The Pyramids of Egypt

Welcome back. We will continue with our analysis of the 4th Dynasty pyramids in Egypt on this page with a further look at The Red Pyramid

I am presently analyzing the pyramids looking at them "edge on". Here are the images and what they reveal when we look at The Red Pyramid in this way.

NOTE HERE: I haven't checked it yet but I am speculating that the angle at Meidum is going to be this same larger angle of 71.56055 degrees

Okay so here we see that incorporated in the various pyramids we have looked at so far are several of the key numbers AND FRACTIONS that were sacred to the ancient Egyptians. Case in point: at Giza and P1 we have 1.1111111111111 and 9 (0.9) and here in our latest one we have found 1/3 rd (0.333333333) 2/3 rds (0.666666666) 1.5 and 3. Somehow it must all tie together and I sense that we are closer to a solution that we have ever been.

While we are pondering that let's take a look at The Bent Pyramid. This one is very complex and although I have found a few things I am not convicned I have it completely deciphered. Here is what I have so far. NOTE HERE: I am using John Legon's diagram and I have sent him some of my work. He has not asked me not to use it so I will continue because it is the best study done yet on The Bent Pyramid !

I was just looking at the angle I arrived at for The Red and tan of 3.00 and noted that it was very close to the ratio for 5 to 7 or 0.71428571428 x 100 or 71.42857 degrees. I decided to see what I would find using this as an angle and keeping first the same base and then second the same height. Here is the result:

With height of 198 and angle of 71.42857 we get base of 589.317 (divide by 2 for 294.6585)

With base of 593.9697 and angle of 71.42857 we get height of 199.56 (4114.99 inches or 342.92 feet or 104.52 meters)

With height of 200 and angle of 71.42857 we get base of 595.27 cubits ! You are probably wondering why I underlined and put in red this measurement. It is twofold. Firstly it is the distance east and west that The Bent and The Red Pyramids are from each other (as per Jim Alliosn) PLEASE NOTE: Image copyrighted to Jim Allison !

The second is that it seems to equal the diagonal of P3 taken from 2 x 440 or base of The Great Pyramid. 2 x 440 = 880 - 595.27 = 284.73. When the math is done this calculates to a base for P3 of 201.33 or 4151.5 inches. The significance can not be understated ! Here is a passage from this website:

Entrance passage: Altitude north of step 41.51 (21.74) , 40.48 (21.2) beyond

And finally we see that in the earlier work of Nick L. and myself where we were using the simple 9 by 11 diagram to define our solar system we see that when 595.27 is added to the hypoteneuse we see that the resulting distance seems to equal the distance to Mars. PLEASE NOTE: When 595.27 is added to the hypoteneuse of 1137.01 the result is 1732.28 AND EXACTLY WHAT IS SURMISED AND CALCULATED FOR THE NORTH - SOUTH DISTANCE OF THE GIZA RECTANGLE

Speaking of Meidum just very quickly we have this: The Pyramid was initially made in 7 steps for 60 m circa of height; it was built around a central core on the four sides of which were laid 6 layers of inclined blocks (74° 5'46''); these, decreasing in height from the nucleus to outwards, formed the steps. This is taken from this website. I was sure it was going to be 71.42857 and couldn't figure out why this angle and how it could tie into what we have already discovered and then I decided to simply see what the tan of this angle would be and it turned out to be tan of 74.09611111 or 3.509623 reverse of this would be 15.9038888 and tan of 0.284931. We have seen 284 before so I decided to see what we would get when we used 284.931 (0.284931 x 1000) as a diagonal (thoughts of P3 in my head) and it calculates to incredibly 201.477 cubits or 4154.45 inches !!! See below for Petrie's measurements of G3

However we must again return to 595.27. Given height of 200.0 and angle of 5/7 x 100 we get 595.27 BUT this doesn't seem to want to check exactly with what Petrie found at Dashar. Here is what he found:

Author's Note: I think we will eventually come to the realization that the pyramids were enormous geodetic survey monuments and were instrumental in the re-laying out of the fields after the inundations. How they did this is a project I am presently working on. A major first step has been achieved however since we now can see that they all tie in to each other and use some of the simple angles and ratios in their slopes and sides and heights.

When one uses 6702 as the "slope" distance between The Bent and The Red Pyramids and we use the bearing of 171 degrees 13' we find that the distance calculates to 595.56 cubits instead of 595.27 and when we convert 6702 feet to cubits we find that we get 3900.29 cubits so it would seem logical to assume that the distance meant was 3900.00 cubits exactly. When we do this we get [(3900 x 20.62 ) / 12] 6701.5 feet. Now when we calculate the short side of our right angled triangle we get sine of 8.7833333 or 0.152698366 and we get 3900.00 x 0.152698366 or 1023.3081 feet which translates to 595.5236 cubits. If we substract this from 2 x 440.0 or base of G1 we get 880.0 - 595.5236 or 284.4764 cubits and as a diagonal yields a square of 201.155 ... not close enough. So let us back track. Value we are looking for is square root of [(201.46 x 201.46) x 2] or 284.9075 and take away from 880.0 and we are left with 595.0925. Using the bearing Petire gives us we get inverse sine of 0.15698366 or 6.548858559 and x's 595.0925 we get 3897.1766 cubits or 6696.6485 which doesn't seem to check with what Petrie has measured. So for the time being this line of study seems to have hit a dead end. Possibilities which could cause a descrepancy is a wrong bearing or wrong measurements. I have faith in Petrie and his ability to measure so the fault could lie in the angle used. If we use 3900.00 as the diagonal and 595.09 as the distance between we get an angle of deflection of 8.7768873 or bearing of 171 degrees, 13 minutes' and 23.2 seconds. Did Petrie simply round off his figures ? 23.2 seconds is not very much ... I guess we will just have to check it some day.

... For it to work out to 595.09 we would need a height of ... well Stanley Kubrick would know ... it would be 2001 or more rightly 200.1 cubits for the height. That could be 90 for the bottom and 110.1 for the top over at The Bent Pyramid. Very nice.

Author's Note: The more I study these pyramids the more I am convinced that each side and each slope is telling us a story. They are not perfectly square because they were not intended to be. Each side has it's own mathematical story to tell us and there was no tip because four diffent angles and slope distances would lead to a rectangle at the top ... not a point. The height at The Red Pyramid was 197.9898 and 198 and 200 and 200.1 all at the same time. Each giving us a diffeent view of things. That is why we get the different angles.

	Length.	Difference from Mean.	Angle.	Difference from Mean.
N. E. S. W.	... 4149.2 4157.8 4153.9	... – 4.4 + 4.2 +.3	+ 16' 48" +12' 23" + 12' 57" ...	+ 2 45" – 1' 40" – 1' 06" ...
Mean	4153.6	3.0	+ 14' 3"	1' 50"