Louvre Glass Pyramid Paris

jimRegular
 Joined: Apr 20 2012, 08:19 PM
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=lou ... ORM=IQFRBA
With pleasure I wish to add a remarkable fact re the dimensions of this glass pyramid and to the cleverness of its architects. This may be common knowledge anong architects but for me it was a discovery.
Length of base given in drawing 35.42 metres. I am not sure if these figures are absolutely correct so if anyone knows then let me knows please.
Height 21.64 metres.
I asked myself why the odd numbers? Why not just 35 metres? for the base and 21 for the height.
Then I looked at the number 35.42 and thought about the closeness of this number to that of a moon based year.
A synodic month = 29.53059 days x 12 months 354.36 days close to the number given 35.42. Ok that is easily shaken off as a coincidence but look.
As in the drawing the length given is 35.42 metres now remember Pei the architect is an American and as I have been informed was living in his Manhattan home in January 2016 he turns 100 on the 27th April this year 2017. I looked at this odd number and converted to feet 35.42m = 116.20734 feet and I saw it straight away.
A circle inscribed into the base of the pyramid at the Louvre measures 365.076 feet 365 the number of days in a year.
By switching from metric to Imperial the architect has given the lengths for a lunar and solar year. 354 and 365. Interesting that the metre allows this??
And not only that he has done it again in the height as he has doubled his base length 35.42 x 2 = 70.84 and named this number FEET.
70.84 FEET = 21.6m. Not sure exactly which value for pi he used but so clever.
Jim
With pleasure I wish to add a remarkable fact re the dimensions of this glass pyramid and to the cleverness of its architects. This may be common knowledge anong architects but for me it was a discovery.
Length of base given in drawing 35.42 metres. I am not sure if these figures are absolutely correct so if anyone knows then let me knows please.
Height 21.64 metres.
I asked myself why the odd numbers? Why not just 35 metres? for the base and 21 for the height.
Then I looked at the number 35.42 and thought about the closeness of this number to that of a moon based year.
A synodic month = 29.53059 days x 12 months 354.36 days close to the number given 35.42. Ok that is easily shaken off as a coincidence but look.
As in the drawing the length given is 35.42 metres now remember Pei the architect is an American and as I have been informed was living in his Manhattan home in January 2016 he turns 100 on the 27th April this year 2017. I looked at this odd number and converted to feet 35.42m = 116.20734 feet and I saw it straight away.
A circle inscribed into the base of the pyramid at the Louvre measures 365.076 feet 365 the number of days in a year.
By switching from metric to Imperial the architect has given the lengths for a lunar and solar year. 354 and 365. Interesting that the metre allows this??
And not only that he has done it again in the height as he has doubled his base length 35.42 x 2 = 70.84 and named this number FEET.
70.84 FEET = 21.6m. Not sure exactly which value for pi he used but so clever.
Jim

jimRegular
 Joined: Apr 20 2012, 08:19 PM
Is the metre and the foot part of the same ancient measuring system.?
I would like you to consider the number 230.4.
It is what I would call a sacred number. Do any of you recognise it 230.4? It is the length of the casing side of the Great Pyramid in metres..
1. Look at the number 230.4 again and call it inches 19.2 imperial feet.
2. Now look at 230.4 and call it metres = 755.90551 imperial feet.
3. Divide by 19.2 = 39.370078 imperial feet
4. Convert to metres = 39.370078 imperial feet = 12 metres.
How is that///// ???? 12 meters exactly.
Can anyone explain that?
I would like you to consider the number 230.4.
It is what I would call a sacred number. Do any of you recognise it 230.4? It is the length of the casing side of the Great Pyramid in metres..
1. Look at the number 230.4 again and call it inches 19.2 imperial feet.
2. Now look at 230.4 and call it metres = 755.90551 imperial feet.
3. Divide by 19.2 = 39.370078 imperial feet
4. Convert to metres = 39.370078 imperial feet = 12 metres.
How is that///// ???? 12 meters exactly.
Can anyone explain that?

Piotr
In step 2 you converted to imperial feet, then in step 4 you converted back to meters. The only operation is division by 19.2, 230.4/19.2=12. There are 12 inches in feet so it makes sense to have 19.2 imperial feet convert to 230.4 inches.jim @ Mar 14 2017, 01:47 PM wrote: Is the metre and the foot part of the same ancient measuring system.?
I would like you to consider the number 230.4.
It is what I would call a sacred number. Do any of you recognise it 230.4? It is the length of the casing side of the Great Pyramid in metres..
1. Look at the number 230.4 again and call it inches 19.2 imperial feet.
2. Now look at 230.4 and call it metres = 755.90551 imperial feet.
3. Divide by 19.2 = 39.370078 imperial feet
4. Convert to metres = 39.370078 imperial feet = 12 metres.
How is that///// ???? 12 meters exactly.
Can anyone explain that?

jimRegular
 Joined: Apr 20 2012, 08:19 PM
Piotr
For interest.
I think there are many mysteries to be solved. It has always interested me how the metre came into being.
Quote 'In step 2 you converted to imperial feet, then in step 4 you converted back to meters. The only operation is division by 19.2, 230.4/19.2=12. There are 12 inches in feet so it makes sense to have 19.2 imperial feet convert to 230.4 inches. '
Yes I get that but it is more than that.
For instance there are 63360 inches in a mile 5280 feet. Now convert 6336 kilometres to miles = 3937.1155 miles.
39.370077 inches = 1 metre. It is the coincidence that gets me.
Now look at the number 3937.1155 miles and say it is a Radius perhaps of the Earth. The diameter is therefore 7874.0154 miles. No it is not exact but the way they did it was by using 2 or 3 different values for pi to reach even numbers.
I have written some stuff on the Great Pyramid and it is interesting to me that the height of the Great Pyramid is 1/86,400 (the same number as seconds in a day) an earth diameter. Not exact that would be impossible but one that creates an even number. The number I have looked at is 7875 using 22/7.
7874.0154 miles/86400 = 481.18983 imperial feet or the height of the Great Pyramid a very close approximate.
Jim
For interest.
I think there are many mysteries to be solved. It has always interested me how the metre came into being.
Quote 'In step 2 you converted to imperial feet, then in step 4 you converted back to meters. The only operation is division by 19.2, 230.4/19.2=12. There are 12 inches in feet so it makes sense to have 19.2 imperial feet convert to 230.4 inches. '
Yes I get that but it is more than that.
For instance there are 63360 inches in a mile 5280 feet. Now convert 6336 kilometres to miles = 3937.1155 miles.
39.370077 inches = 1 metre. It is the coincidence that gets me.
Now look at the number 3937.1155 miles and say it is a Radius perhaps of the Earth. The diameter is therefore 7874.0154 miles. No it is not exact but the way they did it was by using 2 or 3 different values for pi to reach even numbers.
I have written some stuff on the Great Pyramid and it is interesting to me that the height of the Great Pyramid is 1/86,400 (the same number as seconds in a day) an earth diameter. Not exact that would be impossible but one that creates an even number. The number I have looked at is 7875 using 22/7.
7874.0154 miles/86400 = 481.18983 imperial feet or the height of the Great Pyramid a very close approximate.
Jim

Guest
jim @ Mar 27 2017, 11:28 AM wrote: Piotr
For interest.
I think there are many mysteries to be solved. It has always interested me how the metre came into being.
Quote 'In step 2 you converted to imperial feet, then in step 4 you converted back to meters. The only operation is division by 19.2, 230.4/19.2=12. There are 12 inches in feet so it makes sense to have 19.2 imperial feet convert to 230.4 inches. '
Yes I get that but it is more than that.
For instance there are 63360 inches in a mile 5280 feet. Now convert 6336 kilometres to miles = 3937.1155 miles.
39.370077 inches = 1 metre. It is the coincidence that gets me.
Now look at the number 3937.1155 miles and say it is a Radius perhaps of the Earth. The diameter is therefore 7874.0154 miles. No it is not exact but the way they did it was by using 2 or 3 different values for pi to reach even numbers.
I have written some stuff on the Great Pyramid and it is interesting to me that the height of the Great Pyramid is 1/86,400 (the same number as seconds in a day) an earth diameter. Not exact that would be impossible but one that creates an even number. The number I have looked at is 7875 using 22/7.
7874.0154 miles/86400 = 481.18983 imperial feet or the height of the Great Pyramid a very close approximate.
Jim
Piotr,jim @ Mar 27 2017, 11:28 AM wrote:Piotr
For interest.
I think there are many mysteries to be solved. It has always interested me how the metre came into being.
Quote 'In step 2 you converted to imperial feet, then in step 4 you converted back to meters. The only operation is division by 19.2, 230.4/19.2=12. There are 12 inches in feet so it makes sense to have 19.2 imperial feet convert to 230.4 inches. '
Yes I get that but it is more than that.
For instance there are 63360 inches in a mile 5280 feet. Now convert 6336 kilometres to miles = 3937.1155 miles.
39.370077 inches = 1 metre. It is the coincidence that gets me.
Now look at the number 3937.1155 miles and say it is a Radius perhaps of the Earth. The diameter is therefore 7874.0154 miles. No it is not exact but the way they did it was by using 2 or 3 different values for pi to reach even numbers.
I have written some stuff on the Great Pyramid and it is interesting to me that the height of the Great Pyramid is 1/86,400 (the same number as seconds in a day) an earth diameter. Not exact that would be impossible but one that creates an even number. The number I have looked at is 7875 using 22/7.
7874.0154 miles/86400 = 481.18983 imperial feet or the height of the Great Pyramid a very close approximate.
Jim
Ignore this nonsense. There were no imperial units when the pyramids were built, thus imperial numbers applied to the pyramids are pure fiction and contorted to appear like they were intended. The ancient Egyptians had their own units just like the preNorman British had their own units that were fully independent of everything imperial.
Pure pseudoscience!!!

Schleicher
I fail to understand just why the pyramids should have any place in a forum devoted to counting in twelves. What next? Velikovsky, Adamski and Von Daeniken?
You will achiev more credibility if you relieve yourselves of the pseudoscience cranks and forum bully boys.
You will achiev more credibility if you relieve yourselves of the pseudoscience cranks and forum bully boys.

ShaunDozens Disciple
 Joined: Aug 2 2005, 04:09 PM
Schleicher:
It's all very well popping in and making comments like this, but they don't help, do they? You are at liberty to make comments, of course, but why not come out of the woodwork and join the Forum  always assuming, of course, that you actually have an interest in dozenals.
It's all very well popping in and making comments like this, but they don't help, do they? You are at liberty to make comments, of course, but why not come out of the woodwork and join the Forum  always assuming, of course, that you actually have an interest in dozenals.
I use the following conventions for dozenal numbers in my posts.
* prefixes a dozenal number, e.g. *50 = 60.
The apostrophe (') is used as a dozenal point, e.g. 0'6 = 0.5.
T and E stand for ten and eleven respectively.
* prefixes a dozenal number, e.g. *50 = 60.
The apostrophe (') is used as a dozenal point, e.g. 0'6 = 0.5.
T and E stand for ten and eleven respectively.

jimRegular
 Joined: Apr 20 2012, 08:19 PM
Now that April 1st is behind us I will finish this bit on the Great Pyramid. I think the imperial system is an ancient measure and is a part of a system of measures began in the Indus Valley.
In my last post I suggested a coincidence with 63360 inches in a mile and 6336 kilometres being the radius of a sphere the diameter being 12,672 km and connected to the height of the Great Pyramid.
12,672 km is in itself an interesting number. The number 12.672 inches is metric. There are 5000 feet in a mile with a foot measuring 12.672 inches.
12,672 kilometres / 864000 = 146.666666..m the height of the pyramid or nearly as I will suggest.
What we can see is the architects and their decision to use 2 approximates for pi. They have used 22/7 and 864/275 to reach slightly different numbers.
Fibonacci's 864/275 3.141818181.. is of interest 146.6666 x 3.141818181 = a base length of 230.4 metres. 230.4 metres is the length we discussed in an earlier post.
EXACTLY
230.4 m = 755.90551 imperial feet nearly 756 imperial feet a common measure for the pyramid base. 1. This is a coincidence 2. It is deliberate 3. It is a mistake.
If it is deliberate I cant give an answer but if it is mistake I may be able to suggest something. The design of the metre was early but the standard used to find the length of the metre may have been damaged so a false reading taken and therefor did not meld with the imperial foot.
The early French measure the foot which I think is probably 12.672 inches and the Toise ; 6 feet = Toise = 72 inches = 864 Paris lines.
The length of the metre is the problem as it is to short to reach 756 imperial and to short by nearly 0.02/3 percent.
For the present metre to reach the same length 756 imperial the conversion is 39.375 inches = 1 metre not 39.3700776
This must have been recognised as a way to connect 2 measures. Why not have changed it?.
Jim
In my last post I suggested a coincidence with 63360 inches in a mile and 6336 kilometres being the radius of a sphere the diameter being 12,672 km and connected to the height of the Great Pyramid.
12,672 km is in itself an interesting number. The number 12.672 inches is metric. There are 5000 feet in a mile with a foot measuring 12.672 inches.
12,672 kilometres / 864000 = 146.666666..m the height of the pyramid or nearly as I will suggest.
What we can see is the architects and their decision to use 2 approximates for pi. They have used 22/7 and 864/275 to reach slightly different numbers.
Fibonacci's 864/275 3.141818181.. is of interest 146.6666 x 3.141818181 = a base length of 230.4 metres. 230.4 metres is the length we discussed in an earlier post.
EXACTLY
230.4 m = 755.90551 imperial feet nearly 756 imperial feet a common measure for the pyramid base. 1. This is a coincidence 2. It is deliberate 3. It is a mistake.
If it is deliberate I cant give an answer but if it is mistake I may be able to suggest something. The design of the metre was early but the standard used to find the length of the metre may have been damaged so a false reading taken and therefor did not meld with the imperial foot.
The early French measure the foot which I think is probably 12.672 inches and the Toise ; 6 feet = Toise = 72 inches = 864 Paris lines.
The length of the metre is the problem as it is to short to reach 756 imperial and to short by nearly 0.02/3 percent.
For the present metre to reach the same length 756 imperial the conversion is 39.375 inches = 1 metre not 39.3700776
This must have been recognised as a way to connect 2 measures. Why not have changed it?.
Jim

Kanonier
is it not the case that the present Imperial/International foot has nothing to do with the Indus units? The "Northern" foot of 13.2" would seem to be connected, though.
All this playing with numbers and approximations to pi can conjure all soerts of results. Did not the Egyptians also use 25/8 for pi?
All this playing with numbers and approximations to pi can conjure all soerts of results. Did not the Egyptians also use 25/8 for pi?

KodegaduloObsessive poster
 Joined: Sep 10 2011, 11:27 PM
Coincidences happen. They are bound to happen, statistically, simply by random chance. They are not necessarily a sign of causation. Indeed, if we ever observe a system that seems to be devoid of coincidences, that would be a suspicious sign there might be some causative agent or process actively suppressing coincidence. (Often times, that agent is an overzealous reasearcher faking the data, such that it is "too good".)
Humans are patternseeking animals. But our evolutionary history did not drive our pattern seeking to be perfectly accurate, only to be accurate enough to stay alive and breed. That means we are prone to false positives. When trying to detect the face of a possible tiger stalking you through the grass, seeing one that isn't there will not remove you from the gene pool; but failing to spot one that is there, might. This is one reason the scientific method was developed, to counteract these tendencies to overdetect patterns, by means of techniques such as peer review, and falsifiability analysis.
It is unfortunate that some of us here seem to be unaware of this, and let themselves fall into the trap of confirmation bias.
Humans are patternseeking animals. But our evolutionary history did not drive our pattern seeking to be perfectly accurate, only to be accurate enough to stay alive and breed. That means we are prone to false positives. When trying to detect the face of a possible tiger stalking you through the grass, seeing one that isn't there will not remove you from the gene pool; but failing to spot one that is there, might. This is one reason the scientific method was developed, to counteract these tendencies to overdetect patterns, by means of techniques such as peer review, and falsifiability analysis.
It is unfortunate that some of us here seem to be unaware of this, and let themselves fall into the trap of confirmation bias.
As of 1202/03/01[z]=2018/03/01[d] I use:
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Baseneutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Baseneutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)

jimRegular
 Joined: Apr 20 2012, 08:19 PM
Re Indus units.
From The Roots of Ancient India, The Archaeology of Early Indian Civilisation, second edition, revised by Walter Fairservis Jr (1975): … linear measurement was apparently well standardised. Mackay by good fortune found a piece of shell marked in regular fashion and quite clearly intended as a rule. Nine divisions remain, and from circular markings at two places five units apart it would appear that a decimal system was in vogue. Each division is approx 0.264 inches wide, or a fiveunit total of 1.32 inches. Thus a foot in the decimal system would be 13.2 inches,
From The Roots of Ancient India, The Archaeology of Early Indian Civilisation, second edition, revised by Walter Fairservis Jr (1975): … linear measurement was apparently well standardised. Mackay by good fortune found a piece of shell marked in regular fashion and quite clearly intended as a rule. Nine divisions remain, and from circular markings at two places five units apart it would appear that a decimal system was in vogue. Each division is approx 0.264 inches wide, or a fiveunit total of 1.32 inches. Thus a foot in the decimal system would be 13.2 inches,

Kanonier
Thank you. I have found a similar page in Berrimans book which mentions the 'indus inch'.

jimRegular
 Joined: Apr 20 2012, 08:19 PM
Kode has mentioned a number
Quote 'I have described, as an auxiliary adjunct to the Primel metrology, a system of Circumferal Length Units, based on using exactly 24,883.2 statute miles as an approximation for the circumference of the Earth, '
This number uses Fibonacci's value for pi 864/275 3.14181818181 to find the diameter of the circle 7920 miles.
This value for pi can also be written as 34.56/11 or 69.12/22 and these numbers are important.
Now think of the number 792 it is the basis of the old Saxon metre/yard. The old Saxon yard is also known as a WAND.
The Saxon yard is twofold as it based on 48 digits of .825 ins and is also decimal 50 digits of 729 ins. In 3 Saxon feet there are 39.6 inches (3.3 imperial feet) divided into 48 digits each .825 inches.
That is one side of the measure the other is an ancient metre 50 digits in length each digit = .792 inches. note 39.6 inches = 1.00584 modern metre.
Now to the diameter of the Earth and the height of the Great Pyramid as you have seen in my previous posts I divided the diameter by 86,400 .
So 7920 miles / 86400 = 484 imperial feet and 484 x 864/275 1/2 = 760.32 imperial feet or 9123.894 inches for the side of the pyramid at what is known as the socket length.
7920 miles / .792 inches = 633600000 (63360 ins in a mile)
And we recognise this number 760.32 imperial feet as 691.2 Saxon feet of 13.2 inches and 691.2 / 3 = 230.4 ancient metres 'see earlier posts'.
The perimeter of the Great Pyramid is 1/2 minute of 1 degree and with a circumference of 24,883.2 miles 1 degree = 69.12 miles.
The socket side of the pyramid is 691.2 saxon feet (13.2 inches) or 760.32 imperial feet.
Note: Great Pyramid Base.
There are 3 Great Pyramid Base. Flinders Petrie.
1. Core plain mean 9001.5 ins
2. Casing mean 9068.8 ins
3. Socket mean 9125.9 ins
Now values for pi which can be found in these measures .
1. correct value to 9 decimal places
2. 22/7 found with traditional height 280 royal cubits and base 440
(280 royal cubits = 481.25 imperial feet each cubit 20.625 inches)
3. 3.125 value found on clay tablet at susa 1936. 484 imperial feet mentioned above x 3.125 = 756.25 imperial feet or 440 royal cubits of 20.625 ins
4.The Egyptian value for pi 3.16049382712 this number the architects have twigged and I don't know why but what they have done is to take 1/10th of a saxon foot 13.2 inches 1.32 inches from 481.25 imperial feet 5775 inches and use this number 5773.68 inches 481.14 imperial feet to reach 760.32 the socket length.
5. 864/275 3.141818181818 the architects are using different values to reach even numbers.
Look at the number 275 that is a pyramid number /4 = 68.75.
68.75 miles x 360 = 27,750 miles and using 22/7 find a diameter of 7875 miles see my earlier posts.
And 864 is a pyramid number 756.25 imperial feet = 687.5 saxon feet 13.2 inches and a circle inscribed into the base = 2160 using Fibonacci value 864/275.
These guys had it worked and it is now part of our modern system of measures.
Someone has to be in on it?
Quote 'I have described, as an auxiliary adjunct to the Primel metrology, a system of Circumferal Length Units, based on using exactly 24,883.2 statute miles as an approximation for the circumference of the Earth, '
This number uses Fibonacci's value for pi 864/275 3.14181818181 to find the diameter of the circle 7920 miles.
This value for pi can also be written as 34.56/11 or 69.12/22 and these numbers are important.
Now think of the number 792 it is the basis of the old Saxon metre/yard. The old Saxon yard is also known as a WAND.
The Saxon yard is twofold as it based on 48 digits of .825 ins and is also decimal 50 digits of 729 ins. In 3 Saxon feet there are 39.6 inches (3.3 imperial feet) divided into 48 digits each .825 inches.
That is one side of the measure the other is an ancient metre 50 digits in length each digit = .792 inches. note 39.6 inches = 1.00584 modern metre.
Now to the diameter of the Earth and the height of the Great Pyramid as you have seen in my previous posts I divided the diameter by 86,400 .
So 7920 miles / 86400 = 484 imperial feet and 484 x 864/275 1/2 = 760.32 imperial feet or 9123.894 inches for the side of the pyramid at what is known as the socket length.
7920 miles / .792 inches = 633600000 (63360 ins in a mile)
And we recognise this number 760.32 imperial feet as 691.2 Saxon feet of 13.2 inches and 691.2 / 3 = 230.4 ancient metres 'see earlier posts'.
The perimeter of the Great Pyramid is 1/2 minute of 1 degree and with a circumference of 24,883.2 miles 1 degree = 69.12 miles.
The socket side of the pyramid is 691.2 saxon feet (13.2 inches) or 760.32 imperial feet.
Note: Great Pyramid Base.
There are 3 Great Pyramid Base. Flinders Petrie.
1. Core plain mean 9001.5 ins
2. Casing mean 9068.8 ins
3. Socket mean 9125.9 ins
Now values for pi which can be found in these measures .
1. correct value to 9 decimal places
2. 22/7 found with traditional height 280 royal cubits and base 440
(280 royal cubits = 481.25 imperial feet each cubit 20.625 inches)
3. 3.125 value found on clay tablet at susa 1936. 484 imperial feet mentioned above x 3.125 = 756.25 imperial feet or 440 royal cubits of 20.625 ins
4.The Egyptian value for pi 3.16049382712 this number the architects have twigged and I don't know why but what they have done is to take 1/10th of a saxon foot 13.2 inches 1.32 inches from 481.25 imperial feet 5775 inches and use this number 5773.68 inches 481.14 imperial feet to reach 760.32 the socket length.
5. 864/275 3.141818181818 the architects are using different values to reach even numbers.
Look at the number 275 that is a pyramid number /4 = 68.75.
68.75 miles x 360 = 27,750 miles and using 22/7 find a diameter of 7875 miles see my earlier posts.
And 864 is a pyramid number 756.25 imperial feet = 687.5 saxon feet 13.2 inches and a circle inscribed into the base = 2160 using Fibonacci value 864/275.
These guys had it worked and it is now part of our modern system of measures.
Someone has to be in on it?

KodegaduloObsessive poster
 Joined: Sep 10 2011, 11:27 PM
How can one number "use" another number? Numbers aren't conscious, they don't have intentions. Only humans can have intentions. A human being might use one number to derive another. But then that human being is perfectly capable of stating whether they have done so. Short of that, idle speculation about anyone, past or present, using a particular number for a particular intent, is just that ... idle.jim @ Apr 14 2017, 10:54 AM wrote:Kode has mentioned a number
Quote 'I have described, as an auxiliary adjunct to the Primel metrology, a system of Circumferal Length Units, based on using exactly 24,883.2 statute miles as an approximation for the circumference of the Earth, '
This number uses Fibonacci's value for pi 864/275 3.14181818181 to find the diameter of the circle 7920 miles...
It was not my intent to say anything about any approximation of pi, nor to endorse any of Jim's other ... speculations. All I was implying is that it is extremely convenient to use 12^{5}_{d} tenthsofamile as an approximation for the circumference of the Earth. H.C. Churchman also noted this, the better part of a halfbiquennium ago. This distance is intermediate between the Polar and Equatorial circumference, so it is possible to find a Great Circle that has that exact length; and it is not too far from a sensible "average" circumference.
What makes it convenient is that it can translate into an exact quantity of one customary unit or another  as they have fallen to us by historical accident and coincidence. So a circum·stadial·length, under that definition, is exactly equivalent to a tenth of a statute mile, or exactly 528_{d} feet. American cars have odometers that go down to the tenth of a mile, and road markers on most US interstate highways and county roads are laid out every tenth of a mile, so you could use either to measure how far you've traveled in precise circum·stadial·lengths. A dozen of these (1.2_{d} statute miles) would be a circum·dromal·length. One dozenth of one (a circum·habital·length) would be exactly 44_{d} customary feet. A dozenth of that (a circum·ell·length) would be exactly 3 feet 8 inches, customary. A dozenth of that would be exactly 3 and 2/3 inches (Churchman's metron, my circum·hand·length). Such a choice of units would be rather convenient as a way of introducing dozenal measurement to people. Today.
That's all.
As of 1202/03/01[z]=2018/03/01[d] I use:
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Baseneutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Baseneutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)

jimRegular
 Joined: Apr 20 2012, 08:19 PM
The Acre
The acre is 43560 square feet and many fields were laid out by measuring 660 feet x 66 = 43560. Dose not need to be though it could for instance it could be 3960 ft x 11 ft = 43560 square feet.
A fun exercise is to measure the circumference of the earth using 24,883.2 miles and a width of 11 feet and calculating the number of acres it contains.
131,383,296 ft x 11 = 1445216256 square feet or 331,776 acres.
As suggested in my last post the Great pyramid socket length is 760.32 imperial feet (691.2 saxon feet and interestingly 230.4 old saxon metre 39.6 inches same number230.4 as modern metres in the casing base) and therefor its area contains 13.27104 acres or 1/2500th that of our field circling the earth.
To do this exercise again in saxon measure is much simpler as there are 36,000 square saxon feet in an acre.
24,883.2 miles 119,439,360 saxon feet (13.2 ins there are 4800 saxon feet in a mile) x 10 saxon feet = 1,194,393,600 sq ft / 3600 = 331,776 acres.
Jim
The acre is 43560 square feet and many fields were laid out by measuring 660 feet x 66 = 43560. Dose not need to be though it could for instance it could be 3960 ft x 11 ft = 43560 square feet.
A fun exercise is to measure the circumference of the earth using 24,883.2 miles and a width of 11 feet and calculating the number of acres it contains.
131,383,296 ft x 11 = 1445216256 square feet or 331,776 acres.
As suggested in my last post the Great pyramid socket length is 760.32 imperial feet (691.2 saxon feet and interestingly 230.4 old saxon metre 39.6 inches same number230.4 as modern metres in the casing base) and therefor its area contains 13.27104 acres or 1/2500th that of our field circling the earth.
To do this exercise again in saxon measure is much simpler as there are 36,000 square saxon feet in an acre.
24,883.2 miles 119,439,360 saxon feet (13.2 ins there are 4800 saxon feet in a mile) x 10 saxon feet = 1,194,393,600 sq ft / 3600 = 331,776 acres.
Jim

Kanonier
Berriman also noted the Ilahi gaz of 33in, which survived in North India, measuring 25 Indus inches. This gaz was divided into 144 jow. Historical Metrology S4041.jim @ Apr 3 2017, 10:07 PM wrote: Re Indus units.
From The Roots of Ancient India, The Archaeology of Early Indian Civilisation, second edition, revised by Walter Fairservis Jr (1975): … linear measurement was apparently well standardised. Mackay by good fortune found a piece of shell marked in regular fashion and quite clearly intended as a rule. Nine divisions remain, and from circular markings at two places five units apart it would appear that a decimal system was in vogue. Each division is approx 0.264 inches wide, or a fiveunit total of 1.32 inches. Thus a foot in the decimal system would be 13.2 inches,

jimRegular
 Joined: Apr 20 2012, 08:19 PM
Quote 'Berriman also noted the Ilahi gaz of 33in, which survived in North India, measuring 25 Indus inches. This gaz was divided into 144 jow. Historical Metrology S4041.'
You have hit on a problem which has confused many. The old Indus yard 13.2 x 3 = 39.6 inches is 3.3 feet. Somehow this number 33 has been confused, I think.
Alexander Thom theorised a Megalithic yard 2.72 feet when analysing stone circles ellipses etc in England Wales Ireland Scotland and France.
33 inches is 2.75 imperial feet and I find this to be the yard Thom looked at. 33 inches is 2.5 indus/saxon feet 33 inches.
A part of the same system however is not the indus/saxon yard or Wand which is 39.6 inches.
Jim
You have hit on a problem which has confused many. The old Indus yard 13.2 x 3 = 39.6 inches is 3.3 feet. Somehow this number 33 has been confused, I think.
Alexander Thom theorised a Megalithic yard 2.72 feet when analysing stone circles ellipses etc in England Wales Ireland Scotland and France.
33 inches is 2.75 imperial feet and I find this to be the yard Thom looked at. 33 inches is 2.5 indus/saxon feet 33 inches.
A part of the same system however is not the indus/saxon yard or Wand which is 39.6 inches.
Jim

Kanonier
I fear we are wandering from your pyramid the original topic, but I would add this about the Ilahi gaz. known also as Akbars yard (Akbar 1556 ) it was standardised by the British after careful examination of the evidence; it was recognised as 33", i stated that it was 25 Indus inch, and 25 x 1,32" = 33", not 3'3". The Indus inch was also equal to 2 shusi of Sumeren. You have rated it as 30 indus inch 30 x 1,32 = 39,6".
I will make other checks on this. Perhaps we start a new topic on ancient measures and escape the pyranids?
I will make other checks on this. Perhaps we start a new topic on ancient measures and escape the pyranids?

KodegaduloObsessive poster
 Joined: Sep 10 2011, 11:27 PM
If you wish to pursue some specific topic about ancient measures (with not quite so much woo), then by all means start a new thread.Kanonier @ Apr 16 2017, 02:53 PM wrote: Perhaps we start a new topic on ancient measures and escape the pyranids?
As of 1202/03/01[z]=2018/03/01[d] I use:
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Baseneutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Baseneutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)

HaroldCasual Member
 Joined: Dec 25 2016, 09:47 PM
In present USC & imperial there are 5280 feet in a mile and if you multiply 12 inches per foot times 5280 feet, you get 63 120 inches in a mile, not 63 360. Are you making things up again?In my last post I suggested a coincidence with 63360 inches in a mile and 6336 kilometres being the radius of a sphere the diameter being 12,672 km and connected to the height of the Great Pyramid.
According to Wikipedia:12,672 km is in itself an interesting number. The number 12.672 inches is metric. There are 5000 feet in a mile with a foot measuring 12.672 inches.
The fact is there never was a mile that didn't change from time to time, so there is and never has been any special significance to it. You can pick any value you want and make up any numbers to make your numbers look like they have some special meaning. They don't.The English statute mile was established by a Weights and Measures Act of Parliament in 1593 during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. The act on the Composition of Yards and Perches had shortened the length of the foot and its associated measures, causing the two methods of determining the mile to diverge.[20] Owing to the importance of the surveyor's rod in deeds and surveying undertaken under Henry VIII,[21] decreasing the length of the rod by  1⁄11 would have amounted to a significant tax increase. Parliament instead opted to maintain the mile of 8 furlongs (which were derived from the rod) and to increase the number of feet per mile from the old Roman value.[22] The applicable passage of the statute reads: "A Mile shall contain eight Furlongs, every Furlong forty Poles,[n 4] and every Pole shall contain sixteen Foot and an half."[24] The statute mile therefore contained 5,280 feet or 1,760 yards.[14] The distance was not uniformly adopted. Robert Morden had multiple scales on his 17thcentury maps which included continuing local values: his map of Hampshire, for example, bore two different "miles" with a ratio of 1 : 1.23[25] and his map of Dorset had three scales with a ratio of 1 : 1.23 : 1.41.[26] In both cases, the traditional local units remained longer than the statute mile.
12.756 Mm is the equatorial diameter of the earth. If I multiply it by π, I get the equatorial circumference at 40.074 Mm.12,672 kilometres / 864000 = 146.666666..m the height of the pyramid or nearly as I will suggest.
What we can see is the architects and their decision to use 2 approximates for pi. They have used 22/7 and 864/275 to reach slightly different numbers.
All gibberish and meaningless twaddle.Fibonacci's 864/275 3.141818181.. is of interest 146.6666 x 3.141818181 = a base length of 230.4 metres. 230.4 metres is the length we discussed in an earlier post.
EXACTLY
230.4 m = 755.90551 imperial feet nearly 756 imperial feet a common measure for the pyramid base. 1. This is a coincidence 2. It is deliberate 3. It is a mistake.
If it is deliberate I cant give an answer but if it is mistake I may be able to suggest something. The design of the metre was early but the standard used to find the length of the metre may have been damaged so a false reading taken and therefor did not meld with the imperial foot.
The early French measure the foot which I think is probably 12.672 inches and the Toise ; 6 feet = Toise = 72 inches = 864 Paris lines.
The present metre has nothing to do with feet. Please take you silliness to the BIPM and see where it gets you. At least the real scientists there will have a good laugh.The length of the metre is the problem as it is to short to reach 756 imperial and to short by nearly 0.02/3 percent.
For the present metre to reach the same length 756 imperial the conversion is 39.375 inches = 1 metre not 39.3700776
This must have been recognised as a way to connect 2 measures. Why not have changed it?.

ShaunDozens Disciple
 Joined: Aug 2 2005, 04:09 PM
12 x 5,280 = 63,360 ..., not your 63,120.Harold @ Apr 16 2017, 06:29 PM wrote:
In present USC & imperial there are 5280 feet in a mile and if you multiply 12 inches per foot times 5280 feet, you get 63 120 inches in a mile, not 63 360. Are you making things up again?

KodegaduloObsessive poster
 Joined: Sep 10 2011, 11:27 PM
Check your math again, Harold:Harold @ Apr 16 2017, 05:29 PM wrote: In present USC & imperial there are 5280 feet in a mile and if you multiply 12 inches per foot times 5280 feet, you get 63 120 inches in a mile, not 63 360. Are you making things up again?
5280_{d} × 12_{d} = 63,360_{d}
In dozenal, that is 30,800_{z}:
3080_{z} × 10_{z} = 30,800_{z}
As of 1202/03/01[z]=2018/03/01[d] I use:
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Baseneutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Baseneutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)

Kanonier
Yes, we know that already.Kodegadulo @ Apr 16 2017, 05:08 PM wrote:If you wish to pursue some specific topic about ancient measures (with not quite so much woo), then by all means start a new thread.Kanonier @ Apr 16 2017, 02:53 PM wrote: Perhaps we start a new topic on ancient measures and escape the pyranids?

jimRegular
 Joined: Apr 20 2012, 08:19 PM
The hectare and the acre.
I began this topic by noting the combination of metric and imperial measure in the Louvre glass pyramid.
To manage something along the same lines with the Great pyramid begin with the height 481 imperial feet.
If this were the side of a square it would contain 5.3113177 acres.
Now let's do something along the lines of Mr Pei and instead of acres name this number hectares. 5.3113177 hectares and convert to acres = 13.12441 acres.
It is the area of the base of the pyramid 756.1079947 imperial feet. It seems to me the conversion is tied to an approx for pi something close to 3.1441.
Coincidence?
Jim
I began this topic by noting the combination of metric and imperial measure in the Louvre glass pyramid.
To manage something along the same lines with the Great pyramid begin with the height 481 imperial feet.
If this were the side of a square it would contain 5.3113177 acres.
Now let's do something along the lines of Mr Pei and instead of acres name this number hectares. 5.3113177 hectares and convert to acres = 13.12441 acres.
It is the area of the base of the pyramid 756.1079947 imperial feet. It seems to me the conversion is tied to an approx for pi something close to 3.1441.
Coincidence?
Jim