Journal of Geomancy vol. 3 no. 1, October 1978

{7}

CHEPHREN’S PYRAMID
AND THE SEARCH FOR ANCIENT ASTRONAUTS

by Robert Forrest

The publication of M.W. Saunders’s booklets (1) relating the structure of the Great Pyramid to numerical facts concerning Mars and its satellites has prompted me to investigate just how easy it is to ‘relate’ a pyramid to various numerical facts concerning the planets and their satellites. 

I decided to use Chephren’s Pyramid, the second pyramid at Giza, the salient measurements being as follows (refer also to Fig. 1):

From these figures, the following are easily derived:

Let us begin with angle B.  Petrie believed that it indicated that Chephren’s pyramid was constructed from a 3:4:5 Pythagorean triangle (4) and that tan B = 4/3 was the intended angle (this would make B = 53° 8′).  We shall adopt the theoretical slope. 

It is a fact that:

this being the first of many links with Saturn and its satellites.  Here are two others:

with respective accuracies of 0·1 and 0·4%. 

Two rather more general results are:

(N.B.  Orbital period in sense of Siderial Period) {8}

And again, the face gradient of 4/3 can be related to the satellites of Uranus, thus:

..................................................
It was C.P. Smyth who first pointed out that the height of the Great Pyramid multiplied by exp(9) (see note 5) gave the mean Earth–Sun distance.  M.W. Saunders added that the base of the Great Pyramid multiplied by exp(9) was approximately also the mean Mars–Sun distance. 

Here are some similar coincidences for Chephren’s Pyramid:

..................................................

Referring now to Fig. 2, we move to consider the displacements of passages and chambers. 

Now to the passage angles.  These can be accounted for as follows:

..................................................
Finally, and following an idea of M.W. Saunders, we use Chephren’s Pyramid to indicate an orbit in the Earth’s Equatorial Plane by sighting along a line joining the mid-point of the north face base to the vertex (fig.3 below)

The distance OQ, taking into account the oblateness of the Earth, works out to be 31  778 km, a distance which equals 5 times the Equitorial|Equatorial radius of the Earth (acc. 0.4%).  Also, a satellite orbit having this radius, and orbiting in the same direction as the Earth rotates, would have an apex transit period of 1·852 days.  That is, the interval between consecutive appearances of a satellite at the apex of a pyramid, as viewed along the line PQ, would be 1·852 days, which is very nearly 1/16 part of the period between consecutive New Moons (accuracy 0.3%).  Further, {9}

If our hypothetical satellite were to orbit in the opposite direction to that of the Earth’s rotation, its apex transit period would be 0·3937 days, which happens to be, curiously enough, the number of inches to a centimetre.  A hundred apex transit periods would therefore amount to 39.37 days which equals 4/3 × the period between consecutive new moons (0.01%).  And that brings us more or less back to where we started, since 4/3 is the tangent of the face slope angle B …

..................................................
Either these coincidences reveal a planetary basis for the design of Chephren’s Pyramid, or else they show that it is relatively easy to invest the dimensions and proportions of any pyramid with unintended planetary associations.  I believe the latter explanation to be the true one – both for M.W. Saunders’s Martian theory of the Great Pyramid, and for the coincidences of the present article.  Anyone with an electronic calculator and a little patience might like to ‘have a go’ at the Pyramid of Mycerinus, the third pyramid of Giza. 

..................................................

NOTES.

N.B.  Astronomical quantities used in this article are from the 1976 B.A.R. handbook.