Not surprisingly, I am unable to find prior work on Unas’ pyramid, since the subject is fraught with a fair amount of uncertainty, beginning with the raw data itself. Even if the raw data can be taken seriously, however, there is still room for uncertainty about the matter.
A number of Egyptian pyramids may remain unsolved, or even unattempted, because eventually what happens is surprising diversity.
Just as is the case with the Royal Cubit, eventually the overall body of Egyptological data becomes voluminous enough that we can begin to see the unlikelihood of everything having been measured in Royal Cubits only, so too does the body of architectural data become voluminous enough on the whole that is may both contraindicate the use of sekeds in actual pyramid design, and rule out any convenient “rule of thumb” for pyramid perimeter / height ratios.
As such, it becomes harder to identify authentic data when correct or incorrect data, some of the raw perimeter / height ratios are just plain strange, even with a considerable amount of experience to guide an interpretive effort.
If I give the raw data I have for Unas’ pyramid the benefit of a doubt that is may indeed be another Egyptian pyramid with a simple number (in this case, 100) Royal Cubits in the base, we still seem to be looking at something curious.
One thing that is unusual about what emerges tentatively from the data, is that the Half Venus Cycle (Mayan Calandar Round) very much seems to be on display. I think this is an idea that may difficulty catching on for perhaps both lack of scholarly support, and the desire among researchers to have as much scholarly support as possible, but the mathematics of calendars is after all universal.
I have yet to be able to overturn the idea that the height of the pyramid was 120 Megalithic Feet. An homage of this sort, or an additional one, advertising the Megalithic Foot / Alternate Pi has been expected for some time, and this choice of a height value has some remarkable consequences.
However, the actual version of the Calendar Round chosen for representation, and the consequences of that choice, seem more or less uncertain.
For reference, such a pyramid feature may not be entirely without precedent. From Petrie’s raw data, the upper part of the Bent Pyramid at Dahshur also seems to be expressing some form of the Calendar Round.
Note the height of the Bent Pyramid’s upper section from Petrie’s own data. 2277 inches = 189.75 feet, very close to the canonical Calendar Round 18980 / 100 or one of numerous possible useful approximations of it, at least some of which we can find license for from Mayan calendar math itself.
One difficulty with the Calendar Round, being it is near to the (square root of 360) x 10^n, is that there are forward and “backhanded” forms of it
To use the B value for the Half Venus Cycle / Calendar Round to illustrate
HVC B 18997.72194 = (360 x (10^n) / 189.4964044
Such backhanded forms have been referred to before as “Builder figures” because we can build the forward forms from 360 and the “Builders”, and such figures appear to have been included in artifacts such as the very calendar oriented Aztec Sun Stone.
At the moment, I’ve chosen three candidate sets for the proportions of Unas’ pyramid, but I still don’t understand clearly the “Modus Operandi” (plural) at work.
I’ve shown in the past how easy it is to find three different forms of the Calendar Round in the Great Pyramid using onlywhat we are given by the pyramid
However, Unas’ pyramid may have more ideas.
The general trend in projected data sets, particularly the more favorable ones, is
Base in feet = some form of the Calendar Round / 100; height = 200 Megalithic Feet; vertical edge = ~194.8181821 ft, and apothem = ~Faiyum Oasis Wonder Number 170.2535130
There are two promising versions that use the A and B Calendar Round / HVC values for the base.
The third promising version is quite surprising. For the base value, it employs a fourth form of the Calendar Round / HVC that has been projected systematically but never detected in ancient architecture before that I am aware of.
The D value for the HVC is 2 x (Pi^8) = 189770.06203, representing the canonical 18980 day Calendar Round.
One remarkable thing about this model is that it may have the most pleasing diagonal value
189.77006203 x sqrt 2 = diagonal = 134.1880925 x 2 = ~1.676727943 x 80 = 134.1382354 to an accuracy of 134.1382354 /134.1880925 = an acceptable .99962845 = ~99.96%
Personally, I am not eager to have anything except the core set of planetary values sets A-C validated by the ancients, it threatens to make all our headaches from trying to keep up with ancient math warriors 33% more severe, but there is a special reason that this third proposal stands out.
If we square the projected vertical edge length of 194.8181821 ft (which by the way would share an unidentified fundamental unit of measure with Stonehenge’s outer sarsen circle and with the Great Pyramid’s height from the base level) we get 194.8181821^2 = 37954.12406 which would be the D form of the Full Venus Cycle
37954.12406 / 2 = 18977.06203
So did they repeat this curious forth value in both the base, and the vertical edge via square root, for emphasis and reassurance as to the deliberateness of such a gesture, or is the pyramid perhaps really trying to somehow express a more diverse set of Calendar Round values than that?
Why I am writing this, even without having further insights into that all-important question, is because that whatever the exact specifics of which versions of the Calendar Round were incorporated, it continues to seem very likely that the Faiyum Oasis Wonder Number was used here.
Some readers might also remember that it was proposed that the Faiyum Oasis Wonder Number came into prominencebecause of its direct relationship to the Calendar Round, in general reference to the A value.
At any rate, what it looks like is that this Faiyum Number, which came into prominence in the Faiyum region in the architecture of the 12th Dynasty, was already recognized and utilized at Saqqara in architecture attributed to Egypt’s 6th Dynasty, implying that it had already reached a fully realized state no later than the Sixth Dynasty.
As recently I had been exploring the data on Khendjer’s pyramid, it might be of interest that if my calculations are correct, the slope of Khendjer’s pyramid without its capstone comes within reasonable tolerances to 1/2 of the RMA (“Real Mayan Annoyance”)
That is, the pyramid base beneath the slope without capstone probably being 83.65644028 ft = 40 Sacred Cubits of 2.091411007 ft; 2.091411007 ft = Royal Cubit 1.718873385 x Remen 1.216733603, and the height without the capstone appears to be probably 120 feet Imperial, thus
sqrt ((83.65644028^2) + (120^2)) = 146.2819196 ft = ~146.3221164 = (29.26442328 / 2) x 10, 2.926442328 being the so-called “Real Mayan Annoyance” (annoying because it isn’t 2.920160646, and at least as Egyptian as Mayan).
The Faiyum Wonder Number (FWN) being 1.702535130, perhaps it’s slightly interesting that
RMA 29.26442328 / FWN 1.702535130 = 17.18873388 = Royal Cubit in feet x 10, exactly.
That’s the very same good old Morton Royal Cubit that is indicated to us by the Great Pyramid because 17.18873388 is the ratio between the whole pyramid and the missing part (missing apex section).
–Luke Piwalker
Luke Piwalker 