Having visited the Kings Chamber in the great pyramid I must admit that it first appears to be more of a sensory deprivation chamber than a place of burial. The Egyptian culture was focused on how the interior life manifested itself in outward actions. Therefore I would not be surprised if these chambers, which we know were used for initiation rights, were also used by the priests to help their royal counterparts reach a deeper level of inner being. A level were a greater harmony exists and the truth can be seen. Silencing the five senses is necessary for this to be achieved and the chamber that I experienced would have been a perfect laboratory for the experiment.
Posted by: Jim in Philosophy, Painting, Mystery on
Feb 09, 2009
Walt Whitman, in his essay called 'A Backward Glance' referred to the unfinished w ork in the following way.
" The word that I myself put primaily for the description of them as they stand at last, is the word Suggestiveness. I round and finish little, if anything; and could not consistently with my scheme. The reader will always have his or her part to do, just as much as I have had mine. I seek less to display any theme or thought, and more to bring you, the reader, into the atmosphere of the theme or thought-there to pursue your own flight".
This I think is consistent in all great works of art. To some degree they are all unfinished and done so on purpose. To hint but not tell, and to start but not complete, so that they become a path leading to many destinations all in an atomophere of co creation. This is a key to a 'Forever Painting'.
I was watching a recent program on early Greek art. The narrator pointed out that the Greeks like the Egyptians idealized all forms. One area that was most idealized was the smile on the faces of the statues and busts. Interestingly enought that same idealized smile appeared to be the same as the smile on the Mona Lisa.
Posted by: Jim in Science, Philosophy, Mystery on
Jan 18, 2009
The philosphical scientists that existed in the 1930's at Cambridge had a belief that in addition to the phenonemon that was apparent to our five senses there existed that whcih could only be felt intuitively. They called this the 'Somehting More'. I believe that this is what C.S. Lewis was referring to in his many writings as the desire that we all have for something which has not appeard in our ordinary existence. He called it the Secret. As he said, 'our common expedient is to call it beauty' . Further he said that it could be occasionaly glimpsed but never truly found as that whcih beauty represents is not of the work of art but is only suggested by it. I believe that my pursuti of 'Forever Painitngs' is just such a venture. To create that which might point toward the 'Something More' is the goal.
Posted by: Jim in Pyramids, Mystery, Engineering, Egypt on
Sep 05, 2008
As reported by Petrie, in his classic book from the 1800's on the Pyramids, the equisite detail and painstaking pursuit of perfection make these constructions both inspiring and enigmatic. A quote from the book.
" Hence the mean thickness of the joints there is '020'; therefore the mean variation of the cuttting of the stone from a straight line and from a true square, is but '01 on lenght of 75 inches up the face, an amount of accuracy equal to most modern opticians' straight edges of such a lenth."
It is inspiring because it shows what can be achieved with care and attention to detail. It is enigmatic when one wonders why it was considered necessary to dress the stones to this degree of accurracy and how it was done on a such a large scale over a prolonged period of time. Working with businesses today, as a consultant, I can report that to have employees apply themselves consistently over a period as short as one day is an issue. So as we go deeper into the mystery of these monuments we find even more unanswsered questions.
Posted by: Jim in Pyramids, Mystery, Engineering, Egypt on
May 17, 2008
A question that has always haunted me is why the builders used such large blocks in the construction? Logic would tell us that if at their size and weight(minimum 2.5 tons) it was difficult for them to handle they would have reduced their size to facilitate construction. The only conclusion that I can make is that they must not have had trouble working with such large masses or else the construction plan itself required the larger size. Why not make them the size of standard building blocks?
If anyone can shed light on this conundrum please let me know!
Posted by: Jim in Pyramids, Mystery, Engineering, Egypt on
Apr 17, 2008
Not too long ago a program on Nova spotlighted a successful attempt to reconstruct a modern day pyramid near the great pyramids on the Giza Plateau. Over a several week(3) period, using the same methods they thought were used in the construcion of the Giza Pyramids, they were successful in building a pyramid of 186 stones(same size as the smallest in the Great Pyramid)that was 20 feet high. I decided to compare the performance on this new pyramid with the Great Pyramid to see how long using the methods of the new pyramid builders it would take them to construct the great pyramid. Here is what I found out.
Assumptions
New Pyramid Construction(actual)
44 workmen
186 stones
3 weeks
Great Pyramid
2.4 million stones
Problem
Solve the equation for identifying the number of workmen
and time required to build the great pyramid at the same performance
rate as the new pyramid.
Performance Solution Equation - Time
186/3 = 2.4M/X
X = 38,710 weeks or 744 years
What this says is that at the same performance rate of 3 weeks to dress and lay 186 blocks how many years would it take to build a pyramid with 2.4 milllion. (Note: This does not take intoconsideration the additional complexifying aspects of scaled logistics and coordination or size.) It also suggests that that at
the same productivity ratio that it would have taken 567,742 workmen to achieve the same result on the larger pyramid over 744 years.
While these are straight line projections, and are simplfied, they do point to a potential missing element in the puzzle faced with the problem of discovering the design, processes, tools and manpower used in the construction of the Giza Pyramids.
Except for the simplified approach, if I have made any mistake in the
math let me know.
Posted by: Jim in Pyramids, Mystery, Engineering, Egypt on
Apr 17, 2008
How many blocks per hour would the builders of the Great Pyramid have had to lay if it was built in 20 years?
Assumptions
20 years
365 days a year
no days off
2.4M blocks
1. 8 hour work day = 41 per hour
2. 10 hour work day = 32.9 per hour
3. 12 hour work day = 27.4 per hour
If this is true then we need to know what strategies they utilized to be this productive! This is the BIG STORY because if they were this productive then we have lost all touch with the concept of personal and work group productivity. (Note: Remember the smallest block is estimated to weigh 2.5 tons.)
Please let me know if the math is wrong!
Blog 
