![]() |
|
NOTES ON THE USE OF MEGALITHS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GIZA TEMPLES REASON FOR USE
You express some surprise about why cultures
so long ago would want to build with such large stones. There is one very
obvious reason; earthquakes. It seems likely that the earth was much more
active in those days and buildings much more liable to destruction. Damage
by earthquakes is mainly done at interfaces of the stones or blemishes
within the stones. Less interfaces less damage there is. Thus bigger
stones, less damage there is. In essence, the energy can bounce around
inside a large square stone and dissipate harmlessly to heat.
Taken with the sheer weight, it is a wise protection against
earthquakes.
Of course,
the contra also applies. A resonating block can be removed more easily. As
you say in your book, this may be the background to the collapse of the
Jericho walls and why such building went out of fashion. MANIPULATION
I cannot follow the analysis on page 272.
Perhaps you will let me expound some basic mechanics here. In all of this,
the coefficient of friction is king.
If the coefficient of friction is 10%, then a 70 tonne block
requires 21 men to pull it, assuming a force of a third of a tonne per
man. If the load is moving along a 10% slope, then a further 7 tonnes of
force is required, adding a further 21 men, which remains unchanged for
this slope.
The key to
all this must be friction, and the ability of the Egyptians to reduce it.
I suspect that they were much better at it than we realise. First, they
must have wherever possible, pulled objects along the ground, using a flat
interface. Sledges reduce the contact area and dramatically increase
friction. Thus only carved objects would have been born on sledges.
Second,
they probably developed very effective lubricants. River mud is a very
good lubricant, and Nile mud is apparently extra slimy. Thus they had
ample supplies of a cheap and effective lubricant.
In the absence of mud or as a supplement to,
tubular roots, such as potatoes, are also extremely effective. Easter
Island Tradition had it that the statues were moved on a “Sea of
Potatoes”, to general mirth of recent generations. Yet when someone tried
it recently, it worked like a charm.
Third, it
is likely that the very large stones were cut to a length that enabled
them to resonate. A sharp tap on the side would result in a “magical” loss
of weight. This of course could be the source of the levitation stories.
Again this is consistent with your paragraph on Page 203 that the stones
were struck and moved sharply for a short distance.
The question then becomes to what level the
coefficient of friction can be lowered. Many lubricants are efficient but
tend to be squeezed out from the sides, making them useless. Items such as
potatoes have sufficient fibre to stop them doing this. Anyway, between
mud and potatoes, the ancient Egyptians probably had a “magic” formula. If
they could reduce the coefficient to 1%, a 70 tonne block only needs three
men to move it on the flat and twenty four men up a slope of 10%.
For a 200
tonne block, 60 men are required for the upward motion, with a further 60
for 10% friction or six more for 1% friction. These are of course
dramatically less than most estimates. It is likely that the only way 1%
can be achieved is through resonance.
Anyway, this was the challenge, which they must have gone a long
way to meet. Sincerely George Forrest |