It is quite round (circular in various cross sections) and the central axis is quite vertical, but I'm not sure what other "math and geometry" you think are embedded in it. (1000's of reference points, does that just mean they measured the surface position at a lot of points?)
Most of the vases conform to an elipsoid meaning they don't fit any particular shape such as a circle or cyclinder ect. How they determine the accuracy is by mapping 1,000s of reference points and then seeing what shapes and geometry fit onto those reference points. The more it fits to known geomtry the more precise it is.
For example just the flatness of the top lip can be reduced to 1,000s of reference points and the more you have the greater the flatness. Then that horizontal axis can be used as a reference point itself to the bottom, sides, handles and many reference points. You gradually build up many reference points.
You can then create a cyclinder to the inside of the vase mouth and that creates a vertical axis which gives another basis for reference points. It goes on even down to circles mm small within the handles which can then be referenced against the rest of the jar. The more all these reference points conform to geometry and math the more precise it is.
The amazing thing is they all fit to within a hair thickness of each other which would be impossible just by freehand, touch and sight. In fact a mathmatician put all the geometry into a CAD model and found that the vase could be reduced to a single math equation which could then be applied to other vases which also matched with very high accuracy.
This article will describe the preliminary results of our ongoing analysis of the Granite Artefact scan data, our CAD reconstruction, and some remarkable insights into the design of the object.
unsigned.io
I don't think you understand the analogy and I didn't mention one of the minor details of the video that you may have missed. In the video, while discussing "precisionism", the presenter puts up, but does not discuss, a figure showing the measurements of symmetry in an ancient Egyptian statue of a face. The measurements show a great deal of symmetry. By mentioning other well measured later artifacts made by hand with similar levels of precision and symmetry it demonstrates that the precision or symmetry itself is not the issue. Only claims about the viability of the tools to work the specific material.
OK so I am interested in whether there is such later precision and symmetry in later works compared to these early staues and vases for example and the fact that this precision and symmetric geometry is found very early some 5 or 6,000 years ago when we would think pre dated any such knowledge and kill. Considering that these precision works seem to stop and then are followed by less precise and quality works. At least in the hard stones.
Yes of course I meant Dunn. His "engineering background" is about modern tools and metals, not ancient techniques and stone.
But its transferable. For example with Petrie's core 7 his knowledge of tooling allows him to determine what sort of mechanism would be needed to produce the signatures in the core. In fact Petrie at that time was bewildered as to what could have caused the signatures because at that time we did not understand modern tech to explain it.
Dunn proposed for example that some sort of sonic pulse like a modern hammer drill could produce the signatures and explains the mechanism as to why it would cut through quartz as easy or easier than feldspar due to sonic pulses which react to quartz in a way that increases pulse due to the quartz graver.
Others had propsed different mechanisms but could only account for some of the signatures but Dunn worked out a method that is used today that could account for all the signatures. This is the level of analysis rather than experiements with ancient methods which try to replicate the looks rather than the minor details of the signatures in the stone.
I've seen his pyramid book/website. He's definitely a woo merchant, but that is not directly related to the claims about high quality stone work.
Ah so you determine w9oo by the 'look' of a website. Have you read his stuff. He is definitely not a woo merchant as he has scientific calculations and evidence right through his hypothesis. Plus thats the point he describes this as a hypothesis and not a proven fact. You can see the adjustments to the ideas as new evdience is discovered. Which is good science.
Plus his ideas are all backed by other independent science which is only coming online recently when he was proposing some of these ideas very early. I reckon he is a pioneer and will be proven right in the end. Like I said he predicted the electrodes would be found behind the Queens chamber and he was right.
More like 4600 to 4800 years ago. The specific methods for making flat surfaces were not described in that short video, but the existence of the techniques seems widely known by actual archeologists.
Actually the vases I was talking about with the super flat surfaces to within a hair were found under the Stepped pyramid under Djoser around 2670BCE. So there is nearly 5,000 years. Around 40,000 vases were found and there's evidence that many were from other earlier tombs that Djoser raided to collect for himself. The pyramid itself has an estimated date and theres evdience its older.
Drills existed. See video below for a demonstration of some related techniques.
Yes but much of this came later. We have plenty of evidence of these bow drills. Most of these are in softer stone. As with the ealier precision vases in the hardest stone like granite which seem to stop we see many examples of vases in softer stone like alibaster and drilling with bow drills depicted in wall paintings and we have many examples. But they are in soifter stone and are less precise. Like they wanted to copy the earlier works but could not.
Dunn may have proved that vase was a 20th century forgery. But so far only one vase with no provenance has been measured to high precision.
Not sure what you mean by Dunn proving a vase is a modern forgery. Actually several vases have been measured and scanned now and they also very precise.
How many hours have you spend watching "unchartedX" videos? I think you need to work on you stamina.
Lol. I watch all things Egyptian at the moment. I don't watch TV but would rather watch docos or read history or science. UnchartedX is just one podcast of many I watch. I watch Rogan as well so does that disqualify me lol. But as with UnchartedX they have scientific references linked so you can go and check that out independent of them.
The point is about this topic of advanced ancient tech is that practically no one in mainstream is doing it as they have already assumed it was with the tools in the records. Its surprising the lack of interest and work thats not being done rather than being done. So sites like UnchartedX are great in that sense and you can see for yourself and reject it of you want. Or learn something new that others don't want to touch.
Here's another short video showing the manufacture of a hard stone vase using tools from early dynastic Egypt. It is not a precise as the vase that Dunn has obsessed with, but it is a first attempt made by non-expert stone workers.
Yeah its a good effort. But I get the sense that these methods reflect more what came later. We have plenty of examples in the records along with the primite methods.
But the precision works of the predynastic Egyptians seems a one off set as though created by a different level industry that was very organised and high tech. Archeologist speak of a two tier industry seen in the ancient megalths and works and the later more rough and less quality works that tried to copy the earlier works.
Quite often you find the earlier megaliths such as at Sacsayhuaman with the tetra pillowed walls with large blocks and the later Inca works trying to copy them with smaller rough walls and works. This is reflected around the world.
