Author of the Month AoM Message Board

## The Great Pyramid and the Axis of the Earth - Part 2 (cont.)By Gary Osborn and Scott Creighton

23.789º + 11.732º + 11.732º + 6.242º = 53.495º . . . only 0.005º degrees short of 53.5º!

What about the sum total of these angles in relation with the number of course levels as illustrated in fig 11? How do these precise angles given by Spiros compare?

The precise figure for the angle that connects the north vertice with the centre of the King's Chamber is not 20º but 19.98º - a difference of only 0.02º.

Using the precise angles as calculated by Spiros . . .

23.78º + 6.24º + 19.98º = 50º . . . a straight 50!

An interesting fact is this:

23.78º add 6.24º add 19.98º = 50º add angle of Ascending Passage . . . 26.3º = 76.3º

76.3º divided by 2 = 38.15º.

90º - 38.15º = 51.85º . . . the exact angle of the sides of the GP.

This time we will also add the angle of the Descending Passage . . .

23.78º add 6.24º add 19.98º add angle of AP . . . 26.3º add angle of DP . . . 26.3º = 102.6º . . . very close to the sum value of the angles of the two KC shafts - both of which exit at the 102nd Course Level.

Figure 14 - Further Evidence that the number of Course Layers Reflect the Degree Values of the Angles Found within the GP.

We can certainly live with these more precise values as calculated by Spiros - as they work just as well. We are content that the angles from each of the three points and each to the centres of the two chambers are well within the correct "ball-park" - in that they do indeed correlate and present us with meaning.

Again, our main reason for using the values 23.5º, 6.5º and 11.75º in the main text is that it is a much quicker, simpler and neat way of getting the message of this discovery across to everyone who wishes to read about it.

In using the ideal values that relate to us today one would perhaps grasp the geophysical association immediately; and after days, weeks, months, even years of analysing everything we have found here, we feel justified in presenting this discovery in this way.

After all, if one plots the angles 23.5º, 6.5º and 11.75º then nevertheless one would discover that these angles fall well within the boundaries of the chambers and are only a fraction of a degree short of the distance from the centres of these chambers. And again, we would get more-or-less the same result if we were to plot the angles 23.98º, 6.02º and 11.99º (see fig. 15).

Figure 15 - The Angles of 23.98º, 6.02º and 11.99º still fall very close to the centres of the chambers - close enough to see that there is a clear geophysical connection here

Our point is that in using these approximate values and despite the 'obliquity time period' one is keeping to, one would still recognise the connection immediately and would still be able to match and superimpose the two diagrams - i.e., the Earth and the GP.

After this one would endeavour to obtain more precise values for these angles and would eventually get more-or-less the same results we are presenting here: but given the size of the Great Pyramid, and the enormous task and practical burdens the architects and builders had taken upon themselves to attain the level of perfection we are looking for, accepting these tiny discrepancies is not too difficult.

Of course for many these slight discrepancies would immediately be "jumped on" and used by those who could not and will not accept this discovery, as it violates everything we have learned about the pyramids and the people who built them.

Such people would argue against these findings; people who would readily dismiss any question of 'intent' on behalf of the architects - whom we are saying had purposefully planned the GP and its internal features around these geodetic-related angles.

But seriously, would anyone now question the intent of the architects to orient the Great Pyramid to the four points of the compass (its entrance face aligned with true north) because it is out by 3 arc minutes?

This is the point we are making here.

If even outside the boundaries of pyramidology, the above is not a theory, it is a major discovery . . . or rather a major 're-discovery'.

END.

The authors would like to express their thanks and appreciation to Spiros Boutsikos for providing the precise values of these angles to date based on his calculations of the Petrie measurements of the Great Pyramid of Giza.

Spiros' website: http://lexarithmos.net/