Traces of concrete in the Egyptian pyramids. The secret of the Egyptian pyramids
Seeing the controversy about the construction of the pyramids, one involuntarily comes to the conclusion about how little the supporters of the so-called alternative history know about Ancient Egypt. Alas, semi-literate hamsters with iPhones and burning tour packages to Egypt only add fuel to the fire. They photograph things they don't understand and don't even try to understand. All their knowledge is limited to a tourist guide. And so people who do not distinguish the Old Kingdom from the Middle Kingdom and confuse Ramses II with Senusret III begin to draw "significant" conclusions based on their kitchen logic, office knowledge and pictures from a school textbook that historians and scientists are lying. Let me try to dispel some misconceptions.
Egypt during the construction of the pyramids. This is the era of the Old Kingdom (28-23 centuries BC) - one of the few first civilizations of the Bronze Age among the barbarians. Others were the Sumerians in Mesopotamia and the Harappans in Punjab. After a long bloody struggle, many small city-states were united under the rule of one king-pharaoh. To make their power legitimate, the pharaohs assigned themselves a divine status, created a bureaucratic apparatus, an army (the arsenals of bronze weapons belonged to the pharaoh) and put the country under their control. The will of the pharaoh at that time was not limited to anything. Military campaigns made it possible to rob neighbors and increase the flow of copper and tin into Egypt, which were strategic materials at that time. Bronze was also enough for household tools, but they were in the minority - stone and wooden tools were used throughout the entire period of Ancient Egypt. The pharaoh's officials controlled the population literally - everything was recorded in the documents: to whom how much of what was given out and how much was produced. Moreover, the pharaohs appropriated all the arable land in private ownership. The pharaohs distributed the lands as a reward to nobles and temples. The population of Egypt was subject to taxes and duties, including for the construction of public buildings and canals. The peasant did not have any rights - the ancient peasant communities slowly lost their importance, lost their rights and fell under the rule of the pharaoh and nobles. The peasant had to work meekly and praise the gods and the pharaoh, otherwise any official could beat him with a stick.
What technology did the Egyptians of that time possess? They ideally worked with stone (they had a thousand years of experience), made ceramics, and mastered metallurgy. From the Stone Age, the Egyptians received and developed the technology of drilling, including stone, leather, bone, and wood processing. They knew the fermentation process for making bread and beer. The Egyptians used the full range of materials available to them, down to bird feathers and guts. It should be remembered that Egypt, in addition to stone, was in short supply in everything, including wood, so reed was widely used, which was plentiful (they made from mats and baskets to ships, not to mention writing material - papyrus). There was no lack of clay either. The Egyptians knew how to make glazed ceramics - faience. They knew how to make various paints and varnishes. The Egyptians did not know any super-technologies - they simply perfectly mastered the technologies available to them, which hamsters with iPhones are not even able to understand.
Slaves did not build pyramids. One of the most stupid statements of alternatively gifted comrades is that historians allegedly tell them about the construction of the pyramids by thousands of slaves. There is clearly a gap in knowledge here. The alternatives demonstrate their ignorance by attributing false statements to historians. It is very convenient: he himself came up with nonsense - he himself refuted it.
In fact, Egypt slavery at that time was patriarchal, that is, slaves were used in the household. There were not many slaves, mostly women. The pyramids were built by the most ordinary Egyptian peasants. Construction usually took 3-4 months during the flood of the Nile, when the peasants had nothing to do. Construction work was a kind of coven for the peasants, because they received food rations for their work. It is clear that the annual work, willy-nilly, developed their professional qualities. Therefore, by the time of the construction of the Great Pyramids in Egypt, there were enough professional builders. The stone blocks themselves were cut down by professional teams of stonemasons who worked for the state for food, clothing and beer (there was no money at that time). It can be assumed that private orders were also carried out for the tombs of nobles. All the peasants of Egypt knew how to make bricks.
The construction was overseen by officials appointed by the pharaoh. It is difficult to say how much they understood mathematics and geometry, but there were specialists who were able to calculate the area of \u200b\u200bthe base and the angle of inclination. True, sometimes they were wrong. So the pyramids of Pharaoh Snefru (2613-2589 BC) turned out to be defective: Egyptologists called one "broken", and on the second "pink" the architects messed up with measuring the angle of inclination.
Bent Pyramid at Dahshur.
"Pink" pyramid.
Therefore, by the time of the IV dynasty, whose pharaohs built the Great Pyramids, the Egyptians had accumulated experience and knowledge for such grandiose construction projects. Cheops, Mikerin and Khafre only used all the resources of their state and eventually undermined the economy of Egypt and the foundations of the power of their dynasty, when the priests of the god Ra in Heliopolis eventually seized power.
Pyramids built from 10-50 ton blocks. Another lie that alternative comrades feed gullible readers. This is understandable, because the drawings from children's books paint truly terrible pictures, where half-naked people drag huge blocks down the slope.
Something like this is how alternatives stigmatize historians.
In fact, these are nightmares from ignorance. In fact, large blocks are only at the base of the pyramid. The higher the pyramid was, the smaller the blocks became. Here is a photo of the upper tiers of the Cheops pyramid - pay attention to the pigeons for scale. The height of the block is 45-50 cm, that is, the Egyptians had saws to cut blocks of this size.
Horrors about the middle blocks of the Cheops pyramid of 2.5 tons came from an outstanding English Egyptologist of the 19th century. F. Petri, who made the calculations on the pyramid. At the same time, for some reason, he calculated the mass of sandstone as 2.2 tons per cubic meter. m., although in fact - 1.7 tons per cubic meter. m. The weight of limestone is 1.6 tons per cubic meter. m. It is from these rocks that the pyramids were built. The volume of the Petri block was calculated at 1.14 cubic meters. m. As you can see, in fact, the average block did not even reach 2 tons. But many blocks are less than a cubic meter. Even the largest blocks of the lower tiers do not reach 5 tons. This is understandable, the masons would not make blocks that the workers could not budge.
It is not difficult to notice that the ancient builders did not particularly bother with the processing of blocks - they cut it somehow and that's enough. Anyway, no one will see them later, since the pyramid will be lined with slabs.
Millions of blocks in the pyramid of Cheops. The myth came from Wikipedia (I don’t know who squeezed this information in there).
The number of blocks of the average volume does not exceed 1.65 million (2.50 million m³ - 0.6 million m³ of rock base inside the pyramid = 1.9 million m³ / 1.147 m³ = 1.65 million blocks of the specified volume can physically fit in the pyramid, without taking into account the volume of the solution in the interblock seams); reference to a 20-year construction period * 300 working days per year * 10 working hours per day * 60 minutes per hour results in a paving (and delivery to the construction site) speed of about a block of two minutes.
Really impressive. In fact, we do not know exactly how many blocks are in the pyramid. The calculations are made speculatively, based on the total volume of the pyramid (minus the voids and the rocky base). In fact, the pyramid may not be entirely monolithic. So, during the excavations of the Palace of Knossos in Crete, archaeologists discovered that the ancient builders of the palace wall, where stone blocks were used, built them with cavities that were clogged with rubble. It can be assumed that this is Egyptian technology. And given that scientists constantly find mysterious voids clogged with sand in the pyramid of Cheops, it is quite possible that the Egyptians saved time and materials with just such cavities, filling them with sand and rubble. And besides, the error in this calculation is that such a thing as a man-hour is not taken into account. Of course, if the workers, lining up in one row, lay one block at a time, then the calculation is correct. This is how an alternatively gifted mind thinks - they simply cannot imagine the organizational abilities of their ancestors. In fact, the construction was grandiose. Dozens, if not hundreds of brigades worked there. So the pyramid was built from all four sides at once by several dozen brigades at the same time.
Cheops did not have time to complete his pyramid - he died before the interior finishing work began. So he was buried in an unfinished tomb, where the working marks of the ancient builders remained on the walls.
Therefore, millions of blocks in the Cheops pyramid is still a big question that is waiting for its solution.
Geopolymer concrete. Well, the most delicious. Alternative gifted individuals, instead of looking for answers, began to invent them. If, in their opinion, pyramids could not be built from stone, then they were cast from concrete. Why it is easier is not clear. The bike about "geopolymer" concrete was thrown by the French chemist of Jewish origin Joseph Davidovich. It is not difficult to look at his site geopolymer.org to understand - Davidovich did a good business, shoeing suckers with tales of ancient geopolymers. Here and the sale of books, lectures, courses, paid of course. It is also not difficult to find out that the mythical Egyptian geopolymers have nothing to do with real geopolymers. In Russia, this bike was picked up by two neo-hrenologists - Fomenko and Nosovsky, already shoeing our suckers.
Geopolymers are materials based on binders of alkaline activation (metakaolin, for example) or on the basis of finely dispersed amorphous or crystalline aluminosilicate materials mixed with solutions of alkalis or salts that have an alkaline reaction (usually solutions of hydroxides, silicates or aluminates of sodium and potassium). In the minds of the alternatively gifted, this is not the case. They have it just a stone crushed into powder, which was diluted with water, after which anything can be made from the mixture - even a block, even a column, even a statue.
The novohrenologists Fomenko and Nosovsky themselves imagine the process as follows:
To obtain primitive concrete, it was enough to grind the rock into a fine powder, remove moisture from it, and then mix it with water. It is easier to use soft rocks, for example, limestone, the outcrops of which are located right on the pyramid field in Egypt. Here it could be taken simply underfoot, next to the pyramids under construction. To obtain cement, moisture must be removed from the rock. But in the conditions of hot and dry Egypt, where it sometimes rains ONCE IN FIVE YEARS, v.15, p.447, special drying was unnecessary. The rock was already quite dry. After grinding, ready-made cement was immediately obtained. If you pour it into a formwork made of boards, fill it with water and mix thoroughly, then after drying, the particles of crushed rock will firmly bond to each other. When the mortar dries, it will turn to stone. Get primitive concrete.
This quote is the whole alternative theory about "geopolymer concrete". Next, adherents of neo-hrenology usually have dozens of photos of supposedly "liquid stone" and supposedly historical insights of alternative brains. I can say one thing, do not actually make such concrete, otherwise such "concrete" will fall apart right before your eyes. Why? Because a component with binding properties must be present in concrete, but alternatively gifted creatures are not aware of this. By itself, crushed limestone or gypsum does not have astringent properties. To do this, they need to be burned. It was because of the labor-intensive manufacturing process that concrete did not become widespread until the advent of the industrial age. It was easier to cut down a stone block than to grind rock into powder, burn it, mix the solution. Machines facilitated and accelerated this process, with the result that concrete displaced stone and brick from construction. But the new Khrenological Chukchi are not builders, but astronomers.
But let's move on to an alternative version of "geopolymer concrete". For some reason, alternative comrades are firmly convinced that it is easier to cast a pyramid from concrete than to build from stone. Consider the process of building from stone: they cut down a stone in a quarry, hewn it, delivered it to the construction site, put it in a pyramid.
Now the process of casting from concrete.
1. They cut down a stone.
2. They crushed the stone into rubble.
3. Crushed rubble into powder.
4. The powder was burned on fire.
5. Fall asleep in bags or baskets.
6. Delivered to the place.
7. We built the formwork.
8. Knead the solution.
9. Waited for the block to dry.
10. Put in a pyramid.
As you can see, this is a longer and more costly way of construction. What are the objections?
1. How and with what was the crushed stone of the herald and sandstone crushed into powder? Some alternative comrades are of the opinion that they say the stone was rubbed on graters by hand. Well, let them try to do it themselves and see how they succeed. And it’s not at all clear how such a trick will work with granite, basalt, diorite or quartzite. They often offer historians to either make a catapult or make a stone block. So I propose - to crush a couple of granite stones into granite chips with your own hands. It will be very interesting to see this process.
2. The number of tools for such work will be simply fantastic - hundreds of hammers, picks, pestles and everything from expensive bronze and copper, which was very scarce at that time. Egypt of the Old Kingdom could not afford such a consumption of metal when the country actually lived in the Stone Age.
3. It is not clear where the Egyptians got so much firewood for burning limestone or gypsum into lime. Egypt is poor in wood and barely enough for the needs of metallurgy and ceramics. And without firing, no concrete will work.
4. Bags for cement, as we are told by supporters of the alternative version, were allegedly in cash. Like, if a block, according to Petri, is 2.5 tons, then having a bag of 50 kg is 50 bags for casting one block. So, alternative comrades, it was Egypt III millennium BC. e. There were no bag factories. All textiles were produced by women - wives and slaves. The sacks themselves were mainly used for storing wheat - c. 60 kg per bag. The question arises: where did they get so many bags for millions of tons of cement?
5. How were these bags of cement delivered to the construction site? The stone was mined on the opposite bank of the Nile. From the Nile to Giza - approx. 10 km.
Drag bags on your own back - I advise alternative comrades to do this experience themselves. Drag on donkeys - expensive for that time. And there were not so many donkeys in Egypt. Drag on a sled? So what's the advantage over a stone block?
6. What were the formworks made of? Wood in Egypt is a rare scarce imported raw material. It was barely enough for ceiling beams, furniture, weapons, so they had to import or simply rob neighboring peoples. And here we need tons of wood for formwork. It took us 1.5 million blocks for the pyramid of Cheops, remember? But apparently, the alternative comrades themselves understand this. A certain Kolmykov even published a new renology article in a serious journal, where he wrote in all seriousness:
"The combination of features allows us to make a categorical conclusion that the blocks of the Cheops pyramid were made by casting into formwork. The formwork could be, for example, animal skins sewn together or sheet metal with an uneven surface or other material fixed in the frame and allowing you to leave such marks on the trace-receiving surfaces".
IN last years The Internet and other media have been flooded with pseudo-scientific fabrications about ancient Egyptian construction methods: stone building blocks are claimed without any reason to be concrete structures.
For the construction of pyramids, as well as tombs and mastabas in ancient Egypt, they preferred to use relatively soft and widespread rocks - limestone and sandstone, as well as anhydrite and gypsum. James Harrell for the Encyclopedia of Egyptology, published online by the University of California at Los Angeles, prepared an impressive review, where he took into account and mapped 128 ancient Egyptian quarries. There were probably many more, but some are still not discovered, while others were destroyed in subsequent eras.
In recent years, the Internet and other media have been flooded with pseudo-scientific fabrications about ancient Egyptian construction methods: stone building blocks are claimed to be concrete structures without any basis. The source for such assumptions was a series of publications by the French chemist Joseph Davidovits (Davidovits, 1986 and others), in which it was stated that the blocks in the pyramids were poured in place from a solution composed of crushed clayey kaolinite limestone, common in the Giza region, lime and soda. Of course, geologists and paleontologists who studied the composition and structure of the Egyptian blocks have repeatedly noted that they are processed blocks of natural sedimentary deposits, and by no means a concrete pour (see, for example, Jana, 2007), but, alas, it is the most stupid ideas now it is customary to lift it up on a shield.
Geologist James Harrell from the American University of Toledo (University of Toledo, Ohio) not only meticulously mapped 128 ancient quarries on the territory of present-day Egypt and Northern Sudan (Fig. 2), but also figured out in which eras preference was given to one or another building materials in various parts of the ancient Egyptian state.
The Egyptians used stone blocks and slabs not only for the construction of large-scale stone structures, but also fortified and lined with them buildings made of raw bricks - palaces, fortresses, storage facilities, residential buildings. The main building materials were relatively soft, that is, easy to process, sedimentary rocks - limestone and sandstone (Fig. 1, 3). If the limestones were practically pure calcium carbonate, then the sandstones consisted mainly of quartz sand grains with an admixture of feldspars. The Egyptians called limestone "a good white stone from Tura-Masar" (Tura-Masara, or Mazar, is one of the areas where the stone was mined), and sandstone - "a beautiful light hard stone." It is indeed stronger than limestone.
Since the time of the Old Kingdom, limestone has become the main stone of Egyptian builders, since it was this rock that was widespread along the Mediterranean coast and the Nile Valley from Cairo in the north to Esna in the south (Fig. 2, 3a, b). For example, one of the Great Pyramids - Khafra - in Giza was built from limestone, which was mined right behind it (Fig. 3a). Sandstones came to the surface along the banks of the Nile south of Esna (Fig. 2, 3c). They were used less frequently: in the Old Kingdom, a dynastic tomb was erected from sandstone in Hierakonpolis and a small pyramid in Nagada. Nevertheless, despite the difficulties with transportation, in the era of the New Kingdom, it is sandstones that are more resistant to destruction that become the main building materials - most of the temples in Thebes, some of the temples in Abydos, the Aten temple in El Amarna. In the Sinai Peninsula and in the western oases, the choice of stone for construction depended on what could be obtained from the nearest quarry.
Less often and probably for special purposes, both practical (to strengthen the building) and ceremonial (to pay honors to the pharaoh or priest), the Egyptians mined and processed very hard granites and granodiorites (Fig. 1) or confluent (heavily silicified) sandstones and basalts. (Basalt and granodiorite are igneous rocks, granite has a complex metamorphic origin.) Two types of salts suitable for construction were mined on the Red Sea coast - anhydrite (calcium sulfate) and gypsum (hydrous calcium sulfate). Interestingly, the name of the rock and mineral - "gypsum" - through the Greeks goes back to the Egyptians, although they could borrow it from the Akkadians. For cladding, the Egyptians also used travertine, or tufa, known as "Egyptian alabaster".
In order to avoid gaps between large blocks in buildings, as well as voids and chips, the Egyptians invented their own type of gypsum-based mortar back in the Predynastic period. When this mineral is heated to 100–200°C, it loses some of its water and turns into a hemihydrate - burnt gypsum. When mixed with water, this substance re-crystallizes in the form of gypsum and quickly hardens. IN pure form burnt gypsum was more often used to create surfaces on which reliefs were carved, and when it was required as a filler, sand was added. Real cement mortar based on limestone appeared only under the Ptolemies (IV century BC).
Of the 128 known quarries, 89 were mined for limestone, 36 for sandstone, and 3 for gypsum and anhydrite. Although, as a rule, the stone for construction was taken from the nearest quarry, distant quarries could also be used for facing work, if it was possible to find less fractured limestone of pleasant shades and texture, sustained over a large area: for example, limestone from the Tura and Masara quarries in period of the Old and Middle Kingdoms. And for the temples in Thebes, sandstone was delivered a hundred kilometers away. Usually the stone was mined in open quarries, but when material of special quality was required, adits were punched up to 100 m deep into the cliff (Fig. 3b). With the help of picks and chisels (copper, then bronze, later iron) and stone sledgehammers, rectangular blocks were cut down (Fig. 4).
The map of the quarries, compiled by James Harrell, is accompanied by a list that provides information about the rocks that were mined in each of them: the name of the formation, its age, structural and compositional features, the most characteristic fossil organisms, as well as buildings that are probably , built from blocks mined in this quarry, and the time when work was carried out in it. For example, for the pyramid of Khafre, limestone blocks were cut down not far from it in a quarry (Fig. 3a), which uncovered the Middle Eocene Observatory Formation (approximately 45 Ma old), which is normal marine sediments with abundant shells of giant protozoa - foraminifera nummulitids, as well as microscopic operculinids, globigerinids and other foraminifers; there are remnants sea urchins; the structural features of the limestone indicate that it was formed no deeper than the storm erosion base.
It is the mineralogical composition of rocks (Fig. 5), their structure, texture and other petrographic features, and for sedimentary rocks - also the composition of the fossil fauna - that make it possible to accurately determine from which quarry the future elements of specific structures were taken. The unique features of a sea basin or a small part of it are reflected in the sedimentary rocks formed there over time and freeze in them forever, even if fragments of these rocks become building material.
Also, according to petrographic and paleontological features, at one time they were looking for quarries where limestone was mined in the Middle Ages for the construction of temples of Ancient Rus' and France, when they began to be restored. Because even very similar limestone blocks taken from different quarries have a slightly different composition, including chemical composition, which can provoke increased erosion in the restored wall at the junction of “patches” with old stones.
1982 The Congress of Egyptologists is taking place in the Canadian city of Toronto, bringing together all experts in this field of knowledge. The peaceful flow of the congress is blown up by the sensational report of the French chemist, professor at the University of Bern, Joseph (Joseph) Davidovich: as a result of a chemical analysis of samples from the pyramids of Cheops and Teti, it was found that they were undoubtedly made of artificial stone, and are not fragments of natural rock, since contain chemical elements that are not found in natural formations. Simply put, it's concrete.
The initial shock of Egyptologists was replaced by a unanimous opinion: "This cannot be, because it can never be!" So, you can pretend that you didn’t see anything and didn’t hear anything. But the Egyptian authorities definitely heard everything. Davidovich in 1984 asked them to allow on-site research in order to prove the artificiality of the materials from which the Sphinx and other structures and monuments were made. He was denied. The reason was put forward as follows: "Your hypothesis represents only a personal point of view, which does not correspond to archaeological and geological facts."
"EGYPTIAN Noodle"
Of course, the crown number of Egyptian tourism are the pyramids. And the pyramid of Cheops - one of the seven wonders of the world and the only one of them that has survived - a sparkling diamond in this crown. What does official Egyptology say about the construction of the most famous pyramid?
It is known that the pyramid of Cheops was built 4.5 thousand years ago. Construction was carried out over 20 years by 20 thousand workers (in some sources, the number of workers reaches 100 thousand). During this time, 2.5 million stone blocks weighing from 2.5 to 15 tons were laid in the body of the pyramid, but there were blocks of 80, and 150 and even 500 tons. Moreover, the adjustment of the blocks to each other is so precise that it is unattainable even today with the current level of development of construction equipment.
This data alone gives rise to a huge number of questions. Firstly, by simple arithmetic operations, it turns out that every five minutes one block was placed in the body of the pyramid. And this is day and night, without breaks for lunch, sleep, waiting for bad weather ... And so for 20 years. How is this possible and is it possible at all? Ask the builders of the Olympic facilities in Sochi. Maybe they know the answer?
Further: they believe that thousands and thousands of slaves worked in quarries, cutting down huge stone blocks. But specialists are well aware that the output of commercial stone from quarries is approximately 20%, and the rest goes to waste, this is a waste. Moreover, the larger the blocks, the lower the percentage of finished products at the output. And this means that somewhere there must be mountains of waste, which in volume are at least 4 pyramids of Cheops. But nowhere in Egypt is there even much smaller waste. So where did the stone blocks for the pyramid come from?
By the way, how were the huge stone blocks delivered from the quarries? Modern experts have calculated that it would take ... 79 years just to transport all the stone blocks using today's advanced technology. And the Egyptians calmly on primitive "sledges" pulled multi-ton blocks to the construction site, and then raised them to the height of the pyramid, allegedly with the help of ingenious lifting machines or with the help of some giant inclined mounds of sand. At the same time, in 20 years they managed not only to transport, but also to put all the blocks into a pyramid. Aye well done!
ON A VOICE FROM THE TRUTH
Continuing sample research Egyptian pyramids, Davidovich discovered more and more evidence of the artificiality of the materials that make up the blocks of the pyramids. So, practically on the surface of one of the samples, he found a hair. Studies in three different laboratories showed that "a small flagellum of three organic fibers, most likely hair." But the presence of hair in natural limestone is excluded. Limestone was formed about 50 million years ago, at the bottom of the ocean, and therefore the presence of organic remains in it is excluded by definition. Inside the stone, the hair could be only in one case: if, during the mixing of the solution, it fell into the mixture from the head or hand of the worker.
When examining the pyramids with X-rays, signs of a chemical reaction were revealed. According to the French scientific journal "Science and Life", the difference between the stones in the pyramids and the stones in the quarries was significant. French scientist Professor Drexel claims that the stones used in the construction of the Egyptian pyramids are actually synthetic and were cast like concrete during construction.
As Davidovich discovered, an important component of the stone blocks of the pyramids was aluminum oxide, which is contained in large quantities in the silt of the Nile River. This is another confirmation of the fact that the blocks of the pyramids were cast like concrete, and one of the components was the Nile silt, and Nile water was used to mix the dry mixture.
Davidovich continued research, the result of his search was an inscription on a stele of the period of the III dynasty. The deciphered hieroglyphs contained a recipe for the preparation of ancient concrete. He identified 13 components of the ancient Egyptian recipe, patented the "new old" concrete and began its commercial production. The research carried out allowed Davidovich to found a new branch of applied chemistry called geopolymerization. As a result of geopolymerization, concrete is created that is almost indistinguishable from some natural rocks. The most important advantage of these artificial materials is that their production does not require high temperatures, high pressures, or the intervention of otherworldly forces. Only long-term observations and experiments, which the hardworking Egyptians did. Geopolymer concrete quickly sets at room temperature and turns into a beautiful artificial stone. The French Institute of Geopolymers (Geopolymer Institute) and is now conducting research on the development of new compositions of geopolymer concretes.
The question is quite fair: has it really been possible for no one to understand during the entire period of observation that the pyramids are made of artificial material? Let's give the floor to Davidovich himself. He writes: "Any rock can be used in crushed form, and the resulting geopolymer concrete is practically indistinguishable from natural stone. Geologists unfamiliar with the possibilities of geopolymerization ... take geopolymer concrete for natural stone ..."
Our compatriot, the famous traveler Vitaly Sundakov, believes that the ancient Egyptians prepared concrete in this way: they ground limestone to a state of powder (it was not without reason that millstones were found during excavations in the artisans' camp, which, apparently, were used to grind stone). River silt was used as a binder. The crushed rock was then mixed with carefully dried and ground soft rock (limestone) and water, resulting in a mortar with natural aggregate, which was poured into a wooden formwork. Thus, step by step, huge blocks of the correct form were cast.
So, Sundakov considers the composition of ancient Egyptian concrete as follows: crushed limestone with the addition of 5% limestone powder and 5% river silt. There are more components in Davidovich's recipe. But in any case, the recognition of the fact that the ancient Egyptians used geopolymer concrete provides answers to many questions that puzzle Egyptologists.
MYSTERIES AND RIDDLES
Now it is clear why the blocks of the pyramids are not covered with cracks? It is well known that any natural limestone, being a sedimentary rock, has a layered structure. Therefore, over time, natural cracks inevitably appear in it, running along the layers. But concrete, being a homogeneous, amorphous material (since it was ground and mixed), does not form cracks. As it is observed in the Egyptian pyramids.
It also becomes clear that there is no so-called sunburn on the surface of the pyramid blocks. Such a "tan" is formed over time on the exposed surface of any natural stone. The surface of the stone darkens due to the fact that various chemical elements come out on it from the inside. This is due to the crystalline structure of natural stone. And on concrete "sunburn" is almost not formed. Since the crystal structure in it is destroyed when the rock is crushed into powder.
Another "amazing mystery of the pyramids" is perfectly explained - the uniquely precise adjustment of the blocks to each other so that it is impossible to stick a knife blade into the seam. It's just that the builders of the pyramids specially separated neighboring blocks so that they would not stick to each other. Before casting a new block, they covered the surface of the old blocks with a thin layer of lime mortar to prevent sticking. This was done correctly, because otherwise the pyramid would have turned into a single huge concrete monolith, without seams. Such a colossal structure would inevitably burst soon under the influence of internal stresses. And also under the influence of constant and very significant temperature changes in this place in Egypt. It was possible to avoid internal stresses only by laying down a pyramid of separate concrete blocks. So that she can "breathe", relieving the tension that arises.
It was the use of geopolymer concrete in Egypt that made it possible to preserve such a large number of various objects. Created according to the proven technology temple complexes, statues and sculptures, sarcophagi and amphorae vessels, as well as many, many other objects, structures and products. Naturally, in each case, the builders selected a special artificial stone. In some cases, they made artificial limestone, in others - artificial granite, artificial basalt or artificial diorite.
It is generally accepted that the construction of the Egyptian pyramids was carried out by tens of thousands of people who worked in quarries, moved giant stone blocks to the construction site, dragged them up through the scaffolding, installed and fastened them. But is it?
Speaking at the Archaeometry Symposium, which brought together scientists from various disciplines, in Washington last May, polymer chemist Joseph Davidovich from Barry University painted a completely different picture, backing up his arguments with scientific research. He carried out a chemical analysis of stone samples that were used to build three pyramids. Comparing them with rocks found in the nearby limestone quarries of Turaha and Mokhatama, from which, obviously, the material for these structures was taken, he found that the composition of the facing blocks of building stone contains substances that are absent in quarries. But in this layer there are thirteen different substances, which, according to J. Davidovits, were “geopolymers” and played the role of a binder. Therefore, the scientist believes that the ancient Egyptians built pyramids not from natural stone, but from artificially made materials by crushing limestone, making mortar from it and pouring it, together with a special binder, into wooden formwork. Within a few hours, the material hardened, forming blocks indistinguishable from natural stone. Such a technology, of course, took less time and required not so many hands. This assumption is supported by microscopy of rock samples, showing that the limestone from the quarries is almost entirely formed by closely “packed” calcite crystals, which give it a uniform density. The facing stone, found on the spot, as part of the pyramids, has a lower density and is replete with airy “bubble” voids. If this stone is of natural origin, then we can assume the places where it could be developed by the ancients. But such developments are unknown to Egyptologists.
Apparently, sodium carbonate, various phosphates (they could be obtained from bones or from guano), quartz and silt from the Nile served as a binder - all this was quite accessible to the Egyptians. In addition, the facing stone is covered with a millimeter layer of a substance, which almost entirely consists of these components.
Among other things, the new hypothesis allows us to answer the age-old question: how did the ancient builders manage to fit stone blocks with such accuracy? The proposed construction technology, in which the sidewalls of previously "cast" blocks can serve as a formwork for casting a new block between them, makes it possible to adjust them with almost no space between them.
The editor presents:
There is a huge literature about the ancient civilizations that disappeared, that ours is one of many. And all the same, in our culture, no, no, and some kind of “Euro-centrism” and even “Western-Euro-centrism” slips through. And not only at the household level. Marx, for example, created the theory of socio-economic formations on the basis of rather random events in Western European history, which are not at all characteristic of other civilizations.
And in the public mind it often developed: well, Greece, well, Ancient Rome, and earlier - savages, who can be credited with carving stone blocks of tens of tons from rocks and dragging them by hand through the desert.
Read about the collapse of another myth - ancient and stable, like ... the Egyptian pyramids.
Electron Dobruskin,
editor
1982 The Congress of Egyptologists is taking place in the Canadian city of Toronto, bringing together all experts in this field of knowledge. Peaceful course of Congress blows up sensational reportFrench chemist, professor at the University of Bern Joseph (Joseph) Davidovich: as a result of chemical analysis of samples from the pyramids of Cheops and Teti, it was found that they are undoubtedly made of artificial stone, and are not fragments of natural rock, as they contain chemical elements that are not found in natural formations. Simply put, it's concrete.
The initial shock of Egyptologists was replaced by a unanimous opinion: "It can't be, because it can never be!" . So, you can pretend that you didn’t see anything and didn’t hear anything.
But the Egyptian authorities definitely heard everything. Davidovich in 1984 asked them to allow on-site research in order to prove the artificiality of the materials from which the Sphinx and other structures and monuments were made. He was denied. The reason given was as follows:"Your hypothesis represents only a personal point of view, which does not correspond to archaeological and geological facts" .
"EGYPTIAN Noodle"
Of course, the crown number of Egyptian tourism are the pyramids. And the pyramid of Cheops is one of the seven wonders of the world and the only one of them that has survived is a sparkling diamond in this crown. What does official Egyptology say about the construction of the most famous pyramid?
It is known that the pyramid of Cheops was built 4.5 thousand years ago. Construction was carried out over 20 years by 20 thousand workers (in some sources, the number of workers reaches 100 thousand). During this time, 2.5 million stone blocks weighing from 2.5 to 15 tons were laid in the body of the pyramid, but there were blocks of 80, and 150 and even 500 tons. Moreover, the adjustment of the blocks to each other is so precise that it is unattainable even today with the current level of development of construction equipment.
This data alone gives rise to a huge number of questions. Firstly, by simple arithmetic operations, it turns out that every five minutes one block was placed in the body of the pyramid. And this is day and night, without breaks for lunch, sleep, waiting for bad weather ...And so for 20 years. How is this possible and is it possible at all? Ask the builders of the Olympic facilities in Sochi. Maybe they know the answer?
Further: they believe that thousands and thousands of slaves worked in quarries, cutting down huge stone blocks. But specialists are well aware that the output of commercial stone from quarries is approximately 20%, and the rest goes to waste, this is a waste. Moreover, the larger the blocks, the lower the percentage of finished products at the output. And this means that somewhere there must be mountains of waste, which in volume are at least 4the Pyramid of Cheops. But nowhere in Egypt is there even much smaller waste. So where did the stone blocks for the pyramid come from?
By the way, how were the huge stone blocks delivered from the quarries? Modern experts have calculated that it would take ... 79 years just to transport all the stone blocks using today's advanced technology. And the Egyptians calmly on primitive "sledges" pulled multi-ton blocks to the construction site, and then raised them to the height of the pyramid, allegedly with the help of ingenious lifting machines or with the help of some giant inclined mounds of sand. At the same time, in 20 years they managed not only to transport, but also to put all the blocks into a pyramid. Aye well done!
ON A VOICE FROM THE TRUTH
Continuing to study samples of the Egyptian pyramids, Davidovich discovered more and more evidence of the artificiality of the materials that make up the blocks of the pyramids. So, practically on the surface of one of the samples, he found a hair. Studies in three different laboratories have shown that"a small flagellum of three organic fibers, most likely hair" . But the presence of hair in natural limestone is excluded. Limestone was formed about 50 million years ago, at the bottom of the ocean, and therefore the presence of organic remains in it is excluded by definition. Inside the stone, the hair could be only in one case: if, during the mixing of the solution, it fell into the mixture from the head or hand of the worker.
When examining the pyramids with X-rays, signs of a chemical reaction were revealed. According to the French scientific journal "Science and Life", the difference between the stones in the pyramids and the stones in the quarries was significant.French scientist Professor Drexel claims that the stones used in the construction of the Egyptian pyramids are actually synthetic and were cast like concrete during construction.
As Davidovich discovered, an important component of the stone blocks of the pyramids was aluminum oxide, which is contained in large quantities in the silt of the Nile River. This is another confirmation of the fact that the blocks of the pyramids were cast like concrete, and one of the components was the Nile silt, and Nile water was used to mix the dry mixture.
Davidovich continued research, the result of his search was an inscription on a stele of the period III dynasties. The deciphered hieroglyphs contained a recipe for the preparation of ancient concrete. He identified 13 components of the ancient Egyptian recipe, patented the "new old" concrete and began its commercial production.
The research carried out allowed Davidovich to found a new branch of applied chemistry called geopolymerization. As a result of geopolymerization, concrete is created that is almost indistinguishable from some natural rocks. The most important advantage of these artificial materials is that their production does not require high temperatures, high pressures, or the intervention of otherworldly forces. Only long-term observations and experiments, which the hardworking Egyptians did. Geopolymer concrete quickly sets at room temperature and turns into a beautiful artificial stone. at the French Institute of Geopolymers ( Geopolymer Institute ) and now research is underway to develop new compositions of geopolymer concretes.
The question is quite fair: has it really been possible for no one to understand during the entire period of observation that the pyramids are made of artificial material? Let's give the floor to Davidovich himself. He's writing:"Any rock can be used in crushed form, and the resulting geopolymer concrete is practically indistinguishable from natural stone. Geologists unfamiliar with the possibilities of geopolymerization ... take geopolymer concrete for natural stone ..."
Our compatriot famous traveler Vitaly Sundakov- believes that the ancient Egyptians prepared concrete in this way: they ground limestone to a state of powder (it was not without reason that millstones were found during excavations in the artisans' camp, which, apparently, were used to grind stone). River silt was used as a binder. The crushed rock was then mixed with carefully dried and ground soft rock (limestone) and water, resulting in a mortar with natural aggregate, which was poured into a wooden formwork. Thus, step by step, huge blocks of regular shape were cast.
So, Sundakov considers the composition of ancient Egyptian concrete as follows: crushed limestone with the addition of 5% limestone powder and 5% river silt. There are more components in Davidovich's recipe. But in any case, the recognition of the fact that the ancient Egyptians usedgeopolymer concrete provides answers to many questions that baffle Egyptologists.
MYSTERIES AND RIDDLES
Now it is clear why the blocks of the pyramids are not covered with cracks. It is well known that any natural limestone, being a sedimentary rock, has a layered structure. Therefore, over time, natural cracks inevitably appear in it, running along the layers. But concrete, being a homogeneous, amorphous material (since it was ground and mixed), does not form cracks. As it is observed in the Egyptian pyramids.
It also becomes clear that there is no so-called sunburn on the surface of the pyramid blocks. Such a "tan" is formed over time on the exposed surface of any natural stone. The surface of the stone darkens due to the fact that various chemical elements come out on it from the inside. This is due to the crystalline structure of natural stone. And on concrete "sunburn" is almost not formed. Since the crystal structure in it is destroyed when the rock is crushed into powder.
Another "amazing mystery of the pyramids" is perfectly explained - the uniquely precise adjustment of the blocks to each other so that it is impossible to stick a knife blade into the seam. It's just that the builders of the pyramids specially separated neighboring blocks so that they would not stick to each other. Before casting a new block, they covered the surface of the old blocks with a thin layer of lime mortar to prevent sticking. This was done correctly, because otherwise the pyramid would have turned into a single huge concrete monolith, without seams. Such a colossal structure would inevitably burst soon under the influence of internal stresses. And also under the influence of constant and very significant temperature changes in this place in Egypt. It was possible to avoid internal stresses only by laying down a pyramid of separate concrete blocks. So that she can "breathe", relieving the tension that arises.
It was the use of geopolymer concrete in Egypt that made it possible to preserve such a large number of various objects to this day. According to the proven technology, temple complexes, statues and sculptures, sarcophagi and amphorae vessels, as well as many, many other objects, structures and products were created. Naturally, in each case, the builders selected a special artificial stone. In some cases, they made artificial limestone, in others - artificial granite, artificial basalt or artificial diorite.
for discussion at the seminar
from the World of News website
http:// mirnov. ru/ rubriki- novostey/33- nauka- i- tekhnika/2758- egipetskie- piramidy- izgotovleny- iz- betona