Pyramids are impossible: Grok AI

[Hypatia415]

Perhaps not "spacecraft" but maybe some for a anti-gravity device ???

Oh please spare us such nonsense.

I think Suzy Eddie Izzard's take on building Stonehenge is the funniest. Although the Druids had nothing to do with it! Warning for the easily offended, there is some strong language.

A more intriguing case is that of Machu Picchu. Reportedly many of the stones used are too large to fit going up the narrow trails of the mountainsides.

Ever considered that those stones were locally quarried?

Also reported came from a few valleys distant.

Human effort and water transport just like the bluestones and the altar stone at Stonehenge.

I have no idea why you and others here cannot give ancient cultures and civilisations credit for their entirely human achievements.

 

[Hypatia415]

I was trying to be kind, not too offensive in my comments. Not interested in digging out the thesaurus.
"little green humanoids", 'aliens abducting' etc. could also appear as dismissive and/or insulting. Definitely far from a serious reply/comment.

The theme of this thread touches upon many other similar subjects~topics and short sound bites rarely cover or explain fully the depth and complexity of what is encompassed.

For example there is the issue of genetics and a quirk or two of human DNA that could be clue/evidence of non-terrestrial intervention and manipulation of human evolution. Earliest texts provide hints~clues, such as the context of Genesis Chapter six, verses 1-6 or Gilgamesh's comment about his being two-thirds divine, because his mother was Goddess (see "Epic of Gilgamesh").

Too late here, different time zone from you, and I need some shut eye ....

You used the wrong term.

 

[Stryder50]

Do you know what the Nile does regularly? Do you know just how fertile the Nile Delta was and still is? Do you know why Egypt became the proverbial corn/grain basket for Rome?

OMG!

Can you get any more condescending ??? !!!

The Nile floods annual (or did before up stream dams), overflows it's banks, which is why there is that thin band of fertile crop land along it's banks in contrast to the deserts beyond. But it does not and has never appeared to flood the Giza plateau of cover the Sphinx and Great Pyramids. Those structures do show horizontal groves consistent with sand blasting winds, but vertical grooving is caused by vertical fall and run off~down of water = rain.

BTW, Libya and many other parts of coastal North Africa also used to be "grain basket" for Roman Empire until 'climate change' caused those regions to turn to desert.

I've likely forgotten more history than you'll ever know.

 

[Stryder50]

Oh please spare us such nonsense.

I think Suzy Eddie Izzard's take on building Stonehenge is the funniest. Although the Druids had nothing to do with it! Warning for the easily offended, there is some strong language.



Ever considered that those stones were locally quarried?

Human effort and water transport just like the bluestones and the altar stone at Stonehenge.

I have no idea why you and others here cannot give ancient cultures and civilisations credit for their entirely human achievements.

Spare us your silly nonsense if you are going to get so pretentious.

 

[Stryder50]

You used the wrong term.

And you have some mis-spellings.
Spare me the English class and your pick of nits.

 

[Stryder50]

Hopefully you aren't a fan of Dr. Who.

I just posted this earlier on another thread;
....
Here's a copy paste from one of my posts on this of about7-8 months ago;
...
Why physical time travel is impossible

First you have to get around the Law of Conservation of Matter and Energy.

You can change matter into energy, or vice-versa, but you can not add to or subtract from the total amount of energy plus matter in the Universe.

If you go back in time, you have removed a quantity of matter and energy from this "now" universe and added such to that "past' universe.
Most who understand physics will advise that such is impossible.

An example to consider. You ate a big mac burger before your trip back in time. Six months ago the meat pattie was in a cow and the wheat flour for the bun was growing in the field. when you go back in time, does the hamburger remain in your stomach and the cow have a hole where the pattie would have been, the field a gap in the grain stalks OR are the burger ingredients still there in their place and time of origin and you have a vacant void=hole in your gut?

As if that weren't complication enough, if you want to go back in time, say six months ago, then the Earth was on the other side of the Sun from here, and now. So you will have to travel about 184 million miles, +/-.
But that's only part of the physical distance travel portion of the trip. The Sun has moved around the Galaxy center and the Galaxy has moved relative to the universe in those six months so you have some more 3D astrogation to compute and travel.

Want to go back 150 years in the past, then that physical distance part of the equation just grew by billions of miles, not millions.
And that would have to be a near instant speed for the distance, violates that light speed barrier.

It may be fun mental masturbation to think about time travel, but anyone who understands science involved should notice the impossibilities that need to be overcome.
...
Just a basic start for you to chew on.

There are a few other complications, such as a physical time travel machine must also be a space ship, but maybe later ....

 

[Stryder50]

Oh please spare us such nonsense.

I think Suzy Eddie Izzard's take on building Stonehenge is the funniest. Although the Druids had nothing to do with it! Warning for the easily offended, there is some strong language.



Ever considered that those stones were locally quarried?

Human effort and water transport just like the bluestones and the altar stone at Stonehenge.

I have no idea why you and others here cannot give ancient cultures and civilisations credit for their entirely human achievements.

Size and origin of some of the stones are based reports of others who have been there and the training background to know what they reported.
FWIW, here's an aerial view;

 

[Stryder50]

Oh please spare us such nonsense.

I think Suzy Eddie Izzard's take on building Stonehenge is the funniest. Although the Druids had nothing to do with it! Warning for the easily offended, there is some strong language.



Ever considered that those stones were locally quarried?

Human effort and water transport just like the bluestones and the altar stone at Stonehenge.

I have no idea why you and others here cannot give ancient cultures and civilisations credit for their entirely human achievements.

By NICK COOK​

The Hunt For Zero Point​

In 1956, a group of highly respected aerospace engineers revealed that US scientists were perfecting ways to control gravity. They predicted a breakthrough would come by the end of the decade, ushering in an era of limitless, clean propulsion for a new breed of fuelless transport systems – and weapons beyond our imagination. Of course it never happened. Or did it?

Forty years later a chance encounter with one of the engineers who made that prediction forces a highly sceptical aerospace and defence journalist, Nick Cook, to consider the possibility that America did indeed crack the gravity code – and has covered up ever since. His investigations moved from the corridors of NASA to the dark heartland of America’s classified weapons establishment, where it became clear that half a century earlier, in the dying days of the Third Reich, Nazi scientists were racing to perfect a Pandora’s Box of high technology that would deliver Germany from defeat. History says that they failed.

But the trail that takes Cook deep into the once-impenetrable empire of SS General Hans Kammler – the man charged by Adolf Hitler with perfecting German secret weapons technology – says otherwise. In his pursuit of the true facts behind Kammler, Cook finally establishes the truth: America is determined to hang onto its secrets, but the stakes are enormous and others are now in the race to acquire a suppressed technology.

 

[Hypatia415]

And you have some mis-spellings.
Spare me the English class and your pick of nits.

Not mis-spellings but British English spellings.

 

[Stryder50]

Oh please spare us such nonsense.

I think Suzy Eddie Izzard's take on building Stonehenge is the funniest. Although the Druids had nothing to do with it! Warning for the easily offended, there is some strong language.



Ever considered that those stones were locally quarried?

Human effort and water transport just like the bluestones and the altar stone at Stonehenge.

I have no idea why you and others here cannot give ancient cultures and civilisations credit for their entirely human achievements.

I'm still waiting for someone to replicate the process of the ancients for building stonehenge.
Would like to see how it's done, especially placing capstones, without aid of modern mechanized machinery.

 

[Hypatia415]

By NICK COOK​

The Hunt For Zero Point​

In 1956, a group of highly respected aerospace engineers revealed that US scientists were perfecting ways to control gravity. They predicted a breakthrough would come by the end of the decade, ushering in an era of limitless, clean propulsion for a new breed of fuelless transport systems – and weapons beyond our imagination. Of course it never happened. Or did it?

Forty years later a chance encounter with one of the engineers who made that prediction forces a highly sceptical aerospace and defence journalist, Nick Cook, to consider the possibility that America did indeed crack the gravity code – and has covered up ever since. His investigations moved from the corridors of NASA to the dark heartland of America’s classified weapons establishment, where it became clear that half a century earlier, in the dying days of the Third Reich, Nazi scientists were racing to perfect a Pandora’s Box of high technology that would deliver Germany from defeat. History says that they failed.

But the trail that takes Cook deep into the once-impenetrable empire of SS General Hans Kammler – the man charged by Adolf Hitler with perfecting German secret weapons technology – says otherwise. In his pursuit of the true facts behind Kammler, Cook finally establishes the truth: America is determined to hang onto its secrets, but the stakes are enormous and others are now in the race to acquire a suppressed technology.

Hmmm. From Kirkus Reviews. THE HUNT FOR ZERO POINT | Kirkus Reviews

Cook’s spirited if sometimes improbable tale turns on the question of whether human beings might be able to harness and thereby defy gravity in order to do such things as travel through time and cross the galaxy at the speed of light. It’s theoretically possible, Cook suggests; for at least a couple of generations, some physicists have suspected that the universe conceals a fifth dimension—hyperspace—in which gravity as we understand it no longer applies. Getting to that point, of course, presents plenty of practical problems, but that has not discouraged the efforts of engineers, from the Nazi scientists who gave the world jet fighters and the V2 rocket to some of NASA’s best and brightest. Though much of his argument involves questionable evidence and a cool-to-cold trail, Cook examines Nazi efforts to develop “flying discs” (the disc, it appears, is the ideal shape for an antigravity aircraft) and considers the possibility that after WWII, American engineers might have whisked a few Nazi documents (or, for that matter, scientists) off to their labs to continue the experiments. If so, he speculates, then the UFOs that began to pop up in Air Force and police reports in great numbers beginning in the late 1940s might in fact have been antigravitational aircraft making test flights. Cook, who clearly knows his technology, is fully aware that he sometimes treads in the territory of what scientists call “The Legend”; he cautions that no single explanation can satisfactorily account for all the UFO sightings on record.

Hardheaded rationalists will likely take this with a shakerful of salt, but technology enthusiasts, aviation buffs, and UFO watchers should find it fascinating.

Also this Hyperspace – A Scientific Odyssey : Official Website of Dr. Michio Kaku

The only way that these issues can be fully comprehended is via advanced mathematics and I know I do not have those skills and very much doubt you do either.

If you are interested in the Nazi aeronautical developments, among other advances that regime made, I recommend Operation Paperclip by Annie Jacobsen.

 

[Stryder50]

Hmmm. From Kirkus Reviews. THE HUNT FOR ZERO POINT | Kirkus Reviews

Cook’s spirited if sometimes improbable tale turns on the question of whether human beings might be able to harness and thereby defy gravity in order to do such things as travel through time and cross the galaxy at the speed of light. It’s theoretically possible, Cook suggests; for at least a couple of generations, some physicists have suspected that the universe conceals a fifth dimension—hyperspace—in which gravity as we understand it no longer applies. Getting to that point, of course, presents plenty of practical problems, but that has not discouraged the efforts of engineers, from the Nazi scientists who gave the world jet fighters and the V2 rocket to some of NASA’s best and brightest. Though much of his argument involves questionable evidence and a cool-to-cold trail, Cook examines Nazi efforts to develop “flying discs” (the disc, it appears, is the ideal shape for an antigravity aircraft) and considers the possibility that after WWII, American engineers might have whisked a few Nazi documents (or, for that matter, scientists) off to their labs to continue the experiments. If so, he speculates, then the UFOs that began to pop up in Air Force and police reports in great numbers beginning in the late 1940s might in fact have been antigravitational aircraft making test flights. Cook, who clearly knows his technology, is fully aware that he sometimes treads in the territory of what scientists call “The Legend”; he cautions that no single explanation can satisfactorily account for all the UFO sightings on record.

Hardheaded rationalists will likely take this with a shakerful of salt, but technology enthusiasts, aviation buffs, and UFO watchers should find it fascinating.

Also this Hyperspace – A Scientific Odyssey : Official Website of Dr. Michio Kaku

The only way that these issues can be fully comprehended is via advanced mathematics and I know I do not have those skills and very much doubt you do either.

If you are interested in the Nazi aeronautical developments, among other advances that regime made, I recommend Operation Paperclip by Annie Jacobsen.

Thanks.
Not her book yet, but others as well on Operation Paperclip, etc. have crossed my desk. Among many interests I'm strongly focused on history, aviation, military and assorted sciences. Unlike many here, I do provide a short paragraph glimpse of who and what I am in my Profile here on this board.
I just present some of what I did to show there is a range of material and sources on this thread topic and others related to it. And the field of "exotic" science and knowledge is growing rapidly.

 

[Hypatia415]

I'm still waiting for someone to replicate the process of the ancients for building stonehenge.
Would like to see how it's done, especially placing capstones, without aid of modern mechanized machinery.

English Heritage, the organisation which maintains the site, offers a likely explanation.

Building Stonehenge

Stonehenge is a masterpiece of engineering. How did Neolithic people build it using only the simple tools and technologies available to them?

www.english-heritage.org.uk

Raising the stones​

To erect a stone, people dug a large hole with a sloping side. The back of the hole was lined with a row of wooden stakes. The stone was then moved into position and hauled upright using plant fibre ropes and probably a wooden A-frame. Weights may have been used to help tip the stone upright. The hole was then packed securely with rubble.

Timber platforms were probably used to raise the horizontal lintels into position. Then the final stage of shaping the tenons took place, to ensure a good fit into the mortice holes of the lintel.


However, if you want some amusing comment from a historian whose second discipline is the ancient religions of Britain you may find this article from 2014 entertaining.

Stonehenge was built by cowboys... so hasn't it lasted well!

Professor Ronald Hutton described the prehistoric wonder on Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire, as 'a unique and possibly failed experiment'.

www.dailymail.com

 

[Stryder50]

English Heritage, the organisation which maintains the site, offers a likely explanation.

Building Stonehenge

Stonehenge is a masterpiece of engineering. How did Neolithic people build it using only the simple tools and technologies available to them?

www.english-heritage.org.uk

Raising the stones​

To erect a stone, people dug a large hole with a sloping side. The back of the hole was lined with a row of wooden stakes. The stone was then moved into position and hauled upright using plant fibre ropes and probably a wooden A-frame. Weights may have been used to help tip the stone upright. The hole was then packed securely with rubble.

Timber platforms were probably used to raise the horizontal lintels into position. Then the final stage of shaping the tenons took place, to ensure a good fit into the mortice holes of the lintel.


However, if you want some amusing comment from a historian whose second discipline is the ancient religions of Britain you may find this article from 2014 entertaining.

Stonehenge was built by cowboys... so hasn't it lasted well!

Professor Ronald Hutton described the prehistoric wonder on Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire, as 'a unique and possibly failed experiment'.

www.dailymail.com

I came across the hole and wood platform, along with log rollers system long ago. Stonehenge is a rather rough and primitive construction compared to the Giza pyramids though.

I do sometimes engage whimsy and jocularity in my posts, but the tongue in cheek is not easily noticed.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I was going to talk to a site engineer I knew but I decided to ask Grok about the site work at Giza

To level a $350\text{ m} \times 350\text{ m}$ site with a $10\text{ m}$ average grade differential, the ancient Egyptians would have had to remove $612,500\text{ m}^3$ of bedrock, which would take approximately $33.6\text{ years}$using a dedicated workforce of $5,000\text{ quarrymen}$.
Here is the step-by-step mathematical breakdown of the volume, mass, and time frame required for this engineering feat.

---

1. Calculate Bedrock Volume​

To level a sloped surface down to a flat plane, the volume of material to be excavated can be modeled as a right triangular prism. The formula for the volume ($V$) is:
$$V = \frac{1}{2} \times \text{Length} \times \text{Width} \times \text{Height}$$
Substituting your given dimensions:
$$V = \frac{1}{2} \times 350\text{ m} \times 350\text{ m} \times 10\text{ m}$$
$$V = 612,500\text{ m}^3$$

2. Convert to Mass​

Giza limestone has an average density of approximately $2.6\text{ metric tons/m}^3$. To find the total mass ($M$) removed: [1]
$$M = 612,500\text{ m}^3 \times 2.6\text{ tons/m}^3$$
$$M = 1,592,500\text{ metric tons}$$

3. Determine Total Man-Days​

Experimental archaeology shows that a worker using ancient Egyptian tools (copper chisels, wooden mallets, and flint pounders) can excavate roughly $0.01\text{ m}^3$ of solid limestone per day. [2, 3]
$$\text{Total Man-Days} = \frac{612,500\text{ m}^3}{0.01\text{ m}^3/\text{man-day}}$$
$$\text{Total Man-Days} = 61,250,000\text{ man-days}$$

4. Estimate Timeframe Based on Workforce Size​

Because multiple workers can quarry simultaneously across a $350\text{ m} \times 350\text{ m}$ footprint ($122,500\text{ m}^2$), the project timeline depends on the scale of the workforce:

• With 1,000 Quarrymen:
  $$\text{Time} = \frac{61,250,000}{1,000 \times 365} \approx 167.8\text{ years}$$
• With 5,000 Quarrymen:
  $$\text{Time} = \frac{61,250,000}{5,000 \times 365} \approx 33.6\text{ years}$$
• With 10,000 Quarrymen:
  $$\text{Time} = \frac{61,250,000}{10,000 \times 365} \approx 16.8\text{ years}$$

---

Final Answer​

An estimated $612,500\text{ m}^3$ ($1,592,500\text{ tons}$) of bedrock would need to be excavated, requiring $33.6\text{ years}$ to complete if a team of $5,000\text{ workers}$ labored daily.
If you would like to explore this further, let me know if you want to:

• Adjust the excavation tool efficiency rate based on softer or harder rock types.
• Factor in seasonal workforce changes (such as the Nile flooding season).
• Calculate the number of copper chisels that would be dulled and recycled during this process. [4, 5]

<span># Let's compute the total volume of bedrock removed.</span><span><br></span><span># Assuming a wedge-shaped profile for a grade differential or leveling a slope, </span><span><br></span><span># the volume can be estimated as a right triangular prism.</span><span><br></span><span># Volume = 0.5 * Base_length * Height * Width</span><span><br></span><span># Dimensions: 350m by 350m, average grade differential (Height) = 10m.</span><span><br></span><span># If the slope runs across one of the dimensions:</span><span><br></span><span>length</span><span> = </span><span>350</span><span><br></span><span>width</span><span> = </span><span>350</span><span><br></span><span>height</span><span> = </span><span>10</span><span><br><br></span><span>volume</span><span> = </span><span>0.5</span><span> * length * width * height<br>print(</span><span>f</span><span>"</span><span>Volume: </span><span>{volume}</span><span> m3</span><span>"</span><span>)<br><br></span><span># Let's calculate the mass assuming a density for Giza limestone (approx 2.5 to 2.7 tonnes/m3, let's use 2.6)</span><span><br></span><span>density</span><span> = </span><span>2.6</span><span> </span><span># metric tons per m3</span><span><br></span><span>mass</span><span> = volume * density<br>print(</span><span>f</span><span>"</span><span>Mass: </span><span>{mass}</span><span> tons</span><span>"</span><span>)<br><br></span><span># Let's estimate time based on experimental archaeology copper chisel rates.</span><span><br></span><span># A copper chisel might remove around 0.005 to 0.02 m3 of limestone per man-day, or let's look at standard academic estimates.</span><span><br></span><span># Let's check a few scenarios for workforce size: e.g., 1000, 5000, 10000 workers.</span><span><br></span><span># Rate per worker per day = 0.01 m3 (conservative experimental estimate for hard work with copper/dolerite tools)</span><span><br></span><span>rate_per_worker_day</span><span> = </span><span>0.01</span><span> <br></span><span>total_man_days</span><span> = volume / rate_per_worker_day<br><br></span><span>years_1000_men</span><span> = total_man_days / (</span><span>1000</span><span> * </span><span>365</span><span>)<br></span><span>years_5000_men</span><span> = total_man_days / (</span><span>5000</span><span> * </span><span>365</span><span>)<br>print(</span><span>f</span><span>"</span><span>Man-days: </span><span>{total_man_days}</span><span>"</span><span>)<br>print(</span><span>f</span><span>"</span><span>Years with 1000 men: </span><span>{years_1000_men}</span><span>"</span><span>)<br>print(</span><span>f</span><span>"</span><span>Years with 5000 men: </span><span>{years_5000_men}</span><span>"</span><span>)<br></span>

[1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
[2] https://www.ebsco.com
[3] https://www.respectegypttours.com
[4] https://allinonehomeschool.com
[5] https://egyptfuntours.com

 

[Hypatia415]

Spare us your silly nonsense if you are going to get so pretentious.

I thought the video clip might amuse. And as for Machu Picchu (fifteenth century CE), just like Stonehenge and various Egyptian structures that were built millennia earlier it was done by human effort and ingenuity.

 

[Hypatia415]

I came across the hole and wood platform, along with log rollers system long ago.

So why the need for an anti-gravity device?

Stonehenge is a rather rough and primitive construction compared to the Giza pyramids though.

Well it is Neolithic in origin.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

If true, Grok AI just says what every human in his right mind would also conclude: Pyramids are way too complex for ancient Egyptians to build. It also says they are way older than they tell us. It says thousands of years of constant rain are required to cause the erosion. And there was no rain for thousands of years there, except for some exceptions.

You do know that wind and sand can cause erosion also?

 

[Hypatia415]

Meant in reference to most recent few thousands of years.
None to extent that would have caused the vertical grooves of water erosion seen on the stones of the structures.

Which structures in particular are you referencing?

Implication being that much rainfall/water volume appears to have been more than a few thousands years ago, i.e. occurred before "official" date of construction. Hence they are older than is "officially" claimed.

No. It may have been natural erosion in the stone prior to quarrying. It has also been noted that the limestone in Giza is of poorer quality thus more susceptible to erosion.

Of course there various lunatic fringe theories that contend the sphinx is 50,000 years old which puts it in the upper palaeolithic!

 

[Hypatia415]

OMG!

Can you get any more condescending ??? !!!

The Nile floods annual (or did before up stream dams),

There were no dams in ancient Egypt.

overflows it's banks, which is why there is that thin band of fertile crop land along it's banks in contrast to the deserts beyond. But it does not and has never appeared to flood the Giza plateau of cover the Sphinx and Great Pyramids. Those structures do show horizontal groves consistent with sand blasting winds, but vertical grooving is caused by vertical fall and run off~down of water = rain.

See my earlier reply on that.

BTW, Libya and many other parts of coastal North Africa also used to be "grain basket" for Roman Empire

From ancient sources Egypt appears to have been the largest of the grain growing areas in that region for Rome and hence its importance as a province.

I've likely forgotten more history than you'll ever know.

Are you really so insecure that you need to make empty boasts?