The Pyramids of Egypt
Their Secrets Revealed

Part XII

The square roots of 2 and 3
versus
the 9 by 11 Rectangle at giza

Hi all today we are going to look at the ongoing battle among Giza Plateau researchers. The battle being ... is the Giza Plateau in the configuration of a 9 by 11 rectangle or a square root of 2 by square root of 3 configuration ? Up until just recently we only had Petrie to go by and he had the Giza Plateau measuring on the vertical 35,713.20 "inches" by 29,227.00 on the horizontal and so the arguments went back and forth because both scenarios were close. In the 9 by 11 camp was myself and Jim Allison and of course John Legon was firmly in the camp of the square roots. There it sat for 125 years until finally Dash et al: re-measured it in 2006. Amid a flurry of press releases that claimed it proved Petrie grossly in error we still had to wait several years for the results to be made public. When they came it showed Petrie out almost 3 and 1/2 feet on the horizontal and 2 and 1/2 feet on the the vertical and this was touted as proving Petrie had made major errors. BUT I WAS NOT CONVINCED ! Petrie had proved time and time again to be meticulous in his work method and so I went in search of an explanation of why the measurements between these two gentlemen differed.

I think the first thing to do is to post the measurements arrived at by these two surveyors: Petrie first (click image for a larger and clearer view)

The diagram on the left show Clive Ross' work when he set the south side of G1 precisely due west.

Then Dash released this diagram of his: Again click for larger and clearer image)

What an analysis of Dash's numbers showed is that the distance BETWEEN THE CENTERS OF THE PRYAMIDS when compared to those of Petries were virtually exact. What this proved is that THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PETRIE AND DASH WAS IN THE NORTH POINT USED ! So now let us analyze the two of them and their measurements. (Click image for a larger and clearer image)

The thing to notice here here is that although the east-west distance and the north-south distance has a large variance in them the diagonal from the NE corner of G1 to the SW corner of G3 has a variance of only 1.39 inches over a distance of almost 3/4's of a mile or about 3845 feet or checking to an exact match to within 0.99997. Okay so what I did next was to average out Dash's and Petrie's diagonal and I got 46148.13 + 46146.74 = 92294.87 / 2 = 46147.435 inches and this is what I used for the following analysis of a 9 by 11 rectangle (or triangle) and a square root of 2 by square root of 3 rectancle (or triangle).

We start with a diagonal of 46,147,.435 which eqauls either square root of 5 or square root of 202 (9 squared + 11 squared) ... OR BOTH !!!

Here is how it developed: (As always click on image for a larger and clearer view, Please do that for all the following images)

And now we are going to set 46,147.435 as the square root of 202. Observe:

Notice horizontal is almost exactly 9 and vertical is almost exactly 11 and they both check almost exactly to what Petrie measured as is shown in the next diagram but before I do that I need to mention something in regards to planetary movement and the like. Venus and Earth are in an interesting relationhip as the orbital period of Venus times 13 is equal (almost) to the orbital period of Earth times 8. 13 times 224.7001 = 2921.1013 and divided by 8 = 365.1376625. Then I decided to see what 8 times Earth equals and 8 times 365.2564 = 2922.0512 and I immediately saw how close it was to our horizontal distance of 29222.30 When we multiply 2922.0512 by 10 we get 29220.512 and checks to within 0.99994 . So horizonatl distance equals the following:

and Part I - The 9 by 11 rectangle is complete with Petrie givng us 29227 and 35713.5 and almost completely agreeing with the 9 by 11 club. But what does Dash show us ? Here is the final image for Part I

Okay let's look at Dash now. He has the diagonal at 46,146.74 inches with vertical at 35,744.09 and horizontal at 29,187.01

This time our diagonal of 46,147,.435 is not equal to square root of 202 but is in fact equal to square root of 5. Then we assign horizontal as square root of 2 and vertical is assigned the value square root of 3. If all goes well we should close on the value of sqaure root of 5 for the diagonal. So here we go.

If 46,147,.435 = sq rt of 5 or 2.236068 then ONE equals 46,147,435 / 2.236068 = 20637.76033 or "ONE". Therefore horizontal is equal to 20.637.76033 x sq rt of 2 or 1.4142135623731 and we get 29,186.20 "inches" and vertical is 20.637.76033 x sq rt of 3 or 1.7320508 and we get 35745.65 "inches" and a special note here that Dash has the vertical at 35,744.09 while his horizontal distance is 29,187.01 and checking almost exactly to the ratio sq rt of 3 to sq rt of 2 .

Here is the diagram:



So amazingly if you follow Petrie and his north-point you conclude definitively it is a 9 by 11 rectangle while if you go with Dash and his north-point you conclude conclusively that it was a sq rt of 2 by sq rt of 3 rectangle. ... Most interesting. Kind of reminds one of the old Certs commerical where it suggested we all stop arguing and realize we are both right !!!

I guess the final question has to be, and I really don't see how we are ever going to answer the question, what was it exactly that The Ancient Builders used as their North-Point ?


Well it appears that I have erred big time. I sent my site to John Legon and he was very quick to point out that Dash DID NOT re-survey The Giza Plateau as I had thought but had simply converted Petrie's data to the new coordinate system of The Giza Mapping Project of Goodman and Lehner to a degree of accuracy of 1/10th of a meter. All Dash did was to re-survey The Great Pyramid in 2015. Well this throws a rather giant monkey wrench into things however my original premise that depending on the north point used will determine the ratio of the vertical to the horizontal stands as proven... You really have to wonder why no one in ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY SIX YEARS (136) has ever decided to re-measure The Giza Plateau. I mean really how the devil will they ever determine one way or the other whether there is a Pan Generational Plan at Giza if they refuse to study or collect the data. With my background in surveying maybe I should volunteer !


Cheers
Don Barone
June 25th, 2017

Revised with last paragraph June 27th, 2017