domingo, 25 de febrero de 2018

Mesa de medidas de Leptis Magna. Para Fernando Güemes.

Aquí se ve en la primera imagen la mesa de medidas de Leptis Magna. 
En la segunda imagen la página del artículo de Mark Wilson Jones donde recoge su análisis. 
En la tercera imagen he recortado de esa segunda imagen la "regla" de 4 Palmas. 

En esa tercera imagen puede verse que en esa "regla" de 4 Palmas las medidas varían. 

De izquierda a derecha arriba: 7'85 cm, 7'40 cm, 7'10 cm y 7'80 cm. Total: 30'00 cm. 

De izquierda a derecha abajo: 7'65 cm, 7'20 cm, 7'10 cm y 7'65 cm. Total: 29'60 cm. 

O sea, que en el mundo real hay variaciones.

sábado, 2 de diciembre de 2017

VITRUVIAN MAN: Cubit = 45 mm. Hand = 18 mm.

VITRUVIAN MAN: Cubit = 45 mm. Hand = 18 mm. So, Man = 1'80 m.

Cubit = 45 mm:

Cubit is 1/4 of the Man. Cubit is 45 mm. > Cubit is 45 cm. So, Man = 1'80 m.

Hand = 18 mm:

Hand is 1/10 of the Man. Hand is 18 mm. > Hand is 18 cm. So, Man = 1'80 m.




In the model of the Great Pyramid I'm proposing (based on the Human Original Canon = Man in T = 1'80 m) I found a relationship 9/10 that it was also proposed by Herz-Fischler in 2000. See below:

But this morning I found another very curious relationship. I want to put it here now.

Whith this model (9/10) we don't have just the right lenghts and angles of the Great Pyramid.

We have maybe also a way for squaring the cercle in a practical approximative way.


By squaring the circle here I means that we have a circumference with the same lenght of a square:

Perimeter of square = Side of square x 4 --> Circumference = 2 x Pi x Radius.

In the model 9/10 we have:
  1. Perimeter of Big square (20 x 20) = 20 units x 4 = 80 units.
  2. Diagonal of quarter (9 x 9) = Root of 162 = Radius.
  3. Circumference = 2 x Pi x Radius = 79'9718931 units = 80 units
So we have almost the same lenght for the perimeter of the square and the circumference.

PD 1: I did also a graphical explanation. But my scan doesn't work this morning. So this image was taken with my smartphone and it's not very clear. Sorry about that. I will put a better image when my scan will work:

PD 2So we have:

Side Squ = 8 Pletrons = 400 Royal cubits (32 Fingers 1’8 cm = 57’60 cm) = 230’40 m.
Perimeter Square = 4 x 8 Pletrons = 4 x 230’40 m = 921’60 m = 92160 cm.
Circumference = 921’60 m = 92160 cm.

If we take a 360 degree circle we will have:

If we do 92160 cm / 360 each degree is 256 cm. Very near to 10 Natural foot (25’65 cm).

But what if we take a 400 degree circle?

If we do 92160 cm / 400 each degree is 230’40 cm. Exactly 4 Royal Cubits (32 Fingers).


So, with this model we have a simple relationship between linear measures and circular measures in the ancient system of measures. I think that can not be the result of chance.

lunes, 27 de noviembre de 2017


In this Session opened few days ago by Peter Harris on
Richard Bartosz asks some questions on the slope of the Great Pyramid 51º.84.
This is a simple graphic explanation of the Great Pyramid slope 51º.84 for Richard Bartosz and the others participants in the Session based on my research on Historical Metrology:

ADD: I don't still have my main computer but yesterday I remembered that I had also an ancient one. So I will try to add here some words:
Last nigth (30 November 2017) I woke up at 04:00 and I had the idea to take a look at the books I have about the Great Pyramid. Many I bought them and had been able to read but not in great detail.

The fact is that I remembered them and I caught them to take a look. Especially that of Robert M. Schoch (The Mystery of the Pyramid of Keóps) because I remembered that at the end he had (has) very interesting appendices on the measures of the GP.

And when I checked it out tonight I found it, at pages 240 / 241 (El misterio de la Pirámide de Keóps. Robert M. Schoch. EDAF. 2008).
There are the data, exactly, in a note that Schoch collects about the work of a Roger Herz-Fischler in 2000: The shape of the Great Pyramid.

This man is, apparently, a mathematician. I searched the book online and found this link from the Wilfrid Laurier University Press:
I have already ordered it from Amazon (who knows when it will arrive) but my point is on that page comes the Index (Table of Contents), which I leave below and in which I indicate what is now the main thing for me (although I am looking forward to the book and read entirely).


1/ On the one hand the data that Schoch quotes in his book are these data from Herz-Fischler:

Side of the base = 230'40 m. Angle = 51.844. Height = 146'6 m. Diagonal of the base = 325'8 m

Those values are exactly the same ones that come to me in my model. See above.

2/ On the other hand chapter 14 (Chapter 14. Slope of the Arris = 9/10).

Because, for the title, it comes to pick up exactly the same ratio 9/10 than my model. See above.
3/ The book of Herz-Fischler (The shape of the Great Pyramid) is (in my opinion: I still need to read it when I will have) a review of lots of proposals on the Great Pyramid and its shape. The proposal 9/10 is in Chapter 14.
Well, I think this proposal is the right one (best than all the others). And I think also that my studies on the Human Original Canon and on the ancient system of measures give evidences about the fact that this proposal is the right one.
Of course, I still have to read the book (when I will have) and contacting Mr. Herz-Fischler to talk about. But I think I'm on the right track.