Read the study there were NO tests or experiments performed.
I never said there were any tests. I said the theorectic simulations were enough to warrant further testing and base new tech on. There were real science from the research that warrants further investigation and not dismissing.
No again, this is just a popular scientific write up of the same study
So why should I believe your opinion over the scientific write up lol. It seems all the so called "scientific write ups" are saying the same thing. Coming to the same conclusion as myself. The write up actually quotes the researchers.
Which is just saying that they want to produce pyramidal antennas, if they are at a nanoscale it will not be radiowaves they are trying to interact with.
So how is this not advanced knowledge. They are learning from the ancient Egyptian structures and methods to generate such waves and energy sources. Surely the structure, its location and the specifiuc way its build with certain stones was not just luck in producing such results.
This is article has not been peer-reviewed (the pre-print even says so in it's watermarks), it tries to build a case for the connection between the shroud of Turin and the Giza pyramids. It contains no test or experimental work.
Ah peer review, peer review. Everything has to be peer reviewed. At least its a scientific paper. You are dismissing it without any peer review or even any scientific published article. Your doing exactly what I was pointing out was double standard.
Here I am linking peer review and at least scientifice papers and reports laying out the process and anaysis. All I am getting from skeptics is single sentence objections with absolutely no support.
Is not the Piezoelectric Phenomena in the King's Chamber the same effect that the other papers which included peer review were talking about. So we have a number of papers all supporting a similar effect. I would rather side with at least scientific papers then someones personal opinion on a social media platform.
Mentioned in the post you quoted before. There is no connection to egyptian pyramids, is there?
I think I may have linked this to show that the tech is possible. That research has shown that granite can be weakened by Piezoelectric Excitation. Along similar lines to the other research and tests showing Piezoelectric Phenomena and effects.
They are all looking at the use of the natural materials involved and how they interact with each other. How specific combinations or architecture enhances natural phenomena that can ebe harnessed.
As mentioned I don't think for example the location of the pyramid on a high electromagnetic location, over a mineral rich subterrainian water network.
No one of your articles has shown the utility of piezoelectrics in conjunction with the pyramids.
Show me the peer review that states there is no connection.
That was no confirmation! It is enough to make further tests interesting.
According to the findings they clearly state that there was human intervention.
The NMR results suggest that the casing stones consist of limestone grains from the Tura quarry, cemented with an amorphous calcium-silicate gel formed by human intervention, by the addition of extra silica, possibly diatomaceous earth, from the Fayium area.
Conclusion from the pdf is that it may contain both natural and manmade blocks. No hypothesis testing was performed,
Yes there was. The hypothesis was.
1) If the blocks are artificial, their magnetic moments are parallel, oriented approximately in the north-south direction
2) If the blocks are natural, then the directions of their magnetic moments are oriented randomly.
Magnetic analyses suggest the possibility that the pyramids may contain both natural and man-made blocks.
As far as I understand that the blocks that are orientated paralell north to south have a magnetic moments that corresponds to them being artificial. Being reconstituted in situ and never changing orientation. Whereas the natural stones have random magnetic moments as they are changing orientation over time. It is impossible for a natural stone to have a N to S magnetic moment.
so how probable was it that the magnetization directions would be observed by chance alone? Seven samples don't give them much to work with.
Near impossible. The magnetic moments happen as the stones are orientated. So natural stones from quarry to placement will undergo random orientations. Whereas the cast blocks being cast in situ will only have paralell orientation N to S as they have only been orientation in one position.
No hypothesis testing was performed, so how probable was it that the magnetization directions would be observed by chance alone? Seven samples don't give them much to work with.
Thats 7 out of 7 which makes the odds atronomically high that all these blocks just happen to remain paralelle throughout the entire process from quarry to positioning. If they were chiselled and cut and hauled up the pyramid they are going to have random magnetic moments.
But when you add the other tests that show the makeup of the stones are manmade and contain artificial minerals and chemistry in them it makes a strong case.
The Surprising Truth Behind the Construction of the Great Pyramids
The tiniest structures within the inner and outer casing stones were indeed consistent with a reconstituted limestone. The cement binding the limestone aggregate was either silicon dioxide (the building block of quartz) or a calcium and magnesium-rich silicate mineral.
The sample chemistries the researchers found do not exist anywhere in nature. "Therefore," says Barsoum, "it's very improbable that the outer and inner casing stones that we examined were chiseled from a natural limestone block."
The presence of silicon dioxide nanoscale spheres (with diameters only billionths of a meter across) in one of the samples. This discovery further confirms that these blocks are not natural limestone.
Ancient Egyptians were the original--albeit unknowing--nanotechnologists." "Ironically," says Barsoum, "this study of 4,500 year old rocks is not about the past, but about the future."
The Surprising Truth Behind the Construction of the Great Pyramids
In other words just like we are learning from the Piezoelectric effects of the pyramids and applying this to new tech. The same with the geopolymer cement the early Egyptians created which is natural and environmental. They are teaching us how to manipulate nature from 4,500 years ago or longer.
Gathering 'concrete' evidence
The binder, known as a geopolymer, could have been made from lime, kaolinite (a kind of clay), a fine silica (such as diatomaceous earth) and natron (sodium carbonate). The same ingredients were used by the Egyptians to make self-glazing pottery ornaments, a material called Egyptian faience, and well known to archeologists.
MIT class explores controversial pyramid theory with scale model
news.mit.edu
I read the article, they don't claim to have proved anything. What do you want me to do then?
To apply the same standard you apply to me. The skeptics demans peer review and still reject it. They demand scientific evidence from formal sources with credible scientists.
Just saying you disagree meets none of those standards that have been demanded of me. I have several independent sources from either peer review or scientific sources with published papers, reposts and commentary on those papers and reports. You have a personal opinion on a social media site.
It is a suggestion. It even says so in the headline.
Yes just like the idea of giant ramps and wooden sleds or cutting millions of blocks with chisels and copper saws. Why is it that the orthodoxy is accepted out of hand when its also spectulation. At least the idea of hydro lifting is more aligned to a realistic explanation and that the Egyptians were smarter than just using sheer human power.
You're jumping the gun, let us see if others can replicate the findings.
Theres enough evidence to say it was likely. Thats why I always go back to the images. I have shown you observation evidence of softened stone already and its been dismissed. This image is one of the actual blocks on the casing and you can see how it was soft.
How much more evidence do you want.
Even if they were using some sort of cement, how does this follow? Cement-like (true cement with lime came a little later?) construction was known to the ancient egyptians, was it not?
Well the Romans were attributed with create cement. So this like other discoveries pushes back the timeline. But the research results seem to say that this was not just any old cement but one thats eco friendly and lasts longer than any other cement.
Enough to want to reverse engineer it to use as a building product for the future. In other words 4,500 year old knowledge is showing us how ho make cement today.
But also that it explains how the outer casing stones are so tight where you can't even get a human hair between them. This makes sense that they were cast and sank into each other as they dried. The material did not shrink and looked and lasted like real stone. Even to foolw Egyptologists for decades . Claiming they spent years chiseling surfaces to hair tight perfection.
What do you mean with "They all had a purpose associated with the data being collected."? That the egyptians built thing with a purpose in mind, that is more or less a given.
Yes so I am saying that there was much more of a purpose for what they built than given credit for. The same principle but just more of it and more advanced than thought.
I mean the pyramids are a feat in themselves. But the orthodoxy that they were just big tombs and like
Sneferu needed three is becoming unreal. There is a lot more going on and thanks to modern tech its only in recent decade that we are finding out.
Only in the sense, that new findings of course changes our current understanding. That is what science does.
Lol its like they never resisted the idea and when it shows their orthodoxy wrong they pretend thats how science works. As though science never has a paradigm change. I think like all sciences this is exactly what is happening.
www.christianforums.com
