-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA
Paper 3. Pyramidology
M. J. Cooper
Version 2.0 (October 21, 2019)
Copyright © 2019 M. J. Cooper, Oregon, USA
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in
any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or
other electronic or mechanical
methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher,
except in the case of brief
quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other
noncommercial uses permitted by
copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher,
addressed ʺAttention: Permissions
Coordinator,ʺ at the address below.
Publisher: [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 1
3. Pyramidology
The definition of Pyramidology herein is the study of the Great
Pyramid to determine its
divinity; more specifically, was it designed by God? Other
definitions are excluded from this
study. In the course of studying the Pyramid, the question came
to mind, ʺwhy did David
Davidsonʹs chronology end in 1953ʺ, as described in his book
ʺThe Great Pyramid- Its Divine
Messageʺ? Though I never directly answered that question, my
research has taken me down a
path where I now believe the Pyramid provides sufficient
evidence to prove that it witnesses to
all of Godʹs 7000-year plan, which stretches far beyond 1953.
This study presents that evidence.
This concept is not something new as many have followed this
path before, such as John Taylor,
Piazzi Smyth, John and Morton Edgar, David Davidson, and Adam
Rutherford. The ideas that
these researchers provided were based upon the information and
tools that were available in their
times. The most significant difference between now (2018-19) and
then (1865-1970) is that none
of the prior researchers had the advantage of a Personal
Computer (PC) with astronomical,
spreadsheet, drawing, and word processing software and access to
the internet. Without a PC, I
doubt that these hypotheses and clues could have been developed,
and I believe that this marks
the predetermined time of a more detailed discovery as now
rather than an earlier time.
The Goal of The Study
As stated, the original goal of this study was to understand why
the chronology in David
Davidsonʹs book terminated in August of 1953 at the south wall
of the Kingʹs Chamber.
However, it became apparent that the evidence does not support
Davidsonʹs twelve-sided
Pyramid theory but that it should be square. Some students have
a vested interest in Davidsonʹs
theories, which, to a certain extent, are based on the shape of
the base. However, a new theory is
presented herein, which matches what the Pyramid purist looks
for in the Pyramid. That is the
external, and primary internal dimensions are defined by the
number of days in a year, 365.25 as
used by modern astronomers, the Sacred Cubit, the Bʺ, the number
2, and the constant π.
Because the twelve-sided Pyramid concept is not viable, it is
necessary to change two tenets,
which are the length of the Sacred Cubit and the Pyramid inch to
arrive at the new theory. I ask
the ʺDavidsonʺ reader to bear with the concept of this new
theory until at least the end of ʺPaper
4. The Exteriorʺ regarding the external dimensions of the
Pyramid. However, continuing to Paper
7, and beyond, will reveal so much more about God’s design of
the Pyramid and His plan.
This new study shows how the Pyramid matches the story and
chronology of the Bible, to the
day, in most cases and the hour in others. Since the Pyramid was
designed and built before most
Bible events occurred, it foretold them and continues to do
so.
It is this prophetic characteristic that validates the concept
that God was responsible for the
design of the Pyramid. It is the way He has chosen to reveal
Himself at this time in history. As
we saw earlier, Isaiah 19 says we should expect this revelation
to occur at this time.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 2
The Scope of the Study
The study will mainly concentrate on analyzing the surveys of
the Pyramid to define the original
intent of the design and match that to Bible chronology. There
are other tenets of Pyramidology
that will not be investigated in this study; at this time, as
follows:
Precession of the equinoxes
Length of the earthʹs orbit
Mean distance of the earth to the sun
The weight of the earth
Obliquity of the Ecliptic
The volume of the earthʹs crust above sea level
The proportion of land and sea on the earthʹs surface
Built at the geographical center of the land surface of the
earth
Stands on the longest land contact meridian
Situated on the most extended land contact, earth –circuit
bearing (rhumb) on the Earthʹs surface
The purpose of the Capstone is an essential tenet of
Pyramidology, and it will be described in
this paper. There is one other tenet of Pyramidology described,
with new data, at the end of this
paper, which deals with the compass bearing of Bethlem and
Patmos from the Pyramid.
The hypotheses under evaluation in this study are:
The Great Pyramid passage system can demonstrate its equivalence
with the chronology of the Bible within one day, or better, over
7000 years.
The Great Pyramid assists in revealing the measurement system of
God used in the creation of the universe.
There are several constraints:
At least two witnesses are required to prove any point.
Data sources need to be proven to be relevant to the Pyramid.
For example, data from the Egyptian King Lists or Book of the Dead,
if they were ever actually relevant, define a
Pyramid that is too large compared with that revealed by the
surveys. Writings that
describe the initiation of a neophyte into the mysteries of
Egypt or the worship of earthly
kings are hardly a source one should consider for defining
anything associated with God.
Davidson ʺThe Great Pyramid: Its Divine Messageʺ, (pars.
108-109, pp. 87-88). On the
other hand, a survey relating to the dimensions of the Pyramid
is relevant as the data is
speaking for the Pyramid itself. The following resources are
acceptable sources of data
for this study:
o Surveys of the Pyramid o The Bible o Astronomy for generating
and finding historical dates o Mathematics
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 3
o Proven history, particularly but not limited to biblical
history – the Bible is an excellent source for the former
The hypothesis has evolved into three areas, as described
below.
1. The first area is a mathematical study, which is based on
clues derived from surveys of the Great Pyramid and numerical and
physical constants such as π. Other than the Holy
Bible and the results of several surveys of the Great Pyramid,
which are necessary as the
standards by which to compare the hypothesis, no reliance is
placed on any other external
source of data as it may be corrupted. Its association with the
Pyramid will need to be
proven, which is not an easy task after 6000 years.
By two independent mathematical proofs, it will be shown that
the Pyramid was built
using the British Inch (Bʺ) as its primary unit, not the Pyramid
Inch (Pʺ). However, the
Bʺ is a slightly corrupted form of God’s basic length unit with
which He designed the
universe. The hypothesis also shows that the Cubit (20.6 Bʺ), is
mathematically related to
the British Inch, and it too is used in parts of the Pyramid.
Mathematics shows that the
base of the Pyramid should be about 9069 Bʺ based solely on the
use of natural constants
and features of the Pyramid. The average of five surveys shows
that the base, as built, is
approximately 9069 Bʺ, so the only conclusion that can be drawn
is that the Base was
designed using Bʺ.
From the study, it will be shown how to mathematically
reconstruct the exterior and
interior of the Pyramid as designed. The accuracy is generally
better than ± 0.25 Bʺ, and
the worst-case difference is 0.55 Bʺ.
2. The second area is the construction of a complete timeline
that matches both the Bible and the Pyramid from Adamʹs sin in
Genesis to the Judgment Day of the Great White
Throne in The Book of Revelation. The concept, based on earlier
studies by the
researchers named later, is that the chronology of the Bible
maps to the floor of the
Pyramid passageways. Approximately one British Inch represents
one year along the
sloping passages. The goal is to reconstruct a highly accurate
and complete Biblical
timeline along the sloping passages that matches the passage
lengths predicted by the
clues from the first part of the study.
A significant point of this area of the study is that the
passageways demonstrate that all
7000 years of the Bible, i.e., both the Old and New Testaments,
are portrayed in the
Pyramid. Five translations of the Old Testament were evaluated
to determine which one,
or ones, fitted the Pyramid passages, and it was found that only
the Masoretic Text could
be made to precisely fit.
3. The third area is that Danielʹs prophecies, and those in
Revelation, can be mapped onto the internal passages of the
Pyramid. This mapping explains features of the Pyramid that
have remained mysteries until now, particularly in the Grand
Gallery, such as the two
grooves cut in the third overlap, the stepped ceiling tiles, and
the 56 holes cut in the
benches either side of the Grand Gallery. Also shown is that
Danielʹs 490 and 2300 year
prophecies are contiguous and stretch over 2790 years, and only
a few hundred of the
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 4
2300 years remain. The central point of this area of the study
is that it positively
identifies Jehovah with the Pyramid since it accurately portrays
the Holy Bible.
I believe that the first area of the study shows that the
Pyramid was designed by God, who is
identified by the second and third areas as Jehovah.
The three areas of the study, therefore, identify the Pyramid as
the witness in Isaiah 19:19-20
(KJV)
The second is that the Pyramid message relates to Israel and has
the potential to open their eyes
according to Romans 11:25-26 (KJV)
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this
mystery, lest ye should be wise in
your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel,
until the fulness of the Gentiles be
come in. 26
And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall
come out of Sion the Deliverer,
and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Put these two together then, it may be intended to open the eyes
of Israel, according to Romans.
When all hope for Israel seems lost, then it may have the power
to cause Israel to ʺcry unto the
LORD because of the oppressorsʺ Isaiah 19:20.
Introduction to the Study
The popularity of pyramidology has waxed and waned over the
years, depending upon what was
being published at the time. The Figure below shows what I
believe history, and the theory tells
us the Pyramid was intended to be rather than what it has become
over time. Please use it for
general reference throughout the following discussions.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 5
Brief History of the Pyramid and the Pyramidologists
This theory of the Pyramid tells us that it was built
approximately 4700 years ago in the year
2661 BC. Many investigators have visited the Pyramid to seek its
truth. Early visitors were
Herodotus, Strabo, and Diodorus Siculus. In 1637 an Englishman
named John Greaves visited
the Pyramid and conducted a survey.
Later his work suggested to Sir Isaac Newton that the Pyramid
contained facts about the Solar
System that he needed to complete his Laws of Gravitation. In
this search, partly based upon
Greaves’ work, Newton wrote a study titled ʺA Dissertation upon
the Sacred Cubit of the Jewsʺ.
In this document, it is said by many that he derives what became
the Pyramid Inch (Pʺ) or 1.0011
Bʺ. In my opinion, based on this document, Newton found a Sacred
Cubit of average length of
24.83 Bʺ, which, when divided by 25, results in an average unit
of length 0.9932 Bʺ. If this value
is substituted for the Pyramid Inch of Pyramidology, all
problems concerning the difference
between Petrieʹs survey, and the desire for a Pyramid that
measures 365.25 times the sacred cubit
melt away. Newton did not discover what he was seeking from the
Pyramid, but its connection
with astronomy was established.
Like the old Pyramid Inch was used to define the time-scale of
the Pyramid chronology, the new
unit defines it in such a way that significant locations within
the passage system can be shown to
represent precise and recognizable historical dates, and, as it
happens, identifiable future dates.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 6
In efforts to prove the divinity of the Pyramid, many
connections have been made between it and
celestial distances and orbital motions, and these have become
part of Pyramidology. These
relationships are not evaluated herein, at least at this time,
because the precision of the Pyramid
chronology is considered sufficient to establish the divinity of
the Pyramid.
It was John Taylor, an English Publisher, who pulled together
the facts and figures from
researchers who had come before him and first detailed the
divine nature of the Pyramid. His
data came from the likes of Greaves, Napoleonʹs savants, Howard
Vyse, and others.
Vyse was an English colonel who visited the Pyramid in 1837.
Between him and an Italian
named Captain Giovanni Battista Caviglia and later another
Englishman named John Shae
Perring, they dug into and dynamited the pyramids and tombs at
Giza in their search for hidden
chambers and maybe treasure. This approach caused damage to the
Pyramid and surrounding
structures but also uncovered a lot of new facts. Perring did
the best survey up to that date and
published it, between 1839 and 1842, as part of Vyseʹs
three-volume work ʺThe Pyramids of
Gizeh,ʺ. It should be noted that Vyseʹs volume 1, page 3, tells
us that Caviglia started the first 36
inches of the vertical shaft in the floor of the Subterranean
Chamber, and Perring finished it to a
depth of over 30 feet. As you can see in the Figure below, Vyse
did not include it in his drawing
of the Pyramid, so I do not believe it is part of the originally
intended design.
Vyse Great Pyramid Drawing Representing its State in 1837
Without the Pit
Charles Piazzi Smyth was born in Naples, Italy, to Captain
(later Admiral) William Henry
Smyth. He was named Piazzi after his godfather, the Italian
astronomer Giuseppe Piazzi. His
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 7
father subsequently settled at Bedford and equipped there an
observatory, at which Piazzi Smyth
received his first lessons in astronomy. He became the
Astronomer Royal for Scotland in 1846.
On his death bed, Taylor convinced Smyth to continue his work.
As a result, Smyth visited the
Pyramid in 1865 to conduct his survey. Through his connection
with Taylor and his survey of the
Pyramid, I consider Smyth to be the focal point of Pyramidology.
He was a British Israelite, and
one will see him distanced for that in websites like Wikipedia.
I think that Pyramidology did not
get off the ground until he published his four books and other
articles. It is interesting to note the
lure of the Pyramid on the scientific minds of Newton, Smyth,
and others.
Basic Tenets of Pyramidology
Some of the basic tenets of Pyramidology, as written by Smyth
and developed by subsequent
researchers, which, rightly or wrongly, are as follows:
The Pyramid, or Primitive, Inch Pʺ is the unit of measure of the
Pyramid:
The Pʺ equals 1/25th of a sacred cubit as used in the Bible by
Noah and others
1 Pʺ = 1.001 Bʺ so that there are 500,000,000 Pʺ in Earthʹs
polar diameter o Smythʹs data indicated this diameter to equal
7899.3 miles o Modern data indicates that the diameter is 7899.8
miles, so Adam Rutherford
changed 1 Pʺ to be equal to 1.00106 Bʺ
The Pyramid base has to be 9131 Pʺ so that a complete circuit is
36524 Pʺ o This represents the number of days in 100 solar
years
The base is, therefore, required to be 9140 Bʺ based on 1 Pʺ =
1.001 Bʺ
The base length of the Pyramid has been measured over the
centuries, and the measurements
increased from 8316 Bʺ (693 ft.) without casing, by Greaves in
1637, to 9163 Bʺ (763.6 ft.), from
socket corner to socket corner by Vyse and Perring in 1837. The
length measures gradually
increased because the debris around the Pyramid was diminishing
and more and more of the
lower, and therefore wider, courses were revealed. The debris
was caused by the Crete
earthquake in 1303 and the subsequent removal of the Casing
Stones by the local population to
build palaces and mosques in Cairo. Eventually, in 1799, the
French savants Le Pere and Colonel
Coutelle discovered first the NE socket and then the NW socket.
They assumed the sockets were
intended to house the Pyramidʹs corner casing stones, and when
measured, the base length
dramatically increased to 763.6 ft, which is 9163.2 Bʺ. At this
stage, Taylor and Smyth were
beginning to postulate that 9141 Bʺ, or 9131 Pʺ, was the
intended length.
Inglis found, by his measurements, that the mean of all four
sides was 9110 Bʺ, based on the
sockets and then Ordnance surveyors, in 1869 measured the mean
to be 9130 Bʺ. ʺOur
Inheritance…ʺ p516. The average of these two means is 9120 Bʺ I
believe that Smyth felt that
the length of the base side was going to settle down somewhere
between Vyseʹs and this average,
i.e., about 9145 Bʺ which would prove some of his theories.
However, in 1881, along came the bane of early Pyramidologists,
Sir Flinders Petrie, and the
Father of Egyptology. He had the effrontery, according to Smyth
in ʺNew Measures of the Great
Pyramid, by a New Measurer,ʺ to arrive at a mean base length,
including the casing and at the
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 8
Pavement of 9068.8 Bʺ. This is about 72 Bʺ smaller than the
value Smyth was seeking. Before
this, it was just assumed, erroneously, that the four socket
corners defined the corners of the
Pyramid base. However, Petrieʹs measurements of the base were
obtained by sighting along the
Pyramid faces, and from marks along the pavement where the edge
of the Casing had been,
rather than at the socket corners. The sockets were likely used
to define the Pyramid diagonals.
The sockets are at the four corners of the Pyramid base and are
at different levels below the
Pavement. It is common sense that from the outside, a building
should only be defined by what
one sees above ground, or Pavement level, and not by what you
cannot see under this level. So
Petrieʹs measure must stand as being close to the intended base
length of the Pyramid. According
to the Glen Dash Foundation, subsequent surveys provide the
following data:
The Great Pyramidʹs Casing Lengths: Petrie, Cole, Dorner,
Lehner/Goodman, and GDFS
Side Petrie Cole Dorner Lehner/ GDFS GDFS
All Bʺ 1881 1925 1979 Goodman 2015 Sockets
1984 2015
North 9069.41 9065.08 9068.03 9070.43 9068.07 9130.48
East 9067.72 9070.51 9069.65 9066.22 9068.27 9132.96
South 9069.49 9072.99 9069.76 9067.28 9070.24 9124.45
West 9068.58 9069.17 9069.76 9068.39 9071.14 9119.24
Average 9068.82 9069.45 9069.29 9068.07 9069.41 9126.78
In other words, over the last 140 years, five surveys of the
Pyramidʹs base have only varied
within a range of 1.4 Bʺ, at the pavement.
Pyramid Core, Casing Stones, and Platform
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 9
The last column in the table above shows Glen Dashʹs measures of
the distances between the
sockets. The average is 9126.78 Bʺ. The largest socket corner to
socket corner measurement is
9132.96 B” from GDFS in the Table above, which is 8 B” shorter
than the 9141 Bʺ required by
Pyramidology. Please see the evaluation of the viability of
Davidsonʹs twelve-sided base later in
this paper.
Petrieʹs survey is sufficiently accurate that Wikipedia Great
Pyramid of Giza says ʺAlmost all
reports are based on his measurementsʺ, and since he used
theodolites and standard surveying
techniques, it has become the defacto standard of Pyramid
surveys. There are minor variations in
his calculations of the base length that I and others have
found. Also, due to the debris present in
the Descending Passage, Petrieʹs measurements are too short.
Improved surveys have been made
of the base and the Descending Passage.
One can see Petrieʹs antagonism toward Pyramidology in chapter
21 of his book ʺThe Pyramids
and Temples of Gizehʺ, where he compares the theories, in a
generally negative fashion, with his
measurements.
The results of Petrieʹs survey quite literally forced
Pyramidology underground. Since a base of
9141 Bʺ (9131 Pʺ) was theorized the height of the Pyramid had to
be 5819 Bʺ (5813 Pʺ), at what
Pyramidology theorized was an intended base angle of 51 51
14.31. This angle is known as a
π angle since it is computed by finding the angle corresponding
to the tangent of 4/π. Taking
Petrieʹs base of approximately 9069 Bʺ, at the Pavement level,
the height above the Pavement
would be 5773.5 Bʺ. To arrive at the height of 5819 Bʺ the base
of the Pyramid had to be pushed
underground by Pyramidologists to 5773.5 Bʺ minus 5819.0 Bʺ,
which is -45.5 Bʺ. However, the
Pyramid has no physical or mathematical features, which
indicates this level. Petrieʹs
measurements showed that the bases of the sockets were at
different depths below ground, from
28.5 to 39.9 Bʺ. All of the sockets are thus above the requisite
level, -45.5 Bʺ, and the average
level of the sockets is 31.4 Bʺ.
In 1910 John and Morton Edgar, two Scots, surveyed the passages
of the Pyramid and developed
theories that were used by Charles Taze Russell. These two
brothers cleaned the debris out of the
Descending Passage and were able to conduct a much more accurate
survey compared to Petrie.
They found it to be almost 8 Bʺ longer than he did. They have
many ideas, data, and photos that
are useful in their books ʺGreat Pyramid Passagesʺ volumes 1 and
2 and ʺGreat Pyramid Its
Symbolism Science and Prophecyʺ 1924. The Edgarʹs also declare,
in the above-referenced book,
p126, that the base of the corner sockets marked the base of the
Pyramid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 10
Is David Davidsonʹs 12 Sided Pyramid Viable or Not?
David Davidson, in conjunction with Herbert Aldersmith,
published ʺThe Great Pyramid: Its
Divine Message. ʺ In this book, Davidson set about reconciling
Petrieʹs measurements with
Smythʹs theories. Smyth required the length of the Pyramid base
to be 9140 Bʺ so that it equaled
9131 Pʺ. When multiplied by four, it is seen that the Pyramidʹs
perimeter equals 36524 Pʺ, which
symbolizes the number of days in 100 solar years. The conversion
factor is 1.001 Bʺ/P.ʺ Petrieʹs
and all subsequent surveys measure the base as approximately
9069 Bʺ, about 72 Bʺ shorter than
required, so earlier theories needed to be adjusted.
The photograph below was taken under very favorable lighting
conditions. It shows that there are
two, or possibly three, planes on the south face of the Great
Pyramid. In 1881 Petrie reported that
each major face was divided down the middle and consisted of two
planes with an angle between
them, which can be calculated to be about 179°. The small third
plane at the base is debris from
the casing of the pyramid, which had not been completely removed
in 1940 when the photo was
taken, and it should be ignored.
Aerial Photo by P. Groves (1940) – Shows Three Planes on South
Face
Davidson recognized that Petrie had reported this double plane
feature and proposed an
ingenious solution to the problem of Petrieʹs base length not
being the requisite 9141 Bʺ. This
was a 12 sided Pyramid, as shown in the Figure below. The Figure
only indicates the core of the
Pyramid, but this would have been covered by the casing of equal
thickness all over, which
would result in there being three smooth planes per pyramid face
following the contours shown.
Petrie had assumed that the casing edges were straight lines
between the corners, and he showed
this in his Plate X. There is only one plane per face based on
Petrieʹs assumption.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 11
Davidsonʹs 12-Sided Pyramid
The following Figure shows both the basis of Davidsonʹs proposal
and allows its viability to be
assessed. The Figure is based upon the Glen Dash Foundation
Survey (GDFS) of the Great
Pyramid conducted in 2015. The four sides of the pyramid are
shown in an exaggerated fashion,
as individual sub-diagrams within the Figure to better show the
relationships between the
trapezoids and the surveyed edges of the Pyramid. The trapezoids
mark the boundaries at the
bases of the hollowed-in pyramid faces, as proposed by Davidson,
whereas the green, red, and
blue lines represent the casing, platform, and socket edges as
assumed by Petrie and Dash.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 12
The Basis of Davidsonʹs 12–Sided Pyramid Theory and its
Viability
The first step was to draw an exact representation of the GFDS
corners and edges reported in
ʺThe Great Pyramidʹs Footprint: Results from Our 2015 Surveyʺ
at
http://glendash.com/archaeology/as-published.html#sthash.tyJRcsXp.dpbs
North
EastWest
South
A
E
F
B
D
J
I
C
B
G H
C
A
L K
D
M
http://glendash.com/archaeology/as-published.html#sthash.tyJRcsXp.dpbs
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 13
The coordinates of the corners, from the Figures on pages 12 and
13 of the report, were drawn as
blue, red, and green dots, and corresponding lines were drawn
between them for each edge on
each face of the pyramid. Once drawn, the lengths and angles of
the casing and platform sides
were checked for correctness against the reported values on page
11 of the Dash report. The
drawing then consisted of three quadrilaterals, which closely
approximated squares. However,
the distance between the quadrilaterals was small compared with
the length of the sides, and any
useful details were obscured. It was necessary to expand the
sides to see these details. So the
squares were grouped and rotated clockwise by the mean angle of
the casing, 3ʹ 54ʺ, so that a
theoretical representation of a perfect set of Davidson’s base
trapezoids, aligned to the cardinal
points, could be overlaid. This process prevented the trapezoids
from becoming distorted when
expanded in the next step. However, before the next step, the
coordinates of the edges of the
casing measured by the GDFS were plotted as magenta dots and the
areas representing the casing
edges, as found and used by Cole in 1925 were added as thick
magenta lines. The magenta lines
overlapped the magenta dots, so the lines were moved inward
slightly for clarity.
The coordinates of the magenta dots were provided by Glen Dash,
for which I am most grateful.
Each side of the drawing was then independently cut and pasted
into a new drawing, and the
sides were expanded by 100. The expansion was in the horizontal
axis for the west and east sides
and vertically for the north and south sides. The expanded dots
on the new drawing were then
reformatted, and the drawing was labeled.
As shown in the Figure of Davidsonʹs 12-sided pyramid, the base
of each side is not a straight
line. Instead, Davidson has defined a hollowing in of each base
using a trapezoid ABFE, etc. The
two parallel sides should be about 36 Bʺ apart. The trapezoids
are regular in form.
Davidson justified the trapezoids as follows:
Petrie, Cole, and subsequent surveyors assumed that the casing
edge ran in a straight line from D
to A, as shown in the south side in the above diagram. Davidson
proposed that the casing edge
would have actually run from D to K to L and then to A and also
that the extensions of the lines
AL and KD met at M. The length DA multiplied by 4 symbolizes the
number of days in 100
solar years. The length DKLA multiplied by 4 symbolizes the
number of days in 100 sidereal
years. The length DMA multiplied by 4 symbolizes the number of
days in 100 anomalistic years.
In the above drawing, the green lines, i.e., the casing edge, on
each side, were defined by GDFS
by the use of linear regression of the magenta points. GDFS says
ʺIn theory, there is a 95%
probability that the original casing and platform corners fell
within these windows. ʺ It is part of
Davidsonʹs proposal that the short sides in the middle of the
trapezoids partly overlay the casing
edges at the center of the side, and it can be seen that, to a
large extent, they do. To comply with
Davidsonʹs proposal, the casing edge, as shown by the magenta
dots, should follow the sides of
the trapezoids, and we would expect to see them turn outwards at
the end of the short side of the
trapezoid but, in no case do we see this happen. It can be seen
that at the east end of the north
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 14
side, the south end of the west side and the west end of the
south side the magenta dots do follow
the straight-line casing edges and not Davidsonʹs trapezoidal
edges. The east side has too few
points to make a positive determination of whether the dots
follow the casing edge or trapezoid
sides.
There is no evidence that the casing of the Pyramid was hollowed
in, but the evidence does show
the casing edges do appear to be straight for their full length.
It is observed that the casing edges
are more parallel to the edges of the platform, on which the
Pyramid sits than they are to the lines
drawn between the socket corners.
In 1925 Cole carried out a survey similar to the GDFS. As there
were no computers at that time
to calculate best-fit lines, he used his theodolite to
ʺmechanicallyʺ fit lines along the casing edges
that he had found. The thick magenta lines mark the locations of
Coleʹs casing edges. These lines
should overlay the green lines, but I have moved them inwards to
improve clarity since they
obscured the magenta dots. Coleʹs survey results showed slightly
different pyramid base lengths
and angles compared with GDFS. However, it can be seen that on
the east end of the north side
and the west end of the south side, the magenta lines extend
past the ends of the short side of the
trapezoid, indicating that they probably followed a straight
line but did not follow the trapezoid
sides.
Adam Rutherford authored a four-volume treatise titled
ʺPyramidologyʺ. He was present at the
Great Pyramid in 1925 and realized the implications of Coleʹs
survey reported in ʺEgyptian
Government Survey (P39)ʺ. It is also notable that on page 299 of
Pyramidology Book II he says:
ʺThat the geometry of the Pyramidʹs base reveals the three
astronomical years was later shown
by David Davidson, notwithstanding that owing to his never
having been to the Great Pyramid
and consequently having no knowledge of unpublished details of
it, he had the erroneous idea
that the sides of the Pyramidʹs exterior were hollowed-in. But
the results of the present authorʹs
research on the spot at the Great Pyramid, as well as the
Egyptian Government Survey (P39),
demonstrated beyond all question that, unlike the hollowed-in
core masonry, the original Casing
edge of the exterior of the Great Pyramid was quite straight.
The author, on returning home from
Egypt on the occasion of his first visit there in 1925, informed
Davidson of this fact that the sides
of the Great Pyramidʹs exterior Casing were constructed
perfectly straight, whereupon Davidson
then put forward another theory, which will be dealt with in
Book V.ʺ
Unfortunately, Rutherford died before he could publish Book
V.
It is a reasonable conclusion from Coleʹs survey and the GDFS
that the casing sides were straight
lines and not trapezoidal, and so Davidsonʹs 12-sided pyramid is
not viable from this perspective.
Next, we will look at whether Davidsonʹs required 9141ʺ length
between socket corners is viable.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 15
The long sides of the trapezoids, in Davidsonʹs theory, should
be parallel to and at a distance of
35.7625 Pʺ from the short sides and should overlay the socket
corners shown as blue dots. As
shown in the above Figure, Davidsonʹs theoretical socket corners
miss the measured socket
corners by a maximum of 17ʺ at the SW corner to a minimum of 1ʺ
at the SE corner. Looking at
the relationship between the green, red, and blue edges of the
pyramid, we can see that the
builders were able to maintain a reasonably parallel
relationship between the casing and platform
edges. So if it had been critical, which apparently it was not,
it would have been possible for
them to have maintained that relationship between socket
corners.
The distance between the socket corners is required by
Davidsonʹs theory to be 9141 Bʺ. Petrie
measured them as 9130ʺ (N), 9133ʺ (E), 9124 (S), 9119 (W), and
9127ʺ (Mean). Why does
Davidson think his scheme is viable? It is because he takes the
statement ʺsocket corner to socket
cornerʺ too literally. In his Plate XX, he notes that the
diagonals of the pyramid pass through the
NW, NE, and SE sockets at his points L, K, and M, respectively.
However, the SW socket is
different, and the Figure below shows an expansion of the lower
left-hand corner in Davidsonʹs
Plate XX.
Bottom Left Hand Corner of Davidsonʹs Plate XX Showing the Extra
17.5 Bʺ
Here Davidson has identified the socket as UW?YZX where ʺ?ʺ is
the unlabeled NE corner of
the socket. He notes that there is a chiseled line in the socket
floor between W and Z and that the
Pyramid base diagonal crosses the socket line YX at point Z.
Most, if not all, observers also
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 16
consider that point Z is the socket corner. However, the Royal
Engineers survey of 1869
measured the distance between Z and X as 17.5 Bʺ. So Davidson
adds the 17.5 Bʺ to Petrieʹs SE
to SW socket length of 9123.13 Bʺ for a total of 9140.63 Bʺ. He
then argues, in paragraphs 144
and 196, that this length was laid out first and is the model
for the other three sides.
Apart from Davidson and Rutherford, I have not seen any other
commentator conclude that the
extra 17.5ʺ, from Z to X, has any significance in establishing
any past or future dimension of the
Pyramid. Davidsonʹs theory is not viable as it is based on
faulty logic and faulty interpretation of
data.
The Pyramid Inch
Another tenet of Pyramidology is that the Pyramid Inch (Pʺ) is
the standard of measurement. 25
Pʺ make a Sacred Cubit so that the Sacred Cubit would be 25.025
Bʺ in length. I have searched
extensively, and the best match I can find are cubits of 25.3 to
25.6 Bʺ. These are similar to
Newtonʹs findings in his ʺDissertation on the Sacred Cubit..ʺ
The only place a cubit of 25.025 Bʺ
is used extensively is in Pyramidology. Therefore I have doubts
as to its legitimacy as a means of
proving the divinity of the Pyramid. It is close to the truth to
say that there are 500,000,000 Pʺ in
the Earthʹs polar diameter, which is, therefore, close to
20,000,000 sacred cubits. However, this
will never be a fixed standard. Science tells us the ice caps
are melting, the water from them is
making the equator bulge more, and so the polar diameter is
shrinking. However, the land at the
poles, which was previously compressed by the ice, is now
expanding because the pressure on it
has been reduced, which increases the polar diameter. However,
this increase is less than the
decrease caused by the water moving to the equator. The polar
diameter is, therefore, varying
continually and is not suitable as a standard.
Pyramid Base Angle
A third and vital tenet of Pyramidology is that the theoretical
base angle of the Pyramid is a π
angle. The lefthand Figure below shows that the ratio of the
height of a π triangle, to its base, is 4
to π. Petrie and Smyth attempted to measure the base angle by a
variety of means, and the best-
weighted measurement is from Petrie shown on the righthand side
of the Figure below. It can be
seen that the theoretical angle does fall within the measured
angle, but so do other angles. The
Base Angle will be discussed in Paper 4.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 17
Theoretical and Measured Base Angle of the Great Pyramid
Pyramid Displacement, Rectification, Contraction and Expansion
Factors
The Displacement Factor results from recognizing that the axis
of the passage system is offset by
287 Bʺ to the east of the vertical axis of the Pyramid based on
Petrie’s measurement. Davidson
computed a Displacement Factor of 286.1 Pʺ based on the
difference between the inner and outer
squares of his twelve-sided Pyramid. However, it was discussed
above that Davidsonʹs twelve-
sided Pyramid concept is not viable.
Rutherford assumes the Displacement Factor as a negative value,
-286.1 Pʺ, and introduces the
concept of the Rectification Factor, which is a positive value,
+286.1 Pʺ. Rutherford also
introduces the concept of the Contraction and Expansion Factors,
which are 1/8th
the value of the
Displacement and Rectification Factors, respectively. The
following recognizes that the
Displacement Factor is real and shows how Davidson computes his
value and also how it is
computed in this study.
Davidson says, “P148. THE PYRAMIDʹS DISPLACEMENT FACTOR.
Criticism, therefore, has shown that the Pyramid was set out to
a base line of 9141.1 Bʺ, that its
distance between centres of opposite base sides was 9069.5 Bʺ,
and, independently, that its base
sides were centrally hollowed to the extent of about 36ʺ. The
difference between the first two
values, 9141.1 and 9069.5 Bʺ, gives twice the extent of
hollowing-in as 71.6 Bʺ, and therefore
the hollowing-in as 35.8 Bʺ =35.76 Pʺ.
The actual PyramId base circuit is therefore defined by two
squares, one marginally 35.76 Pʺ
internal to the other. The outer square, defining the base
corners, is 36,524.24 Pʺ circuit, and
the inner square is 8 x 35.76 Pʺ (or 286.1 Pʺ) less in circuit
than the outer square.
51° 51' 14.31"
4
π
51° 52' 0.00" ± 2'
Theoretical Angle Petrie’s Measured Angle
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 18
Now 286. I Pʺ (286.4 Bʺ) is an important geometrical value of
the Pyramid. It is also the
measurement of the displacement of the North to South Vertical
Plane of the PyramIdʹs Passage
System Eastwards from the north to South Central Vertical Plane
of the Pyramid.
The existing displacement of the Passage System, as defined, was
measured by Professor Petrie
as follows :-
Petrieʹs stated possible range of error.
Entrance Door on North Face =287.0 Bʺ ±0.8 Bʺ.
Entrance Passage End in Natural Rock =286.4 Bʺ ±1.0 Bʺ.
Beginning of Ascending Passage =286.6 Bʺ ±0.8 Bʺ.
End of Ascending Passage =287.0 Bʺ ±1.5 Bʺ.
Plates XXIII, XXIV, and XXV (Figs. A, A1 and A2) show how the
hollowed-in base feature, the
35th course axis, and the displacement of the Passage System are
all geometrical functions of a
composite system of geometry featuring the solar year to the
scale of 10 Pʺ to a day, and to the
scale of 100 Pʺ to a day. To convey the full significance of
this to the reader it is necessary first
to define the precise value of the solar year intentionally
identified with the Pyramidʹs base
square circuit.”
Davidson takes advantage of the Displacement Factor to define a
twelve-sided Pyramid, which is
described in Paper 3. It shows that the Pyramid has three base
circuits of slightly different
lengths, and theses circuits are defined by three different year
lengths as follows:
Davidsonʹs Year Length (Days) (from para. 154)
Solar or Tropical Year 365.242465
Sidereal or Stellar Year 365.25647I536
Anomalistic or Orbital Year 365·259973I7
However, as shown by Paper 3, Coleʹs survey in 1925 and the Glen
Dash Foundation Survey of
2015 show that the twelve-sided Pyramid concept is not
viable.
Even with the concept of a four-sided Pyramid, there are still
dimensions of about 286.1 Pʺ,
which need to be understood. For example, Rutherford points to
the fact that the Grand Gallery
roof, according to Smyth, is 339.5 Bʺ and the vertical height of
the Ascending Passage is 53 Bʺ.
The increase in height at the junction of the Ascending Passage
and Grand gallery is 286.5 Bʺ or
286.2 Pʺ. He calls this the Rectification Factor, Vol II p
250.
The passage system is offset 287 Bʺ, 286.7 Pʺ, to the east of
the central north-to-south vertical
axis.
Also, David Davidson, p172. Points out that:-
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 19
The levels of the Pyramid courses are as obtained by Petrie. The
reader should note that the
geometrical considerations of Plates XXIII, XXIV, and XXV (Fig.
A2) require that the special
apex Pyramid should be 364.27665 Pʺ =364.68 Bʺ high.
The Pyramidʹs geometrical height being 5813.01 Pʺ = 5819.40 Bʺ
gives base of original apex
Pyramid, or top surface of the highest course of masonry at
5454.72 Bʺ above the base. This
agrees with the highest existing course, the 203rd course, at
545I.8 Bʺ, thus leaving 2.9 Bʺ for
subsidence of the highest course. Owing to the cumulative effect
of the flat-arching of the
courses, from the centre of the base to the topmost course, as
explained in ~~ 183 and 184, the
subsidence at the apex would not be more than this. The special
apex Pyramid would not be a
single apex stone, but an apex Pyramid of finer (casing)
limestone. The reader must not confuse
the apex Pyramid with the apex stone.
In chapter 3 of ʺPyramidologyʺ, Vol. II, Rutherford describes
the Contraction and Expansion
Factors. The Contraction Factor is nearly 36 Bʺ which is the
amount that the center of each
Pyramid side is reduced according to the twelve-sided Pyramid
theory. Rutherfordʹs precise
dimension is 286.10216 divided by 8 = 35.76277 Pʺ. He argues
that the circuit of each course is,
therefore, 286.1 Pʺ shorter than the intended length and so the
Capstone will overhang each side
of the Pyramid by 35.76277 Pʺ. Rutherford calls this the
Expansion factor.
The 286.1 Pʺ dimension can be accounted for in another way. Bear
in mind that it is based on
Petrieʹs measurement of 287.0± 0.8 Bʺ or 286.7 Pʺ. In Paper 4,
it is shown that the exterior
dimensions and angles of the Pyramid are based on the values π,
4, the Sacred Cubit of 24.83 Bʺ,
and 365.25, the number of days in a solar year rounded to the
nearest quarter day. To Davidson,
the value 286.1 is the Displacement Factor based on Pʺ and 286.4
when based on Bʺ. The Figure
below shows how a value, close to 286.4 Bʺ, is interpreted in
this new theory. Note that it is
actually closer to Petrieʹs measured value of 287 Bʺ. Note also
that Tanα = 4/π and Y = 365.25.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 20
In the Figure above, the dimensions show a value in black, which
is the measured value, a value
in red, which is the theoretical value and an expression in
blue, which is the theoretical equation
from which the dimension in red is calculated.
The lefthand Figure shows that the passage entrance is,
according to Petrie (P35), 287±0.8 Bʺ
east of the vertical axis, which Davidson calculates is the
Displacement Factor of 286.4 Bʺ.
However, it can be seen that if a right-angled triangle has a
vertical height of 365.25 Bʺ and a
base angle 51° 51ʹ 14.3ʺ, which is Tan-1
(4/π), then its base length is 286.87 Bʺ, which is within
Petrieʹs range and closer than Davidson to Petrie’s measured
value of 287 Bʺ.
In the righthand Figure above, the apex of the Pyramid is half
the base length, 9069.165/2 ×
Tanα = 4534.58 × 4/π = 5773.61 Bʺ above the Pavement. Also, the
average height of the top of
the 201st course is 5408.55 Bʺ. So the top of the 201
st course is 365.06 Bʺ below the apex of the
Pyramid. When the base angle, α is assumed to be 51° 51ʹ 14.3ʺ
the base length of the triangle is
286.72 Bʺ which is within Petrieʹs range of 287±0.8 Bʺ for the
passage offset.
These two triangles provide witnesses that the entrance to the
Pyramid is offset 365.25/Tanα to
the east of its north-to-south vertical axis. It is, therefore,
consistent with the exterior
measurements of the Pyramid, which also use the value 365.25.
For example, the base length of
the Pyramid is 365.25 Sacred Cubits, which are determined to be
24.83 Bʺ, on average, by Sir
Isaac Newton. The use of Bʺ in the exterior of the Pyramid is
also validated by these two
measurements and calculations.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 21
The height of the roof of the Grand Gallery over the roof of the
Ascending Passage is 286.5 Bʺ
according to Smyth and Rutherford. However, this is based on
Smythʹs average height of 339.5
Bʺ, which, in turn, is based on a range of measurements of 11.6
Bʺ, from 334.4 to 346.0 Bʺ.
Most likely, this wide range is caused by the characteristics of
Smythʹs self-designed measuring
apparatus, which required leveling in two axes, and also the
ʺratchetingʺ of the roof stones.
If the vertical height of the Grand Gallery is based on Petrie’s
average height of the corbels at its
south end, then the height is 235.34 Bʺ which is comparable to
the height of the walls in the
Kingʹs Chamber, 235.2 Bʺ. (P46 and P, plate 13).
So the values of the Displacement Factor, etc., that Davidson
and Rutherford arrive at can be
accounted for in terms that are consistent with other features
of the Pyramid.
The Capstone
One of the major tenets of Pyramoidology is that the Capstone
symbolizes Jesus. He is the head
of His People and His Church, and, when installed, the Capstone
is the head of the Pyramid.
There are many verses in the Bible which refer to Jesus in a
manner that points to the Pyramid as
follows:
Psalm 118:22 (KJV)
22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone
of the corner.
Isaiah 28:16 (KJV)
16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for
a foundation a stone, a tried
stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation: he that
believeth shall not make haste.
Matthew 21:42 (KJV)
42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures,
The stone which the builders
rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the
Lordʹs doing, and it is marvellous
in our eyes?
Mark 12:10 (KJV)
10 And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the
builders rejected is become the head
of the corner:
Luke 20:17 (KJV)
17 And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is
written, The stone which the builders
rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 22
Acts 4:11 (KJV)
11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders,
which is become the head of the
corner.
Ephesians 2:20 (KJV)
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and
prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the
chief corner stone;
1 Peter 2:6-7 (KJV)
6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay
in Sion a chief corner stone, elect,
precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
7
Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them
which be disobedient, the stone
which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the
corner,
The above verses indicate that Jesus is the chief cornerstone,
or the headstone of the corner, and
the stone which the builders rejected. The builders of the
nation of Israel, who were the Pharisees
and Sadducees, thought that Jesus did not fit their concept of
the head of their nation and rejected
Him.
The Bible verses quoted above refer to a stone that is the head
of the corner, i.e., the chief stone
of which there can only be one. The photograph below shows how
the four arris edges of the
Pyramid would come together to form an apex, which is also a
corner, and yet they fall short of
this because some courses and the Capstone are missing.
The Capstone is called the Pyramidion, or Benben. In Hebrew,
ʺBenʺ means ʺsonʺ, (Strongʹs
H1121) and ʺebenʺ, means ʺstoneʺ, (Strongʹs H68). Therefore,
ʺBen-ebenʺ means son-stone.
Jesus is the Son of God and a specific cornerstone. Over the
years, Ben-eben could have
morphed to Benben.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 23
Top of the Pyramid Shows the 201st Course is Complete With Two
Ruined Courses Above
As shown later in this paper, there is no evidence that the
Capstone of the Pyramid was ever
installed, and the reason why is that the Capstone was not
intended to be installed until later, and
the event that stimulates its installation has not yet occurred.
Since the Capstone symbolizes
Jesus, then this event, at this time, can only be His second
coming. It is shown in Paper 7 that the
Capstone is vertically in line with and covers, like an
umbrella, the features in the Pyramid,
which symbolize resurrection and judgment, events for which
Jesus is responsible.
The Symbolism of the Capstone
For the Capstone to symbolize Jesus, and also for the Casing
Stones to symbolize the builders so
that the Pyramid aligns with the Bible narrative, the following
criteria must be valid:
1. From the time that Adam originally sinned to the Crucifixion,
Jesus did not head up His
people Israel on earth.
a. Therefore, the Capstone was not required to be installed, and
it was not.
2. At His first coming Israel, and particularly the Pharisees
rejected Jesus by crucifying
Him. However, that sacrifice opened up the path to forgiveness
and had Israel asked for
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 24
that and accepted Jesus the Kingdom could have then begun. See
Acts 3, especially 17-
26. The Capstone would have been added to the Pyramid, but that
did not happen.
a. At that time, the Pyramid was just a little too big for the
Capstone. The Pyramid
could have been made to fit with relatively minor changes by
adjusting the Casing
Stones, which symbolized the builders, who are the Pharisees
and, partly, Israel.
Partly because Israelites like Peter believed Jesus was the Son
of God, but in Acts
3, he was talking to Israelites who did not believe that.
3. Since Jesus was rejected, it became necessary to wait for His
second coming when he
would be King of Heaven on Earth. in Matthew 21:42-45 (KJV)
42
Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The
stone which the builders
rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the
Lordʹs doing, and it is
marvellous in our eyes? 43
Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from
you, and given to a
nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. 44
And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on
whomsoever it shall fall,
it will grind him to powder. 45
And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables,
they perceived that he
spake of them.
Because of the rejection of Jesus by the Pharisees, the kingdom
of God was to be taken
from them and given to another nation.
a. This was symbolized by the Casing being shaken off and
removed by the
Caireans from the Pyramid thereby, requiring new Casing Stones
to be added
later. This time is assumed to be after the second coming of
Jesus. So it can be
seen that the old Casing Stones symbolize the builders who were
the Pharisees.
The top of the 203rd
course is the current top of the Pyramid, and it is tempting to
think that it
marks the base of the Capstone, but evidence shows that this is
not the case. Since it is not the
Apex of the Great Pyramid, and since a complete understanding of
the intentions of the Designer
is being sought, the task is to determine the form of the
Pyramid between the top of the 203rd
course and its intended apex including the Capstone.
Paper 4 shows that the level of the top of the 203rd
course is significant in defining the overall
height of the Pyramid. The Ratio Clue, described in Paper 4, is
part of this definition. If this
course did not stand out, by being the top remaining course, it
is most unlikely that the Ratio
Clue would have been discovered, and the theoretical height
would not be known either.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 25
There is no evidence that the Capstone of the Pyramid was ever
installed. The earliest record
relating to the Capstone comes from the Greek historian Diodorus
Siculus around 60 BC. In
Bibliotheca Historica he describes the Great Pyramid as
follows:
ʺFor the largest is in the form of a square and has a base
length on each side of seven plethra
and a height of over six plethra; it also gradually tapers to
the top, where each side is six cubits
long.
The entire construction is of hard stone, which is difficult to
work but lasts forever; for though no
fewer than a thousand years have elapsed, as they say, to our
lifetime, or, as some writers have
it, more than three thousand four hundred, the stones remain to
this day still preserving their
original position and the entire structure undecayed.ʺ
The above was copied from chapter 63 of the translation
available at Diodorus_Siculus/1C
The phrase ʺit also gradually tapers to the top, where each side
is six cubits longʺ. ʺSix cubitsʺ
does not refer to the sloping arris edges, which are hundreds of
cubits long, but indicates that
there was a six cubits square plateau instead. In turn, this
implies that there was no Capstone.
This author is not aware of any visitor to the Pyramid who
mentions seeing the Capstone, which
is indicative of the fact that it was never installed.
The history of the gradual reduction in the number of courses is
shown by Colonel Howard
Vyse, who studied the Pyramid in 1837.
The following table was compiled from his book, ʺOperations
Carried On At The Pyramids Of
Gizeh In 1837 Vol. II.ʺ.
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Diodorus_Siculus/1C*.html
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 26
Author Year Page
#
#
Courses
Platform
Dimensions
Notes
Diodorus 60 BC 184 6 Cubits (111ʺ) Casing intact
Bellonius 1553 191 250
Johannes Helfricus 1565 193 230 12 fathoms in circuit
Jean Palerme 1581 194 213 4 Paces QC 5 or 6 paces long
Prosper Alpinus 1591 196 125 10 paces
Baumgarten 1594 198 5 cubits Vyse ʺThis is obscureʺ
Sandys 1610 199 255 3 stones, 60 men
Pietro Della Valle 1616 202 210-250
M De Villamont 1618 203 215 15 sq feet
Greaves 1638-9 205 207-208 13.28 ft, 9 stones
M De Monconys 1647 214 208 Entrance on 16th step
M Thevenot 1655 215 208 16 ft 8ʺ
Melton 1661 217 206 16 ft 8ʺ Entrance on 16th step
M Lebrun 1674 222 210 16-17 ft Entrance on 16th step
M Maillet 1692 224 208
De Careri 1693 229 208 16 ft 8ʺ, 12 stones Entrance on 18th
step
Lucas 1699 230 243 5 Stones, 2 wanting
Veryard 1701 232 206
Egmont 1709 234 206 6 + 6 stones wanting
Pere Sicard 1715 236 220 10 - 12 feet
Pococke 1743 244 212 9 stones + 2 wanting
M Fourmont 1755 251 207-208 Entrance on 16th step
Davison 1763 255 206 6 stones
M Denon 1799 265 208
Colonel Coutelle 1801 269 203 2 ruined tiers at top Entrance on
15th step
M Jomard 1801 274 203 2 ruined tiers at top
Dr. Clarke 1801 280 32 ft sq 9 stones
The data in the table is contradictory in places, and it was not
possible to reconstruct a course by
course history. The best that can be done is to identify
specific years and the difference in the
number of courses between them. In the Table above, data
identified by yellow shading are
considered outliers and have been rejected from consideration,
mainly because the total number
of courses differs significantly from the likely value at that
time. Also, in these cases, the
dimensions of the platform at the top are either not defined or
lie outside the range of the period
in which they were reported.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 27
The stone courses of the Pyramid were unmoved until an
earthquake loosened the casing stones,
and those near the top were probably cast off. Smyth claims an
earthquake occurred in AD 908
and that the locals started to remove the remaining casing
stones about AD 1000. Although
Smyth claims this earthquake was recorded, it does not appear in
the Wiki List of historical
earthquakes but, the Crete earthquake in AD 1303 does, and the
resulting tsunami devastated
Alexandria. the vintage news
the-great-pyramid-of-giza-was-once-covered-in-highly-polished-
white-limestone-before-it-was-removed-to-build-mosques-and-fortresses/
says
After that, an amount of casing stone was carted away by Bahri
Sultan An-Nasir Nasir-ad Din
al-Hasan, in 1356, to use as material for building mosques and
fortress in nearby Cairo, the
capital and the largest city of modern-day Egypt. In addition,
plenty more casing stones were
removed from the Great Pyramid by Muhammad Ali Pasha during the
early 19th century and
reused as material for his Alabaster Mosque, also in Cairo.
Wikipedia Mosque-Madrassa_of_Sultan_Hassan provides details of
where some of the casing
stones were used.
It is most likely that the 1303 Crete earthquake was the one
that started to shake off the casing
stones, and this stimulated the local princes to purloin most of
those that remained.
The analysis of the reduction in the number of courses begins
with Diodorus. It is assumed that
he climbed up to the top of the Pyramid, sometime during his
life between 90 BC and 30 BC, to
measure the sloping height and determine that the plateau was
six cubits square. Is it possible to
climb a smooth face at 52°? It is a reasonable conclusion that
the Capstone was missing at that
time since, according to Diodorus, there appeared to be no other
damage, which would not be the
case if the Pyramidion had been removed. Therefore six cubits
define the Base Length of the
Capstone at the Casing.
Although Diodorus was born in Sicily, he was a Greek historian,
and it is assumed that he used
Greek cubits. There are two major versions of the Greek cubit,
18.23 Bʺ (kyrēnaikos pēchys) and
18.67 Bʺ (metrios pēchys) in length. In the absence of any data
as to which cubit Diodorus used
the average of these two lengths, 18.45 B is used. Therefore the
Base Length of the Capstone
would be approximately 111 Bʺ, and its approximate height would
be that of a man, 71 Bʺ.
Greaves appears to agree with the use of the Greek cubit here
since on page 208 of Vyseʹs book,
referenced in the Table above, he quotes Diodorusʹ measurement
as 9 feet, which is 108ʺ.
The height of the Pyramid, above the Pavement, will be shown to
be 5774 Bʺ, in round numbers.
The base of the Pyramidion will be 71Bʺ lower than this, which
is 5703 Bʺ.
The following Figure shows course 160 and above. The courses
above 203 and the Pyramidion,
which is shaded blue, are a reconstruction of the probably
intended courses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historical_earthquakeshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historical_earthquakeshttps://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/09/06/the-great-pyramid-of-giza-was-once-covered-in-highly-polished-white-limestone-before-it-was-removed-to-build-mosques-and-fortresses/https://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/09/06/the-great-pyramid-of-giza-was-once-covered-in-highly-polished-white-limestone-before-it-was-removed-to-build-mosques-and-fortresses/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosque-Madrassa_of_Sultan_Hassan
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 28
Top of the Pyramid Showing How Courses Are Arranged in Bands of
Decreasing Height
There are two groups of the courses at this height of the
Pyramid, which are banded in groups of
16. In general, the rule is that within these bands, a course is
less thick than the one upon which
it sits. However, this is not always the case as some courses
are slightly thicker than the one on
which they sit but not more than an inch. When the band is
complete, the next course is thicker,
by several inches, and then they diminish again to form a new
band. There are 16 banded courses
from 164 to 179, for a total of 332.0 Bʺ. There are16 banded
courses from 180 to 195 for a total
of 345.6 Bʺ. The average of these two 16 course bands is 338.8
Bʺ. Courses 196 to 199 form an
uncharacteristic, at this height, four-course band.
From Petrieʹs Plate 8, the top of the 199th
course is, on average, 5363.6 Bʺ above the pavement.
The four existing courses above the 199th
diminish in height, indicating that a new band is being
formed. So adding 16 courses on top of the 199th, at an average
of 338.8 Bʺ, would put the top
of the 215th
course at 5702.4 Bʺ, which is 0.6 Bʺ lower than the estimate.
Adding the Pyramidion
makes a total of 216 courses, which is a reasonable number since
216 = 6 × 6 × 6, or 63 because,
as shown later, the height of the Pyramid is calculated using
third-order equations. The primary
factors of 215 are 5, and 43. The number 43 occurs several times
throughout these papers in a
significant manner.
215
166
165
164
163
162
161
160
190
189
188
187
186
185
184
183
182
181
180
179
178
177
176
175
174
173
172
171
170
169
168
167
203
202
201
200
199
198
197
196
195
194
193
192
191
166
165
164
163
162
161
160
190
189
188
187
186
185
184
183
182
181
180
179
178
177
176
175
174
173
172
171
170
169
168
167
203
202
201
200
199
198
197
196
195
194
193
192
191
213
212
211
210
209
208
207
205
204
206
213
212
211
210
209
208
207
205
204
206
214
216
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 29
The Figure below shows a reconstruction of the probably intended
courses at the Head of the
Great Pyramid based on Vyseʹs historical records in the Table
above.
Possible Reconstruction of the Missing Courses at the Top of the
Great Pyramid
From the Table above, the first data point is based on Diodorusʹ
6 cubit plateau that is the base of
the Pyramidion at 5703 Bʺ above the Pavement. The Pyramidion is
assumed to be designed to be
installed at this level and has a base length of 111 Bʺ and a
height of 71 Bʺ.
The next data point is from Greaves in 1638, which is
reconstructed at the top of course 209,
which is 5579 Bʺ above the Pavement. It is assumed that the
casing stones and courses above this
height were all shaken loose or shaken off the Pyramid by the
1303 earthquake. The
reconstruction above uses Petrieʹs data (P25-26). He reports
that the inside bottom edge of the
Casing stones of the first course were set back 108 Bʺ from the
edge of the Casing, at the center
of the sides of the Pyramid. At the top of course 201, he
reports that it resembles a rectangle
rather than a square, but the reconstruction assumes that it is
supposed to be square and averages
Petrieʹs measurements for the four sides, for a length of 436
Bʺ. The sloping red lines in the
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 30
Figure above pass through the bottom inside edges of the Casing
stones of each course, so that it
is possible to easily measure the theoretical length of the core
stones of each course.
It can be seen at the ʺGreavesʺ level that the reconstruction
shows a core length of 167 Bʺ more
than his measurement of 13.28 ft., or 159 Bʺ. The reason for
this 8 Bʺ difference is not known.
Perhaps Greaves reported the shortest edge of the rectangular
core instead of the average.
However, course 208 is a good fit for all the surveyors from
Monconys to Denon, who reported a
plateau of 16 ft. 8ʺ, which is 200 Bʺ, at the top of course 208.
The reconstruction Figure above
shows a precise match between the historical data and
theoretical data at this point. Based on this
data, it is assumed that the height was reduced by two courses
between 1647 and 1799.
The Table shows that the Pyramid decreased in height from course
206 to course 201, with a few
stones for courses 202 and 203 between the years 1799 and 1801.
The Pyramid remained at this
height until Petrie surveyed it in 1881.
A granite capstone would weigh about 12 tons, at a density of
162 lb/ft3.
Pyramidions or Capstones at the Egyptian Museum (Bodsworth)
In summary, it can be seen that there is no data to support that
the Capstone was ever installed.
Had it been its intended length is estimated to be 111 Bʺ, its
height 71 Bʺ, and its weight, if made
of granite, would be 12 tons. These dimensions are assumed to be
close to the intent of the
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 31
Designer. A couple of Capstones, or Pyramidions, are shown at
the Egyptian Museum in the
Figure above. Though these appear to be slightly smaller than
estimated above, it should be
remembered that the Capstone under discussion was intended to
fit the largest Pyramid ever
built.
If the Capstone had been installed when the Pyramid was built,
how was it removed by the time
Diodorus measured the plateau at the top? One reason is that it
could have been dislodged by a
massive earthquake, which would also have destroyed much of the
Casing. This destruction was
not evident to Diodorus since he reports that ʺ the stones
remain to this day still preserving their
original position and the entire structure undecayed. ʺ
A second reason considers that the Capstone may have been
manually removed later. The only
likely reason why it would have been removed is that it was
valuable, and the thieves would not
have cared about damaging the Pyramid. An operation like this
would have been a difficult task
without the aid of the original working platforms and other
construction tools. Damage below the
Capstone, caused by the removal, would have been evident, but
again Diodorusʹ reports no such
damage.
So it is concluded that the Capstone was not fitted during
construction, which validates
criteria 1, repeated below:
1. From the time that Adam originally sinned to the Crucifixion,
Jesus did not head up His
people Israel on earth.
a. Therefore, the Capstone was not required to be installed, and
it was not.
So why would the Capstone have been rejected by the builders? It
would have been built in
Heaven with the intent of it being let down like Jesusʹ at His
second coming. Acts 1:9-11 (KJV)
9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was
taken up; and a cloud
received him out of their sight. 10
And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up,
behold, two men stood by
them in white apparel; 11
Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into
heaven? this same Jesus,
which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like
manner as ye have seen him go
into heaven.
It is assumed that the measurement system used by the Pyramid
builder was intended to be the
same as used in Heaven, but the human version could easily have
become corrupted. That would
symbolize how man is incapable of preserving that which God has
given him without corrupting
it and his lack of understanding about Jesus, i.e., the
Capstone.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 32
An investigation was carried out, and it was determined that the
various base units of Godʹs
measurement system can be discerned in the universe. The results
of this investigation will be
presented in Paper 10, which, at this time, is unfinished.
The investigation reconstructed Godʹs values of six of the seven
base units defined by the
measurement system as described in Wikipedia: Metric System .
For length, it is determined that
there are 39.3899 God units per meter; and
there are 39.3701 Bʺ per meter;
So each of Godʹs units is 0.9995 shorter than 1 Bʺ, an increase
of +0.05% in the human version.
It is easy to see that corruption of this magnitude could have
crept into the measurement system
over time. For every 2000 God units required by the Pyramid
plans, the builders would have
built 2000 Bʺ, which is 2001 God units. The 9069 unit base
length would have been at least 4.5
God units longer than required. At a constant base angle, each
course would be too long by the
same amount, including the plateau on which the Capstone was to
sit. If the Capstone, course
216, had been set on this plateau, there would have been a ledge
of about 2.25 God units between
its base and the top of course 215, as shown in the Figure
below. The symbolism would be that
Jesus does not cover all of His Chruch, which is unthinkable. It
also symbolizes that the builders
had added to Godʹs law, which is true, Matthew 23:4 (KJV)
4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay
them on menʹs shoulders; but
they themselves will not move them with one of their
fingers.
Ledge Around Capstone (Jesus) Caused By the Pyramid Builders
(Pharisees)
The photograph below shows that over the millennia, the Mokattam
casing stones have lost their
whiteness and need to be refinished. Had the Pharisees not
rejected Jesus, he would have become
the king. The casing stones would have been trimmed to the
correct size and, thereby, restored to
their pristine whiteness. Thus, the second of the criteria above
is met.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_system
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 33
2. At His first coming Israel, and particularly the Pharisees
rejected Jesus by crucifying
Him. However, that sacrifice opened up the path to forgiveness,
and had Israel asked for
that, and accepted Jesus, the Kingdom could have then begun. See
Acts 3, especially 17-
26. The Capstone would have been added to the Pyramid, but that
did not happen.
a. At that time, the Pyramid was just a little too big for the
Capstone. However, it
could have been made to fit with relatively minor changes by
adjusting the Casing
Stones, which symbolized the builders, who are the Pharisees
and, partly, Israel.
Partly because Israelites like Peter believed Jesus was the Son
of God, but in Acts
3, he was talking to Israelites who did not believe that.
Original Casing Stone From the Great Pyramid
Since part of Israel rejected Jesus and did not repent of that
act, then the kingdom of heaven was
taken from them. Symbolically they were shaken off or removed
from the Pyramid in the 1303
Crete earthquake. Rutherford thinks that the Pyramid will be
rebuilt at some time during the
Millenium, and that will be an opportune time to replace the
missing Casing stones with new
ones on which the Capstone will fit precisely. Perhaps a new
technology might make an
everlasting Casing possible. The new Casing Stones will
symbolize the nation bringing forth the
fruits thereof. The Capstone will be let down from Heaven,
symbolizing both Jesus and the
manner in which he will return. The third criteria will,
therefore, have been met.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 34
4. Since Jesus was rejected, it became necessary to wait for His
second coming when he
would be King of Heaven on Earth. in Matthew 21:42-45 (KJV)
42
Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The
stone which the builders
rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the
Lordʹs doing, and it is
marvellous in our eyes? 43
Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from
you, and given to a
nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. 44
And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on
whomsoever it shall fall,
it will grind him to powder. 45
And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables,
they perceived that he
spake of them.
Because of the rejection of Jesus by the Pharisees, the kingdom
of God was to be taken
from them and given to another nation.
a. This was symbolized by the Casing being shaken off and
removed by the
Caireans from the Pyramid thereby, requiring new Casing Stones
to be added
later. This time is assumed to be after the second coming of
Jesus. So it can be
seen that the old Casing Stones symbolize the builders who were
the Pharisees.
Bearings From the Pyramid
Another tenet is that rhumb line bearing drawn on a map from the
center of the Pyramid, at an
angle of east minus the angle of the Pyramidʹs sloping passages,
passes through Bethlehem. The
bearing is 63° 41ʹ 50ʺ or 63.6973 °. Calculators on the Movable
Type Scripts website are used to
evaluate this tenet.
Below are two views of the route that shows it comes as close as
225 meters to ʺManger Squareʺ
in Bethlehem, based on the scale at the bottom. There werenʹt
any National Heritage agents back
then who could place a bronze plaque on the stable to positively
identify it, saying ʺJesus was
born hereʺ so this is a reasonable claim. However, it is just
one witness, and this study requires
two.
https://www.movable-type.co.uk/scripts/latlong.html
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 35
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 36
Recognizing that the nativity begins the New Testament, a search
was carried out to see if there
was another witness, and a second one was found. If we go round
the compass precisely 270°
and navigate along a great circle route with an initial bearing
of north minus the theoretical
passage angle, i.e., 333° 41ʹ 50ʺ or 333.6973 °, we will come to
the island of Patmos. Here the
apostle John received the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which is
the end of the New Testament.
Shown below is the overall route, and the journey is mostly over
the sea. For this journey, a boat
or airplane would be used, and navigation would be along a great
circle route rather than a rhumb
line as one would follow on land.
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 37
The route comes within 600 m of the ʺCave of the Apocalypseʺ as
shown in the close-up view
below:
-
© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page –
Oregon USA 38
The Pyramidʹs location permits the drawing of two bearings,
precisely ¾ of a circle apart,
such that one passes through Bethlehem and the other through
Patmos, symbolizing the
beginning and end of the New Testament. This location was chosen
2700 years in advance
of the New Testament, and so it is prophetic and validates the
original tenet. Quite possibly,
the need to define these bearings helped define the location of
the Pyramid.