Pyramid geometry - exactitude of angle degrees

topic posted Mon, April 27, 2009 - 11:25 AM by  Ash of the Dark
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
Hi all,

In researching the design of pyramids (ultimately to build one of wood frame for meditation), I'm coming up with different information on the angles. I'm also confused about what part of the "angle" people are talking about. Here is what I have found in designing my own:

If I make a frame of a four-sided pyramid with a total of 8 struts of equal length, the four struts going upward diagonally are at a 45 degree angle. This makes for a "slope" of each side at 54.7 degrees. When people talk about the angle of the Great Pyramid at Giza, it's something like 51.86 degrees. But what are they talking about? The angle formed between a bottom corner and the apex? Or the slope of one of the pyramid's sides?

In designing the above pyramid, my thinking is that you get a simpler, more symmetrical, purer, geometry with struts of equal length. You would end up with a perfect square at the bottom, & equilateral triangles instead of isoceles. Angles of 45 degrees are exactly at the midpoint between vertical and horizontal. Alot of what I have seen online seems to really underscore the importance of replicating the exact dimensions of the Great Pyramid, but is there nothing to be said of pyramids with a more symmetrical design?

Though I plan to, I have not yet meditated in a pyramid. I am curious to know if any here have done so, whether angles make a difference, and whether anyone has used crystals to facilitate the flow of energy into the king's chamber.
posted by:
Ash of the Dark
Los Angeles
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • I know the answer to all these questions, but Dr. Patrick Flanagan (Pyramid Power) has threatened to 'never cease to amaze me with his silence' should I reveal them.
    • Aha! Some reading I have ahead of me... thank you for pointing me in the right direction... :)
      • To come up with the exact degree of the pyrimid, try this... It seemed to work for the Egyptians...

        Take a bag of sand and punch a hole in the bag and let it run out on the ground... See the shape the sand makes? This is the exact shape of the pyrimid! Don't believe me? Take a picture of the sand and make it almost transparent with almost any paint program and then impose the sand picture over the pyrimids of Gyza and you'll see the same angles that gravity made the sand form... Neat, huh?

        In this way, the pyrimids will always contain the same amount of force on every square inch of the pyrimid no matter where you take the reading, inside or outside of the pyrimid... A pyrimid too tall seems to put undue pressures on the outside lieing edges of the pyrimid and one to low of an angle won't hold together as well because of unequaled distribution of weight...

        Notice that each side of the pyrimids of giza have different lengths(ahh, but everyone said they were so precise, but they are not)... The different length in ratios corrispond to the ratios of the Earth as the Earth isn't exacally a ball but kind of egg-shaped and the pyrimids take these very precise ratios into mind and correspond to the corresponding ratios of the Earth... www.youtube.com/watch

        Notice that if the ratios match then how did the ancient Egyptians know that the Earth wasn't a perfect sphere? and how did they match these ratios?
        • Also the sides of the Great Pyramid are not flat.
          They dish in ever so slightly.
          This was first observed from an airplane in the 20's 0r 30's (I think) in the fading light of the setting sun.
          • I think a lot of people are over awed by the simple beauty of the pyramids, and ignore recent revleations about gravity (1700's) which reveal that when surveying the plumb bob will move out of center towards a mountain, and be "inaccurate". To me, this knowledge of gravity and space/shape (Stephen is onto something I think, about the scale and proportion of a shape being the key to energy relations) should be more prominent in the pyramid theories.
            I think the ideal pryamid would be a Tetrahedron, but, that makes me think "why then is it a truncated Octohedron half?"
            also, why is there a volume separated in the center, and the base?
            I think several things are going on in these pyramids...
            The limestone shell, with a gold tip creates a face of negative ions that are an outside charge, created without machines.. simply pulling the ions from the passing atmosphere...
            the granite headers over the main central chamber act to focus the gravity center into the main chamber...
            Which has small tunnels that point towards Sirius.
            Which, when the merkaba chariot was placed, acted as a time machine.
            also, the chambers act as a giant bong.
            which pulls a heavy smoke when the doors are closed, a slow heavy smoke.
            but, you wont' read all this...
            tis my own musings...
            • If anyone is into harmonics and sound through harmonics, the pyrimids create tones that man can't hear... Long deep bass tones through the passageways... People say that these tone sooth when you are in the pyrimids. I never visited but would surely like to... Kind of like a tuned port on a giant bass speaker
            • Interesting observations all,
              The slightly concave walls were DESIGNED and not an effect of collapse or erosion.It is a contrived innovation for even weight distribution and enhanced structural integrity through shape/gravity integration.
              This structure has so many advanced and calculated design attributes ,is so old ,and of course because of its size has remained one of the most impressive examples of construction of sentient beings on our world,it's difficult not to conceive of it as a SYMBOL or physical ICON,left by some advanced race to lead successive terrestrial populations to THINK,and STUDY,and PONDER about life beyond our borders...
              There is much on Google about where the approximate 52 degree angle is measured and why that degree is relevant.
              You need only search a bit more to find those answers.
              I agree with Shadoan to some degree about the tetrahedron being an "ideal" pyramid.
              This one seems to be more about the octahedron,but that may be because it's designed specifically for this planet (shaped like a pear,{oblate spheroid}) and it's exact location on that shape.
              I personally like the metaphors posited that the pyramid's function is actually a LENS for diffusing some energy evenly throughout the geophysical grid of earth...
              • Interesting, indeed. Like VidasVeron said, the angle of rise derived from a pile of sand is such an awesome way to look at this. It got me thinking, if we were to do this on a different planet, like Mars, a pile of sand would be shaped differently because of the gravitational influences on that planet. On Jupiter, I imagine a cone of sand would be pretty flat. That the angles of pyramids would be calculated to be harmonious with Earth's gravity opens up a whole new vista of research possibilities. After all, isn't it gravity that makes our planet "alive" with geothermal activity in our core, keeps us spinning, keeps us in orbit?

                I agree with Stephen in that they are some of the most impressive examples of construction we have ever mustered as a race.
                • Some interesting facts about the Golden Ratio and the pyrimids of giza... A lot of math involved but I think you'll get the gist of the amazing mathmatics involved in the building and knowledge of math 3000 years ago when they built these things...

                  In architecture, art, plants, painings and even book design throughout history, the use of the golden ratio has made the aesthetics look more pleasing to the eye and through this ratio man has copied nature to produce some of the most wonderful works of art and architecture on earth.


                  Pyramids

                  A regular square pyramid is determined by its medial right triangle, whose edges are the pyramid's apothem (a), semi-base (b), and height (h); the face inclination angle is also marked. Mathematical proportions b:h:a are of particular interest in relation to Egyptian pyramids.Both Egyptian pyramids and those mathematical regular square pyramids that resemble them can be analyzed with respect to the golden ratio and other ratios.


                  Mathematical pyramids and triangles
                  A pyramid in which the apothem (slant height along the bisector of a face) is equal to φ times the semi-base (half the base width) is sometimes called a golden pyramid. The isosceles triangle that is the face of such a pyramid can be constructed from the two halves of a diagonally split golden rectangle (of size semi-base by apothem), joining the medium-length edges to make the apothem. The height of this pyramid is times the semi-base (that is, the slope of the face is ); the square of the height is equal to the area of a face, φ times the square of the semi-base.

                  The medial right triangle of this "golden" pyramid, with sides is interesting in its own right, demonstrating via the Pythagorean theorem the relationship or . This "Kepler triangle" is the only right triangle proportion with edge lengths in geometric progression, just as the 3–4–5 triangle is the only right triangle proportion with edge lengths in arithmetic progression. The angle with tangent corresponds to the angle that the side of the pyramid makes with respect to the ground, 51.827… degrees (51° 49' 38").

                  A nearly similar pyramid shape, but with rational proportions, is described in the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus (the source of a large part of modern knowledge of ancient Egyptian mathematics), based on the 3:4:5 triangle; the face slope corresponding to the angle with tangent 4/3 is 53.13 degrees (53 degrees and 8 minutes). The slant height or apothem is 5/3 or 1.666… times the semi-base. The Rhind papyrus has another pyramid problem as well, again with rational slope (expressed as run over rise). Egyptian mathematics did not include the notion of irrational numbers, and the rational inverse slope (run/rise, multiplied by a factor of 7 to convert to their conventional units of palms per cubit) was used in the building of pyramids.

                  Another mathematical pyramid with proportions almost identical to the "golden" one is the one with perimeter equal to 2π times the height, or h:b = 4:π. This triangle has a face angle of 51.854° (51°51'), very close to the 51.827° of the Kepler triangle. This pyramid relationship corresponds to the coincidental relationship .

                  Egyptian pyramids very close in proportion to these mathematical pyramids are known.


                  Egyptian pyramids
                  In the mid nineteenth century, Röber studied various Egyptian pyramids including Khafre, Menkaure and some of the Gizeh, Sakkara and Abusir groups, and was interpreted as saying that half the base of the side of the pyramid is the middle mean of the side, forming what other authors identified as the Kepler triangle; many other mathematical theories of the shape of the pyramids have also been explored.

                  One Egyptian pyramid is remarkably close to a "golden pyramid" – the Great Pyramid of Giza (also known as the Pyramid of Cheops or Khufu). Its slope of 51° 52' is extremely close to the "golden" pyramid inclination of 51° 50' and the π-based pyramid inclination of 51° 51'; other pyramids at Giza (Chephren, 52° 20', and Mycerinus, 50° 47') are also quite close. Whether the relationship to the golden ratio in these pyramids is by design or by accident remains controversial. Several other Egyptian pyramids are very close to the rational 3:4:5 shape.

                  Adding fuel to controversy over the architectural authorship of the Great Pyramid, Eric Temple Bell, mathematician and historian, claimed in 1950 that Egyptian mathematics would not have supported the ability to calculate the slant height of the pyramids, or the ratio to the height, except in the case of the 3:4:5 pyramid, since the 3:4:5 triangle was the only right triangle known to the Egyptians and they did not know the Pythagorean theorem nor any way to reason about irrationals such as π or φ.

                  Michael Rice asserts that principal authorities on the history of Egyptian architecture have argued that the Egyptians were well acquainted with the golden ratio and that it is part of mathematics of the Pyramids, citing Giedon (1957). Historians of science have always debated whether the Egyptians had any such knowledge or not, contending rather that its appearance in an Egyptian building is the result of chance.

                  In 1859, the pyramidologist John Taylor claimed that, in the Great Pyramid of Giza, the golden ratio is represented by the ratio of the length of the face (the slope height), inclined at an angle θ to the ground, to half the length of the side of the square base, equivalent to the secant of the angle θ. The above two lengths were about 186.4 and 115.2 meters respectively. The ratio of these lengths is the golden ratio, accurate to more digits than either of the original measurements. Similarly, Howard Vyse, according to Matila Ghyka, reported the great pyramid height 148.2 m, and half-base 116.4 m, yielding 1.6189 for the ratio of slant height to half-base, again more accurate than the data variability.

                  In my real life encounters that mkae sense to the average guy, look at it this way...

                  When I do construction, to find the beginning square corner of the building site, I take a stake in the ground and run a line off of it to 30 foot and place a stake. Then I run a string from the first stake out about 40 foot and another string from the second stake out to 50 foot and where the 40 and 50 foot strings cross is where I stake the last stake and I'll always have a perfect 90 degree corner starting at the first stake... This is the 3,4,5 triangle or 30,40,50 or 300,400,500... It always makes a perfect corner with a 90 degree angle at my first stake! Remember this and you'll build perfect pyrimids every time.
                • The slope angle of the Great Pyramid relates to Universal gravitational harmonics, sacred geometry, in fact, ...meaning not Limited to Particular circumstances, (such as the relative mass of a celestial object)........

                  High gravity can produce certain effects that tend more towards flattening, yet a pile of sand (isolated from influences like high atmospheric pressure, friction-tension between sand particles, etc.) under high gravity will behave much like a pile of sand under lower gravity...... under low gravity there may be fewer peripheral influences, allowing friction-variables to play at keeping the pile somewhat steeper.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
                    I should have studied Physics.
                    • Its actually a lot more specific than just physics. Its how shape and vibration relate. How vibration becomes a physical manifestation as energy or as a solid, liquid, gas, plasma. Its cymatics *grin* Geometry and perhaps trigonometry are the best areas of study for using shape in relation to energy. Energy comes in the form of waves which are related to certain shapes by their common ratios. Like the great Pyramid having the ratio in its dimensions the same as the difference between earths equatorial diameter and polar diameter. As far as I know pyramid shapes concentrate and accelerate aether. Pyramid= fire in the middle. The more acute the angle of the apex the more accelerated the energy becomes and vice versa for a more obtuse angle. Dome shapes hold in aether, points or sharp corners bleed aether. Its very much like how sharp points can generate free electrons when charged with electricity and ionize the air. Sharp points or corners bleed charge.
  • this you will find interesting!
    notice his description of zinc to save the frame?
    this is an awesome pad!
    www.n55.dk/MANUALS/FLOA...OAT_PLAT.html
    • It looks to me that this construction employs the tetrahedron,not sure why they call it an octet truss.
      Bucky Fuller extolled the benefits of the tetrahedron and effectively invented the tetrahedral truss ,currently employed in space, expanding the International Space Station. It has the greatest strength and flexibility ratios with the least amount of materials that I know of. Wherever he is Bucky is smiling...so often treated like an eccentric wacko during his lifetime,now we seem to have caught up to at least a part of his vision.
      That part about sacrificial zinc is interesting...
      If there is a charge occurring within seawater,couldn't it be used to advantage somehow?
      I built a monolithic kinetic metal sculpture with my father in 1984 for a cancer clinic in Texas. Much of it was stainless and other key parts were aluminum. There was so much of a charge between these two metals that the aluminum would get a white powdery corrosion on it over night even when assiduously polished...

Recent topics in "SacredGeometry"