Sound & Pyramids
Just Like That
March 28, 2023
Freedom of Speech
March 29, 2023Have engineers figured out how the pyramids were made?
Those large stone blocks would be a challenge using modern equipment.
No. That’s not what engineers do. Engineers build things. Archeologists figure out how the ancients did things. Sometimes archeologists consult with engineers, but that’s two very different jobs.
Don’t be absurd. The largest block in the largest pyramid weighed 70–80 tons, but few weighed more than a tenth that much and could be lifted by one of these:
But you don’t need a crane to build a pyramid, you just need time, motivation, and smart people not made lazy by the availability of horsepower and computers.
The Egyptians were smart.
They built spiral ramps up the sides of the pyramids as they went, because that’s the obvious and efficient thing to do and they weren’t idiots.
To move blocks long distances, they pulled them on wooden sleds across trackways lubricated with water or oil. We know this because they left paintings of the procedure (and we’ve verified that it works).
The ancients were very inclined on how sound works, ancient religions use there ‘ohms’ in certain frequencies which changes brain patterns, sound directly affects waters molecular structure and humans are based on 80% water.
It is said they even used light language, this is why the Ancient Hebrew dialect can be shown as a physical symbol when measured with a sound measuring device. You can visually see the sound.
From what we know, all past ancient civilizations used tools such as Torus Stone’s, come tools and even metamorphic Quartzite which can absorb sound, energy and even light, to be emitted.
Note that most megalithic structures around the world in which we still guess how they were built, happen to have these tools around.
If you haven’t heard about the coral castle story, where an old man lifted incredible blocks of coral into a building where no one knew how he done it until he unfortunately passed away, with his secrets gone with him. The only people who saw him where two children who said he was holding the Torus stone and cone tool.
2013, a French archaeologist working near the coast of the Red Sea found a collection of papyri which directly address the construction of the pyramids
. However, they mostly concern the day to day management of the construction work rather than technical details of the architecture and logistics.
That gets us that much closer to understanding those items, though, and it goes a long way towards narrowing down specific dates for their construction (which are pretty much about what we thought they were; no lost antediluvian civilizations here).
The problem, of course, is that these are not the kinds of documents which tend to be preserved intentionally. That is, nobody cares to copy and recopy the account books for a construction project which has long since been completed or inscribe it in durable stone.
These are ephemeral documents, where we have to rely on somebody absentmindedly tucking the document away somewhere (or more specifically, somewhere with phenomenally good preservation conditions, like a cave in a desert) and nobody else disturbing that site for a few thousand years. We are, then, very fortunate that this document exists at all.
To remove blocks from the quarries, they built ramps with stairs on either side with holes chiseled into the rock at regular intervals so posts could be inserted to lever the blocks—or more likely, wooden sleds bearing the blocks—using a rope and pulley system. We know this because the ramps still exist.
To quarry the blocks, they used bronze and arsenical copper tools and stone and wood mallets. The alloys they had weren’t very good for the purpose, so they had dedicated workers continually supply the masons with fresh chisels, then take the worn ones to the forge to be remade. We know this because they left paintings of tool use in their tombs. And their quarries are littered with evidence:
So no, the pyramids were not an impossible task requiring ancient astronauts. Like the moon landing, they were just very hard, and required smart people working for a higher purpose instead of carping at the world.
For this to work you have to forget our mainstream understanding of the Pyramids, everything we are told is merely a guess even though we dismiss it as ‘fact’.
It is told in Sumerian Tablets and the Emerald Tablets of Thoth written by the builder himself, that it took around 200 years to build around 11000BC.
They used frequencies, sound, resonance and vibration. This is what Nikola Tesla was so obsessed about and based his Wardenclyffe Tower on.
Then you move the boulder to the place where you want to build the pyramid and repeat the process another 2,299,999 times and you have your pyramid.
At 20 years with about 150 work days each (to account for work in the fields and travel to and from the site) that amounts to moving 767 boulders a day, on average. With 20,000 workers that gives you a crew of 10 for each boulder,
with some 60% of the workforce engaged in logistical support (sourcing and preparing food, preparing tools, preparing ramps, repairing ropes, etc, etc, etc).
For the most part, archaeologists do not say that. The super-perfect masonry of the pyramids is largely mythical. Most of the masonry of the pyramids is fairly rough, requiring mortar to fill in gaps and hold things together.
But there are some stones which do fit together very well. How did they do it? We know from other early societies which wrote about how they did similarly fine masonry like the Romans that it can be done with simple geometry, exacting measurement, and a lot of labor.
Getting two stones to fit together reasonably well is just a matter of chipping away at them until they’re the desired shape. For really close fits, though, masons tended to go with abrasives.
Quartz sand could be used to carefully grind away small protrusions and polish a stone surface to perfect flatness. Since this was all done by hand, it was very difficult to over correct and take off too much material.
It was nevertheless significantly more labor, so it was only done for the outermost stones, where appearance was important, not the vast majority of the inner stone which provided the structure.
A tradition of fine stone masonry in the area predated the Inca, who adopted and used it widely.
Something to realize about South American indigenous culture is that the Inca inherited a long and rich tradition and borrowed from existing cultures greatly.
They had a lot to borrow from both because the prior heritage was so rich, and they conquered and made use of so many different cultural traditions.
Many many ancient cultures (or even more recent or modern cultures) stressed the construction of monumental architecture with dressed stone, so there is nothing unique about the Inca in that regard.
And well built structures using shaped rocks were far more impressive than a haphazard pile of rocks, which were also more likely to fall down.
One of the notable things I noticed is just how custom the fit was. The temple at Pisac was probably an important structure, and has finally honed square blocks in many of its walls.
Some walls have tumbled, so you can observe the upper surface of the stone block as it was fit into the now missing block above. It is not a flat surface, but instead had tiny raised areas on the edges in the interior of the wall to cup the stone above.
The little ridges are not present on the exterior edge, but only on the interior meeting surfaces. Someone was paying very close attention to every detail on how two stones would meet. I doubt that you could rearrange the blocks in the structure since every one seems to be custom made for its neighbor.
Pisac also has impressive agricultural terraces made with stones which are basically piled rocks, but done with a high degree of competence.
I refer to Pisa c because it is typical of many structures that I have seen in Peru and Ecuador, although each location seems to have unique characteristics
G.I.T.C
The Andes are subject to earthquakes, and ancient peoples undoubtedly learned over time the benefit of well built stone structures. Inca architecture is particularly resilient to earthquake damage.
The Incan stone masonry was very labor intensive, and there are all sorts of variations. The differences seem to reflect this basic fact regarding how much labor was going to be devoted to make something, and some structures were simpler to make than others. Some used very finely shaped stones, some are not a lot more than a pile of rocks, and many are somewhere in between.
The Inca shaped building stones by simply pounding a hard rock against the building stone, and slowly shaped the surfaces where the stones would meet.
Exactly how they shaped the two surfaces of stone to match so well is not known for sure (it can be conjectured). Having looked at the stonework myself, a key fact is that each surface is custom made to match the stone above and below to one another.
Only the very finest Inca buildings used what we think of as typical stone masonry, which are square-shaped blocks of uniform shapes that are laid in parallel lines. Obviously, making such blocks was the most labor intensive, and if your means to shape stone are crude, it also made sense to fit irregular shaped stones together, and just dress the contact surfaces for the tight fit.
