King Chamber Petrie Measurements

King Chamber Petrie Measurements

(this effort was first done around 2000…it is updated at the end)

The coffer model clearly shows design intent. But modeling in the King Chamber is truly spirit lifting for someone willing to put in a little time with numbers. The proof is very simple. There is overwhelming evidence of design intent. The question is whether the design intent can be discovered and then if the real communication can be understood.

The computer modeling effort seems to be providing conclusive evidence that the dimensions interact with mathematical and scientific data. It could be that these dimensions and precision are necessary for the proper functioning of the Pyramid Complex.

To begin this particular episode, we need a simple system of names to be able to easily blend Petrie’s measurements with the data from the modeling. For this, we assume T = top, B = bottom as a designation of elevation. For the directional second designation letter, let N = north, S = south, etc. Therefore, the length in inches of the top of the south wall is TS=411.88 and the length of the bottom of the north wall will be BN = 412.78 as given by Sir Petrie.

Below is the chart of Petrie’s measurements on the King Chamber. One might think of them as combinations to 8 separate padlocks.

TN = 412.14 BN = 412.78 TS = 411.88 BS = 412.53

TE = 206.30 BE = 206.43 TW = 206.04 BW = 206.16

King’s Chamber Volume and Circumference

If the four lengths are averaged, the average is 412.3325. The widths average to 206.2325. All info herein comes from Sir Petrie’s book “The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh” which I have a copy for frequent reference. The Petrie “corrected for cracks” measurements are provided above and below. LTN is the length of TN and WTW for width top west. The average length is avlen and avwid is the average width. The height = ht is of special interest. In the body of the discussion on the King’s Chamber, Petrie spends quite a bit of time explaining how rough the floor and ceiling are and one can imagine it being fairly difficult to be 19 feet up in the air using crude measuring rods of the era. There doesn’t appear to be any height given in the body but it does show up on the King’s Chamber Plate XIII on the right margin as 230.09 inches.

In the blog on Tibetan Levitation referenced at the end, the conversion for feet to meters is derived from the acoustical basis for music at [2^^(1/12) * 50 / 1.5]^^(1/3)=

3.280863732 or the reciprocal 0.304797786 as it usually appears. In 1959 an international committee established the conversion as 0.3048 even though the value in use at the time in England was closer to the acoustic value above.

In the blog on Stonehenge it was found that in electrostatic measurements it might be wise to us the .304766564 developed from Log[1.60217662 x 10^^(-19)] squared, divided by 10 and then taken to the cube root, similar method to the acoustic conversion.

The model using the average lengths and widths and 200 times the charge number developed the height at 230.0263. Petrie didn’t even put his measurement in the body of his book because of the difficulties in measuring and rough surface. However, he did put it on Plate Xiii on the right margin at 230.09 inches. At first the 230.0263 was thought to be close enough.

As a trial and error approach, the length was assigned 2.0617552953783 x 200. This number is a solution for the equation X^^(1/x) = 1.4204057517667 which are the digits of the hydrogen hyperfine frequency used in several areas of science. It picks up on the use of the 206.17 type numbers in all the King Chamber lengths and widths.

From other work that develops 206.17 type numbers, the basic atomic mass is given usually near 1.660538 x 10^-24 and that number taken to the 1/128 power (2^⁷ = 128) and then multiplied by the square root of 100000 gives 206.167732949. This is just a trial and error approach and could have produced nothing of interest.

In the Mathcad model below (shown in two halves) one can follow thru the development of the avlen and avwid numbers, etc. The Petrie ht = 230.09 is used as a starting point and then Mathcad finds the exact solution.

One can see below underlined in green that the Petrie height of 230.09 is very nearly matched at 230.0882 with a difference of only 1.7 thousandths. The two calculations underlined in red demonstrate additional connectivity in that the geometric product results in a number very near the arithmetic sum and both are “near (e-1)”.

If this model was intentional, then there ought to be some other signs in parallel. The perimeter in the above model would be 2 x length + 2 x width = 2 x 412.351 + 2 x 206.1677 = 1237.03758 / pi = 393.7612925 and the reciprocal x 120 = .30475313, very close to the metric to feet conversion in the model assumption. The whole affair demonstrates a superior knowledge of mathematics and the use of it in communicating with people trying to figure out what the design is trying to say.

As it turns out, this is just the beginning of what the Pyramid design is trying to convey to anyone who will listen and dig into it faithfully. The next section is trying to convey a sense of “systems”. One does not need to go thru it line by line unless you want to. These systems lead to a major discovery our regarding our universe, as we think we know it.

SYSTEMATIC PATTERNS

The first program simply compares all these dimensions with each other to see what the differences look like. Here we look at just the comparison of the four lengths with each length and four widths to each width. Both are shown in absolute terms without negative signs. This first system suggests BN and BW could be 0.01 higher.

DIFFERENCES

Lengths Widths

412.79 - 411.88 = 0.91 (7*.13) 206.43 - 206.04 = 0.39

412.79 - 412.14 = 0.65 (5*.13) 206.43 - 206.17 = 0.26

412.79 - 412.53 = 0.26 (2*.13) 206.43 - 206.04 = 0.39

412.53 - 411.88 = 0.65 (5*.13) 206.30 - 206.17 = 0.13

412.53 - 411.88 = 0.65 (5*.13) 206.30 - 206.04 = 0.26

412.14 - 411.88 = 0.26 (2*.13) 206.17 - 206.04 = 0.13

TN = 412.14 BN = 412.79 TS = 411.88 BS = 412.53

TE = 206.30 BE = 206.43 TW = 206.04 BW = 206.17

Repeated for convenience

Note that all differences are multiples of 0.13 (7 x .13 = .91, 5 x .13 = .65, 3 x .13 =.39). This discovery alone determines that the dimensions are all designed and intended to have these relationships. One should note that the bottom north length is used 3 times as the larger one. In the widths the larger one is the bottom east use three times. On the outside of the pyramid the angle made by the north edge to the east edge is 90.000 degrees.

widths	dbl widths	--------	lengths	------->		diff .98-(-.71)
		412.7900	412.5300	412.1400	411.8800	1.69
206.4300	412.8600	0.0700	0.3300	0.7200	0.9800	1.6900
206.3000	412.6000	-0.1900	0.0700	0.4600	0.7200
206.1700	412.3400	-0.4500	-0.1900	0.2000	0.4600
206.0400	412.0800	-0.7100	-0.4500	-0.0600	0.2000	0.3900
						diff .33 -(-.06)
					sum of all=	2.1600
					2^(3) * 3^(3)=	216

The chart above compares all possible double widths with the lengths. This pattern is far from random. The total of the relations is 2.16 which is 6 cubed divided by 100. All lengths and widths are related to each other and are precisely what was intended….and Sir Petrie got them all right enough. Eight measurements with only two off by 0.01 inch in 34 and 17 feet is a fine job of measuring. Note that one of the differences is the square of 1.3 at 1.69 and the other one not paired is .39 at 3 x .13.(marked in colored numerals)

His method was more appropriate for measuring engine parts. He laid his very accurate rods end for end on scaffolding and used short scales to make the final contribution in 1/1000^th inch increments. In measuring machined parts we do the same thing, but usually much shorter dimensions. The King Chamber lengths are longer than a mid-size truck. Sir Petrie explains that he repeated some measurements up to 50 times.

We can easily program the computer to look at all the King Chamber combinations of numbers when each can vary +/- 0.01 inch. In rough terms, this would be 100 to the 8^th power, or 1 followed by sixteen zeros. Even modern computers groan a little at this assignment.

In my opinion as a retired Professional Engineering Manager, I have already proven the point. There is very little chance of random occurrence and the accuracies of placement take it out of any type of capabilities we have today.

The question immediately surfaces as to why anyone would go to all the trouble to build such a chamber with these particular dimensions? The remainder of my arguments is along the line of developing this issue. And if there is some high level intelligence involved, whether human or spiritual, then perhaps we should raise our level of intensity in our quest for truth. The systems developed here should be very interesting.

We could start with the very simple question of what if the numbers themselves provided the answer. Perhaps there is a way to investigate the basic numbers themselves. I started with wondering how these eight numbers could be put together, just as you would a picture puzzle without a picture.

Since we know the solution now a very simple looping program can calculate all the combinations of these eight numbers. The computer effort even for this small task is potentially several million calculations. Perhaps there are some shortcuts we can employ.

If we consider just the four lengths, we see the sum is 1649.34. Other numbers adding to 1649 can be made using various combinations of lengths, some more than once, some left out. There are several such combinations.

The widths can also be similarly combined by using double their values, the total sum of the four widths, each doubled, is 1649.88. The average of these doubled widths and the lengths are 1649.61. We shall see later that these numbers are very important.

A computer program was written to look at the sum of the sides when the lengths were allowed to contribute at multiples that vary from 0 to 4 and the widths to vary from 0 to 8. A typical example is the first formula for 1648.7 which is 0 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 and highlighted in this color. This formula means zero BN’s, zero TN’s, zero BS’s, two TS’s, zero BE’s, two TE’s, two BW’s and zero TW’s. The sum of these six sides equals the 1648.7.(square root of natural log base 2.71828 = 1.6487)

Note that all of the formulas, which add to 1648.7, have six elements, shown in blue in the far right column below. In fact, note in the whole spreadsheet that for any given sum total, the number of sides is always equal. While I am sure there are relatively simple mathematical reasons, it surely is not obvious from a general viewpoint.

The total printout is in the file Totald2.xls and has some 1100 rows. One highlighted block is printed below for convenience of this discussion.

BASIC CHART FOR 1648.7

BN	BS	TN	TS	BE	TE	BW	TW	TOTAL
412.79	412.53	412.14	411.88	206.43	206.3	206.17	206.04

1648.70	0	0	2	0	2	2	0	6
1648.70	0	0	2	0	3	0	1	6
1648.70	0	0	2	1	0	3	0	6
1648.70	0	0	2	1	1	1	1	6
1648.70	0	0	2	2	0	0	2	6
1648.70	1	0	1	0	0	1	3	6
1648.70	0	1	1	0	0	4	0	6
1648.70	0	1	1	0	1	2	1	6
1648.70	0	1	1	0	2	0	2	6
1648.70	0	1	1	1	0	1	2	6
1648.70	0	2	0	0	0	2	2	6
1648.70	0	2	0	0	1	0	3	6

Condensing the 1100 lines to remove the repetitions, the chart below represents the 131 individual values without repetitions.

1647.52	1647.72	1647.78	1647.85	1647.92	1647.98	1648.04	1648.05	1648.11	1648.12
1648.17	1648.18	1648.24	1648.25	1648.30	1648.31	1648.32	1648.37	1648.38	1648.43
1648.44	1648.45	1648.50	1648.51	1648.56	1648.57	1648.58	1648.63	1648.64	1648.69
1648.70	1648.71	1648.76	1648.77	1648.82	1648.83	1648.84	1648.89	1648.90	1648.95
1648.96	1648.97	1649.02	1649.03	1649.08	1649.09	1649.10	1649.15	1649.16	1649.21
1649.22	1649.23	1649.28	1649.29	1649.34	1649.35	1649.36	1649.41	1649.42	1649.47
1649.48	1649.49	1649.54	1649.55	1649.60	1649.61	1649.62	1649.67	1649.68	1649.73
1649.74	1649.75	1649.80	1649.81	1649.86	1649.87	1649.88	1649.93	1649.94	1649.99
1650.00	1650.01	1650.06	1650.07	1650.12	1650.13	1650.14	1650.19	1650.20	1650.25
1650.26	1650.27	1650.32	1650.33	1650.38	1650.39	1650.40	1650.45	1650.46	1650.51
1650.52	1650.53	1650.58	1650.59	1650.64	1650.65	1650.66	1650.71	1650.72	1650.78
1650.79	1650.84	1650.85	1650.90	1650.91	1650.92	1650.97	1650.98	1651.04	1651.05
1651.10	1651.11	1651.16	1651.17	1651.18	1651.23	1651.24	1651.30	1651.31	1651.37
1651.44

The chart below shows how many lengths and widths it took for each of the numbers above. We see the value 1648.7 shown in red is in column one and row 4 above and the number of equations is 6 and is shown below with an enlarged red 6 in column 1 and row 4.

4	5	4	5	6	5	4	6	5	7
4	6	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	4
6	8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	4
6	8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	4
6	8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	4
6	8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	4
6	8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	4
6	8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	4
6	8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	4
6	8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	4
6	8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	6
8	5	7	4	6	8	5	7	6	8
5	7	4	6	8	5	7	6	8	7
8

What if we simply take the differences of the 131 hits? What follows is truly amazing.

The total chart was hard to see so the initial and ending of the chart is only shown above. Be sure to note that there are 13 elements marked by the blue bar at the beginning and ending. This is beginning to look like a pretty serious message and it is all done with numbers.

Remember that the 131 numbers above were the non-repeating numbers from the 1086 total. Below is the chart of the repeating numbers showing how much duplication there were for each number. This seems to be a lesson in numerical patterns. It was pure luck that 10 were printed in each row which then made 13 rows, leaving off the 131^st number which would have created a double 1 value at the bottom matching the double 1 at the top.

Highlighted in light blue the box shows the matching 5 ones in each area.

Across the middle in MS pink shows the step up from 25 to 26 on the left half and a corresponding step up from 26 to 27 on the right. Down the middle is the pattern 1-1-1-1-2-3-2-1-1-1-1.

Can all of these patterns be caused by the basic original data in the lengths, widths and the regular differences between them? But what if these same patterns show up in other areas of the pyramid? What if the surface variations on the coffer have these same types of patterns, and are not random grinding variations? Isn’t this just a bit too much for happenstance? Anybody who can’t see what is going on here is like Snow White without the kiss from the Prince….a frog…or was it a toad?

We saw in other articles that “1648.7” was a key number and this exact number is generated 12 different ways, called equations here. The overall range of the output of the program in the increment near 1649, is 1647.52 to 1651.44 and occurs in definite increments with repeating patterns.

As an example using the 12 equations of 1648.7, there are more equations than there are variables (the eight original lengths and widths) and so one might be able to solve for a more exact solution to the King Chamber dimensions.

When those twelve equations are entered into Mathcad, the software develops an exact solution with some additional decimals and a similar set of patterns, though different in several respects. Of particular note, there are still 1086 equations but only 61 separate sums where there were 131 in the previous system. Further, the maximum number of equations for a given sum is 40 and it occurs at 1649.61, the average of lengths and double widths.

The spreadsheet and printouts list the detailed equations and various results. Basically, the solution is the original model numbers with 1/400^th added to lengths and 1/800^th subtracted from widths.

TN = 412.1425 BN = 412.7925 TS = 411.8825 BS = 412.5325

TE = 206.29875 BE = 206.42875 TW = 206.03875 BW = 206.16875

The original numbers repeated below for comparison:

TN = 412.14 BN = 412.79 TS = 411.88 BS = 412.53

TE = 206.30 BE = 206.43 TW = 206.04 BW = 206.17

It turns out this is just a training mission to look at scientific knowledge far beyond what we know currently. I will do my best to explain it on as simple basis as possible.

Most readers probably are not aware the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) is a US bureau which produces the Codata containing the scientific standards every few years. The years cited herein are 1973, 1983, 1998, 2006, 2010 and 2014. Without a good handle on data analysis, this can get really confusing in short order.

In the prior model, the use of the basic atomic mass of 1.66053873 x 10^^-24 was taken to the 1/128 power and then multiplied by the square root of 10,000 to get a number of 206.17 from two different points of view. One rounded up from 206.1677 and the other rounded down from 206.1755. Even numbers for the proton, neutron, deuteron and hydrogen masses all develop into numbers befitting the King Chamber dimensions. After being slapped severely about the head, it finally occurred to me that the King Chamber might be trying to tell us something about the basic structure of our universe.

All of the data used herein came from the Codata for the years mentioned previously. Never in my wildest dreams did I think much would come of it other than perhaps a convincing argument that the Pyramid was trying to talk to us meaningfully.

There has to be enough detail information for a well-grounded technical person to get what is needed to check it all out. But 90 percent of the readers can’t or won’t want to understand those details. The non-technical people perhaps need to read it with one eye closed.

If the reader has struggled with technologies in the past, perhaps this Computer Modeling will make scientific material more interesting and perhaps more mentally tangible. Please give me a chance in the next few paragraphs. I think you will find it easy to appreciate.

Perhaps you faintly remember that Planck’s constant is a fundamental number of great importance to physicists. It is used to investigate the very nature of atomic structure. But it is given as 6.6260687652 x 10^-34 and who can even visualize such a number. Perhaps this is why a lot of youth do not go further in science. If they had a better methodology of studying the number, it might be different.

Let us take out this frustration on the number by poking at it with the square root key until it becomes something we can have a good feeling about. In fact, God is said to have created the world, as we know it in 6 days, so let us poke the key 6 times in relentless abuse of this number from Satan himself. For lesser humorists, we are taking the 1/64 root of Planck’s Constant.

The result of this action is 0.303097339337785 and let us magically visualize this in units of cubic feet, being roughly 2/3 foot on an edge. Let us multiply by 1728 to convert this small cube to cubic inches. Now let us take this volume apart and put each cubic inch in a line and pretend some magician turned them into centimeters and we want to change them back to inches again, so we divide by 2.54 to get 206.201654478619.

Given our previous discussion, does this number seem to have connectivity with the KC widths? The Coffer Computer Model produced a definition of the cubit at 20.61938194 and the difference between our magic Planck number and 10 times the cubit is still another significant number to be explained later. Meantime, we continue the search for purpose.

Now if we multiply this 206.20165 number by 8 as if it were one of the widths in the KC, then we get 1649.61323582895. This number fits into the summation scheme quite well, and in the basic printout for the original data, we see that the number 1649.61 has several equations. And as mentioned just above, this number has the peak number of 40 equations in the Mathcad solution.

To make a very long story short enough to retain the interest of most folks, there is an exact solution that produces this Planck Number in as many decimals as we know Planck’s constant. Perhaps it produces a more exact Plank’s Constant than we know. By taking the 1/64^th root of Planck’s constant we get a pseudo-accuracy multiplier and perhaps this is just the technique the ancients were numerically herding us towards.

Perhaps some technical people will be aghast at this speculation of fitting into the purpose for the King Chamber system of numbers. But maybe a few more numbers that do not depend on anything from the Pyramids will lend some credibility, particularly as it relates to purpose. Perhaps the pyramid designer wanted us to discover exactly what I am presenting below.

If we take just the 1/12^th root of Plank’s constant and multiply it by 1000, we see 1.71832243946223, which seems quite close to numbers we saw in the Coffer Model.

If we take a similar magical approach to other bewildering numbers from Satan himself (kidding of course), such as the mass of the proton, neutron, deuteron and hydrogen atom, we see some interesting phenomena. The mass of the neutron is given as 1.67492716 x 10^-24 and again who can visualize this type of number.

If we again start taking square roots, and this time do it seven times (1/128^th root), we get 0.652003561711447. If we multiply this number simply by the square root of 100000, we see 206.181629755033.

We basically take the Satan out of four basic mass numbers in two totally different equations. In the first equation, we do exactly as was done to the neutron mass above, namely, take the square root seven times and multiply by the square root of 100,000. The sum of each of these four numbers is doubled, as in the King Chamber widths, to give 1649.43988073578.

If you have been paying close attention, you will see this number is like a logarithm, having the first part 1649 and the second .439880. Remember that the scientific concert A from the Coffer Model used the number 256 x A = 439.8801480. These results are from the 1998 Codata and have not been altered in any manner whatsoever. There are no pyramid measurements or anything else that can be manipulated in this equation.

One might ask how we are doing with our general scientific progress in recent decades. The identical equation using the 1986 Codata gives 1649.4398806, so apparently we are making some progress in that one more digit of connectivity is established in the .43988014 in 1998 than the .4398806 in 1986.

Earlier it was stated there were two equations. The second is very similar, but enough different that it could not be an accident. This equation simply converts the masses to something more visual by multiplying by a cube 10⁸ units on a side, or 10²⁴ overall on a volumetric basis.

So we take 1.6749271613 ( the basic string of digits) from the mass of the neutron, 1.6726215813 from the proton, and ½ the deuteron and finally the hydrogen atom and sum these four basic numbers. Now we punch the square root key only three times (1/8^th root) and multiply this number by the square root of 10 and further multiply by 128 and divide by 1200. These are all numbers commonly used in the construction of the pyramid and the square root of 10 is obviously the same digits as the square root of 100,000.

The results are .4398805815 where again we see the .439880 appearing using only basic data from the 1998 Codata.

It appears to be like a magnifying glass for finding relationships in numbers. One can set the computer to work trying to come up with a solution for the four particle masses, but with four unknowns and only two equations, it falls short of the mark at this time. But the effort continues later below.

The basic equations, using mn, mp, deu, and mh for the mass of neutron, proton, deuteron and hydrogen take the following form:

(Mn^1/128 + Mp^1/128 + [deu/2]^1/128 + Mh^1/128)x Ö100000x 2 =

= 1649+256x A/1000

(Mn x10²⁴+Mp x10²⁴ + (deu/2) x10²⁴ +Mh x10²⁴)^1/8 xÖ10 x128/1200 =

= 256x A/1000

In the case of the first equation the chance of random occurrence is one in about a million just with our current level of knowledge on these particle masses. The chance of random occurrence in the second equation is about one in a million. Collectively, the chance of random occurrence is relatively non-existent.

But what if there are two more equations, each having something to do with 1649 or 256 x A? Could it be the basic solution would provide massive insight into the fundamental structure of matter? Would this be sufficient purpose to be drawing our attention in that direction? For sure it is.

What has been presented here seems ample reason to pursue some additional research, in my humble opinion.

Those who want the details can download Mathcad files and Excel spreadsheets with added details when I get them posted.

How can it be argued that the basic mass of particles combine in a way to “not be an accident”, given our current theory of the “big bang”. Notwithstanding that the theory is most likely “substantially in error”, the ancient intelligence could have provided us a start towards the benefits of science by establishing a set of units that almost beg to find relationships. Many argue that our scientific units of measure have been around for millennia and one can see it is hard to change this social momentum by its very nature. It is still a marvel to me how we can think the ancients decided to base the standard meter on the earth polar quadrant when they were supposed to think the world was flat. Minor details I guess.

The computer modeling particularly points out how conversion units seem to provide insight into the pyramid construction and then into basic relationships. Therefore, even if the big bang is somewhat correct, the units could have been selected to assist in our development of “the system” at the appropriate time. Is now the time for you? Is this just playing with numbers, or do you get the feeling something is going on here?

CONCLUSIONS

It seems that the Sir Petrie measurements reflect a design criteria and construction execution of far greater complication than has been previously anticipated. While it is extremely likely that subsequent generations may have adopted the Great Pyramid for a tomb or as a religious monument, its original construction was for a much greater purpose.

If it was built in the time period thought by current scholars and built with common human physical powers, then some guiding spirit or intelligence provided some very complex oversight. Perhaps Imhotep was just such a genius level person. Perhaps such folks just happen routinely in every few millennia. My research does not address these issues. It stays with the facts based on mathematics and scientific data. The computer is an essential ingredient.

In regards to other issues associatively discussed above, if one believes there is even a slight chance that the pyramid was constructed with intelligent assistance, it behooves us to get to work trying for a higher level of understanding.

bransonjim9 at gmail dot com

Jim Branson

Retired Professional Engineering Manager

www.newgrange-geometry-portals.blogspot.com

www.arkaim-geometry.blogspot.com

www.king-chamber-coffer.blogspot.com

click on picture from profile to see full list of a couple dozen other blogs

References

1. CRC Handbook, Standard Constants Section I

2. Perry’s Handbook of Chemical Engineering

3. Tompkins, 1971 “Secrets of the Great Pyramid”

4. Petrie, Sir Flinders, 1883 “Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh”

5. Lubicz, Schwaller de, “Temples of Man”

Research on Codata (2019)

Below is an image of the Newton Gravitational Constant for years 1973, 1986, 1998, 2006, 2010 and 2014. Five of the six pieces of data fit a very consistent mathematical curve. It is only year 2006 (fourth data) that is apparently some type of difficulty. There is Russian experimental data that suggests the gravitational constant varies even on an hourly basis and most technical people agree that the precision of this constant is quite questionable after three digits of precision. And yet the force of gravity is one of our most important tools for understanding our universe. The regularity of the data indicates it cannot be just a function of random error.

It just happened that when a lot of this work was being done on the King Chamber of the Great Pyramid, the 1998 Codata was in play and later when the 2006 Codata came out, there was not sufficient suspicion that it was all that different. In fact, there was no known way to compare such data. Yes, we knew the mass of the proton and neutron were different, but no trend was really apparent.

However, with the previous work on the King Chamber and the discovery of the links to electric charge, basic atomic mass and the hyperfine calculation, it became of interest to see how the basic particle mass interacted with each other.

By simply adding the results of the 1/128 numbers, the total was a number which was known from the King Chamber analysis would resolve to a 206.17 type number and that multiplied by 8 would be a 1649 type number, widely discussed above. It seemed strange that in the middle of a ten digit number, here was a precise six digit number. It was very reminiscent of the old logarithm chart days when you had the mantissa and then the decimal portion.

But the decimal portion isn’t just any number. It is the highly repeated herein number for middle A on the piano of 256 or (2 ^⁸)x (E -1) = 439.880148. This should not accidentally result in this number appearing in the result….unless….it was designed to be that way. Could the King Chamber measurements be trying to call our attention to something far more basic in our universe?

Because of a lot of other engineering work, business ventures, etc, this effort was more or less left standing in the closet for over a decade. It wasn’t until early 2019 that other Codata were substituted into this equation and astounding results developed in the chart below.

The data for 1998, 2006, 2010 and 2014 are so minutely changing that they have to be plotted separately when compared to 1973 and 1986 because those are changing much greater and in the opposite direction. A key point is that the 1649.439880 seems to be at the precise bottom of the curve.

A second equation was discovered, similar in approach but differing in the 10^-24 portion of the masses for particles. And the deuteron was not divided by 2. The equation is shown at the top of the image below. Like the image above, the 1973 Codata is off the page and not shown. The other five points reflect a similar shape to the image above. And again the key comparable number is the 0.256 x (E-1) at 0.439880xxxxx.

It is abundantly clear that the mass of the nuclei of the universe are related to something very similar to the middle “A” acoustic note on the piano. And it reversed near 1998 and now is on a fairly gentle slope upward, but a definite mathematical function. The quote below offers some interesting ideas about historical thinkers.

The ancient Greek philosopher and mathematician Pythagoras first theorized that the stars and planets moved according to mathematical equations which corresponded to musical notes and thus produced a symphony, the "music of the spheres." The concept persisted. Shakespeare referenced it in The Merchant of Venice, Act V scene I:"...There's not the smallest orb which thou behold'st But in his motion like an angel sings...." Johannes Kepler's Harmonics Mundi (1619) discusses it. Babcock used the reference in 1901 in his popular hymn, This is My Father's World, in the line, "all nature sings and 'round me rings/ the music of the spheres."
In 1999, NASA and MIT determined a super massive black hole in the Perseus Cluster sound a B-flat, albeit one too low for human ears. In a 2006 experiment, Greg Fox determined that orbits of celestial bodies could produce (through manipulation) sound. Thus modern thinkers have proven Pythagoras and Kepler correct.

https://www.musicofspheres.com/wholesale/learn-more/about-our-name/

The mn73, mp73 etc all contain 10^^(-24) and so the positive 10^⁽²⁴⁾ simply takes them out of the equation and just uses the digits. If we take out the 128/1200 the results are all become KC widths at 206.19. (average width 206.2325)

There no doubt is a substantial improvement of measuring precision from 1973 to 1986 and therefore there may be some laboratory error in those data. But there is no doubt that the values were coming down prior to 1998 and started a reversal upward rather suddenly. The curve from 2006 to 2014 is very slight and almost appears as a straight line, but it is not.

The four equations below finally provides a result in line with the 1998 Codata, shown in the definition phase (:=) of the Mathcad model. The first equation is unchanged from above. The second equation took out the ratio 128/1000 and worked with the KC width at 2.0619 and doubled it to a KC length at 4.1238 (/100). If the value is left unchanged, some of the results are only good to seven digits and not much better than taking the equation totally out of the model. The fourth equation is purely based on what other work developed regarding the ratio of the most abundant wavelengths of hydrogen which seems to use the 1.3125 squared as the basis for all those wavelengths.

The first two equations are far too similar to be accidental to six digits. The third equation seems to indicate there are some types of corrections for our particular solar system. The primary number is 2.109143364 x pi = 6.62609299 and are the digits of the Planck / pi number but having no measurements involved. The complex solution for this number is mind numbing complicated below. The earth-sun distance is also a pure number and not a measure of the distance, even though it is the correct distance with the decimal between 5 and 7 at the end.

Below is the complex solution for the Planck/ pi –like equation just as an illustration. It has to be wrapped three times to get it on one image even with fine print. Copy it and zoom it up in your photo software if you want to examine it more carefully.

It looks like mass is not a “thing”. You can’t keep carving things up and finally get down to a more basic particle. Mass is more like a vibration that imparts mass to basic particles. One must keep in mind that the density of a basic nucleus is something like

(1.67 * 10^^-27 kg) * (1.22 * 10^⁴⁴ m^^-3) or 2.04 x 10^¹⁴ gr per cubic centimeter

The neutron weighs about 1800 times as much as the electron, but the electron is about 1/1000^th the radius of a nucleus, so that makes it much denser than a neutron or proton since the volume is related by the cube of the radius.

The density of a white dwarf star such has Sirius B is thought to be 10^⁴ to 10^⁷ gram /cubic centimeter and therefore is by far less dense than a nucleus. Whatever is responsible for creating the mass of various particles of matter, appears to like small things much better than large. The primary difference is the distance between objects. The atomic makeup has the nucleus at about 10^^-15 meter and the electron 10^⁷ times that for its orbit. That means a lot of space of near zero regular mass. The solar system likewise has a lot of space between planets and of course the galaxy has even more space between star systems. With the precision of nuclear particle masses, there must be some system for administering the mass. The message of the King Chamber is that this system can be analyzed.

The plot below is for the Codata 1986 – 2014 and 1973 is far off the top of the page.

Why Have a Pyramid Relay Station

An advanced civilization may want to communicate with another advanced civilization that exists behind the center of the Galaxy from their location. The type of communication would be instantaneous and not electro-magnetic. This would parallel the Einstein suggestion of worm holes and may be able to send and receive holograms for more thorough transfer of ideas and features. The image below shows a potential layout and not representative of Earth’s location or the advanced civilizations.

The image below is just an example of the type of stars which may be visible from the north face of the Pyramid and those from the south face. The north face “air shafts” from the King and Queen Chambers cross in a thousand feet or so and spread out at 7.133333 degrees. The south face “air shafts” from the King and Queen Chambers spread out at 6.755555 degrees toward the southern hemisphere visible from that face of the pyramid.

Just as we would now send a technical person to backward civilizations in Africa or perhaps the Amazon jungle for specific gains for our relatively advanced civilization such as space launch communications, advanced people that look like us could fit into backward civilizations, perhaps as locally accepted gods. If the person is going to be there a long time, he would probably marry and even have children. He would direct the natives as to how to build a communication system and even perhaps call it a tomb for himself. Telling the natives too much could end with a trip to the burning at the stake as a witch. Just as there are now laws against forcing backward civilizations into modernization, people from distant star systems could have been under the same regulations.

There never was any intention for the natives to get inside the Great Pyramid. The people who knew how it worked sat in the temple by the Nile connected acoustically to the base of the Pyramid on the east side thru the causeway. It is likely the Pyramid gave off a loud sound and the earth-based users needed some distance in separation to receive and transmit their signals.

The orientation of the Giza Pyramid Complex and that of the Temple at Luxor are almost identical and shaped like the Constellation Orion, particularly if one uses the Horsehead Nebula instead of the nearby star. The layout is designed to attract your attention to Orion and then the detail of the layout indicates the Horsehead Nebula.