...   hows d PYRAMID MADE??  thing is watz tat material...???
550809
Howdy! :)\n\nFirstly, I'd like to say that I've never heard of the man-made stones "theory" before -- & I've read a good bit on the subject, as well as ancient history in general, as well as watched & listened to many TV & radio documentaries that dealt with the subject, as well as ancient history in general!\n\nActually, the ancient Egyptians employed different kinds of stone in building at least the Great Pyramid. They used limestone & 2 varieties of granite. There are several varieties, quite a few being the most durable on the planet. Rose stones & blue stones, that were used to build Stonehenge, are 2 of the varieties that come to mind.\n\nAs for method, a number have been suggested, none of which involving the wheel, because archaeologists & scientists etc. keep insisting that the ancient Egyptians didn't have them, have access to them or separately invent them. But I beg to differ. There was a long history of interaction between the various peoples of the region & the ancient Egyptians, even if they didn't separately invent the wheel, did have access to & could have easily bought or traded them from the other cultures with wheels that they regularly interacted with.\n\nWhat I'm pretty certain of is that they used gravity as an easy & reliable means of power. Meaning: imagine a portable forklift. If you're not familiar with this object, it's basically a rectangle of metal, with a tray or sheet of metal at the bottom attached to two wheels. What I'm convinced they did is that they used something similar: basically 2 boards of wood (they did have tables & so did have boards of wood & knew how to cut them from the tree or at least buy them!) one of which attached to 2 wheels (or at least a log) with one of them "sitting"/attached to the bottom one with the wheels vertically & at an angle. This one is further connected with X # of sticks/logs or a triangular board of wood angled down, this being attached to a wheel (or at least a log). When the stone is manoeuvred onto the bottom board, gravity pulls it down through the angled sticks/logs (had they not been there, gravity would've simply pulled the stone to the ground, making the board with the wheels upright, albeit at an angle, & the one the stone was leaning on on the ground!). Gravity is such a great force, it is more force than is necessary to move the stone. So there is plenty of momentum. & even if the sand provided a great amount of friction (regardless whether it was dry or wet), gravity, combined with human labour is more than enough to manoeuvre the stones from point A to point B.\n\nCreating ramps & using sand to support the stones is quite sufficient & effective to manoeuvre the stones to higher levels.\n\nEven if the scientific community could conclusively prove, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the ancient Egyptians did not have wheels or access to them, the website I provided demonstrates an alternative means to manoeuvring large & heavy stones using building principles that are as old as building itself -- even if earlier in history people didn't understand & couldn't quantify & explain these principles & why they worked. The important thing was & still is that the principles work & that they are effective.\n\nWhat you will want to reflect on is this:\n\nThe ancient Egyptians had very simple tools, such as a level (used to determine the angle of a wall & whether or not it is straight) & thread or rope. & yet, they achieved unbelievable accuracy. In fact, & I wish I could remember where I read this or the temple in question, I once read of a temple in the Nile river. It was unique because it was built in such a way so as to glorify 2 events in the pharaoh's life: his birthdate & that of his son. The temple's unique qualities were that on those 2 days, at sunrise & sunset, the sun lined up with the pharaoh's throne & illuminate it in such a way as to give the illusion that he&#39
346369
Egyptians did NOT build the great pyramids at Giza but did build many smaller, cruder pyramids.  The Bent Pyramid is one example of the ones they did build.\nThe main question is this: How could the ancient Egyptians emerge from the stone age, build a structure as big as the Great Pyramid at Giza, build a slightly smaller one, then never build another one to match either one?  Supposedly Khufu had the GP built, but there is absolutely not one shred of evidence that he did.  NOt one cartouche, wall inscription, nothing inside it.\nEither Altlanteans or aliens built it.
484427
i really need a new pyramid built in my yard.  can you help?
762769
Pyramid but written in chineese Lol!\n\nNah i think its Pylamid :D
160337
square-based pyramid=\n1 squared base\n4 triangle shaped sides\n1 point at the top of the shape\n4 more at the bottom
42152
the stone may have been cut with a chisel.  the stones may have been placed by workers moving them up ramps and into position.  it is hard to imagine either of these possibilities, but they are the best explanations that i have read.  chiselling such large blocks(i've read as much as 200 tons) and pushing them up a ramp seems unlikely, because even if u had the stones on site(which they probably didn't), building a ramp that could support that much weight, and to that height, would be just as difficult a building the pyramid in the first place.  it's also hard to understand how they had so much time to work on pyramids, when they should have been fishing and farming.  unless you think aliens or magic was involved the best answer is "with lots of hard work" and maybe more importantly a long time.
103257
The latest in graphix design is called "The Egyptian Technology". Computer researchers are now exploring the depts of the pyramids to find out how the pharoah and his people came up with the 3-D option of making pyramids. However the martian government has now offended the researchers in this regard. The martians claimed that the pharoahs how are now in mars have opposed to the research because of the fact that it involves opening of the graves. The pharoahs believe that once the tombs are opened then they have to come back. They quite like the life in mars better than the life here in earth. Hence, the researchers have now takent he matter to the highest authority on earth, that is the UNO. The UN supreme court will now have to solve a dispute between the martians and the humans..\n\n\n---x--\nto answer your question - WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION!
500715
I just made it yesterday out of paper and you can't believe it can fly for more than a second... and also you can make living beings sit in it ... ants//// \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI am sorry I don't know the answer to your question. :(
563210
The volume of a pyramid is equal to one-third the base area multiplied by the height.\n\n\nImagine a step-pyramid made up of small square prisms with dimensions\na-by-a-by-b, arranged in square layers. If the layers are k-by-k for\nk = 1, 2, 3, ..., n, then the total volume of the step-pyramid is:\n\n   V = a^2*b*[1^2 + 2^2 + 3^2 + ... + n^2],\n     = a^2*b*n*(n + 1)*(2*n + 1)/6 (which can be proved by induction),\n     = a^2*b*n^3*(1/3 + 1/[2*n] + 1/[6*n^2]).\n\nNow, the height of the step-pyramid is h = b*n, and the area of the \nbase is:\n\n   B = a^2*n^2, \n\nso the volume is:\n\n   V = h*B*(1/3 + 1/[2*n] + 1/n^2).\n\nNow let n -> infinity, so the steps get smaller and smaller, and the\nvolume of the step-pyramid approaches the volume of the inscribed \npyramid. Then the right-hand side approaches h*B/3, as the volume V \napproaches the volume of the pyramid.\n\nThis same proof works for a pyramid with any polygonal base. For a \ncone, take a pyramid with a regular m-gon for a base, and let \nm -> infinity.\n\nThe base approaches a circle, and the pyramid approaches a cone, and \nthe formula V = h*B/3 still holds in the limit.\n\nThere is another proof, which cuts a rectangular solid into six pieces \nof equal volume, each of which is a triangular pyramid (or irregular\ntetrahedron). This proves that the volume of each is 1/6th the volume \nof the starting rectangular solid, and each has base of area 1/2 the \narea of one of the faces of the solid, and height equal to the \ndimension of the solid perpendicular to that face
454233
Ziggurats were like modern churches...they were places of worship. They were constructed by solidly stacking layer upon layer in steps (similar to, but not the same as most pyramids). The most popular theories suggest that the Mesopotamians built these structures to get as close to their gods as possible
1038654
I'm not entirely sure to what it is you're referring.  Most Egyptian pyramids are built of stone blocks or slabs - roughly dressed on the interior and smoothed on the exterior.  Typically the stone is limestone for the exterior, with the occasional use of granite on lower courses.  Interior chambers in the pyramid itself or subterranean chambers were frequently lined with a different type of stone - granite was a popular choice.\n\nThe peaks of the larger (ie. royal) pyramids are now large flat spaces now that stone has been robbed out and the pyramidia (capstones) have been removed.  The capstones, from what we know from contemporary inscriptions and a few examples that have actually been found were essentially little pyramids in miniature, each face was inscribed with the name of the pyramid  - each royal pyramid was named, usually a name including the nomen and/or prenomen of the king for whom it was built.  Additional inscriptions usually concerned the sun god and/or were specific to the cardinal direction that face of the pyramid faced.\n\nIt is extraordinarily unlikely that Egyptian pyramids serve as radio receivers and even more unlikely that they were designed to do so.  They were tombs.
440362
I would guess it is made from rapid prototyping:- Fused-deposition modeling.  It technique is call Extrusion of melted plastic. there is more information that you can find. Just keep looking..
316050
square pyramid...if square as base\n\ntriangular pyramid...if triangle as base\n\nBasically just look at the base...and add pyramid to it.\n\nEx. 5 sided regular polygon base...pentagonal pyramid.\n\nIf it isn't a regular polygon...look it up...or just leave it as pyramid I guess. LOL!\n\nTetrahedron...sound molecular...like the shape of methane molecule. I'm thinkin' this is geometry...so stick with the simplistic "pyramid".\n\nOH...BTW...if it only has one base...and is composed of multiple triangular sides...then it's a pyramid. If it has 2 bases...and any other figure for it's sides...then it's a prism.
566148
If you read the current archeological literature, you will read many contradictions. For one, they tell you that pyramids are essentially tombs for pharaohs, when in reality, not one mummy was found in the Great Pyramid of Giza for example. I specify that pyramid, because two chambers inside it are called the king’s and queen’s chambers and so people assume it’s because mummies were found there. Yet, archeologists stubbornly insist that they were tombs. They also INTERPRET the book of the dead as a reference by the Egyptians about the journey the dead take in the afterlife. As a result, they feel compelled to dismiss the ‘emerald tablets of thoth’ as fanciful magical verses and gibberish. Consider the fact that you don’t see many archeologists talking about the glyphs in Abydos that show glyphs resembling helicopters and flying vehicles? http://www.crystalinks.com/ancientaircraft.html \nIf you read those tablets, you will understand that the book of the dead was not about the dead at all. It was referring to something similar to out of body experiences. The Egyptians were knowledgeable in sacred geometry and spirituality. It was describing ways for one to be ‘free of the body’ and roam other dimensions freely. The book of the dead was a symbolic representation of a hidden knowledge; a decoy of sorts for the ‘real’ knowledge meant for the ‘worthy’… the emeralds of thoth. This knowledge represented the ability to travel by thought and intention alone anywhere in the universe, among other things. It holds many secrets. Some concepts reflect understandings we have today of 'quantum physics' and the nature of cause and effect (that effects precedes the cause)...etc.
898151
Pyramids.  Need I say more?  :o)\n\nSeriously, they did a lot of building.\n\nSue
1028914
"How were the great pyramids of Egypt built?"\n\nVery, very carefully
649951
General History of Pyramids in Egypt and Nubia:\n\nThe pyramid is thought to have developed out of the mastaba tomb. Mastaba is an Arabic word, meaning bench, which was applied to the flat-topped, slope sided superstructures of tombs. The pyramid is also thought to be associated with solar worship and the "ben-ben" stone which played a major role in sun worship and was vaguely pyramid shaped.\n\nIn the 3rd Dynasty, several mastabas were stacked forming the Step Pyramid of King Djoser. By the 4th Dynasty in the reign of Snefru attempts at building a true pyramid were underway. The pyramids of the 4th and 5th Dynasties, including those at Giza, essentially reflect the further refinement of the pyramid, the chambers within it, and the associated temple complexes. Eventually the standard style was an orientation of east to west (significant in Egyptian religion), with a pyramid temple, located directly on the east side of the pyramid, and a causeway leading to the "valley temple" located near the Nile at the edge of the cultivation.\nWhile it is accepted by reputable Egyptologists that pyramids served as burials for kings, the exact details of the theology behind them remains unclear. One idea, popularized I believe by Dr. Mark Lehner, one of the foremost experts on Egyptian pyramids, is that pyramids served as "resurrection machines" providing all the necessary means for eternal life with the gods for the dead king.\nIn the late 5th Dynasty in the Pyramid of Unas at Saqqara, we have the first appearance of formal texts within the pyramid itself - the appropriately-named Pyramid Texts. These texts are somewhat esoteric and are essentially a collection of spells, stories, and guides relating to the Underworld. Initially these texts were limited to royalty. In succeeding pyramids, elements of the Pyramid Texts were included in the "Coffin Texts" of the First Intermediate and Middle Kingdom and in the "Book of the Dead" of the New Kingdom - texts available to a broad spectrum of society.\n\nPyramid construction continued in the Middle Kingdom - again limited to royalty, but not on the grand scale of the Old Kingdom. The last known royal pyramids located in Egypt are that of King Ahmose, founder of the 18th Dynasty of the New Kingdom (ca. 1550 BCE) and the pyramid-cenotaph constructed for his grandmother, Queen Tetisheri. Both are located at Abydos.\n\nIn the New Kingdom, pyramids came to be part of tombs for reasonably wealthy private individuals - frequently added to the exterior portico area of rock-cut cliff tombs or appearing as architectural elements of brick constructed tombs in varous parts of Egypt.\n\nThe Napatan and Meroitic kingdoms in Nubia (modern Sudan) also used the pyramid for royal burials at sites such as El-Kurru and Nuri. While the Napatan kings ruled Egypt for a time during the 25th Dynasty and were buried in pyramids, those pyramids were located in Nubia proper.\nPyramid Construction:\n\nPyramid construction relied on highly skilled teams of workmen who were housed nearby the pyramid fields - in the Old Kingdom located in the general vicinity of the ancient capital Memphis at sites now knows as Giza, Saqqara, Meidum, and Dashur. A few pyramids in the Middle Kingdom were located near the Fayum, roughly Middle Egypt.\nIn addition to the full-time workmen, there was likely a seasonal labor requirement asked of the lower classes of Egyptian society - a sort of taxation, often referred to by the French term "corvee" labor. This is distinct from slavery. While the ancient Greek historian Herodotus (writing over a thousand years after the construction of the pyramids at Giza) reported that he was told the pyramids at Giza were constructed by slaves, Herodotus was wrong about any number of things in his reports and may not even have visited Egypt in person, so he is usually not taken as a realiable source.\n\nThe book by Mark Lehner mentioned below contains an