Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Architect Claims to Solve Pyramid Secret

Posted by Zonk on from the that's-one-way-to-do-it dept.

Alreadybutnotyet writes "A French architect claimed Friday to have uncovered the mystery about how Egypt's Great Pyramid of Khufu was built — with use of a spiral ramp to hoist huge stone blocks into place. The construction of the Great Pyramid 4,500 years ago by Khufu, a ruler also known as Cheops, has long befuddled scientists as to how its 3 million stone blocks weighing 2.5 tons each were lifted into place. 'The most widespread theory had been that an outer ramp had been used by the Egyptians, who left few traces to help archeologists and other scientists decode the secret to the construction. Houdin said he had taken into account the copper and stone tools available at the time, the granite and limestone blocks, the location of the pyramid and the strength and knowledge of the workers.'"

14 of 209 comments (clear)

  1. History Channel by StarWreck · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is old news to me. I saw the "Spiral Ramp" idea on either the History Channel or The Discovery Channel at least a couple years ago. The show even had a CGI model of the spiral ramp.

    --
    ... and in the DRM, bind them.
    1. Re:History Channel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
      rtfa.

      According to his theory - shown in a computer model available at http://www.3ds.com/khufu - the builders put up an outer ramp for the first 140 feet, then constructed an inner ramp in a corkscrew shape to complete the 450-foot structure.
    2. Re:History Channel by jeffasselin · · Score: 5, Informative

      I thought the same thing, then read the FA and realized he's proposing that they built a spiral ramp INSIDE the pyramid, instead of outside. Advantages being keeping the workers out of the sun, and it could have been much smaller. It's certainly the first time I see someone proposing an interior ramp.

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    3. Re:History Channel by Oligonicella · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope. The one on Discovery wasn't a huge, gently sloping mound, it used the limestone to create a mortar and wound around the pyramid. They even duplicated the mixture and had men haul a rock up it.

    4. Re:History Channel by Seumas · · Score: 1, Informative

      Right, but the interior-ramp method isn't exactly solving the secret of the pyramid. It's a minor (but important) tweak on a pre-existing theory. The article (at least the title in the article that is linked to) is rather hyperbolic. And while it may present a realistic method of doing it, until we find some blue-print, manual or a home video from back in the day, nobody can ever claim to have "solved" it, unless they're just looking for a lot of attention.

    5. Re:History Channel by martin-boundary · · Score: 4, Informative
      You seem to be confused about what the word theory means. Merely dreaming up a scenario with an external ramp is not so much a theory as speculation.

      Anybody can come up with an idea like the external ramp, it's a nice story but meaningless if it can't be verified. In other words, to call the external ramp idea a scientific theory, you'd have to show exactly where you think the remains of the ramp infrastructure are located, directly on the pyramid. You could also show places where you think the material of the external ramp was put, show stones which look to you like they were cut to form part of the ramp, etc. In other words, you'd have to connect the idea of the ramp to the physical evidence, so that other scientists could agree or disagree. Merely making a drawing of a spiral ramp in a book and waffling about it does not constitute a preexisting theory.

      On the other hand, the internal ramp idea does constitute a real theory, because it actually makes a lot of engineering claims that can be checked by other scientists, like where the ramp actually is/was inside the pyramid etc.

    6. Re:History Channel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Layers of rock form over time. You could quite easily have bacteria at the center of a solid chunk of stone.

    7. Re:History Channel by Carewolf · · Score: 4, Informative

      Of course recent research shows that the workers probably wasn't slaves. They were treated much better, had good homes, received health treatment, etc. They were probably professional craftsmen.

    8. Re:History Channel by Tatarize · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Egyptian government does that a lot. They have a fairly practical approach. When you can't get at the information without messing the stuff up, you don't get the information. Develop something to see through walls without damaging anything and they'll let you do it. Try to figure it out by tearing into stuff or using large vibrations and they won't.

      --

      It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
    9. Re:History Channel by Blain · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes and no. Yes, there were some well-paid (well-fed) professionals in charge of the construction of the pyramids. No, there were no slaves involved with the production of the pyramids. There was, however, a huge body of workers that rotated to the pyramid site from different regions to work on these pyramids. They were peasants who were not slaves, but their lives were pretty bleak. They had the same diet while working on the pyramids as they did when working in the fields. Working on the pyramids (or other large construction projects) was just another part of their responsibility in maintaining ma'at, and was carried out during the part of the year when these workers weren't needed for agricultural work.

      This was a mixture of religious responsibility and make-work that not only satisfied ma'at, it also provided work with which these workers could earn food when there wasn't other work to be had.

  2. Probably a true story by GFree · · Score: 2, Informative

    Doesn't have that SlashRating© bullshit on the side of the article. The horror has ended!

  3. Eh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Here, you missed this part in your copy/paste...

    Ending eight years of study on the subject, architect Jean-Pierre Houdin released his findings and a computerized 3-D mockup showing how workers would have erected the pyramid at Giza outside Cairo.

    ...

    According to his theory - shown in a computer model available at http://www.3ds.com/khufu - the builders put up an outer ramp for the first 140 feet, then constructed an inner ramp in a corkscrew shape to complete the 450-foot structure.

    Houdin also postulated that King's Chamber was hoisted into place through a system of counterweights.

    Houdin said he plans to verify his theories through non-invasive tests on site.

    If you're going to copy half the article word for word, at least do the whole damn thing.

  4. Re:Feasible... by WrongMonkey · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Egyptians didn't have simulations, but they did have a lot of trial and error. The pyramids at Giza are only the most famous. There were many other projects that show a refinement of methods. These were sophisticated people with generations of engineering experience, so the "obvious" method may not be not correct.
    That said, you are correct about this article being speculation. The author is making quite a claim without any physical evidence.
    Examples of other pyramids: http://www.egyptologyonline.com/pyramids.htm

  5. Apparently they were not slaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Last I heard, it wasn't slaves that built the pyramids, but paid laborers. They found tablets with their wages and everything. Typically, it would be farmers that during the off season would make some extra money by working at the pyramids.