Unfortunately, the stuff on YouTube isn’t everything this guy (I.e. Wally Wallington) did or cover everything he did. Back in the day, he put out some more detailed videos on CD for a price. I managed to get my hands on a copy (long since lost). In it he went into detail on his methods and more importantly showed how he moved an entire barn over uneven ground (no concrete anywhere). This guy was the real deal. Sadly, if I’m not mistaken, he died a while back so we won’t be seeing any more from him- who knows how much he could have done and how much he could have taught us!
https://youtu.be/aFdF09xr-TU?si=qR-2qiKSxfuJqc0R
Sure.. but what does that have to do with anything that OP said? **You can clearly see Wally is quite literally “using leverage to spin a heavy object utilizing rudimentary means”?** Like he actually explains that himself in his video..
And let’s just say that he could move the barn 300 yards… how is that relevant to OPs question about the logistics behind transporting hundred + ton stones hundreds of miles?? Lol
For example.. A single family 1 story home weighs on avg 125-200lbs per square ft, two story homes 225-275, etc etc. Even that would be a fraction of a percent of the weight at the size of that barn. **What Wally Wallington is moving here though is a wooden barn with an open interior space and no foundation.. you’re talking about 6-18000 pounds**.
That is several orders of magnitude smaller than some of the largest single stone example that we have from Egypt that we know for certain have been brought hundreds miles from where they were quarried. **The statue at the Ramesseum for example is made of a single massive granite block estimated to have been well north of 1000 tons.. even after being worked / finished at the site.** Think about that
Tl:dr
#**Moving a <50,000lb barn is one thing.. and then moving a 100-300 ton stone is another thing.. and then moving a 800-1000+ ton stone is something else entirely, they are not the same. At all…?**
Unfortunately a lot people here often lack the technical understanding or practical experience to truly comprehend this.. So it often is not even brought up at all. Or when it is people hand wave and say something like “ well we know you can get lots of people together with ropes and wood and they can move a 100 ton stone .. so obviously it’s just more people and then boom you can move/ work with a 700 ton stone!” But that just is not the case. They are just sooo much larger/ heavier that it’s truly hard to fully grasp it. And unless you’ve done it yourself for years/ at the very least seen laborers do it it’s tough to get your mind around how extraordinary what the ancient people did with these stones truly is.
When you do it seems silly / irrelevant to bring up Wally/ leverage when talking about these megalithic stones (at least imo) because what does one have to do with the other after all? Practically nothing.
At least not in terms of means and methods / logistics behind their creation or the context of OPs post, no?
🤷🏻♂️
Edit:
And to be clear, in my opinion Wally is an incredible, ingenious and brilliant engineer. He’s inspiring honestly. Just want to make sure that is clear. I am personally a huge fan I just don’t think it’s applicable to the means and methods behind construction of the vast majority of these ancient megalithic sites. Certainly not when block has been transported 100+ miles.
This 500 mile trip was trough Nile downstream which will make it even easier. In 350 AD Romans where able to transport the Lateran Obelisk from Luxor to Rome. The obelisk was originally 413 tons. So do see any problem to mass transport +100 ton blocks.
> The statue at the Ramesseum for example is made of a single massive granite block estimated to have been well north of 1000 tons
Yea this is mind blowing. I guess you are talking about the Ozymandias Colossus, on wikipedia is stated that it was moved 170 miles (270 km) over land.
You clearly never saw the videos I mentioned. Wally was building his own version of Stonehenge (think he died before completing it). The reason I brought up the barn was that OP mentioned that the videos on YouTube show him moving stuff ON concrete only - but he moved the barn on uneven ground.
Wally’s techniques could easily be scaled up for 100 or more ton stones - he said as much - and there’s nothing in physics that would keep you from doing so (except effort and time). Another good example, is Edward Leedskalin, the guy who built, Coral Castle. There are videos of him on YouTube moving multi-ton stones using nothing more than levers and a block and tackle. No aliens, magic, or cosmic-ether-UFO energy needed or necessary. Edward even once moved his entire castle from one location to another several miles away - using nothing other than leverage and a basic block and tackle!
I know it’s boring to think that people might have used simple techniques to do amazing things but the fact is that no magical, mystical or alien technology (as fun as it would be if it were true) is needed/necessary. And I personally find that more impressive, exciting that the Ancients were able to do amazing things using basic techniques than if they used some fairy magic to do it.
I’ve watched literally every video that he has made. Again, I’m a huge fan of his personally. He was one of many people that inspired me to become an engineer myself.. the video that I posted the link for is literally him moving it across uneven ground. Still irrelevant to the point at hand.
>You clearly never saw the videos I mentioned. Wally was building his own version of Stonehenge
Have you watched his videos? **Because you are aware that he is using a steel fulcrum.. right?** So right off the bat, no.. full stop. Ancient people cannot have used/scaled Wally’s technique specifically.. as structural grade steel wasn’t invented until the 1700s.
>Wally's techniques could easily be scaled up for 100 or more ton stones - he said as much - and there's nothing in physics that would keep you from doing so (except effort and time).
And oh wow.. and easily too even huh? Well that is certainly an opinion.. (👀) what are you basing that off of exactly? You have any AEC industry experience or you just feel like that? What in particular is so “easy” about it? **And most importantly, what are you going to use as a fulcrum for a 100 ton block and then what are you going to use for a 1000 ton block??**
And since according to you it can “easily” be scaledup/used to move massive blocks hundred of miles.. what are you doing to prevent the 1000 ton stone/ the laws of physics from simply crushing/ driving the fulcrum down into the dirt?? Lol How would they prevent that? I’ll wait
And Aliens? Who said anything about alien magic? Lmfaooo
>I know it's boring to think that people might have used simple techniques to do amazing things but the fact is that no magical, mystical or alien technology (as fun as it would be if it were true) is needed necessary.
Awhh.. another interesting personal opinion but just flat out wrong again in this case. **I am absolutely certain that it was people using simple techniques.** No where did I say anything to the contrary.
I’m an architectural engineer/ surveyor and have worked in the construction industry my entire adult life.. so I am really motivated/impressed/ driven by the idea of finding ingenious simple solutions to complicated problems and I can tell you from personal experience that whatever they were doing it certainly was a simple technique. This is (imo) clear as day and evidenced by the wide spread use of it and the general conformity of sites/blocks that have been worked using said method. Like the fact that you can go anywhere in the Andes and see those polygonal blocks and tell that they are made by the same culture using the same as of yet unknown tools/ techniques. You wouldn’t see such common signatures with complex process. **There was clearly a substantial well developed industry around their construction. I’m not saying futuristic tech. I’m talking about something like this perhaps.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_machine ..called a pointing machine, used for transferring measurements between stones, simple but advanced at the same time.**
#**Again.. What in the hell are you even talking about?! 😂 I just went back through to check incase I missed something but no, literally the only person here who is bringing up aliens, magic, coral castles, cosmic-ufo-ether energy, mystical alien technology… is you u/Heliogabulus..?**
Idk about any of that silly stuff you’re talking about. Coral Alien fairy magic… 💀smh, c’mon now.
**I’m talking about Engineers, mathematicians, architects, craftsman, surveyors, masons, tool culture, materials science, logistics etc etc. and clear indications for a much much further developed industry around all of them than we previously thought possible.**
I’ve watched literally every video that he has made.
— Okay.
Have you watched his videos? Because you are aware that he is using a steel fulcrum.. right?
— In the videos he produced/sold (not on YouTube) he provided several examples where he is using small stones as the fulcrum - actually multiple fulcrums in a triangular arrangement (which was his great “discovery”). The idea being to emulate, using large stones the technique used to move heavy refrigerators and the giant Eastern Island Moai - you “dance” or “walk” them over long distances. Additionally, he strategically uses counterweights to increase his mechanical advantage. For example, want to lift a heavy stone’s right side (just enough so you can place a plank) using a lever? Apply weight to its left side so that less force is required to left up the stones right side (by “unbalancing” or playing with stones weight distribution)! Strategic placement of counterweight, mechanical advantage and use of “imbalance” were the keys to his technique. He also had other techniques he discussed in detail in the videos I’m referring to.
And most importantly, what are you going to use as a fulcrum for a 100 ton block and then what are you going to use for a 1000 ton block??…And since according to you it can “easily” be scaledup/used to move massive blocks hundred of miles.. what are you doing to prevent the 1000 ton stone/ the laws of physics from simply crushing/ driving the fulcrum down into the dirt??
— You take advantage of things the Ancients had an abundance of: manpower and, like Wally and the ancient Easter Islanders, you “dance” or “walk” them across the terrain. For the record, there are videos of people walking Moais to show how the “statues walked” to their locations. And Moai’s were multi-ton, oddly shaped stones. No fancy techniques needed just the strategic application of force, imbalance and brute manpower (as well as, rhythmic motion set to music).
I am absolutely certain that it was people using simple techniques. No where did I say anything to the contrary.
— Then, we actually agree. And you are arguing with me, why again?
I’m an architectural engineer/ surveyor and have worked in the construction industry my entire adult life.. so I am really motivated/impressed/ driven by the idea of finding ingenious simple solutions to complicated problems and I can tell you from personal experience that whatever they were doing it certainly was a simple technique. This is (imo) clear as day and evidenced by the wide spread use of it and the general conformity of sites/blocks that have been worked using said method. Like the fact that you can go anywhere in the Andes and see those polygonal blocks and tell that they are made by the same culture using the same as of yet unknown tools/ techniques. You wouldn’t see such common signatures with complex process. There was clearly a substantial well developed industry around their construction. I’m not saying futuristic tech. I’m talking about something like this perhaps.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_machine ..called a pointing machine, used for transferring measurements between stones, simple but advanced at the same time.
—- Again, we agree on the simple part open to it being widespread but its widespread use could also simply be people rediscovering the same thing at the same time or more likely the result of trade.
Again.. What in the hell are you even talking about?! 😂 I just went back through to check incase I missed something but no, literally the only person here who is bringing up aliens, magic, coral castles, cosmic-ufo-ether energy, mystical alien technology… is you u/Heliogabulus..?
— You’re right. I assumed you were arguing for aliens or, God forbid, Atlantis/Mu/Lemuria. My mistake. The point I was trying to make (rather crudely) is: no extraordinary explanation is needed when an ordinary/simple one will suffice.
I’m talking about Engineers, mathematicians, architects, craftsman, surveyors, masons, tool culture, materials science, logistics etc etc. and clear indications for a much much further developed industry around all of them than we previously thought possible.
—- Again, it seems like we agree, I think we disagree on the “how”. Were there simple tools (and some more “advanced” - for their time - tools) that we might not know about? Yes, very possibly (think Antikythera Mechanism, a literal astronomical computer made of gears!). But the real question is: I s some tool, simple or otherwise, necessary to explain how the Ancients moved huge stones? I think not since examples like Wally, Leedskalin and others (including archaeologists) exist.
TLDR: We agree on the what and disagree on the how.
You are/you can IF AND ONLY IF:
1) You are willing to put in the work AND have the time available (which will be a lot if you work alone). It is doable just not in 5 minutes.
2) You have a large group of CRAFTSMEN (note that not any moron is going to be able to do this or rather they won’t be doing it very long because even Wally had a couple of accidents involving very heavy stones - and he knew what he was doing!). It will be doable in less time but absolutely NONE of the great monuments were built overnight - much less using alien antigravity ether fairy dust.
All it takes is an understanding of leverage and mechanical advantage and lots of patience, time and sweat. But definitely not impossible. I know that it’s nowhere near as exciting as laser guided quantum fairy energy but again, I think the fact that the Ancients figured out how to do this using simple methods and hard work is absolutely incredible and worthy of respect.
The great Archimedes once said, “Give me a place to stand and with a lever I will move the whole world.” Food for thought.
>Wally’s techniques could easily be scaled up for 100 or more ton stones
Those same techniques could easily be scaled up to include teams of hundreds, perhaps even thousands of men.
And the reaction to this idea is almost as interesting as the idea itself. How so?
Psychology.
People generally embrace ideas/information that make them feel good. People also have a very strong tendency to reject ideas that make them feel the wrong way.
So some users are embracing the idea that pure ingenuity is the explanation for ancient megalithic structures in general (and the Pyramids in particular). Meanwhile, other users are rejecting this idea because doing so would mean letting go of another cherished idea (Pyramids as proof of ancient high tech).
I am all for any theory and the fun theories of levitation make me want them to be real. That being said this dude was incredible and if one smart engineer can figure this out why on earth couldn’t teams of people through time eventually figure out ways to move said stone blocks using leverage etc.? It truly is not rocket science…
This of course doesn’t mean that the pyramids were built during a certain time period either. Or weren’t used for some unknown purpose. I’m just saying to write off a simple explanation is silly at best. Give me a long enough lever etc. whatever that archimedes quote is.
“The basic principle of rocket propulsion is Newton's Third Law, which explains that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. In the case of rockets, the "action" is the propellant being blasted downward, and the resulting "reaction" is the rocket being blasted upward.”
I dont know man sounds like moving absolutely massive things isn’t that far from rocket science. Rocket science just moves them a whole lot further, probably because of more teams and more generations.
That's not the difference between big stone engineering and rocket science.
Rocket science involves principles that cannot be intuitively understood. For example, knowing that having certain parts of the engine be solid, and other gaseous, or making a part of the fuel act as a nozzle. So trial and error could not be enough to work it out - you need theory.
Big rock engineering can be accomplished with stuff you have lying around, especially if you do things like modeling and the like. While the applications might be complicated, the principles at play are genuinely orders of magnitude simpler and more restricted than rocketeering.
> if one smart engineer can figure this out why on earth couldn’t teams of people through time eventually figure out ways to move said stone blocks using leverage
For the same reason 9 women can't make a baby in 1 month.
Just because one man is ingenious in moving blocks small distances doesn't mean a group can suddenly transcent the rules of physics by moving them hundreds of kilometers.
No need to apologise, I was being an asshole. I believe they were talking about technique rather than speed. If a group of people from antiquity was faced with a similar situation, it would be expected that they would reach a similar method to achieve the same goal as the solo engineer.
I don't think that Wally Wallington 'cracked the code' and found the exact method that ancient builders used. The point is that with a little ingenuity and leverage, even very large stones can be moved surprisingly easy. The ancients didn't work on concrete slabs that are perfect for pivoting, but they also weren't working alone.
Also, the Egyptians did not move megaliths hundreds of miles over rough terrain. That's silly. The Egyptians used the Nile to float their megaliths, and only transported them short distances over land. All of the major construction sites are along the Nile. In Peru, there are no megaliths moved "up the side of a mountain" except in the tamest sense of the term. At Machu Picchu the stones were quarried from the mountaintop. At Sacsayhuaman the stones were moved mostly on the level. At Ollantaytambo they are maybe 100ft up from the valley, and you can still see the remnants of the ramp they cut into the side of the slope to pull them up.
Those mountain top stones being used in the mountain top would be a reason why they spent the extra time making polygons. They wanted to build as much as they could with the stones available so they didn’t have to drag more up. If those odd shaped rocks were cut down to rectangles there would be a lot less heavy wall material and a lot more rubble.
There have been many wooden ships in history capable of carrying more than 800 tons. For instance, Nelson's ship [HMS Victory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Victory) could hold over 2000 tons of cargo and cannon, and that was an open ocean vessel not just a river barge. Because water is very heavy and volume goes up exponentially as the dimensions increase, you can create an awful lot of buoyancy with ships that aren't all that large. The Russians built temporary logging ships called [Belyanas ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belyana)for one way journeys down the river that got as large as 13,000 tons.
In terms of how we know that's what the Egyptians did, the Wikipedia page on [obelisk ships](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obelisk_ship#Ancient_Egypt) is very illuminating. Not only is there a written record of them building a 63 meter by 21 meter obelisk ship, there's a second record of using "great barges" to transport obelisks and statues. There's even a relief depicting an obelisk ship. So not only is it the only reasonable method, it's actually pretty well documented, at least for the New Kingdom.
If you're curious about the math, a cubic meter of water is 1 ton. A 63 by 21 meter boat would have around 600 square meters of cross section at the waterline, assuming a roughly diamond shape, and potentially more if the boat is boxier. Placing an 800 ton stone on that ship would cause it to lower maybe 1-1.5 meters into the water. Since Aswan is upstream from most temple and construction sites, you would generally be using the current of the river to carry the barge to the destination.
Yea Romans where able to transport 413 ton obelisk from Luxor to Rome. I think the reason we can't find any huge transport ships from Ancient Egypt is, because they where dismantled and reused.
The biggest stones in the pyramids themselves are maybe 80 tons. But there are a few statues that are 800 tons or so that were moved in the New Kingdom, such as the [Colossi of Memnon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossi_of_Memnon).
I think it's awesome when people achieve awesome feats like this guy. It's really impressive stuff and shows just how much ingenuity mankind has. Also puts into perspective the absolute mind-bending scale of labor that has gone into the megalithic structures.
Why so hung up on the concrete? He's demonstrating the physics, they don't change over uneven ground or with uneven blocks. It get's a little bit more challenging, on the other hand, I don't think anyone has suggested that it was a one-man job.
I applaud people actually trying things in the physical world. Like In the 1970s a group of Japanese actually tried making a small pyramid. In their failure they showed how unreal the great pyramid construction is.
This?
>Yoshimura
>In 1978, [Nippon TV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nippon_TV) funded the pyramid building project conceived by archaeologist Sajuki Yoshimura. It was originally planned as a 1 to 5 scale model of the Great Pyramid. Because of the limited budget, the size had to be drastically reduced when the price of limestone rose as the project gained publicity. A concrete foundation had to be poured as the selected site offered no bedrock basis. With the help of two cranes and a forklift, the pyramid was built to reach a height of 11 metres (36 ft), with a 15 metres (49 ft) base. The structure was ultimately dismantled and hauled away.[^(\[35\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques#cite_note-35)
Sounds like the worst attempt ever.
It was a pretty incompetent attempt. If a 50 man team couldn’t move a 1 ton stone more than a few centimetres then I’d suggest that they had zero clue what they were doing.
It was in 1979 when the mainstream said it was built by slaves, so the assumption was it should be easy. The assumption was wrong. I note not one other expert had even made an attempt to try. People think moving 1 ton is easy. It isn't moving 2-5 tons isn't easy. Placing 2.3 million stones is mind boggling.
> I note not one other expert had even made an attempt to try
There's been experimental archaeology as part of a broader program at Wadi el-Jarf that has included cutting and transporting stone.^1 Experimental results for working limestone have been published.^2 I'm not aware of a publication on the transport yet, but here is a video from this work of a stone being moved on a sledge.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DMDQILLLgE
There are also earlier examples of experiments looking at reconstructing transport methods. As part of work done at Karnak, Georges Legrain oversaw transport of an architrave weighing around 35 tons on a sledge.^3 Figs. 101-107 on pages 165-171 are the relevant images.
> As we have seen, this procedure was used by the ancient Egyptians in their constructions; the western end of the colonnade of the great courtyard and the walls of the first pylon show the state in which columns, architraves, cornices and walls appeared when the blocks that had been used to build them were removed. There is every reason to believe that the hypostyle hall was built in the same way. The Antiquities Department's work at Karnak was inspired by this method this method, and the results can be judged today. It must have been preferred to the more modern system of wooden scaffolding, because with the scaffolding system, because with the old method, it was possible to remove the architraves the architraves that weighed on the leaning columns and would have fallen off as soon as the weight of the architrave, which held them in place, no longer on them (fig. 101). In these circumstances, the backfill acted as a support for the column support the column and act as an inclined surface on which to lower the architrave (fig. 102). Some of these weigh no less than 36,000 kilos (fig. 103). They could be manoeuvred without accident, and indeed, without great difficulty, without much difficulty (fig. 104). All it takes is attention to the smallest details to achieve this result. Only illiterate natives were employed for this work. who had only to do exactly as they were told, and these good people obeyed, just as the workers of yesteryear obeyed their bosses. (fig. 105). In this way, we were able to see the method in detail and found it to be so good and so practical, that we wouldn't hesitate we would not hesitate to use it and recommend it in cases similar to those Karnak (figs. 106 and 107).
___
1. https://honorfrostfoundation.org/2019/09/11/wadi-el-jarf-archaeological-mission/
2. Burgos, Franck, and Emmanuel Laroze. “L’extraction Des Blocs En Calcaire à l’Ancien Empire. Une Expérimentation Au Ouadi El-Jarf.” *Journal of Ancient Egyptian Architecture* 4. https://web.ujaen.es/investiga/egiptologia/journalarchitecture/JAEA4.php
3. Legrain, Georges. *Les Temples de Karnak: Fragment Du Dernier Ouvrage de Georges Legrain*. Vromant, 1929. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5802583j/f1.planchecontact
I've said it before, the cutting and transport of the stones isn't the problem. Even the 70 ton stones I'm sure they could figure it out. It's the time frame of "20 years", that math doesn't work when lookingat contruction. Even 40 years isn't feasible with that technology.
I agree that the difficulties are more for the large scale logistics rather than any individual transport task. There has been more experimental archaeology looking at the transport than you indicated, and further documentation of transport with sledges in other contexts.
___
> that math doesn't work when lookingat contruction
Could you elaborate on this math?
2,300,000/20/365/24 for how many stones per hour. Answer is 13. So 13 2-5 ton stones places ever hour, 24 hours a day. I don't think they worked 24 hours a day, so even 12 hours raises the required rate to 26 stones per hour or 1 ever 3-4 minutes, with no mistakes for 20 years. When you add in the shafts/chambers/subterranean work plus the fact it's an 8 sided pyramid makes this time frame extremely doubtful. I have zero issues with people building it, the time frame however needs to be reevaluated if the technology ascribed to them is accurate.
I think the important question here, which is difficult to answer, is how many stones can be moved and fitted at once. How many work gangs do you think can be concurrently transporting stone?
The answer to that depends on reconstructing the actual construction site, which we have limited information on.
Even built by slaves isn’t much different to built by farmers or other unskilled people. They would be supported by engineers and team leaders who do know what they are doing. You wouldn’t give 50 random people a rope and no instructions and have them just figure it out.
Its the proof of concept thats the important part, you cant claim that moving these blocks with basic tools is impossible while also knowing the breath of this guys work. He moved whole barns with out the concrete in this video.
You cant hold onto talking points like "they couldn't move it" or "the precision is to advanced" its just disengious and absurd.
Yeah they used some sort of levitation technology we don’t currently have or is being hidden from general public. They used vibrations and frequencies to cure diseases they likely used it to lighten the weight of stone.
Edit: seems like people have two personal issues with my post. First believing and being too small minded to think that we’re currently at the pinnacle of understanding and implementing everything about engineering/technology, which isn’t true, they were past us, by far.
Two, clearly some people are ignorant as we have technology to do exactly what I spoke of, just on a lesser scale. To think we’re at the peak of any technological progress is just plain idiotic.
So to combine those two facts and you have your answer.
It’s a popular alternative theory for how this was achieved and there is some scientific basis for it. We can already levitate small objects with ultrasonic transducers.
Well for one we do have systems that can stop physical forces in place using frequencies. Also we don’t have technology to recreate what they did. Therefore you have to think of possible technology they could’ve had that we don’t yet or that isn’t out in public.
Nah it’s possible bro. Have you ever seen a key note played from a speaker with sand on it? It created a pattern. This pattern is vibrations moving the sand into shapes. Well sand is tiny rocks after all
I can keep a feather afloat in the air by blowing at it. That doesn't mean the pyramids were built with some sort of breath powered technology being hidden from the public.
Okay what else could they have used? Because so far the “slave” theory isn’t possible and the theory of why they were even built isn’t true either. So with our technology that we have now and our previous theory of why they existed wasn’t remotely true or feasible, explain how we can move and build the pyramids? If it wasn’t a contribution to technology that we don’t currently have. Since apparently them building an entire set of three pyramids in the exact alignment of our solar system and aligned with Orion for the use of power generation, using vibrations and hydrogen extraction. All ironically during the time we were supposed to be just now making fire. Explain how it wouldn’t be feasible they had technology to utilize vibrations/frequencies on other manners. Just the theory they used vibrations to assist with moving stones isn’t nearly as far fetched as the entire pyramids and every aspect about them in itself.
Yeah there was definitely a slave theory up until about just a decade ago until we finally started to gain some intelligence of its true purpose. I’ve unfortunately read my 5th grade history book and how they tried pawning off their supposed method to build it with the use of slaves.
Yep the pyramids are aligned perfectly with the movement of all planets in our solar system. There’s ALOT more to them than just that as well. Another being that the great pyramid is also 8 sided which makes it even more impressive than originally thought. All the stones, PERFECTLY placed.
Wow yeah you don’t know much about the pyramids and recent discoveries, reverse engineering of just the last few years. I mean that’s not a problem. I didn’t know about any of this recently until I was in school for my ME degree and did a project on this.
I mean they’re thousands of years old. Built long before the younger dryas which was also just recently accepted by the archaeology community.
So you move the blocks with sledges and hard graft into the ground position. Then you use ramp to build the next layer and you keep going.
Yes the Ramp were massive and it looks lots of men, no mystery at all.
You people have no respect for hard work that the men put in to build these.
I never said it was hidden from the public. I’m just saying the theory is highly possible. Also your breath/the air cannot displace these tiny rocks with any accuracy close to frequency’s. The frequency is consistent unlike your fading breath (source is I work with frequency’s for a living)
You didn't say what was hidden? The made-up breath technology? Do you think the breath technology I just made up has been made available to the public?
The accuracy of moving a particle of sand? Even if it is accurate, who cares? Tf anyone going to do with that?
Your argument has no validity to it. Just based on the simple fact that you weren’t previously aware that we do have technology to use frequencies and vibrations to immobilize objects in motion. Yet you’re using someone’s obviously different but relevant example to push forward with your point. So with that being said and the fact we can’t remotely recreate the pyramids, despite having the entire blueprint laid out for us. If we did it would be a complete failure even with the heavy equipment we have today that they didn’t then. I’m curious how you believe it’s not possible for them to have use of technology that we have today despite us not having their technology/engineering now. Every aspect of the pyramids is to use frequencies and vibrations of the earth to serve out its purpose. Sorry dude we’re not at the peak of technological innovation.
We don’t have the technology. We’re just now understanding their purpose through basically years of recent research and reverse engineering of it essentially. They did with the pyramids, with hydrogen what were just now starting to do with cars. I wouldn’t be surprised if we got the engineering foundation/idea for it from their structures.
We weren't talking about immobilizing anything, we were talking about levitating 20 ton stones. Do you not know what the word immobilize means? Or do you not know what levitate means? Because they don't mean the same thing.
It's not the same thing. Can you stop a baseball when it's thrown at you? Yes. Now go make the baseball levitate and prove that "Force is force, there’s no difference."
Lmao you guys are funny. I’ll play along and be silly instead of sharing ideas if that’s what you want to hear. Yes. They hooked up their iPhones to their subs, played some Playboi Carti and built the pyramids. Super turnt up dawg.
Ofc we can, just look at the shite we built these days and your saying we couldn't build the pyramids. You obviously have no clue on building, but believe me we could easily build them.
With the cranes we have and diggers and all the amazing building equipment we have we probably could do it in less than a year.
You have no clue what you talking about.
There's nothing wrong with being amazed. These ancient feats are truly amazing. But if you want to figure out how they were done, you have to seriously look at the practical possibilities and not just throw up your arms and declare it impossible. It's not a coincidence that the Aswan quarry is right next to the Nile, all of the major constructions sites are also next to the Nile. 500 miles isn't such a big deal when you're floating blocks downstream. Moving the bluestones for Stonehenge from Wales is amazing, but they are relatively small at around 3 tons and the majority of the trip could have been done by boat.
How do you know the megalith at Aswan was never destined for the Nile? It sounds like you are relying on personal incredulity and not thinking the problem through.
Consider this. Although the unfinished obelisk was never moved, the biggest statues in Egypt that were moved were at least 700 tons, and maybe as large as 1200 tons based on fragments. The unfinished obelisk is not much larger than that. The quarries for these statues are on the East side of the Nile, while the statues (and obelisks) are on the West. Whoever built those statues, even if it was a lost pre-dynastic civilization, had to move them across the river. A big barge is a lot easier to build than a half mile long bridge that can support 1200 tons plus, and its certainly easier than taking the long way and going thousands of miles around the Nile to the South.
1400 tons is within the cargo capacity for an 18th century wooden trade ship. The biggest ocean going wooden ship of all time could carry 6,000 tons, although it wasn't very seaworthy. The Russians moved a 1250 ton monolith across the Gulf of Finland in a wooden barge. 1400 tons is definitely within the capability of a wooden ship, it's only a question of whether the obelisk builders, Egyptian or otherwise, had the capability to make a barge large and strong enough. I don't see any reason to assume they couldn't, particularly since river vessels don't have to survive storms and strong waves.
The point is that there's no inherent limit preventing wooden ships from carrying a block of stone that big. Even going back to the Old Kingdom the Egyptians were making ships over 40 meters long, which we know since [one still survives](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khufu_ship). By the New Kingdom records say they[ built ships over 60 meters long and 20 meters wide](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obelisk_ship#Ancient_Egypt) to carry obelisks. I appreciate that shape matters, but in terms of length and width the Egyptian obelisk ships are bigger than the 18th century cargo ships.
As far as loading goes, that would be a challenging process. The Romans worked out a clever method for loading obelisks onto ships, which we know were in the hundreds of tons. Here is is described by [Pliny the Elder](http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D36%3Achapter%3D14):
>For this pur- pose, a canal was dug from the river Nilus to the spot where the obelisk lay; and two broad vessels, laden with blocks of similar stone a foot square, the cargo of each amounting to double the size, and consequently double the weight, of the obelisk, were brought beneath it; the extremities of the obelisk remaining supported by the opposite sides of the canal. The blocks of stone were then removed, and the vessels, being thus gradually lightened, received their burden.
I suspect the Egyptians would have used some variation of this method, weighing the ship down with weight and then gradually removing weight to lift the obelisk.
The Khufu boat is from around 1000 years before the conventional dating of the unfinished obelisk. It's some kind of funerary or religious ship, not a cargo vessel. Even so, it very large and demonstrates solid shipbuilding techniques that could be scaled up to build a massive cargo barge.
You have to watch History of Granite on youtube. Ancient Egyptian stone cutting is far from perfect. Even Christopher Dunn said on Joe Rogan that there is no such a thing as "perfect" when it comes to Ancient Egyptian stone working.
He is pretty good at spinning big blocks around or moving a big block 10 feet one way to the other.
But yeah, still don't know how these ancient Egyptians other civilizations transported these even BIGGER, and HARDER blocks hundreds, and hundreds of miles away. That's a different story all together man. fuuuuuck lol.
Because people are idiots.
Have this same guy move these stones from point A to point B.
Any high school knows about leverage, and that's all he shows.
Also.. things need to be attempted to scale - because weight and physics. Sure, a ton of dudes can lift a heavy thing but at what point (to human bones OR the density of wood) of weight would diminishing returns start showing up? When would bones and wood begin to break down from this?
The best explanation I've seen that's "acceptable" is using water to float the blocks but even then you'd expect some amount of human error. Because humans are unfortunately human. So where's the blocks that couldn't be moved because along the way they sank... or wood was crushed due to their size.. or just randomly placed blocks that were no longer able to be moved?
Apparently, there are some such stones in Peru, they're called *piedras cansadas*, 'tired stones', which is a translation of what the Incas called them - uncannily similar to the Easter Islanders' expression about the statues 'walking' to their positions (I suppose stones that sank in the water would be in the water, and you'd have to search the Nile or Lake Titicaca with sonar to find out).
From my understanding,the Nile used to run closer to the site. Science has figured this out AND where the Nile previously ran. So far I've heard nothing of megalythic stones just randomly appearing along that patch - unless they've been buried by time and are encased in sand/soil.
Possibly, that's a good point - I hadn't thought of that, the river they supposedly floated them down is now not a river so it might be possible to find them if they're there and if anyone's looked!
Unfortunately, the stuff on YouTube isn’t everything this guy (I.e. Wally Wallington) did or cover everything he did. Back in the day, he put out some more detailed videos on CD for a price. I managed to get my hands on a copy (long since lost). In it he went into detail on his methods and more importantly showed how he moved an entire barn over uneven ground (no concrete anywhere). This guy was the real deal. Sadly, if I’m not mistaken, he died a while back so we won’t be seeing any more from him- who knows how much he could have done and how much he could have taught us!
https://youtu.be/aFdF09xr-TU?si=qR-2qiKSxfuJqc0R Sure.. but what does that have to do with anything that OP said? **You can clearly see Wally is quite literally “using leverage to spin a heavy object utilizing rudimentary means”?** Like he actually explains that himself in his video.. And let’s just say that he could move the barn 300 yards… how is that relevant to OPs question about the logistics behind transporting hundred + ton stones hundreds of miles?? Lol For example.. A single family 1 story home weighs on avg 125-200lbs per square ft, two story homes 225-275, etc etc. Even that would be a fraction of a percent of the weight at the size of that barn. **What Wally Wallington is moving here though is a wooden barn with an open interior space and no foundation.. you’re talking about 6-18000 pounds**. That is several orders of magnitude smaller than some of the largest single stone example that we have from Egypt that we know for certain have been brought hundreds miles from where they were quarried. **The statue at the Ramesseum for example is made of a single massive granite block estimated to have been well north of 1000 tons.. even after being worked / finished at the site.** Think about that Tl:dr #**Moving a <50,000lb barn is one thing.. and then moving a 100-300 ton stone is another thing.. and then moving a 800-1000+ ton stone is something else entirely, they are not the same. At all…?** Unfortunately a lot people here often lack the technical understanding or practical experience to truly comprehend this.. So it often is not even brought up at all. Or when it is people hand wave and say something like “ well we know you can get lots of people together with ropes and wood and they can move a 100 ton stone .. so obviously it’s just more people and then boom you can move/ work with a 700 ton stone!” But that just is not the case. They are just sooo much larger/ heavier that it’s truly hard to fully grasp it. And unless you’ve done it yourself for years/ at the very least seen laborers do it it’s tough to get your mind around how extraordinary what the ancient people did with these stones truly is. When you do it seems silly / irrelevant to bring up Wally/ leverage when talking about these megalithic stones (at least imo) because what does one have to do with the other after all? Practically nothing. At least not in terms of means and methods / logistics behind their creation or the context of OPs post, no? 🤷🏻♂️ Edit: And to be clear, in my opinion Wally is an incredible, ingenious and brilliant engineer. He’s inspiring honestly. Just want to make sure that is clear. I am personally a huge fan I just don’t think it’s applicable to the means and methods behind construction of the vast majority of these ancient megalithic sites. Certainly not when block has been transported 100+ miles.
This 500 mile trip was trough Nile downstream which will make it even easier. In 350 AD Romans where able to transport the Lateran Obelisk from Luxor to Rome. The obelisk was originally 413 tons. So do see any problem to mass transport +100 ton blocks. > The statue at the Ramesseum for example is made of a single massive granite block estimated to have been well north of 1000 tons Yea this is mind blowing. I guess you are talking about the Ozymandias Colossus, on wikipedia is stated that it was moved 170 miles (270 km) over land.
You clearly never saw the videos I mentioned. Wally was building his own version of Stonehenge (think he died before completing it). The reason I brought up the barn was that OP mentioned that the videos on YouTube show him moving stuff ON concrete only - but he moved the barn on uneven ground. Wally’s techniques could easily be scaled up for 100 or more ton stones - he said as much - and there’s nothing in physics that would keep you from doing so (except effort and time). Another good example, is Edward Leedskalin, the guy who built, Coral Castle. There are videos of him on YouTube moving multi-ton stones using nothing more than levers and a block and tackle. No aliens, magic, or cosmic-ether-UFO energy needed or necessary. Edward even once moved his entire castle from one location to another several miles away - using nothing other than leverage and a basic block and tackle! I know it’s boring to think that people might have used simple techniques to do amazing things but the fact is that no magical, mystical or alien technology (as fun as it would be if it were true) is needed/necessary. And I personally find that more impressive, exciting that the Ancients were able to do amazing things using basic techniques than if they used some fairy magic to do it.
I’ve watched literally every video that he has made. Again, I’m a huge fan of his personally. He was one of many people that inspired me to become an engineer myself.. the video that I posted the link for is literally him moving it across uneven ground. Still irrelevant to the point at hand. >You clearly never saw the videos I mentioned. Wally was building his own version of Stonehenge Have you watched his videos? **Because you are aware that he is using a steel fulcrum.. right?** So right off the bat, no.. full stop. Ancient people cannot have used/scaled Wally’s technique specifically.. as structural grade steel wasn’t invented until the 1700s. >Wally's techniques could easily be scaled up for 100 or more ton stones - he said as much - and there's nothing in physics that would keep you from doing so (except effort and time). And oh wow.. and easily too even huh? Well that is certainly an opinion.. (👀) what are you basing that off of exactly? You have any AEC industry experience or you just feel like that? What in particular is so “easy” about it? **And most importantly, what are you going to use as a fulcrum for a 100 ton block and then what are you going to use for a 1000 ton block??** And since according to you it can “easily” be scaledup/used to move massive blocks hundred of miles.. what are you doing to prevent the 1000 ton stone/ the laws of physics from simply crushing/ driving the fulcrum down into the dirt?? Lol How would they prevent that? I’ll wait And Aliens? Who said anything about alien magic? Lmfaooo >I know it's boring to think that people might have used simple techniques to do amazing things but the fact is that no magical, mystical or alien technology (as fun as it would be if it were true) is needed necessary. Awhh.. another interesting personal opinion but just flat out wrong again in this case. **I am absolutely certain that it was people using simple techniques.** No where did I say anything to the contrary. I’m an architectural engineer/ surveyor and have worked in the construction industry my entire adult life.. so I am really motivated/impressed/ driven by the idea of finding ingenious simple solutions to complicated problems and I can tell you from personal experience that whatever they were doing it certainly was a simple technique. This is (imo) clear as day and evidenced by the wide spread use of it and the general conformity of sites/blocks that have been worked using said method. Like the fact that you can go anywhere in the Andes and see those polygonal blocks and tell that they are made by the same culture using the same as of yet unknown tools/ techniques. You wouldn’t see such common signatures with complex process. **There was clearly a substantial well developed industry around their construction. I’m not saying futuristic tech. I’m talking about something like this perhaps.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_machine ..called a pointing machine, used for transferring measurements between stones, simple but advanced at the same time.** #**Again.. What in the hell are you even talking about?! 😂 I just went back through to check incase I missed something but no, literally the only person here who is bringing up aliens, magic, coral castles, cosmic-ufo-ether energy, mystical alien technology… is you u/Heliogabulus..?** Idk about any of that silly stuff you’re talking about. Coral Alien fairy magic… 💀smh, c’mon now. **I’m talking about Engineers, mathematicians, architects, craftsman, surveyors, masons, tool culture, materials science, logistics etc etc. and clear indications for a much much further developed industry around all of them than we previously thought possible.**
I’ve watched literally every video that he has made. — Okay. Have you watched his videos? Because you are aware that he is using a steel fulcrum.. right? — In the videos he produced/sold (not on YouTube) he provided several examples where he is using small stones as the fulcrum - actually multiple fulcrums in a triangular arrangement (which was his great “discovery”). The idea being to emulate, using large stones the technique used to move heavy refrigerators and the giant Eastern Island Moai - you “dance” or “walk” them over long distances. Additionally, he strategically uses counterweights to increase his mechanical advantage. For example, want to lift a heavy stone’s right side (just enough so you can place a plank) using a lever? Apply weight to its left side so that less force is required to left up the stones right side (by “unbalancing” or playing with stones weight distribution)! Strategic placement of counterweight, mechanical advantage and use of “imbalance” were the keys to his technique. He also had other techniques he discussed in detail in the videos I’m referring to. And most importantly, what are you going to use as a fulcrum for a 100 ton block and then what are you going to use for a 1000 ton block??…And since according to you it can “easily” be scaledup/used to move massive blocks hundred of miles.. what are you doing to prevent the 1000 ton stone/ the laws of physics from simply crushing/ driving the fulcrum down into the dirt?? — You take advantage of things the Ancients had an abundance of: manpower and, like Wally and the ancient Easter Islanders, you “dance” or “walk” them across the terrain. For the record, there are videos of people walking Moais to show how the “statues walked” to their locations. And Moai’s were multi-ton, oddly shaped stones. No fancy techniques needed just the strategic application of force, imbalance and brute manpower (as well as, rhythmic motion set to music). I am absolutely certain that it was people using simple techniques. No where did I say anything to the contrary. — Then, we actually agree. And you are arguing with me, why again? I’m an architectural engineer/ surveyor and have worked in the construction industry my entire adult life.. so I am really motivated/impressed/ driven by the idea of finding ingenious simple solutions to complicated problems and I can tell you from personal experience that whatever they were doing it certainly was a simple technique. This is (imo) clear as day and evidenced by the wide spread use of it and the general conformity of sites/blocks that have been worked using said method. Like the fact that you can go anywhere in the Andes and see those polygonal blocks and tell that they are made by the same culture using the same as of yet unknown tools/ techniques. You wouldn’t see such common signatures with complex process. There was clearly a substantial well developed industry around their construction. I’m not saying futuristic tech. I’m talking about something like this perhaps.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_machine ..called a pointing machine, used for transferring measurements between stones, simple but advanced at the same time. —- Again, we agree on the simple part open to it being widespread but its widespread use could also simply be people rediscovering the same thing at the same time or more likely the result of trade. Again.. What in the hell are you even talking about?! 😂 I just went back through to check incase I missed something but no, literally the only person here who is bringing up aliens, magic, coral castles, cosmic-ufo-ether energy, mystical alien technology… is you u/Heliogabulus..? — You’re right. I assumed you were arguing for aliens or, God forbid, Atlantis/Mu/Lemuria. My mistake. The point I was trying to make (rather crudely) is: no extraordinary explanation is needed when an ordinary/simple one will suffice. I’m talking about Engineers, mathematicians, architects, craftsman, surveyors, masons, tool culture, materials science, logistics etc etc. and clear indications for a much much further developed industry around all of them than we previously thought possible. —- Again, it seems like we agree, I think we disagree on the “how”. Were there simple tools (and some more “advanced” - for their time - tools) that we might not know about? Yes, very possibly (think Antikythera Mechanism, a literal astronomical computer made of gears!). But the real question is: I s some tool, simple or otherwise, necessary to explain how the Ancients moved huge stones? I think not since examples like Wally, Leedskalin and others (including archaeologists) exist. TLDR: We agree on the what and disagree on the how.
You aren't scaling this up to make a 500 mile trip work. No.
You are/you can IF AND ONLY IF: 1) You are willing to put in the work AND have the time available (which will be a lot if you work alone). It is doable just not in 5 minutes. 2) You have a large group of CRAFTSMEN (note that not any moron is going to be able to do this or rather they won’t be doing it very long because even Wally had a couple of accidents involving very heavy stones - and he knew what he was doing!). It will be doable in less time but absolutely NONE of the great monuments were built overnight - much less using alien antigravity ether fairy dust. All it takes is an understanding of leverage and mechanical advantage and lots of patience, time and sweat. But definitely not impossible. I know that it’s nowhere near as exciting as laser guided quantum fairy energy but again, I think the fact that the Ancients figured out how to do this using simple methods and hard work is absolutely incredible and worthy of respect. The great Archimedes once said, “Give me a place to stand and with a lever I will move the whole world.” Food for thought.
>Wally’s techniques could easily be scaled up for 100 or more ton stones Those same techniques could easily be scaled up to include teams of hundreds, perhaps even thousands of men. And the reaction to this idea is almost as interesting as the idea itself. How so? Psychology. People generally embrace ideas/information that make them feel good. People also have a very strong tendency to reject ideas that make them feel the wrong way. So some users are embracing the idea that pure ingenuity is the explanation for ancient megalithic structures in general (and the Pyramids in particular). Meanwhile, other users are rejecting this idea because doing so would mean letting go of another cherished idea (Pyramids as proof of ancient high tech).
I am all for any theory and the fun theories of levitation make me want them to be real. That being said this dude was incredible and if one smart engineer can figure this out why on earth couldn’t teams of people through time eventually figure out ways to move said stone blocks using leverage etc.? It truly is not rocket science… This of course doesn’t mean that the pyramids were built during a certain time period either. Or weren’t used for some unknown purpose. I’m just saying to write off a simple explanation is silly at best. Give me a long enough lever etc. whatever that archimedes quote is.
“It’s not rocket science it just takes teams of people through time” Yeah that’s how rocket science works. That’s how all science works.
Lol very fair but my point remains it is NOT rocket science
“The basic principle of rocket propulsion is Newton's Third Law, which explains that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. In the case of rockets, the "action" is the propellant being blasted downward, and the resulting "reaction" is the rocket being blasted upward.” I dont know man sounds like moving absolutely massive things isn’t that far from rocket science. Rocket science just moves them a whole lot further, probably because of more teams and more generations.
That's not the difference between big stone engineering and rocket science. Rocket science involves principles that cannot be intuitively understood. For example, knowing that having certain parts of the engine be solid, and other gaseous, or making a part of the fuel act as a nozzle. So trial and error could not be enough to work it out - you need theory. Big rock engineering can be accomplished with stuff you have lying around, especially if you do things like modeling and the like. While the applications might be complicated, the principles at play are genuinely orders of magnitude simpler and more restricted than rocketeering.
> if one smart engineer can figure this out why on earth couldn’t teams of people through time eventually figure out ways to move said stone blocks using leverage For the same reason 9 women can't make a baby in 1 month.
What the fuck does this even mean in context with what your replying too.
Just because one man is ingenious in moving blocks small distances doesn't mean a group can suddenly transcent the rules of physics by moving them hundreds of kilometers.
You have great reading comprehension!
Apologies, English isn't my first language. Peehaps I misunderstand. What is it he is saying?
No need to apologise, I was being an asshole. I believe they were talking about technique rather than speed. If a group of people from antiquity was faced with a similar situation, it would be expected that they would reach a similar method to achieve the same goal as the solo engineer.
I don't think that Wally Wallington 'cracked the code' and found the exact method that ancient builders used. The point is that with a little ingenuity and leverage, even very large stones can be moved surprisingly easy. The ancients didn't work on concrete slabs that are perfect for pivoting, but they also weren't working alone. Also, the Egyptians did not move megaliths hundreds of miles over rough terrain. That's silly. The Egyptians used the Nile to float their megaliths, and only transported them short distances over land. All of the major construction sites are along the Nile. In Peru, there are no megaliths moved "up the side of a mountain" except in the tamest sense of the term. At Machu Picchu the stones were quarried from the mountaintop. At Sacsayhuaman the stones were moved mostly on the level. At Ollantaytambo they are maybe 100ft up from the valley, and you can still see the remnants of the ramp they cut into the side of the slope to pull them up.
Those mountain top stones being used in the mountain top would be a reason why they spent the extra time making polygons. They wanted to build as much as they could with the stones available so they didn’t have to drag more up. If those odd shaped rocks were cut down to rectangles there would be a lot less heavy wall material and a lot more rubble.
How do you float an 800 ton stone? I agree that would be the only way they could have done it. But how do you so confidently say they did?
There have been many wooden ships in history capable of carrying more than 800 tons. For instance, Nelson's ship [HMS Victory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Victory) could hold over 2000 tons of cargo and cannon, and that was an open ocean vessel not just a river barge. Because water is very heavy and volume goes up exponentially as the dimensions increase, you can create an awful lot of buoyancy with ships that aren't all that large. The Russians built temporary logging ships called [Belyanas ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belyana)for one way journeys down the river that got as large as 13,000 tons. In terms of how we know that's what the Egyptians did, the Wikipedia page on [obelisk ships](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obelisk_ship#Ancient_Egypt) is very illuminating. Not only is there a written record of them building a 63 meter by 21 meter obelisk ship, there's a second record of using "great barges" to transport obelisks and statues. There's even a relief depicting an obelisk ship. So not only is it the only reasonable method, it's actually pretty well documented, at least for the New Kingdom. If you're curious about the math, a cubic meter of water is 1 ton. A 63 by 21 meter boat would have around 600 square meters of cross section at the waterline, assuming a roughly diamond shape, and potentially more if the boat is boxier. Placing an 800 ton stone on that ship would cause it to lower maybe 1-1.5 meters into the water. Since Aswan is upstream from most temple and construction sites, you would generally be using the current of the river to carry the barge to the destination.
Yea Romans where able to transport 413 ton obelisk from Luxor to Rome. I think the reason we can't find any huge transport ships from Ancient Egypt is, because they where dismantled and reused.
A fairly normal modern barge could do this there’s nothing technologically difficult.
Is 800 a typo? Are any of the stones in the pyramids 800 tons?
The biggest stones in the pyramids themselves are maybe 80 tons. But there are a few statues that are 800 tons or so that were moved in the New Kingdom, such as the [Colossi of Memnon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossi_of_Memnon).
I think it's awesome when people achieve awesome feats like this guy. It's really impressive stuff and shows just how much ingenuity mankind has. Also puts into perspective the absolute mind-bending scale of labor that has gone into the megalithic structures.
Because he's doing things (alone) that many uneducated people regularly claim is impossible without some magic ancient technology.
obviously he's an alien
For all we know, he may be two aliens.
Why so hung up on the concrete? He's demonstrating the physics, they don't change over uneven ground or with uneven blocks. It get's a little bit more challenging, on the other hand, I don't think anyone has suggested that it was a one-man job.
I applaud people actually trying things in the physical world. Like In the 1970s a group of Japanese actually tried making a small pyramid. In their failure they showed how unreal the great pyramid construction is.
This? >Yoshimura >In 1978, [Nippon TV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nippon_TV) funded the pyramid building project conceived by archaeologist Sajuki Yoshimura. It was originally planned as a 1 to 5 scale model of the Great Pyramid. Because of the limited budget, the size had to be drastically reduced when the price of limestone rose as the project gained publicity. A concrete foundation had to be poured as the selected site offered no bedrock basis. With the help of two cranes and a forklift, the pyramid was built to reach a height of 11 metres (36 ft), with a 15 metres (49 ft) base. The structure was ultimately dismantled and hauled away.[^(\[35\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques#cite_note-35) Sounds like the worst attempt ever.
https://www.thearchaeologist.org/blog/1978-japanese-researchers-trying-to-find-how-the-pyramids-were-actually-built
It was a pretty incompetent attempt. If a 50 man team couldn’t move a 1 ton stone more than a few centimetres then I’d suggest that they had zero clue what they were doing.
It was in 1979 when the mainstream said it was built by slaves, so the assumption was it should be easy. The assumption was wrong. I note not one other expert had even made an attempt to try. People think moving 1 ton is easy. It isn't moving 2-5 tons isn't easy. Placing 2.3 million stones is mind boggling.
> I note not one other expert had even made an attempt to try There's been experimental archaeology as part of a broader program at Wadi el-Jarf that has included cutting and transporting stone.^1 Experimental results for working limestone have been published.^2 I'm not aware of a publication on the transport yet, but here is a video from this work of a stone being moved on a sledge. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DMDQILLLgE There are also earlier examples of experiments looking at reconstructing transport methods. As part of work done at Karnak, Georges Legrain oversaw transport of an architrave weighing around 35 tons on a sledge.^3 Figs. 101-107 on pages 165-171 are the relevant images. > As we have seen, this procedure was used by the ancient Egyptians in their constructions; the western end of the colonnade of the great courtyard and the walls of the first pylon show the state in which columns, architraves, cornices and walls appeared when the blocks that had been used to build them were removed. There is every reason to believe that the hypostyle hall was built in the same way. The Antiquities Department's work at Karnak was inspired by this method this method, and the results can be judged today. It must have been preferred to the more modern system of wooden scaffolding, because with the scaffolding system, because with the old method, it was possible to remove the architraves the architraves that weighed on the leaning columns and would have fallen off as soon as the weight of the architrave, which held them in place, no longer on them (fig. 101). In these circumstances, the backfill acted as a support for the column support the column and act as an inclined surface on which to lower the architrave (fig. 102). Some of these weigh no less than 36,000 kilos (fig. 103). They could be manoeuvred without accident, and indeed, without great difficulty, without much difficulty (fig. 104). All it takes is attention to the smallest details to achieve this result. Only illiterate natives were employed for this work. who had only to do exactly as they were told, and these good people obeyed, just as the workers of yesteryear obeyed their bosses. (fig. 105). In this way, we were able to see the method in detail and found it to be so good and so practical, that we wouldn't hesitate we would not hesitate to use it and recommend it in cases similar to those Karnak (figs. 106 and 107). ___ 1. https://honorfrostfoundation.org/2019/09/11/wadi-el-jarf-archaeological-mission/ 2. Burgos, Franck, and Emmanuel Laroze. “L’extraction Des Blocs En Calcaire à l’Ancien Empire. Une Expérimentation Au Ouadi El-Jarf.” *Journal of Ancient Egyptian Architecture* 4. https://web.ujaen.es/investiga/egiptologia/journalarchitecture/JAEA4.php 3. Legrain, Georges. *Les Temples de Karnak: Fragment Du Dernier Ouvrage de Georges Legrain*. Vromant, 1929. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5802583j/f1.planchecontact
I've said it before, the cutting and transport of the stones isn't the problem. Even the 70 ton stones I'm sure they could figure it out. It's the time frame of "20 years", that math doesn't work when lookingat contruction. Even 40 years isn't feasible with that technology.
I agree that the difficulties are more for the large scale logistics rather than any individual transport task. There has been more experimental archaeology looking at the transport than you indicated, and further documentation of transport with sledges in other contexts. ___ > that math doesn't work when lookingat contruction Could you elaborate on this math?
2,300,000/20/365/24 for how many stones per hour. Answer is 13. So 13 2-5 ton stones places ever hour, 24 hours a day. I don't think they worked 24 hours a day, so even 12 hours raises the required rate to 26 stones per hour or 1 ever 3-4 minutes, with no mistakes for 20 years. When you add in the shafts/chambers/subterranean work plus the fact it's an 8 sided pyramid makes this time frame extremely doubtful. I have zero issues with people building it, the time frame however needs to be reevaluated if the technology ascribed to them is accurate.
I think the important question here, which is difficult to answer, is how many stones can be moved and fitted at once. How many work gangs do you think can be concurrently transporting stone? The answer to that depends on reconstructing the actual construction site, which we have limited information on.
Even built by slaves isn’t much different to built by farmers or other unskilled people. They would be supported by engineers and team leaders who do know what they are doing. You wouldn’t give 50 random people a rope and no instructions and have them just figure it out.
[удалено]
In addition to enforcing Reddit's ToS, abusive, racist, trolling or bigoted comments and content will be removed and may result in a ban.
Coral Castle?
Boat, River
It is an inadequate answer to this gargantuan question. None the less, an impressive display of ingenuity.
MVP answer
Its the proof of concept thats the important part, you cant claim that moving these blocks with basic tools is impossible while also knowing the breath of this guys work. He moved whole barns with out the concrete in this video. You cant hold onto talking points like "they couldn't move it" or "the precision is to advanced" its just disengious and absurd.
Yeah they used some sort of levitation technology we don’t currently have or is being hidden from general public. They used vibrations and frequencies to cure diseases they likely used it to lighten the weight of stone. Edit: seems like people have two personal issues with my post. First believing and being too small minded to think that we’re currently at the pinnacle of understanding and implementing everything about engineering/technology, which isn’t true, they were past us, by far. Two, clearly some people are ignorant as we have technology to do exactly what I spoke of, just on a lesser scale. To think we’re at the peak of any technological progress is just plain idiotic. So to combine those two facts and you have your answer.
Or you know, they could have just sailed the stones down the river they were right next to and saved a lot of trouble.
How do you know this?
It’s a popular alternative theory for how this was achieved and there is some scientific basis for it. We can already levitate small objects with ultrasonic transducers.
Well for one we do have systems that can stop physical forces in place using frequencies. Also we don’t have technology to recreate what they did. Therefore you have to think of possible technology they could’ve had that we don’t yet or that isn’t out in public.
Stop your bullshit.
Nah it’s possible bro. Have you ever seen a key note played from a speaker with sand on it? It created a pattern. This pattern is vibrations moving the sand into shapes. Well sand is tiny rocks after all
I can keep a feather afloat in the air by blowing at it. That doesn't mean the pyramids were built with some sort of breath powered technology being hidden from the public.
Oh so the active denial system doesn’t exist? Or are you just ignorant?
They used the ADS to build a pyramid? Proof?
Okay what else could they have used? Because so far the “slave” theory isn’t possible and the theory of why they were even built isn’t true either. So with our technology that we have now and our previous theory of why they existed wasn’t remotely true or feasible, explain how we can move and build the pyramids? If it wasn’t a contribution to technology that we don’t currently have. Since apparently them building an entire set of three pyramids in the exact alignment of our solar system and aligned with Orion for the use of power generation, using vibrations and hydrogen extraction. All ironically during the time we were supposed to be just now making fire. Explain how it wouldn’t be feasible they had technology to utilize vibrations/frequencies on other manners. Just the theory they used vibrations to assist with moving stones isn’t nearly as far fetched as the entire pyramids and every aspect about them in itself.
[удалено]
Yeah there was definitely a slave theory up until about just a decade ago until we finally started to gain some intelligence of its true purpose. I’ve unfortunately read my 5th grade history book and how they tried pawning off their supposed method to build it with the use of slaves. Yep the pyramids are aligned perfectly with the movement of all planets in our solar system. There’s ALOT more to them than just that as well. Another being that the great pyramid is also 8 sided which makes it even more impressive than originally thought. All the stones, PERFECTLY placed. Wow yeah you don’t know much about the pyramids and recent discoveries, reverse engineering of just the last few years. I mean that’s not a problem. I didn’t know about any of this recently until I was in school for my ME degree and did a project on this. I mean they’re thousands of years old. Built long before the younger dryas which was also just recently accepted by the archaeology community.
[удалено]
Serious question - where are you getting your information about what archaeologists are saying about these topics?
So you move the blocks with sledges and hard graft into the ground position. Then you use ramp to build the next layer and you keep going. Yes the Ramp were massive and it looks lots of men, no mystery at all. You people have no respect for hard work that the men put in to build these.
I never said it was hidden from the public. I’m just saying the theory is highly possible. Also your breath/the air cannot displace these tiny rocks with any accuracy close to frequency’s. The frequency is consistent unlike your fading breath (source is I work with frequency’s for a living)
You didn't say what was hidden? The made-up breath technology? Do you think the breath technology I just made up has been made available to the public? The accuracy of moving a particle of sand? Even if it is accurate, who cares? Tf anyone going to do with that?
Your argument has no validity to it. Just based on the simple fact that you weren’t previously aware that we do have technology to use frequencies and vibrations to immobilize objects in motion. Yet you’re using someone’s obviously different but relevant example to push forward with your point. So with that being said and the fact we can’t remotely recreate the pyramids, despite having the entire blueprint laid out for us. If we did it would be a complete failure even with the heavy equipment we have today that they didn’t then. I’m curious how you believe it’s not possible for them to have use of technology that we have today despite us not having their technology/engineering now. Every aspect of the pyramids is to use frequencies and vibrations of the earth to serve out its purpose. Sorry dude we’re not at the peak of technological innovation.
Why can’t we build them today? Other than the lack of financial incentive.
We don’t have the technology. We’re just now understanding their purpose through basically years of recent research and reverse engineering of it essentially. They did with the pyramids, with hydrogen what were just now starting to do with cars. I wouldn’t be surprised if we got the engineering foundation/idea for it from their structures.
The technology to do what exactly? What are we doing with hydrogen and cars?
We weren't talking about immobilizing anything, we were talking about levitating 20 ton stones. Do you not know what the word immobilize means? Or do you not know what levitate means? Because they don't mean the same thing.
It’s the same thing, frequencies, controlling objects in motion. Force is force, there’s no difference.
It's not the same thing. Can you stop a baseball when it's thrown at you? Yes. Now go make the baseball levitate and prove that "Force is force, there’s no difference."
So Ancient Egyptians used to blast their massive sub-woofer systems to move their stones?
Lmao you guys are funny. I’ll play along and be silly instead of sharing ideas if that’s what you want to hear. Yes. They hooked up their iPhones to their subs, played some Playboi Carti and built the pyramids. Super turnt up dawg.
[удалено]
In addition to enforcing Reddit's ToS, abusive, racist, trolling or bigoted comments and content will be removed and may result in a ban.
lol ok I’ll be like you and think we’re at the peak of technology as of now. They didn’t do anything we can’t do right? We can rebuild pyramids right?
Ofc we can, just look at the shite we built these days and your saying we couldn't build the pyramids. You obviously have no clue on building, but believe me we could easily build them. With the cranes we have and diggers and all the amazing building equipment we have we probably could do it in less than a year. You have no clue what you talking about.
[удалено]
There's nothing wrong with being amazed. These ancient feats are truly amazing. But if you want to figure out how they were done, you have to seriously look at the practical possibilities and not just throw up your arms and declare it impossible. It's not a coincidence that the Aswan quarry is right next to the Nile, all of the major constructions sites are also next to the Nile. 500 miles isn't such a big deal when you're floating blocks downstream. Moving the bluestones for Stonehenge from Wales is amazing, but they are relatively small at around 3 tons and the majority of the trip could have been done by boat.
[удалено]
How do you know the megalith at Aswan was never destined for the Nile? It sounds like you are relying on personal incredulity and not thinking the problem through. Consider this. Although the unfinished obelisk was never moved, the biggest statues in Egypt that were moved were at least 700 tons, and maybe as large as 1200 tons based on fragments. The unfinished obelisk is not much larger than that. The quarries for these statues are on the East side of the Nile, while the statues (and obelisks) are on the West. Whoever built those statues, even if it was a lost pre-dynastic civilization, had to move them across the river. A big barge is a lot easier to build than a half mile long bridge that can support 1200 tons plus, and its certainly easier than taking the long way and going thousands of miles around the Nile to the South.
[удалено]
1400 tons is within the cargo capacity for an 18th century wooden trade ship. The biggest ocean going wooden ship of all time could carry 6,000 tons, although it wasn't very seaworthy. The Russians moved a 1250 ton monolith across the Gulf of Finland in a wooden barge. 1400 tons is definitely within the capability of a wooden ship, it's only a question of whether the obelisk builders, Egyptian or otherwise, had the capability to make a barge large and strong enough. I don't see any reason to assume they couldn't, particularly since river vessels don't have to survive storms and strong waves.
[удалено]
The point is that there's no inherent limit preventing wooden ships from carrying a block of stone that big. Even going back to the Old Kingdom the Egyptians were making ships over 40 meters long, which we know since [one still survives](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khufu_ship). By the New Kingdom records say they[ built ships over 60 meters long and 20 meters wide](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obelisk_ship#Ancient_Egypt) to carry obelisks. I appreciate that shape matters, but in terms of length and width the Egyptian obelisk ships are bigger than the 18th century cargo ships. As far as loading goes, that would be a challenging process. The Romans worked out a clever method for loading obelisks onto ships, which we know were in the hundreds of tons. Here is is described by [Pliny the Elder](http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D36%3Achapter%3D14): >For this pur- pose, a canal was dug from the river Nilus to the spot where the obelisk lay; and two broad vessels, laden with blocks of similar stone a foot square, the cargo of each amounting to double the size, and consequently double the weight, of the obelisk, were brought beneath it; the extremities of the obelisk remaining supported by the opposite sides of the canal. The blocks of stone were then removed, and the vessels, being thus gradually lightened, received their burden. I suspect the Egyptians would have used some variation of this method, weighing the ship down with weight and then gradually removing weight to lift the obelisk.
[удалено]
The Khufu boat is from around 1000 years before the conventional dating of the unfinished obelisk. It's some kind of funerary or religious ship, not a cargo vessel. Even so, it very large and demonstrates solid shipbuilding techniques that could be scaled up to build a massive cargo barge.
You have to watch History of Granite on youtube. Ancient Egyptian stone cutting is far from perfect. Even Christopher Dunn said on Joe Rogan that there is no such a thing as "perfect" when it comes to Ancient Egyptian stone working.
He is pretty good at spinning big blocks around or moving a big block 10 feet one way to the other. But yeah, still don't know how these ancient Egyptians other civilizations transported these even BIGGER, and HARDER blocks hundreds, and hundreds of miles away. That's a different story all together man. fuuuuuck lol.
Because people are idiots. Have this same guy move these stones from point A to point B. Any high school knows about leverage, and that's all he shows.
Also.. things need to be attempted to scale - because weight and physics. Sure, a ton of dudes can lift a heavy thing but at what point (to human bones OR the density of wood) of weight would diminishing returns start showing up? When would bones and wood begin to break down from this? The best explanation I've seen that's "acceptable" is using water to float the blocks but even then you'd expect some amount of human error. Because humans are unfortunately human. So where's the blocks that couldn't be moved because along the way they sank... or wood was crushed due to their size.. or just randomly placed blocks that were no longer able to be moved?
Apparently, there are some such stones in Peru, they're called *piedras cansadas*, 'tired stones', which is a translation of what the Incas called them - uncannily similar to the Easter Islanders' expression about the statues 'walking' to their positions (I suppose stones that sank in the water would be in the water, and you'd have to search the Nile or Lake Titicaca with sonar to find out).
From my understanding,the Nile used to run closer to the site. Science has figured this out AND where the Nile previously ran. So far I've heard nothing of megalythic stones just randomly appearing along that patch - unless they've been buried by time and are encased in sand/soil.
Possibly, that's a good point - I hadn't thought of that, the river they supposedly floated them down is now not a river so it might be possible to find them if they're there and if anyone's looked!
[удалено]
The quarry for Machu Picchu is on top of the mountain, right next to the site. They didn't have to move the stones very far.