Copyright © Gary Osborn 2005. All Rights Reserved.

Posted April 2012.

“Whoever would know the secret of the Pyramid must know the secret of the Earth”.

Hermes Trismegistus

My drawings of the Great Pyramid are to scale and based on the accepted measurements as recorded by William Flinders Petrie during his survey of the Great Pyramid between 1880 and 1882.

Naturally, using our own 360° degree system, we would be looking for angles with the same geodetic/Great Pyramid-locale-related values as we saw in figures 7 and 8 in the previous presentation – i.e. 6.5º, 23.5º and 30º.

And to our surprise – because it is something so simple that has been completely overlooked – it doesn’t take a great deal of searching, head scratching or fumbling around with a protractor to find these very same angles within the angle geometry of the Great Pyramid once we know what we are looking for.

Indeed by examining our ‘to-scale’ cross-section drawing, we find that the most specific ‘key points’ of the Great Pyramid are actually connected by these very same angles!

I will begin with a simple drawing of the Great Pyramid so as to delineate the key points I will be using.

In cross-section, the pyramid becomes a triangle with only three points:

1). Apex

2). South Vertex

3). North Vertex

To demonstrate these findings we will begin with a simple cross-section diagram of the Great Pyramid (looking West) – a simple triangle.

Three Points

Again, this alignment which illustrates that the upper shafts are offset by 6.5º from the apex as well as those of the lower shafts, further verifies the ‘mean difference’ of approximately 6.5 degrees regarding the sum total of the angles of the upper and lower star shafts.

However, as we will see later, the angle of 6.5º has more significance in that it also relates to the location of the Great Pyramid on the Earth – i.e., the Great Pyramid coming as close as almost 6.5º from the Ecliptic as illustrated in figure 8.

Again, assuming that we don’t know where it is going or what it is pointing to, we will now plot the angle of 23.5º from the second point – the south vertex. (Again 23.5º is exactly 16 Sekeds – 7/16 ratio).

Further confirmation that both these angles plotted from 2 of the 3 points do indeed correlate with each other directly thereby confirming their meaningful, geodetic relationship with the Great Pyramid and its location is determined by the fact that both these angles intersect each other within half a degree of the point-centre of the King’s Chamber!

And in so doing, and in respect of the enormous size of the Great Pyramid, they give the height of the King’s Chamber and its N-S position within the Great Pyramid.

KC

Copyright © Gary Osborn 2005. All Rights Reserved.

Figure 5: The angles of 23.5º and 6.5º intersect the CENTRE of the King’s Chamber thereby giving its position within the Great Pyramid.
(Shafts not included for clarity).

By chance these angles could have crossed each other anywhere within the vast internal dimension of the Great Pyramid, but – remarkably – they intersect at the centre of the King’s Chamber.

So far so good . . . but what about the ‘third point’ – the North vertex in our diagram of the Great Pyramid in cross-section?

Does this present anything of significant value and in relation?

There are only two main chambers we know of inside the superstructure of the Great Pyramid.

One of these is the King’s Chamber – the position of which has already been determined by the geodetic/Great Pyramid-locale-related angles from the first two points.

The other is, of course, the Queen’s Chamber.

The central, vertical axis of the Great Pyramid actually runs through the mid-plane of the Queen’s Chamber as shown by the vertex of its shafts) and we know that this chamber is positioned just above the vertex of it's shafts.

Based on what I have already discovered with the King’s Chamber, and again using a scale drawing, the next logical step would be to measure the angle beginning from the North vertex to the centre of the Queen’s Chamber.

For it to fit the emerging picture and provide further evidence that will take us one more step beyond any notion or belief that this is all a coincidence, the angle that connects the North vertex with the centre of the Queen’s Chamber, has to have a correlating, geodetic relationship with the other angles.

At this stage, this is a tall order . . .

As we can see, and even before we begin measuring the angle, whatever this angle is we know that it cannot be 23.5º, 6.5º or 30º.

In fact, one finds that this angle is very close to 11.75º.

For many of us, on first discovering this, the value would appear meaningless . . . until we realise that 11.75º is exactly half the angle of 23.5º.

11.75

Copyright © Gary Osborn 2005. All Rights Reserved.

Five Points

“You can get any number out of the pyramid by choosing random points”.

. . . So said a sceptic debunker in response to a public forum posting that included a brief introduction to these angle discoveries, and I quote it here as a typical example of the not so bright “knee-jerk” reactions people often make when first confronted with this data.

With due respect, this individual clearly didn’t understand the simplicity of what is being expressed here because, as we can see, the four values with which we began and which we see illustrated in figure 8 – i.e., 30º, 23.5º, 6.5º, 53.5º – are all present within the geometry of the Great Pyramid and all from connecting just the three points and the two chambers we have at our disposal when viewing the Great Pyramid in cross-section . . . just five points – and five highly significant points I might add.

Angles and Course Levels

The next logical step would be to examine the angle between the two chambers.

One would suspect that the angle would also be 23.5º and perpendicular with the 23.5º angle that intersects the King’s Chamber.

At first, one is disappointed to find, that like the slope angle of the Ascending and Descending Passages, the chambers are centred on an angle close to 26.5º– not 23.5º.

This appears to be the only “chink in the armour”.

However, the significance of this 26.5-degree angle will become clear in the next presentation.

In any case, it’s interesting that a line from the centre of the KC to the floor of the Queen’s Chamber – intersecting the point where the floor and the central axis of the Great Pyramid meet – is indeed 23.5º.

And the thing that is so appealing about this alignment is that the floor of the Queen’s Chamber is level with the 23.5th course layer of the Great Pyramid.

As many will know the core masonry of the Great Pyramid is now exposed due to its outer limestone casing having been removed centuries ago.

The core masonry now consists of 203 (interesting that this number reduces to 23) steps or layers from the base to the truncated top of the pyramid.

So in effect, this 23.5º angle from the centre of the King’s Chamber intersects a point (the centre of the green cross in Fig. 18) on the centreline of the pyramid that is already marked-up to the value of 23.5º.

It would appear that the same number of Course Layers from the base of the Great Pyramid to the floor of the Queen’s Chamber was used by the architects to verify this angle and its alignment.

Surely this is a coincidence?

By making sure there are 23½ course levels from the base to the point where this 23.5º angle intersects the centre of the pyramid so as to confirm this angle, would indicate that the architects used the 360º degree system we are familiar with today.

Even if we were to accept this, one could argue with this and ask “why go to all this trouble?”

“Why not simply centre the two chambers on an angle of 23.5 degrees if this was the original intention?”

The simple answer is that for the architects this was impossible given the 51.84º angle of the sides, which appears to have been vital to the overall design.

If the architects had already determined the positions of both chambers via the 23.5º and 6.5º angles to the centre of the KC, and the two 11.75º angles that are half the 23.5º value for the QC, then it would have been impossible aligning the centres of both these chambers on a perpendicular 23.5º angle.

The only way this would be possible was if the angles of the sides were 48.42º – a difference of 3.5º.

This again means that the side angles of 51.84º (and the converse angle of the Queen’s Chamber shafts between 38º and 39º) was of paramount importance.

The geophysical/geodetically-associated message has already been made clear with the angles I have already discovered, and as we will see later, this perpendicular 23.5-degree angle, although important, would have been considered secondary in the overall plan.

So, to perhaps show that this alignment would have been ideal in practice and was originally intended for reasons which will soon be made clear, the next best thing was to make sure that the intersection point of both the mid-plane of the Great Pyramid and the floor of the QC were connected to the centre of the KC by an angle of 23.5º, and that as an afterthought it was decided that the number of Course Layers from the base to the floor of the QC would both reflect and confirm the value of this intended angle.

This could be argued of course, but this is my explanation as to how the architects may have got around the problem of not being able to centre both chambers on a 23.5-degree angle in addition to the other alignments they had already made and on which the overall geometry of the Great Pyramid depended.

In any case, there is a good reason why this perpendicular angle of 23.5º would have to exist and be present within these alignments, and this is because it completes the geophysical picture encoded within the geometry of the Great Pyramid which will be the subject of the following chapter. But before I reveal this, let’s look at another aspect of this perpendicular alignment . . .

If we now extend the lines of the cross on which the King’s Chamber is centred (as I have done in figure. 18, lines in red) to emphasise the 6.5-degree offset of the KC from the apex, we note that the perpendicular 23.5º angle and the 6.5º angle together present us with the 30º angle – signifying the latitude distance of the Great Pyramid from that of the Equator or Equatorial Plane.

23.5 courses 30 and 6.5

Copyright © Gary Osborn 2005. All Rights Reserved.

Figure 10: The angle of 30 degrees.

It appears that the 23.5º angle is for positioning, in that it supports the perpendicular 23.5º angle from the South vertex to the centre of the King’s Chamber, thus completing the present geophysical picture of our planet as a ‘frame of reference’ on which further information has been grafted and can be extracted – this picture I will reveal in the following presentation.

The 26.5º angle appears confusing, but because of its rate of recurrence within the angle geometry of the Great Pyramid, I am now certain that the value of 26.5º is also part of the code, and so it is additional information ‘tacked’ onto the 23.5º frame of reference and therefore is associated with the changing and possibly cyclical shift of the Earth’s Axis of rotation around the 23.5º obliquity, and again this is something I will reveal more of in the following presentations.

In any case, the implication of all this correlating angle and course-level data is quite profound for it demonstrates that whoever built the Great Pyramid used and fully understood our modern 360º system for measuring angles, something that orthodox Egyptology simply dismisses.

But should there be any doubt of this we also find that the angle between the two shafts of the upper King’s Chamber is just a little over 102º – 2 x 51°.

Given what we have just seen with the floors of the King’s and Queen’s chamber and the associated angles within those chambers, should it be any surprise to learn then that we find these two shafts exit the Great Pyramid at course layer 102?

“It is also manifest that the technical terms of ancient science varies but slightly all over the globe. The circle was divided into 360 degrees for convenience of measurements, the properties of the ‘Pi proportion’ applied to the squaring of the circle, the law of the square of the hypotheneuse, the number of days between solstices, the geometry of the solar system, the cycles of the planets and the phenomena of terrestrial motion are not inventions of man which can be one thing in one place and another elsewhere.

“The third and fourth chapters of Prescott’s immortal ‘Conquest of Mexico’ tell precisely what the Spaniards found in this respect upon their arrival in America, so that it is not proposing an at all wild or improbable hypothesis to assume that as these same facts were at the root of the religious mysteries of the whole ancient Eastern world they performed a precisely similar role on the American continent. Freemasonry has preserved the assurance in its ritual and symbolism, that this is the case through long ages of persecution and tyranny which have conspired to suppress all popular knowledge of the fact.

“The evidences of a community of crude scientific knowledge between the widely separated ancient races of Asia, Europe and America, and with particular reference to the latter, its distribution over our own continent, from the great lakes of the North to the Andes in the South, are bound up in the existence everywhere, over the entire enormous expanse, of graven and sculptured objects, ranging all the way, from tiny amulets and so-called ‘ceremonial stones’ to monoliths, elaborately carved ‘idols’ and gorgeous temples designed uniquely to set forth the principal cosmic figures and angles of astronomical observation.

“These may be briefly enumerated as the angles of 23½ degrees, that of the inclination of the earth's axis to the pole of the ecliptic and of the equator to the plane of the ecliptic 47 degrees, or double the foregoing, which apprises their knowledge of the circumpolar motion; the precession of the equinoxes, the earth's orbit, equinoxes and solstices; the angles of 66½ degrees and 113½ degrees, which relate to the crossing of the plane of the ecliptic by the earth's axis and that of the equator by the pole of the ecliptic.

“These are the angles which are so closely bound up with the cosmic expression of the divine name of Jehovah, but closely associated with them are various triangles and oblong figures, such as the triangle of Pythagoras (3–4–5) and its derivations, the 3–4–3 triangle, which gives us the side of a square and the radius of a circle equal circumference thereto, this latter being the vertical axis of the great Pyramid of Cheops, at Gizeh, Egypt.” (My Italics).

Ancient Freemasonry: An Introduction to Masonic Archaeology.
Frank C. Higgins. (Kessinger Publishing. Originally published in 1919). p. 72–73.

Although Frank C. Higgins writes about these geophysical-related angles and the knowledge they convey which goes back to very ancient times and sometime in remote antiquity – all being designed into various structures and art – temples, stone amulets, trinkets, and other artifacts from around the world . . . Higgins didn’t know how, or if he did, he didn’t say how, these angles were encoded within the Great Pyramid or where they might be found.

It should be emphasised that I personally discovered Higgins’ book many years after the discoveries I have presented for the first time in this presentation, and for me the above quote from this book changes everything, in that these discoveries are indeed valid.

Summary of Presentation

  • When the Great Pyramid is viewed in East-West cross-section (looking West), we find that geophysical and geodetic information relating to the orbital dynamics of the Great Pyramid (being at latitude 30° North) can easily be extrapolated from the five angles plotted between only five major points—being the apex, the two base vertices, and the centres of the two internal chambers.
  • These angles present us with the present axis obliquity value of around 23.5°, along with two other values (20° and 6.5°).
  • The geodetic information pertaining to the Great Pyramid’s own location on the Earth—being 30° from the equator and 6.5° from the ecliptic—is the key to understanding the geophysical axial-shift-cycle data.
  • Taken together, these same angles present us with the precessional diameter of 47° and in total give us the other extreme position of the Great Pyramid from the ecliptic—53.5°.
  • Furthermore, as if to confirm or corroborate this angle data, these geodetic/geophysical-related degree values are reflected in the number of course levels (like a checksum value) from the base of the pyramid to the floors of the King’s and Queen’s Chambers, and also from the floor of the Queen’s Chamber to the floor of the King’s Chamber. This seems to indicate the use of the 360° system of angular measure and is further strengthened with the angle of the upper shafts at 102° exiting the Great Pyramid at course layer 102.
  • The findings revealed in this presentation are substantiated by the statements published by Higgins in 1919: that the geophysical-axis-related “cosmic angles” of 11.75°, 23.5°, and 47° were encoded in the geometry of ancient temples and many ancient artifacts found around the world. In the same paragraph, Higgins also cites the Great Pyramid as one of these temples, so it could be said that in turn my own findings relating to the Great Pyramid have confirmed Higgins’s findings and observations.

In the next presentation I will reveal the 'ancient geometric formula' from which these geophysical/geodetic angles were derived.

Click here to go to next page:

You are viewing the text version of this site.

To view the full version please install the Adobe Flash Player and ensure your web browser has JavaScript enabled.

Need help? check the requirements page.


Get Flash Player