News The height of the pyramid of Cheops

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ad VanderVen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Height Pyramid
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the mathematical ratios associated with the height and base of the Cheops Pyramid, specifically comparing the ratio derived from the formula 2/π (approximately 0.6366) to the ratio derived from the golden ratio (approximately 0.6180). Participants express skepticism about the accuracy of these calculations, citing potential issues with the historical measurement methods and the inherent inaccuracies in ancient measurements. The conversation highlights the difficulty in determining the original design intentions behind the pyramid's dimensions, suggesting that without precise historical records or architectural plans, any numerical analysis may be speculative. The debate touches on the significance of these ratios in understanding Egyptian engineering and the possible historical implications of their construction techniques. The conclusion emphasizes that while both ratios are mathematically valid, their relevance to the pyramid's design remains uncertain without further historical context.
  • #31
russ_watters said:
omeone had to stick their neck out to pick the new angle.

Literally.
 
  • Like
Likes Rive and russ_watters
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Vanadium 50 said:
The Giza pyramids have slopes of 42, 43.3 and 41.6 degrees. (Slope taken from the corners to the top).
You clearly have looked into this more than I have; all I have is what the wiki article says:
wiki said:
Slope51°52'±2'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza
And:
Wiki said:
One Egyptian pyramid that is close to a "golden pyramid" is the Great Pyramid of Giza (also known as the Pyramid of Cheops or Khufu). Its slope of 51° 52' is close to the "golden" pyramid inclination of 51° 50' – and even closer to the π-based pyramid inclination of 51° 51'. However, several other mathematical theories of the shape of the great pyramid, based on rational slopes, have been found to be both more accurate and more plausible explanations for the 51° 52' slope.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio

Can you explain the discrepancy?
V50 said:
Literally.
You did what I saw there.
 
  • #33
Slope is "rise over run", right? The rise is well defined, but the run is not. I took them from the corners. Wikipedia takes it from the midpoint of the sides, presumably.
 
  • #34
From the wiki article on "golden ratios" I cited in an earlier post also referred to by other posters:

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.[99]

Bell, a noted mathematician and historian of mathematics, debunked many popular misconceptions surviving into the 20th Century and, apparently, well into the 21st.
 
  • Like
Likes BWV
  • #35
Vanadium 50 said:
Slope is "rise over run", right? The rise is well defined, but the run is not. I took them from the corners.
Oh...that's an interesting choice.
 
  • #36
For some reason, this thread reminds me of this:

dimensional_analysis.png


(source: https://xkcd.com/687/)
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes f95toli, Rive and BillTre

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
968
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K