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:
For Menkaure, we get 202 – 3 = 199.
199√2 = 281.4284989
1000/281.4284989 = 3.5533…… which is a close approximation of √(4π) or 2√π.
For the 4th pyramid, we have
162 – 3 = 159
159√2 = 224.8599564
1000/224.8599564 = 4.44721246 which is a close approximation of π√2, or the opposite of Menkaure.
I find this interplay between 2, π and φ among the pyramids quite interesting.
Both Menkaure and the 4th pyramid are linked to φ, because for Menkaure, base/height is 202/125 = 1.616, and for the 4th, the base is 162 ≈ 100φ. For Khufu, the design itself is based on the so-called Kepler right-angled triangle 1 : √φ : φ. (Khafre is based on a 3 : 4 : 5 right-angled triangle.)
And now we see links to π and 2 as well, as shown above. For Khufu, 2 x base/height = 2×440/280 = 3.142857 ≈ π, given the use of whole-cubit dimensions.