Atlantis Online
October 04, 2022, 04:46:55 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Were seafarers living here 16,000 years ago?
http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=34805893-6a53-46f5-a864-a96d53991051&k=39922
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Pyramids: Cast, Poured, or Both?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Pyramids: Cast, Poured, or Both?  (Read 8519 times)
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #45 on: May 29, 2007, 11:01:00 am »



Q:

I don't know if this might help or not:

On the AKHENATEN thread that I have been working on, something made me
stop and think about this CEMENT theory.

It seems that hatred for Akhenaten was so great, that his succerssors destroyed
everything that he had erected.

PYLONS have been found FILLED WITH BRICKS that had been used by Akhenaten's
builders.

I don't know much about this stuff, but:

PYLONS are columns, right?  How were THEY made?  I hardly think that they had
been built by rock slabs - it would be hard to keep them together after being
filled with bricks.  How were they made HOLLOW?

THEY HAD TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN TWO PIECES LIKE A PIPE.

So, the only answer for me is CEMENT.

Hope this helps,
B
« Last Edit: May 29, 2007, 07:00:19 pm by Bianca2001 » Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #46 on: May 30, 2007, 12:48:32 am »

Hi B
This is a picture of a modern cast concrete pipe, made so the ends fit into each other.  It's not a complicated design, and I can see where the ancients, could have come up with it also.  Just keep stacking them on top of each other.  A fine coating of plaster goes on afterwards, with the decorative features added to the plaster.  They likely used shorter sections for strength.
Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #47 on: May 30, 2007, 04:02:21 am »

Quote
Just keep stacking them on top of each other.

Just show us some stacked units forming a pylon.

I'll show you a photo of a partially carved obelisk which was abandoned because it split.

I think you are confusing a pylon with a column or obelisk. In AE a pylon refers to a large entrance building or gate building. Pylons formed of twin towers. The earliest examples of pylons in front of a courtyard appear in the 11th Dynasty.

http://touregypt.net/featurestories/templeentrance9.jpg

Here is a better photo:

http://www.touregyptphotos.com/showphoto.php?photo=1267&password=&sort=1&cat=2&page=1

http://www.touregyptphotos.com/data/2/186113-1338_img-med.jpg?3310



The two rectangular tower with a gate between constitute the pylon. An obelisk is standing in front (usually one of a pair).

« Last Edit: May 30, 2007, 08:14:28 am by Catastrophe » Report Spam   Logged
Tom Hebert
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1370


« Reply #48 on: May 30, 2007, 08:16:36 am »

Now, Qoais.  Aren't you really grasping at straws here?  Every time that Cat proves you wrong, you come up with a even more far-fetched argument to support this poured-concrete notion.  Why not just throw in the towel and admit that your magnificent obsession was "all wet"?


Hi B
This is a picture of a modern cast concrete pipe, made so the ends fit into each other.  It's not a complicated design, and I can see where the ancients, could have come up with it also.  Just keep stacking them on top of each other.  A fine coating of plaster goes on afterwards, with the decorative features added to the plaster.  They likely used shorter sections for strength.

Report Spam   Logged
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #49 on: May 30, 2007, 08:57:22 am »




Okay, Tom and Cat:

How did they make the pylons?  Just curious.
B
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #50 on: May 30, 2007, 09:59:28 am »

B

This:


http://www.touregyptphotos.com/showphoto.php?photo=1267&password=&sort=1&cat=2&page=1

is a pylon. I think you are getting confused with electricity pylonas as being tall and thin.

pylon

1. a tall structure erected as a support (esp. for electric power cables) or boundary or decoration
2. a gateway esp. of an ancient Egyptian temple
3. a structure marking a path for aircraft
4. a structure supporting an aircraft engine

The Concise Oxford Dictionary

Clearly 2 is intended in this context.

Thus obelisks were not hollow although some were erected in segments. However the partly quarried fractured obelisk destroys any nonsense that obelisks were poured.

Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #51 on: May 30, 2007, 10:01:50 am »

Quote
Now, Qoais.  Aren't you really grasping at straws here?  Every time that Cat proves you wrong, you come up with a even more far-fetched argument to support this poured-concrete notion.  Why not just throw in the towel and admit that your magnificent obsession was "all wet"?

Thanks Tom

I might add that I think the hypothesis a bit pourly

Pun intended.
Report Spam   Logged
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #52 on: May 30, 2007, 10:56:32 am »





Thanks, Cat-

I was going by the impression of a column, like in the pediment of a bridge
which, on second thought, does resemble an Egyptian pylon.

I still think the Egyptians were capable of making cement, whether they
used it in the construction of pyramids or not.

B
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #53 on: May 30, 2007, 02:29:22 pm »

What the heck is mortar if it isn't a type of "cement"?

Also, this technology was supposedly super secret.  Why would they plaster it all over the walls in pictures, if it was a secret?
Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #54 on: May 30, 2007, 03:00:03 pm »

Here is a way of understanding the basic construction method of constructing this Obelisk.
Firstly examine the pictures in the link below in fine "DETAIL"



http://www.waseda.jp/prj-egypt/sites/Aswan/AswanPh-E.html

Details to look for:

      Color of the surrounding rock, color of the Obelisk and color of the material between the surrounding rock and the Obelisk.
Natural Strata cracks in the surrounding rocks
compared with the lack of them in the Obelisk.
 
The pounding marks on the top of the Obelisk especially the edges and the sides of the tapered surfaces
Also the lack of pounding grooves on top of the main body of the Obelisk.
Notice the pounding grooves in relation to the bench on the lower right hand corner of the picture, they do not penetrate the ledge. Why? "TO HARD"
The right hand side of the excavation has straight lines where as the left hand side shows strata cracks all over the place.
 The type of fault crack emanating from the wedge groove. This is not a Strata type crack, it has all the hallmarks of a man made substance.





From there the plug is removed and the stabilized sand is dressed to the shape required while still moist but not hard.
All that is required now is to fill the mould with a run down of Granite "Chips" collected and screened from the quarry floor  mixed with their Calcined product in the mould.

Rock Pounders can now be employed to pound out the "Stabilized Sand" not Granite to release the moulded form.


Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #55 on: May 30, 2007, 03:02:21 pm »

I would also like to know why there are pound marks only on the end.  If they pounded this out with balls, where are the pounding marks on the length of this thing? Why is the rest of it smooth if it was pounded?  If this hadn't broken, how would they have smoothed out all those pound marks?
Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #56 on: May 30, 2007, 03:26:47 pm »

Madam Catastrophe,  you seem to think the WORD "disaggregation" is an impediment to the theory.  Anyone reading that word for the first time, would understand immediately what it means, however, you're the only one having a problem with it.

First of all, you claim they used saws for cutting the mega blocks in the King's Chamber.  Show me the 27 foot saw that would be required to cut this length.  Once again, we see the giants at work here Grin

You have proven in the other forum that you are ignorant regarding the manufacture of cement, and did not know that there is stones (aggregate) in cement.  Nor did you seem to realize that cement sets (cures) by the evaporation of the water content.

Disaggreation simply means the separation of the components of the aggregate.  Whatever that aggregate might be.  So - you're saying that if I find a sea shell with clay on it, I can't wash the clay off, because...................?  All I'm doing by washing the clay off the shell, is disaggregating the original compound.  What's so hard to understand about that?

You have no proof of the AE's having the necessary tools to create these masterpieces of polished rock.  There are no experiments done today, that can duplicate this feat.  There are pictures on the walls showing how certain tasks were performed, however, pictures can be deceiving.  This knowledge was secret - for the priests and Pharoah only. 

You cannot show how they raised numerous blocks, the weight of two railroad tankers, and placed them perfectly in the King's Chamber.  Even today, we require wire cable to lift such a weight.  Rope will not bear the weight.

So Madam, until you can duplicate these feats to prove your theory, do not pooh pooh the "concrete" theory.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2007, 03:45:07 pm by Qoais » Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #57 on: May 30, 2007, 04:43:41 pm »

Please STOP calling me feMALE.

You have the gender AND THE ARGUMENT incorrect.

Desist!

Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #58 on: May 30, 2007, 04:59:56 pm »

DISaggregation is ANTIentropic

But then you need your long fled "expert".

Stop calling me Madam


Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #59 on: May 30, 2007, 05:07:19 pm »

Let us get one thing correct.

My wife has loads of TV and press experience. GMTV live. Daily Telegraph. You name it. She has done it. Yet you still make aspersions that I am female. I have no problems with females or males unless they tell lies. Especially about mouldy concrete.

Get it correct!
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy