Some thoughts on why the Great Pyramid is not a tomb… we’ll get to what it may be in another post.
Various other people have pointed out things about the Great Pyramid which indicate that it was not a tomb. These include:
1. The sarcophagus was empty.
2. It’s a bit small for receiving a king in full burial kit … mummified with layers of cotton wrapping, then assorted nested boxes, gold death mask, etc. 3. The sarcophagus (and the entire pyramid) are devoid of any carvings or inscriptions. There’s absolutely nothing along the lines of “I came. I saw. I built.” or “Here lies King Khufu with his six wives and 97 children. He was The Man” or even “Warning: no tomb robbers (or Englishmen) allowed.” Nil. Nada. Unlike your typical tomb.
Okay, last one for tonight… since I upset √2 with the previous formula, I thought I’d have a go using square roots, but didn’t find anything yet. Maybe another day.
But… I did find something using cube roots… in fact, the cube roots of 2, 3, 5, and something derived from 7 …. and the accuracy is the best yet, even if the formula is horribly complex. Beauty and the beast, I suppose.
After fiddling around a bit, eventually found another way of getting an approximation for the royal cubit. I say approximation because, compared to the other methods, it’s only accurate to about 3 decimal places.
Be that as it may… I just found the correlation between this 0.83 metre (or 0.8296 if you want to be more precise), and the sum of the cubit + foot of 0.8319m (they’re both 0.83 if you work to two decimals) as discussed on the Origin of the Foot page, to be rather curious.
The close similarity is hard to ignore, and cubit+foot may make a more compelling origin argument than arguing for a circle divided into 366 degrees instead of 360.
[Note: I’m not entirely convinced that my “average year” calculations are correct. I was looking for a way to get 364.75 and since it is tantalizingly close to 365.25 I was looking for a way to get there from that. It may be better to just use 365.25 – 0.5 … now need a Reason Why.]
I was playing around with the calculator and stumbled across this curious sum.
Let’s start with how long a year is. As you should know, it’s 365.25 days for a solar year. If however, we measure against the background stars, it’s about 364.25 days.
From Wikipedia: “Both the stellar day and the sidereal day are shorter than the mean solar day by about 3 minutes56 seconds. ”
If we take those 3 minutes 56 seconds == 236 seconds, and work out the difference over a year (x 365), we get 86140 seconds, which is 23.927777 hours, effectively one day.
So if we take the average of a solar year and stellar year, we get (365.25 + 364.25)/2 which is 364.75 days, or more precisely, 364.7436921 days.