking April 26, 2016 01:41PM

Re: Arris angle

cladking May 07, 2016 08:29PM

Re: Arris angle

Warwick L Nixon July 14, 2009 12:38PM

Re: Arris angle

cladking July 14, 2009 01:49PM

Re: Arris angle

Hermione July 14, 2009 01:54PM

I Q test?

Warwick L Nixon July 14, 2009 02:36PM

Re: Arris angle

RLH July 15, 2009 11:06AM

Re: Arris angle

cladking July 16, 2009 11:34PM

Re: Arris angle

cladking January 09, 2019 10:03PM

Your ideas destroyed by questions you could not answer

Hans January 21, 2019 02:37PM

Re: Your ideas destroyed by questions you could not answer

cladking January 22, 2019 02:22PM

Re: Your ideas destroyed by questions you could not answer

cladking January 23, 2019 09:31AM

Question

Hans January 25, 2019 07:30PM

Re: Question

cladking January 27, 2019 11:05AM

Re: Question

Hermione January 27, 2019 01:33PM

Re: Question

cladking January 27, 2019 03:15PM

Oh my!

Hans January 27, 2019 08:51PM

Re: Oh my!

cladking January 27, 2019 09:57PM

Thanks for the amusement

Hans January 27, 2019 10:11PM

...and you avoided the questions.

Hans January 27, 2019 08:47PM

Re: ...and you avoided the questions.

cladking January 27, 2019 10:03PM

Still trying to avoid the question...amazing

Hans January 27, 2019 10:16PM

Re: Still trying to avoid the question...amazing

cladking January 28, 2019 09:49AM

No answers provide - so bye bye

Hans January 28, 2019 12:49PM

Re: No answers provide - so bye bye

cladking January 28, 2019 01:04PM

Again no answers - just avoidance - questions asked for the last time

Hans January 28, 2019 04:54PM

Re: Again no answers - just avoidance - questions asked for the last time

cladking January 28, 2019 05:55PM

Re: Arris angle

Clive July 16, 2009 11:35PM

Re: Arris angle

RLH July 17, 2009 04:04PM

Re: Arris angle

Don Barone July 17, 2009 09:50AM

Re: Arris angle

RLH July 17, 2009 04:05PM

Re: Arris angle

Don Barone July 18, 2009 06:33AM

Re: Arris angle

Mark Heaton March 17, 2010 02:21AM

Re: Arris angle

Don Barone March 11, 2016 08:17PM

Addendum to Re: Arris angle

Don Barone March 12, 2016 08:05AM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login