Slashdot Mirror
Ancient Papyrus Finally Solves Egypt's 'Great Pyramid' Mystery (newsweek.com)
schwit1 was the first Slashdot reader to bring us the news. Newsweek reports:
Archaeologists believe they have found the key to unlocking a mystery almost as old as the Great Pyramid itself: Who built the structure and how were they able to transport two-ton blocks of stone to the ancient wonder more than 4,500 years ago...?
Experts had long established that the stones from the pyramid's chambers were transported from as far away as Luxor, more than 500 miles to the south of Giza, the location of the Great Pyramid, but had never agreed how they got there. However, the diary of an overseer, uncovered in the seaport of Wadi al-Jafr, appears to answer the age-old question, showing the ancient Egyptians harnessed the power of the Nile to transport the giant blocks of stone.
According to a new British documentary Egypt's Great Pyramid: The New Evidence, which aired on the U.K.'s Channel 4 on Sunday, the Great Pyramid, also known as the Pyramid of Khufu, was built using an intricate system of waterways which allowed thousands of workers to pull the massive stones, floated on boats, into place with ropes. Along with the papyrus diary of the overseer, known as Merer, the archaeologists uncovered a ceremonial boat and a system of waterworks. The ancient text described how Merer's team dug huge canals to channel the water of the Nile to the pyramid.
According to a new British documentary Egypt's Great Pyramid: The New Evidence, which aired on the U.K.'s Channel 4 on Sunday, the Great Pyramid, also known as the Pyramid of Khufu, was built using an intricate system of waterways which allowed thousands of workers to pull the massive stones, floated on boats, into place with ropes. Along with the papyrus diary of the overseer, known as Merer, the archaeologists uncovered a ceremonial boat and a system of waterworks. The ancient text described how Merer's team dug huge canals to channel the water of the Nile to the pyramid.
Aliens did it man. Everyone knows that. Flying saucers, tractor beams, glowing power crystals, the works.
The base of the Great Pyramid may have been designed as a water pump. Maybe it was part of the waterworks.
No problem. All they need is a race of slave people to do the work.
Ramps, boats and good rope. I pretty much guessed that as a child but you know well done to those involved.
Why cannot use any modern technology to prove its feasability?
I mean we had a lot of people die during this process. You could prably measure the force of a thousand people to move a stone 1 meter. Then use heavy machinery to test the rest of the process.
They don’t need to make a whole structure. Just each of the tricky parts as a proof of concept.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
ancient egypts were white...
Who is looking for the canals?
Nobody's saying they should go to jail or have the government stop them. But free speech does not mean there can be no consequences. If the NFL wanted to fire them they could, within the bounds of whatever their contract is. They also can choose to not do anything or even support it. But that has nothing to do with their "Constitutional Right of Free Speech".
The people saying it's disrespectful are also exercising their rights. For what it's worth, I think they don't understand, or choose not to understand, what the players' protest is actually about. And for what its worth I think Trump is a dangerous lunatic who should not be in charge of anything. But defending the players by saying "it's their right" is missing the point.
Foget Net neuatrality? These sites will kill internet as we know it.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Why would the aliens necessarily be ancient? Maybe they were just alien kids playing with blocks, and now that they've grown up they've moved on to other worlds.
Those "archeologists" were not present there.
That "surveyer" was only part of a conspiracy to surpress the truth about our ancient overlords.
No ammount of "evidence" will change that.
I still can not conceive how that could be done by mere humans, therefore: Aliens!
Anything and everything else is all fake news.
*** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
No need to get fancy about such ideas; levers, rollers, ramps, chisels, hammers, muscle. It's not only possible, it's obviously possible. They were metalworkers.
And that's not to say they didn't apply something, or several somethings, more clever to the problem, either - it's just that excavating such blocks can be done with those things and nothing more.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The comments section on this site has really gone downhill. Where did all of the intellectually brilliant and funny comments go? Could it be a new age of younger, less smart people due to frequent use of cell phones and Facebook? Has the NSA infested the community? Mass mind control?
The workers were not slaves. There are payroll records to prove it.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
The real mystery is how they lifted these blocks up the structure. The descendant of the caste of temple builders in South India says they build a helical wall that spirals around the structure. The wall is filled with sand. Stones are rolled up the helical ramp and moved into place. Once the structure is complete, the scaffolding wall is broken, sand spills out, and the structure is reveled. How they build the Big Temple at Thanjavur
It is possible the Egyptians also used inclined planes, possibly even the same helical inclined plane. BTW the helical inclined plane is used day in day out by us, we call them the threads in nuts and bolts.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
You realize that by using basic physics it is possible to prove it with out doing it right? 1) can humans dig canals? Yes 2) lets calculate the required buoyancy of a barge for such a stone....check 3) can such a barge be built using the materials in the area? yes.... proved it can be done....have a nice day.
This "great mystery" hasn't been such for a long time. Quarries carved rocks to make blocks, the blocks were moved onto barges and then the barges were sailed to places where they were required. Evidence for canals was established long before now. The only mystery is why anybody has such trouble understanding that ancient peoples weren't idiots.
"It could possibly have been done this way" is not the same as "proved it can be done".
As for your specifc "proof" by "basic physics" well... that's another matter entirely. I don't even know where to begin.
Required reading for internet skeptics
Water locks and water channels are already proven technologies. Even ancient China had them.
Once the water is level, it doesn't take much energy to pull a vessel on a channel. For instance in France, I've seen a horse pull a multi-ton vessel with no working motor without much effort at all.
And once the vessel is inside the pyramid and assuming the pyramid acts like a giant water reservoir, then filling up that reservoir and raising the water level, and then pulling the vessel to the side where you need the blocks shouldn't take much energy either.
The only tricky part might be the ancient water pumping mechanism and how efficient it was before the water would evaporate or seep away.
In Egypt, there are still large obelisks, and large carved stones, including granite!
Your solution doesn't explain those.
My explanation does not have to. I'm not trying to explain the construction technique of every stone structure from ancient Egypt, only how some of the large stones came to be in the pyramids. Even the people that believe in the use of poured lime slurry blocks will agree that some of the stones were quarried far away and brought in with boats, sledges, and muscle. Perhaps they used the large stones as the forms, not wood. There was not a lot of wood in ancient Egypt.
Carving granite was done in ancient Egypt, I don't recall anyone disputing this. Those that do will likely think of fantastic explanations of aliens bringing them forges capable of forming granite into shapes. Then they'll explain how all of this technology was lost without a trace. It doesn't take aliens from a distant planet to explain these things, just more imagination and some understanding of physics, chemistry, and engineering.
People like to point to the 10 ton blocks of granite in the pyramids to "prove" that they had access to heavy machinery. I remember in high school the track team picking up the coach's truck (admittedly a small truck) and putting it sideways in its parking spot as a joke. That's 2 or 3 tons lifted by a bunch of teenagers on a whim. Get a much larger group of motivated adults, and with planning, they'll move 10 ton blocks great distances and to great heights. They'll do this with tools made of bronze and wood too.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Thanks to Obama and Hillary there is an abundance of illiterate undocumented laborers ready to be exploited for the task!
They're poor and desperate, so they're necessarily illiterate, and came here because of Hillary? You've already called them rapists and murderers, Mr. Trump, so you need not continue to insult and demonize them.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
Personally, I think the most obvious theory is likely to be the closest to the correct explanation: that the blocks WEREN'T quarried, but are some form of manmade cast stone made from ancient concrete.
If they were cast instead of directly quarried, the builders could have just built the whole thing like a modern freeway embankment... build the perimeter, backfill the inside with sifted & graded crushed rock & sand. Maybe put down an occasional layer of cloth to stabilize it horizontally (knowing the cloth will eventually decay, but only really NEEDING it for stabilization during construction). Cast the next row of stones, move them horizontally into place, and backfill the interior up to the next level. Stir, rinse, and repeat until you're done. Modern retained-earth construction obviously goes quite a bit further, (like using steel cables to pull the retaining walls inward so they can be vertical instead of sloped, and using precast wall segments instead of casting them on-site), but the basic idea is the same.
Moving big, heavy things HORIZONTALLY is fairly straightforward. So is moving crushed-rock cementious slurry up a hill in small buckets. If they're cast stone, the pyramids' construction basically just becomes a matter of having lots of money, immense HR management resources, and good supply-chain management.
From what I've read, Egypt's antiquities ministry is part of the reason why relatively little is known about the "nuts and bolts" construction details of the pyramids. It WANTS to preserve the aura of mystery, because the official narrative drives tourism and brings enormous amounts of money into Egypt. From their point of view, the absolute WORST thing that could happen is if someone were to demonstrate that the pyramids were no more special than a random freeway embankment.
Bozhe moy, you managed to pivot an article on ancient pyramids to arguments about the NFL! Well-played, comrade.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
Just watch out when the impatient/overworked/stressed out alien parents show up to pick after their kids.
Its not gonna be pretty.
Yeah, we bitch about stepping on those damned legos all laying about. Wait 'til someone steps on a pyramid! It's all fun 'til someone gets hurt!
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
Dude, you don't want what he's having. You really don't.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
You are right, but some were. There are other historical records.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
Especially important is the fact that Egypt did not use slaves for construction.
A small pickup is in the ton and a half range. But, point taken.
In the past I think a lot of the guessing was by scientists that were not engineers.
And then there was Erich von Däniken. Great fun for pubescent minds.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
But they were (and still are, if they come over here) "African Americans"
No...."Prove what was said in the papyrus can be done" was the challenge. All it takes is showing that it is physically possible.....you are asking a different question "Prove they did it". OK....The papyrus said so....that's all you get from archaeology.
I learned that almost five decades ago.
#DeleteFacebook
You think Trump is a dangerous lunatic,
Yes.
in contrast to Obama,
Yes.
a sympathizer of Islam and communism.
No.
Stephan
Whatever race they were, they were using slaves. We should hate the Egyptians solely because they used slavery.
Well, Yul Brunner notwithstanding, the currently accepted theory is that the pyramids were not built by slaves, but by paid labourers.
Stephan
Actually there is DNA evidence that the original founders of Egypt were Indo-European.
Since Indo-European is a language, part of a cultural complex that spread over many different populations, I find that hard to believe. Do you have any reliable sources? Of course there is European DNA in Egypt - it was very much part of the Greek and Roman worlds. However, I'm not aware of any linguistic evidence for PIE ever playing a role in Egypt before Alexander's conquest.
Stephan
Islam is not a threat. Extremist Islam is a threat, it's not the same thing. Extremist Christianity is a threat as well, like any extremist sect or ideology.
I have not seen Obama being a communist sympathizer, though that's a phrase seldom heard these days, invented by the anti-commie extremist of Joe McCarthy who I thought was still dead.
As for Trump, he's automatically dangerous because he's the president and is far more dangerous than any other single person in the US. He's also showing plenty of signs of being a lunatic; an out of control ego, and sees hallucinations of things that aren't there. Now putting his own personal foibles ahead of the good of the country isn't necessarily a sign of madness, it is more evidence of being dangerous. So, dangerous lunatic is not necessarily an incorrect description.
The hanging gardens of Babylon used Archimedes screws. Egyptians must have used water in order to keep the dust down and keep the workers hydrated as well as used them for canal boats.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
You've heard the expression "in theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not."
Theoretical calculation can show why something is IMPOSSIBLE. It cannot show that there is no unforeseen, insurmountable impediment. Only actually doing it can prove that there is not anything that makes it impossible to actually do.
Having said that, accomplishing each part, separately, is strong evidence that the entire process can be done. If people build appropriately sized canals in similar geography using only tools and technologies available to the ancient Egyptians, and they can (separately) build appropriate barges, and another group can move the blocks to where the barges would have been, it's reasonable to think they probably could have combined each of these steps.
He's not exactly Lord God King Writing either.
Perhaps he's ... using .. speech to text ...... and he talks ... like Sha..................t...n....er.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
There has been no historical or archeological evidence found that the Egyptians ever enslaved the Jews.
This space unintentionally left blank.
If they were poured, they wouldn't have chiseled tool marks on them. Duh.
Have you ever poured concrete? I have. Sometimes the forms move on you, things break, and now you have a very hard material that has gone beyond the bounds of where you want it to be and you have to do something about it. What do you do? You get out some chisels and hammers. Today we'd use power saws, jackhammers, and so forth but the problem and solution is much the same.
Again, as I recall the explanation on how the pyramids were built, is that it was a combination of quarried and poured blocks. Some of the stone was cut from a mine and moved to the site as a whole. The rest of the blocks were poured on site into forms. The material for the poured cement like material was likely from busted up pieces from the same mine that they got the whole stones. That means most any chemical, radiological, and such testing might not show which was poured and which was not. What would prove this theory is destructive testing, and that's not going to happen willingly. For that to happen we'd need something like an earthquake or meteor shower to hit the site and then someone look at the busted up pieces.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Water channels probably would work. However, there may be a bit of a problem. The Sphinx, pyramids, etc at Giza are built on top of a limestone plateau. It looks like the Giza Plateau is at least 30 meters (100feet) above the peak level of the Nile back in pre-Aswan Dam times. I would think that any system of engineering works capable of lifting boats, innumerable BIG rocks, and prodigious amounts of water up to the top of the plateau would have left some pretty obvious traces.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Dr. Daniel Jackson isn't posting here any more.
So you're not disputing the dangerous lunatic part?
I remember from about 15 years ago a documentary on putting up obelisks in which a number of archaeologists tried to do it as a practical demonstration. They tried elaborate schemes with sand running out of boxes and so on. The foreman of the team of hired help that constructed these things begged to be allowed to try his own method, and on the last day he was allowed to try. He built an A frame and a few other bits and with his team of men it took them half an hour once that was constructed. It shows the value of practical experience. So in this case it would be good to get some engineers skilled in hydrology, construction, shipping, etc., with good practical experience to look over the evidence in the diary and see if they could come up with a suitable way of implementing what it hints at (I imagine given the expense you'd have to simulate it in silico, though) to see if it makes sense. That sounds like it would be a really fun research project.
They must have had help from white people.
It's a good thing, then, that Egyptians themselves are significantly Europoid, right?
Ezekiel 23:20
Actually there is DNA evidence that the original founders of Egypt were Indo-European.
Since Indo-European is a language, part of a cultural complex that spread over many different populations, I find that hard to believe. D
The term Egypt is complex, as there were multiple kingdoms in both time and geography. That's not surprising as we are talking of a period of thousands of years, and the borders of European countries have been fluid over even the last 200, let alone the classic pharonic period of over time times that.
The point is that indeed there must have been some pretty sophisticated tools at work, well beyond what is attributed the ancient peoples.
The mystery is NOT whether ancient peoples moved large blocks, but rather HOW they did so without sophisticated setups that they weren't supposed to have known about.
Even stranger is the fact that the oldest structures (some perhaps much older than has been attributed) seem to be the grandest and most perplexing.
The mystery is: What kinds of technology did the ancients actually have, and why did they seem to lose their knowledge of these things.
The thing about ancient civilizations is that their collapse buried technology/knowledge that then get discovered again centuries or millennia later. Writing was discovered, lost, rediscovered... probably a few times. Most likely because reading and writing wasn't wide-spread in the society, but only in a specific class. If our civilization was to collapse tomorrow, I'm relatively confident that it wouldn't regress too much as literacy is more widespread in our civilization than in any before and we still have repositories of knowledge in printed form. The same thing happened with steam power (between Hero of Alexandria and 1606's Spain), mechanical computing devices (between the Antikythera device and the Pascaline in 1642) and even some simpler/humbler tools.
I'm going to use the woodworking hand-plane as an example... it's a simple family of tools that quickly adjust the size, flatten, shape or finish the surface of wood. A properly setup smoothing plane can adjust the dimensions by increments of a thousandth of an inch, scrub planes can take off chunks of an eighth of an inch. The hand plane is believed to have originated in ancient Egypt as a jig to hold either an adze blade or a chisel at a constant angle to the piece being worked. During medieval times, and up to the mid 19th century, they were a block of wood with a channel carved through it to hold the plane blade in the correct position (secured with a wedge). In the 19th century, 3 new designs of the tool were invented: metal-bodied planes, transitional planes (wood sole, metal holding/adjustment) and infill planes (wooden body, clad in metal). However, digs in Pompeii and other big Roman sites have brought up both metal-bodied and infill planes from the Roman era. So it's another relatively simple tech that was lost and rediscovered.
The only non-trivial change in woodworking tools between the Egyptians and now is that we have motorized most of the tools in order to speed up the process. If you remove the power tools from the equation, we're not even at the peak of the tool design. The peak in design happened between the 17th and the 19th centuries, and modern non-power tools are either copies of those designs (with better materials) or functionally inferior to those designs.
Is the Torah of so little historic value to you? You sound like an anti-semite.
Of course there is European DNA in Egypt - it was very much part of the Greek and Roman worlds.
Given Cleopatra's relationship to Julius Caesar this statement is true in several ways.
I read they were moved using an alien transportation system powered by the Sun's harmonics. The book had equations and everything.
Dunno why my idea never caught on :-) .
Ask any sculptor, and they'll say "take a block of wood/stone and remove everything that doesn't look like a [final object].
Clearly the Egyptians set up a gigantic block of stone and then carved away everything that didn't look like a stepped pyramid.
Waiting for my Nobel Prize..
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
It is actually well known that they used a sand ramp circling around the pyramid, which had a center made of mud (here comes your water) and round logs.
The workers were mostly hydrated with beer, well,during work time probably more with water or thinned down beer.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
The Sphinx (face) is _carved_ out of a rock. It was a huge rock just sitting there and they cut away the outside rock to carve the figurine.
The rest, like legs etc. are made from relatively small bricks.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Yes and no.
Strictly speaking ancient Egypt had no slaves.
On the Pyramids only free men worked.
In the quarries however also convicted criminals.
The only slaves usually where prisoners of war, who worked everywhere but not on pyramids, and got released into freedom when they spoke enough Egyptian to settle down or to go home.
There are "ceremonial slaves" like the Eunuchs in old China.
The only other way to fall into slavery was huge debts, which could made you a slave to your creditor.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
That means most any chemical, radiological, and such testing might not show which was poured and which was not.
You don't need an analysis to see if a stone us poured.
You see that with blank eye.
It is extremely unlikely that the Egyptians used poured blocks. If they had: we had literature about it. Like we have about basically everything covering their lives.
And we probably had ruins of stuff that *obviously* used pouring techniques.
If you can make poured blocks, it would make much more sense to simply use pouring to make big structures instead of pouring blocks on site and then moving them just like you move the chiseled blocks.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Aside from the off-color humor, Cleopatra was greek (ptolomy dynasty) and lived closer to our time than the time when those pyramids were built - they were already 3000 years old when she was alive, 2000 years ago.
Yes, the pyramids really are that old.
Yes Egypt has been invaded by many groups.
No, we don't know much about the ethnicity or culture of the time when they were built.
Yes, Subsaharan Africa had some extremely advanced cultures and kingdoms - and did so right up to about the 15th century when the Portuguese systematically flattened just about every coastal city they could locate.
If you can make poured blocks, it would make much more sense to simply use pouring to make big structures instead of pouring blocks on site and then moving them just like you move the chiseled blocks.
The blocks where not moved once poured, they were poured in place. The theory is that many of the blocks were quarried and moved to the site. When carrying the large blocks became difficult, or they wanted a smooth surface to work with, they would pour the blocks in place. Sometimes the blocks poured in place would have to be trimmed to allow for the placement of carved blocks, and that would mean chiseling into the poured block.
You don't need an analysis to see if a stone us poured.
You see that with blank eye.
You are correct, the evidence of poured blocks can be plainly seen. I was mistaken before on the need to crack open blocks to see this, there are already damaged blocks showing evidence of being poured in place.
It is extremely unlikely that the Egyptians used poured blocks. If they had: we had literature about it. Like we have about basically everything covering their lives.
And we probably had ruins of stuff that *obviously* used pouring techniques.
We do have literature about it. There's also a lot of literature on the use of carved blocks. Building these pyramids took decades and it is not inconceivable that the building techniques changed over that time, so early documentation may not have this technique because they didn't use it then. There is an obvious line in the blocks where the construction quality improved. This is where they shifted from only carved blocks to a combination of carved blocks moved to the site and blocks poured in place. The poured blocks can be seen in between carved blocks, where they fit so tightly that they could not be made any other way.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Trump acting to silence them is, imo, crossing the line. The constitution protects us from the government. This wouldn't be a big issue out trump didn't fan the flames
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
Sorry, it is extremely obvious that they never used any pouring techniques.
A) no literature
B) no poured building parts of ordinary architecture (temples, walls)
C) no poured blocks, or what ever, in the pyramids
If you can prove otherwise, I'm sure you get a Nobel Prize.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
So all religions are equal for you? You seem like a cultural relativism.
For me, as well as for Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Douglas Murray, and many more, Christianity is a better religion because Jesus was a hippie, while Mohammed was a warlord who had a child bribe. Both prophets are seen as the perfect man by their followers.
Who is a better man for you, Jesus or Mohammed?
Would following one or the other makes you a better person and if so, which one?
Also, check this out: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D8tFH5yIvsQ
Even moderate Muslims admit you are wrong.
Nope, the Jews were never captives in Egypt. That's all myth.
You mean like these traces?
http://sentinelkennels.com/Res...
Extremist Buddhism is terrifying...
I am very sucseptible to "let's have another drink"
And they where better paid than workers now. (OK, not that difficult to do)
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
What BLM wants is basically for the existing laws to be enforced. The perception is that a police officer can kill a black person at will and get off without serious punishment. There have been plenty of highly visible examples, although I don't know how the stats actually work out.
This is complicated because the lack of enforcement is within the justice system, for the most part. Grand juries did not indict in some egregious cases. Juries tend to find the police not guilty, no matter what the circumstances. BLM wants this to change.
(This is why I'm not keen on jury nullification. It can really easily turn into a system of oppression for a disfavored group, when crimes against that group go unpunished.)
In this country, a jury trial is necessary to convict someone of a serious crime, and so this is going to be a matter of changing how juries think. BLM therefore needs publicity, preferably not of the violent kind, and the NFL protest is an excellent way to do it from their point of view. They also need to publicize every Tamir Rice or Philandro Castile case, to get people thinking that the outcomes may be wrong.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
They even get free bullets, courtesy of the local police departments.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
"Slavery" doesn't have a single meaning. Some systems weren't all that harsh, some were horrifying.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Indo-European is a language family, which Egyptian of whatever period doesn't belong to. How do you label DNA as Indo-European?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I read they worked from 7am to 11am and 1pm to 5pm. Sunrise and sunset at the equator are at 6am and 6pm, with a sharp change from night-time to day-time. Noon-time is too hot to work, so they would have lunch then. There were studies on the food consumption; beer and bread. They actually optimized these two processes by noticing that the lightly baked dough was also used to make the beer mash, and that the froth from the beer went back into the dough.
http://www.aeraweb.org/lost-ci...
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Well, the Pyramids are quite far away from the equator.
But you are right in principle.
Through the middle ages we had the same dough/yeast trading in Germany. Most german countries had laws that required bakeries to take/buy the yeast left overs from breweries. No idea how that actually worked out, as the amount of yeast a brewery is producing is enormous!
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Dumb fuck...... "proved it can be done" is exactly what physics does. "Prove it was possibly something that was done" is what the fucking papyrus does. and literally....that is all you get from Archaeology.
Dude, you said something incredibly stupid. Then completely failed at reading.
Let it go. You'll feel better. Dwelling on your failures just isn't healthy.
Required reading for internet skeptics
They answered the easy part about how they moved the bricks horizontally. So how did these cavemen move them vertically to build something that tall?