A follow-up to the 437 post, this time applying the same methodology to Khafre and the other two pyramids.
If you have seen my papers then you will know that Khafre is often connected to the number 3. This same idea pops up here.
So …. Khafre has a base length of 411 ₢. 411 – 3 is 408.
If we had a square with side 408, then the diagonal would be 408√2, or 576.999.
If we divide 1000 by that (a process which effectively takes the inverse, and fixes the location of the decimal point), then we get
1000/576.999 = 1.733104858, which is a close approximation of √3 … it differs by 0.0010540… Accuracy is of course limited by having to start with whole-cubit dimensions.
I have tried the same approach with the other two pyramids, as follows. SInce we are using smaller dimensions to start with, accuracy does suffer a bit:
While playing around with the calculator, looking at relationships between the numbers at Giza, I took another look at the diagonal of the great pyramid.
The great pyramid has a base of 440 ₢. This means the diagonal is 440√2, which is 622.25 ₢. This is about 4 ₢ more than 1000/φ, which is 618 ₢. The error percentage is about 0.6%, which is annoyingly close.
So I got to wondering what base size would produce a diagonal more or less exactly 1000/φ.
The answer turns out to be 437, which is 3 ₢ less the existing size.
437√2 = 618.011 which is as close as you are going to get using whole-cubit dimensions.
But the oddness does not stop there.
One of the downsides of running a public web site is the junk mail you get. It has long been standard practice to have a feedback form for users to contact you. This was not a problem in the beginning, but it wasn’t long before the lowlife on the net started to abuse the facility to send spam.
One such example was this message I received today: