This page reproduces in full various bitmap images of a fair weight, extracted from several works cited. In order not to weigh down the overall loading and reading space I have associated them with an icon, only by clicking which they will be loaded from the server and displayed, then also hidden, for what the icon remains visible and accessible over the enlarged images.
Some measures use the comma instead of the period: this allows a more direct copy/paste for testing purposes on those system calculators that require it.
Life, Death and Miracles from the Pyramids
A passage that I find useful in unravelling some tangles of typically popular credulity, yet attributed to those who knew much more.

It must be kept in mind that as much as we know about the Egyptian cult of the dead and the afterlife, our culture is not organized to truly understand the meaning and function of the pyramids, intended as portals to a di­men­sion beyond.

If death for our rational corridor can only mean the end of earthly existence, and at most an ill-defined passage to the eternal, in Egyptian initiatory cognition it represented the threshold, a true bridge of otherworldly con­ti­nu­i­ty, a notion for which current science is not prepared, and not even the Catholic religion which only manages to distort it to its own advantage.
The pharaonic tomb therefore translates from an irreversible cemetery concept, at most of a mausoleum, a monumental tomb dedicated as a ter­mi­nus for illustrious remains, to an advanced instrument for safe­guarding and interconnecting the energetic realities of the deceased, bodies alternate with the physical one and relatively more durable, to a parallel level of existence and operation, which is unknown to us.
In the case of the pyramid attributed to Cheops, which instead according to the authoritative clairvoyant Egar Cayce, and others, dates back to more than 10 thousand years, an empty sarcophagus may well represent the opposite of death as the final stage, inviting its location and very special workmanship to be used for ESP experiences.
It is this premise, although here exposed in a rudimentary way, that com­bines the choice and construction of this Great Pyramid, intended more for the function of a single tomb, assuming and not proven that it was so in its unrepeatable location, with that of an interactive cosmic apparatus with higher order frequency levels.
According to the study inspired to Eng. Mario Pincherle - Dedicated to the Accademia Dei Lincei in 1969 - it was erected as a shell of the Zed, or Djed, primary word and symbol in every Egyptian cult, translated as 'presence', 'stability'; a simulacrum representing an anthropomorphic pillar or a mum­mi­fied man carrying a sceptre and an ankh cross, symbol of eternal ex­ist­ence, backbone of the god Osiris, otherworldly dispenser of death and re­birth, justice and regeneration, therefore even more than existence in life. There is certainly no need to resort to the Egyptians to affirm that the spinal column is the seat of the vital fluid; I will simply point out the presence of four levels in slabs or spaces, which evoke the four Elements, surmounted by the fifth as a dome.
If this is the case, the pyramid is absolutely the most suitable means, per­haps the only adequate one I might add indirectly, to safeguard also in this sense, that is, in the silence of a transitory tomb for the necessary pas­sage of millennia, the most sacred tower of Akkadian or Atlantean origin.
… the entity became the supervisor of the excavations, studying the old records and preparing and building the house of records for those of Atlantis, as well as a part of the house for the initiates - - namely the Great Pyramid. (re-translated)
The Ancient Atlantean Record at Gizeh – www.edgarcayce.it
A device perhaps even capable of disintegrating or dissolving into the ether, once it has completed its task of maintenance until the emergence of a new phase of evolution of and on the planet.
The day will come when the tower will render what has been entrusted to it,
the Pyramid will leap like a ram and then the sad iron age will end.
(it says from the "Book of Enoch")

Although various other pyramids trace certain geometric and mathematical proportions with a common purpose at the time of the Egyptians, it is more than evident that the Great Pyramid is unique, if not far superior, therefore prior and unrepeatable, and that its otherworldly uniqueness, certainly not conceived at the time of Cheops, may have constituted the ideal model of reference and indoctrination for certain practices, advanced yes, but of a more limited horizon.
No other, moreover, can replace it for its geophysical and astronomical location, which corresponds to canons and measurements that were mostly un­known at that time, its orientation and, last but not least, the mystery of its in­te­ri­or, whether interpreted or unexplored, certainly full of challenges that mechanical robots will not be able to reveal.
And who could have ever composed and combined so much perfection, if not most likely the sublime spirit of ENOCH, who lived right in the era described by Edgar Cayce, and the supreme initiator of writing and architecture?

And while we're on the subject, let's talk about eternal life, a concept that should be retracted in many articles.
No person with common sense can think or imagine an eternal life.
Whoever attributes such a belief to the Egyptian initiates offends with his very naivety an elite that at least taught the Greek and Latin philosophers.
First and foremost, because a definition of eternal life after death is a con­tra­dic­tion in terms. The meaning and etymology of ‘Life’ refer to living, nev­er to after being deceased. But above all because anyone of average culture can distinguish material life, or incarnation, from its spiritual co­ex­ist­ence, com­monly called soul although in a still raw form, science not having the means to be able to classify or recognize it in its reality; whereas the holy church has made it an object of monopoly and commerce for cen­tu­ries, misleading and subjugating its believers; and therefore a knowledge still reserved to a few endowed with an advanced capacity to contemplate it on their own.

Yet it would be enough to use reason: you don't have to be an occultist to deduce from the very concept of reincarnation the sense of continuity of the true existence, which is not and can never be that of a single life prolonged to infinity.

That one can exit with the astral body from one's physical body in life (then also from the astral one), moving away to unthinkable distances and di­mensions by performing actions and experiences, and then reintegrating, should be by now established and an excellent point of reference.
Even more so, a civilization that has given and left such testimonies of in­ter­dimensional development that even today we are not able to decipher them in full, had sufficient reason and knowledge to practice and prepare means to support the stages of transition of the entity that animates each single incarnation, towards the status of cosmic spiritual eternity that was due to it both before and after, provided that it had been conferred.
On the other hand, if the very term reincarnation does not provide for just one, it is understandable that translating the post mortem – or any new era – into an abstruse idea of eternal life or resurrection, even if coun­ter­bal­anced by a poorly concealed sense of superiority, is nothing but a sign of naivety.
It would be enough to ask oneself at what age anyone can die and at what age they would be resurrected to then live it forever…
Abbot Théophile Moreux
To save ourselves from the tumultuous ocean of articles and sentences that are increasingly crowding the web, and instead compare some of the most accredited or eminent historical sources, it will be appropriate to take a step back in time.
We meet the well-known scholar Abbot Théophile Moreux, missionary of scientific dissemination, perhaps the most famous recent reference – prob­a­bly reincarnated after having lived as Apollonius of Tyana, perhaps he himself whispers it to me, and so I propose it to you – who in his extensive investigation, after having traced the premises, begins on the official π (3.1416) with the following reflections:
The methods used to achieve this result were unknown to classical antiquity;
they are based on entirely modern considerations; yet we will see that this constant sought for so many centuries materializes, so to speak, in the Great Pyramid.
«La science mystérieuse des pharaons» (1943, Abbé Th. Moreux – p.37)
A conclusion as full of emphasis as it is of contradictions, and yet self­-il­lu­so­ry as it is based on presumed facts: that is, that modern methods are the right ones, 'and yet' we find the constant already present in the Pyramid of Giza.
A charming complacency in the absurd, for a scientist: the formulation of an irrational number sought for the next 4 thousand years is unknown, but it ‘materializes’ as if by magic in the gigantic stone architecture, the last of the 7 wonders of the globe, placed by longitude at the center of the e­merged lands at 30°N and 30°E: in what fortuity should we believe?
but the worst is yet to come: to achieve this miracle, with a low-cost loop­hole the measurements of the pyramid are adjusted so that they correspond to the squaring of the circle in the perimeter of the base, according to that π which however makes the second conditio sine qua non incompatible: the area of each façade equal to that of the height squared.
Let's add the four sides of the base of the monument, whose original value was
232 m. 805; we will have for the perimeter 931m. 22: Let it be: 4 x 232.805 = 931.22
Let's now divide the length of this perimeter by 2 times the height of the Pyramid
which was 148 m 208 at the time of its construction, we will find the value of π.
In fact 931.22 / (2 * 148.208) = 3.1416.
Note that this result cannot be a coincidence, because according to the law formulated by Herodotus and which we have cited, the angle of the faces should have been 51°49'; however, this angle is actually 51°51' and it turns out that the ratio between the perimeter or the sum of the 4 sides of the rectangular base and the vertical height is equal to 3.1416 x 2, that is to say the ratio between the circumference of a circle and its radius;
so that this monument, unique in the world, is truly the material consecration of an important value for which the human spirit has made unimaginable efforts.
Where did the producers get this notion from? Always a mystery!
«La science mystérieuse des pharaons» (1943, Abbé Th. Moreux – p.23)
A rather forced coincidence, we will see how later; however a mystery to be exalted, since it evokes the union of vertical and horizontal, abstract and concrete, spirit recognized in the circle, and matter in the square.
It should be noted immediately, however, that if the angle 51°51' - see below - does not correspond to that of 51°49' indicated by Herodotus (and Kepler), this invites some reflections.
Herodotus could report this measurement only if it had been reported to him by someone who knew it exactly, not being able to detect it with his own means. Given this, and just as the theoretical measurement is correct precisely at 51°49', the only one that will satisfy the authentic Squaring of the Circle and all the rest with the π 3.14460, we can argue that the angle 51°51' was enough to satisfy the tendency to square a circle with a ra­di­us­~height great­er than enough for the π 3.14159. We will see details and con­fir­ma­tions of this later, in the detailed reports of W. M. Flinders Petrie.

The right angle?
Calling it pi (π)’Theory, author Christopher Bartlett states:
The Φ (Kepler) theory gives a theoretical angle of 51°49'38 (51.827"), while the π theory results in an angle of 51°51'14 (51.854"), very close to each other.
The Φ and π theories are in such great contention as the primary design theory because of this close similarity.
Nexus Network Journal – Architecture and Mathematics
The design of The Great Pyramid of Khufu, p.9

An apparent conflict, which arises only from the theory based on an incorrect π. It will be seen that the method and the theoretical basis of Cole and Petrie's measurements differed, but the results coincided ‘within the permitted limits’ (say like between 3.1416 and 3.1446 ?)
Determination of the Exact Size and Orientation of the Great Pyramid of Giza."
"J. H. Cole, of the Survey of Egypt, carried out a survey of the base of this pyramid in 1925, the exact size, shape and orientation of the original base of the Pyramid on the pavement. The distances were measured with the Base Line Apparatus designed by M. M. Benoit and Guillaume using 24 metre standardized invar wires.
The angles were measured with a 6 inch Troughton and Simms micrometer theodolite.
The method and theoretical basis of the measurements of Cole and Petrie differed,
but the results coincided within the limits of the permissible error."
"Determination of the Exact Size and Orientation of the Great Pyramid of Giza. By J. H. COLE. - Survey of Egypt. SURVEY OF EGYPT PAPER No. 39. Government Press, Cairo, 1925.

The Great Pyramid protractor
angle in degrees and decimal
The graphic goniometer in the PDF nat­u­ral­ly con­firms the gold­en ra­tio, made known by Kep­ler, while no the­o­ry re­fer­ring to the π could have a good out­come out­side the set of pro­por­tions al­ready spec­i­fied be­tween the ba­ses, heights and edges. Al­though his es­say it­self re­pro­duces Gan­­tenbrink's work with mer­it, from that graph­ic one cer­tain­ly can­not de­duce such a pre­cise an­gle; and he can­not but cite as a dis­pute the one be­tween the two theories, which he calls Gold­en Ra­tio The­o­ry and the π.
It is now clear to everyone that a height of the pyramid as a radius of a cir­cum­fer­ence equal to the perimeter of the base, but calculated with π 3.14159, this being less than 3.14460, will have to be greater than that required by the real π.
The greater height will cause the golden ratio of the faces to fail and their area will not be equal to the square of that radius.
To give a better idea for practical evaluation, this is the PDF diagram, tech­ni­cal­ly reliable, sufficient to visually trace what differences are being argued, to support or demolish a theory in fact.

Finally, there are corners proposed here and there 51º51' 14.3", 51º 50' 39.1", 51º 50' 34.0", 51º 49' 38.3", 51º 40' 16.2", 51º 20' 25", 51°84, 51°51'46", 51°50'40", 51°826, 51°52'… also as averages of 4 different angles and it is difficult to use the term ‘in reality’.
It would seem rather that such angles serve or are deduced from the pri­o­rities of various authors in affirming uncertified measurements.
For the purposes of this presentation, it is of no use to reiterate calculations on the current state of an architecture bearing asymmetries caused by time and impoverished in various ways; without considering that even different and stable temperature conditions, or seasonal or climatic, with the con­tri­bu­tion of gravitational and telluric effects upstream of human error, could influence the detection of the base/height ratio in centimeters, of a stony mass such as that of 2,300,000 blocks, even without affecting the energy potential that has been conferred upon it from the beginning, that is:

as it stood in the early ages of the world,
but with the secret of its nature upon it, clothed
complete with its polished casing-stones, bounded on
every side by perfect planes, terminating in a point above,
rising from a duly levelled area of rock-surface below…
“OUR INHERITANCE IN THE GREAT PYRAMID”
BY PROFESSOR C. PIAZZI SMYTH, F.R.SS. L. &E. – 1864
In essence, it is necessary to take into account the geometric apparatus that represents the envelope and the metaphysical intent of the design, not merely technical construction; an aspect that is not only virtual but, for my first perception in its presence, 'still functioning':
It was 1985, maybe '86, and it happened on impulse, on my first privately organized visit, with a few days added on purpose to the classic tourist pro­gram. Home! I also remember telling my travelling partner, when we were at the Sphinx, that there was a hidden underground connecting tunnel that connected the inside of the Sphinx with the Great Pyramid…

For now, returning to Moreux:
he attributes the specifications of the measurements to the celebrated re­search­er Piazzi Smyth (A­STRO­NO­MER­-RO­YAL FOR SCOT­LAND, not with­out first stating that:
The original dimensions were necessarily
altered, but it is easy to correct them, as Piazzi Smyth did in 1864.
According to this astronomer, to whom we owe a first-rate work on this ancient monument, the Pyramid of Cheops had a square base measuring 232 m. 805
on each side and a height of 148 m. 208
ibid. page 23
and since the great discovery hinged on the π, the one officially valid, it is not difficult to argue that the calculations had undergone a certain, albeit slight but appetizing influence, given the passion and the stakes.
In fact, the astronomer wanted to be buried under a tombstone with a shape proportionate to the great pyramid. The PDF shows in the simulation below of a cartouche dedicated to the Supreme revelation of the secrets of the Great Pyramid to the Piazzi Smyth couple, the dominant presence of the π symbol at the vertex of a triangle.
Having believed so much in the magic of this simulacrum, to overwhelm any conviction at a purely scientific level, he aimed not without sagacity at the satisfaction of an otherworldly di­men­sion. He in turn inspired many successors, who worked to put an end to this debate, without however ever being able to provide definitive proof for or a­gainst; and we should know the reasons by now.

So much so that Moreux himself does not hesitate to rig the dice: this by
citing the relevant measurements of the astronomer Piazzi Smyth (I reproduce the original) as “232.805m. of the side and height of 148.208m”, applying which one obtains the π familiar to him (Moreux).232,805 / 148,208
He also points out “the fact that architects of the time calculated all di­mensions with their units of measurement, inches and cubits.”
In truth, the measurements that Piazzi Smyth reported in ‘feet’ - already published by the author John Taylor in 1859 (as can be read in the figure), for the measurements carried out by the 17th century archaeologist John Greaves and by the French scholars who had examined the Great Pyramid of Giza during Napoleon's Egyptian expedition – differed from those de­scribed by Moreux, precisely because they tended to already then un­know­ing­ly state the true π, at least down to the thousandths.
  there's little missing a meet:baseheight½base/altezza
Piazzi Smyth – / John Taylor232,8672148,1328π: 3.14403
Gantembrink – Great Triangle 232,9134148,1352π: 3.14460
1528 / 486 = 3,144032921810 – in metri: 232,8672 *2 / 148,1328 = 3,1440.
How close was it to being in front of the ideal dimension?
A height of 485.911 (148.1056728), less than 9 hundredths of approximation, in this case 0.00018% leaving the base unchanged! and since for some reason they were relied on integers, it was natural to round to the nearest number; the same goes for the base leaving an integer value for the height, ideally 1528.278 feet (232.9095672).
Nor was a rough rounding like the one reconstructed by Moreux deemed useful, after that first disappointing verification starting from the fourth number; or perhaps it was thought that it was necessary to limit oneself to whole numbers in order to respect special units of measurement in hypothesis; but whatever they were, they could only submit to the perfect balance of the golden section, which is not expressed through whole numbers (despite the pathetic worldly efforts to make it coincide with the nice Fibonacci series, which the initiated designers had absolutely no need for, and whose numerical progression certainly does not serve to round the figures).
Unable to know or even suppose it, Piazzi Smyth, despite his passion, truly missed out on the immense joy of discovering what great treasure his beloved pyramid contained: the actual π which in modern times, composed of mechanics and astrophysics, is to be considered a discovery second only to that of fire. He consoles himself, or justifies in the eyes of the world a wis­dom that he cannot inherit (the product of another dimension or pre­-ex­ist­ing civilization), by exalting it on the pedestal of primordiality:

To have found, however, only three numbers built in correct into the primeval building, shows a striking achievement for that early time;
(see above)
Others instead underline their deep-rooted certainty by saying:
It is therefore given that the equivalency of the area of a circle and a given square is derived using the value of the square root of Pi (π) It should be understood however, that this is a theoretical equivalency since Pi is an Irrational Number and cannot be written as the ratio of two integers. This was proven by Johann H. Lambert in 1761. (22)
Furthermore, it is important to note that Pi (π) is transcendental whereby there is no polynomial with rational coefficients of which Pi is a root.
This was proven by Ferdinand von Lindemann in 1882. (23) The consequence of this is that Pi is not constructible, which is to say that one cannot “construct” a circle equal in area to a square using a compass and straight edge.
Therefore the theoretical equivalence is not constructible.
The allure of the Square Root of Pi for the builders of the Great Pyramid, it appears,
was simply that they reached the limit of the possible.
THE GREAT PYRAMID OF GIZA: Decoding the Measure of a Monument - p.12”
COPYRIGHT 2012 © Eckhart R. Schmitz

It is not at all clear why π and Φ cannot be used in the same way; but the point is another: Lindemann only proved that the simulated Pi (π) is almost un­us­a­ble, except as an ununderstood constant, ie 3.14159.
Moreover, the expression "it appears" is not mathematical, but only literature.
Rather than cling to the saying that π is transcendental, just because it has been approached in a roundabout way, it would be much better to recognize its true nature.
As I see it, numbers are either rational or irrational; ‘transcendent’ is a term that can be attributed only to non-algebraic functions.

Two values are competing for the sceptre, one irrational resulting di­rect­ly from 5, the other called transcendent, in truth of hybrid origin, dif­fer­ent by so little as to make them usable without distinction in many circumstances, and this is what is happening; but also so much so that while the one [3.14460] is strictly connected to the constant 0.786151 3777574232860, (of which I have proposed the symbol and the name ‘Platinum’) and as such keeps a reality in perpetual and rel­a­tiv­is­tic vibration standing, the other [3.14159] is not and with 0.7853981 would cause the balance of the world to collapse.

4. The Effect of Direction of Particles
There exist some differences between particles receding
and those approaching each other. At extremely high relativistic speeds,
objects approaching each other have a repelling effect.
When objects approaching each other are at 0,78615 c,
their inertia equals to their gravitational affect.
For particles approaching each other at still faster speeds,
the gravitational effect will have a negative repelling gravitational effect.
As I had introduced on page 28 of my «2x2=3.14» and reiterated later on page squaring-the-circle-with-the-true-pi, but without going too far from the basic theme, it is worthwhile in this context to give a more daring image, based on the very special parameter that is 'c', the speed of light of 299.792.458 meters per second (or presumed to be so).
Maxwell's Equations-(2-of-30)
– Speed of Light –
I wondered in fact if and to what extent the π takes part in the formulas that led to its official calculation; while in the case cited above, the constant could have circumvented the problem, keeping its dependence of ¼ of the golden π 3.14460, unsuspected by the researchers.
The π, generally considered the ratio between a circle and its radius, should be understood as a universal constant independent of any state, which with its 4 quarters maintains equilibrium in circular motion, in gravity as in the 4 phases of wave manifestations.
As for the constant, I will simply point out that by applying to 299792458 the approximate quotient between the values 3.14460 / 3.14159, = 1.0009590…, the speed in a vacuum could approach 300079966; that in pure air (if any still exists on the planet) oscillates for the generic refractive index 1.0002926 (incidence calculated with the usual π) around 299992188, and with index 1.000243285 at 50° Celsius (halfway between ice and boiling), at 300006978, values much closer to the favored, instinctively idealized for­mu­la­tion 3×108 m/s. It is worth remembering that in the circle of diameter = 1, the area of the inscribed Divine Triangle is Φ / φ2 = 0.30028310…, which is like saying area of the circle ÷φ2
By the way, even if it constitutes the maximum speed limit in nature, declaring it the maximum speed at which any information can travel in the universe, whose boundaries we have certainly not crossed, is nothing but a completely terrestrial and untrue presumption).
And since in general relativity it is the "speed of gravity", as also expected for gravitational waves, and in a gravitational field space is curved, here we are faced with the intervention of the golden π.

In the square c2 of that base – component of the fundamental equation E = mc2, Einstein's well-known formula of relativity – with its constant or ¼π cuts out the arc, quarter of a circle or sinusoid, of which each point will be proportionally equidistant from each vertex, ie will be affected by the same attraction/repulsion in a radial manner in constant dynamic e­qui­lib­rium.
Multiplying the formation by 4, the period of attendance is completed, vir­tu­al­ly recomposing the [gravitational] circle of which each vertex is the cen­ter, governed by the π. At the moment I could not express this concept sketched with difficulty in a more appropriate way; I only hope that it does not induce me to further advanced research, such as from the π to the gold­en spirals

It has been seen that deviations between the measurements of less than a decimeter cause the ratio to slip by 3.1 thousandths, from ,..16 to ,..46; therefore, like the results proposed by Moreux and many others, they are not authoritative. Moreover, in a theoretical challenge like this, an ap­prox­i­ma­tion of a few figures, which instead should guarantee the now very fa­mous tail of the π, is anything but to be taken seriously and reliably.
If the validity of a mathematical or geometric formulation is to be dem­on­strat­ed, at least 5 or 8 decimal places are necessary for precision on paper; this varies of course in relation to whole quantities.
Furthermore, Moreax attributes to the Great Pyramid a height of 148 mt. to which he adds 0.208 instead of 0.1328, to obtain the quotient he desired, which without his addition would have been 3.14403.
From whom and how would he have deduced it, if not to be able to trace it back to the only constant to rely on, which was already the discordant note in the theoretical pyramid concert?
Consecrations aside, it remains one of the few hypotheses to support meas­ures that come within a decimeter of the higher precision meas­ure­ments obtained in modern times with the Gantenbrink instrumentation; there­fore, within certain limits and despite everything, it would validate the best.
Ultimately, his report had the merit of having encouraged me to undertake this further and fascinating verification of the Squaring of the Circle, refining my research on the π in the Great Pyramid precisely because of its her­me­neu­tic symbolic content, which I had not immediately dealt with, even though I had first focused on the most imposing Golden Triangle, which in it­self set all the other strings of my thought in vibration.
Among other things, today I wonder how much the robotic exploration itself has been dedicated to corridors and internal volumes, rather than to the o­ver­all profile, perhaps reconstructed on the data of the major pre­de­ces­sors; but whatever the primary sources, what has emerged is what matters to the re­search I have carried out.
Although a smaller approximation of the base side may affect the accuracy of the ratio, I double-checked that even in my 2003 publication, the reported av­er­age values were quite close to the due proportions; although this in-depth analysis would only occur in the years to come.
In fact, a probable average of 230.3683 *4 / (146.515 *2) = 3.1446 was given, although made up of short measures, the most common.
At the time I was unaware of it, and could only refer to official mathematics; while in reality a circle of radius Φ × the right π has a perimeter of 8, like the square of side 2 at the base of the pyramid, and not 7.992335 as in my note (3 of that time.

The fact is that no matter how many tricks one may use to square this cir­cle, the whole vast mass of hypotheses, copied and almost never the same, conversions of conversions to make disagreements even on units of meas­ure­ment and various suppositions coincide, theories all worthy in the ab­sence of certainties, supported by a large series of bibliographical ref­er­ences, they will never achieve the intended purpose, even if they are sat­is­fied with satisfactory correspondences on the basis of a golden section - degraded to an effect, crumbled in the numerical sequence devised by Fib­o­nac­ci, a series which in itself does not represent any mathematical law - and of π 3.1416, an agreement which is not arithmetically possible, some­thing already widely documented.
A fractional deviation of 3.1‰ in establishing a ratio between base and height is really easy to round off, but the real secret for measuring the pyr­a­mid, especially in virtual configuration after thousands of years, lies solely and exclusively in adopting the reference to the Great Golden Triangle which constitutes its geometric and design framework, since it contains π and Φ in absolute and coexisting precision.


To draw conclusions and start from a well-founded conclusion, if most of the analyses must contrast the descriptions of Herodotus and other ancients with the numerous interpretations and relative units of measurement a­dopt­ed, it seems very difficult to support pre-established and safe figures.
Since here we are only interested in the measurements connected to the de­clared Squaring of the Circle, we must start from the two basic concepts that are not at all significant:
  1. In order to realize it, the designers had to know the true π and its math­e­mat­i­cal essence, or they would not have associated it with the gold­en section in this extraordinary monumental synthesis; in my o­pin­ion, they would have had no reason to try their hand at a hybrid and dis­joint­ed com­bi­na­tion for such an undertaking, where a given re­la­tion­ship is per­fect and the other is not.
    What for our current point of view is dissociated into two opposing the­o­ries, for those Wise Men had to be the maximum union and cor­re­spond­ence at every level; and it is not just a question of a 3‰: I have al­ready cited the constant 0.78615 regulating the effects of at­trac­tion­/re­pul­sion in subatomic motion.
  2. Herodotus, and many others did not know its exact value, especially in an­tiq­ui­ty; therefore any numerical reference to ancient statements on the squaring of the circle is to be considered abstract or simply reported, but only at a historical and documentary level, without direct or math­e­mat­i­cal knowledge of the facts.
Unfortunately, not even the value of π, reconstructed from modern for­mu­la­tions, is able to satisfy the calculations necessary to validate these theses.
It follows that every attempt to balance the accounts by adapting the meas­ures of the pyramid involves two opposite but equally prohibitive effects:
  • Allowing skeptics to deny this possibility and geometric fact, an attitude that does not respect the truthfulness of the Squaring of the Circle as a vi[r]t[u]al reality, of which the pyramid is the proof in being, di cui la pi­ra­mi­de è la prova in essere.
  • Seeing the alleged count fail, since reducing the hypothetical meas­ure­ments to ratios that please the official π can only produce a false result, given that the current π is not precise enough to validate such a com­par­i­son, not being compatible with the golden proportions involved.
After all, the author Bartlett himself, and not only him, admits and un­der­lines:
It is hard to believe that with the precision with which the Egyptians built this massive pyramid that there was not an intention to build it based on some important specific design.
id. – The design of The Great Pyramid of Khufu, p.13
He is right about this, but will have to take a good part of it back due to the insufficiency of the π, diluting the supposed display "to demonstrate to the future an advanced mathematical knowledge" as transversal with respect to their “other very real spiritual and funereal concerns”. It seems logical that this perception that pervades everyone from admiration to the inevitable frustration for the lack of a definitive answer, increases the most varied views, substituting the application of numerical ratios that if in intuition they would replace the golden ratio, in reality branch out the thought into many rivulets, disjoined from the imprint of that hieratic triangle that above all contains and represents it, π included.

It is remarkable that the proportions of the Great Pyramid have exerted such a strong and repeated attraction, as to induce many scholars to re­trace it with the utmost care, even though they are aware of having to deny it but not with­out making sense of it, almost as if it were a tribute due to such theoretical genius.
This can be justified by taking into account the fact that they had no al­ter­na­tive to the one-off π established, and probably not even motivations to re­place it, if not faced with this bench test which could prove epochal.
Now in fact, starting even just from the Divine Golden Triangle that encloses it, the reasons for discussing it are undeniably exposed in my essay «2x2=3,14» on pages 15,16, implemented extensively on this site during and after having re­stored order to the world of golden spirals, with proof and a computer dem­on­stra­tion of the error, so that they should induce due at­ten­tion.

I will then try on this page to re-establish a comparison from the works of accredited researchers, of the designs they have entrusted to history and culture, with such a decisive and fundamental imprint for all the dimensions that involve this pyramid. The first and sensible purpose in the face of too many theories is to show how in reality almost none of the outlined schemes escapes the magnetism of the Great Triangle, despite the in­ev­i­ta­ble variations and inaccuracies of time, places and calculations.
Personally, in 2002 I had the good fortune to come across the measurements of the Great Pyramid provided by the surveys carried out by the UPUAUT project, documented by precise AUTOCAD diagrams, from which I was able to extract millimetric measurements that were more reliable, a posteriori, than any available drawing; at that time they were sufficient to lead me to the dis­cov­ery of that Divine Triangle, which I did not hesitate to propose as the Third Treasure of Geometry, revealed to my perception as the most sumptuous mys­tery of all geometry, sacred and profane..

Although I have already published them in PDF format since the first report in 2003, I reproduce a screenshot taken from the most recent and complete illustrative video «Every CAD drawing of Cheops Pyramid from www.cheops.org», clickable to check it in a PDF of 8937px × 7689px, on the profile of which I superimpose simple measurement data and two graphs: a protractor centered at the left vertex of the base, and in gold hatching the Great Golden Triangle with its four golden circles.
triangle hatching —: 370,853 mm |: 235,866 mm, ratio ÷ 0,786151
[370,853 / 235,866 * 2 = 3,144607531] The construction rests on a square base, with sides oriented to the cardinal points, as to the four essential El­e­ments of material existence, already indicated on the previous page.
The pyramidal structure connects each side of the basic square to a single vertex, giving rise to a triangular face, which may or may not be there as a full surface, i.e. whose main function is to combine the four fundamental Es­sences into one: the Quintessence, ‘quinta essentia’ (in Greek pémpton stoichêion) to name the ether which in reality radiates the manifestations, vivifying them.
It is crucial to understand this passage from the number 4 to the number 5 (or vice versa), since geometrically the circumference with center at the vertex and radius up to the base is transmuted, so to speak, transfiguring itself into the base perimeter, of which it is the 'root' by virtue of the golden ratio between their bodies, which we have seen to be: Φ on base Φ.
It is in the study carried out on the fifth level golden spiral that I had already highlighted how the number 5 is the determining radical in any formulation of the Golden Section, of which I repeat only a brief indicative passage:
[0.05 + 0.05 + 0.05 + 0.05 + 0.05] + 0.5 + 0.5 = 1.118,
in short 0.52 × 5 on a base 1, which ± 0.5 leads to both 0.618 and 1.618, which multiplied together make 1.
A breakdown to the minimum terms that could be considered banal, if it did not make it clear how:
The Golden Section is a "mystery" governed by the number 5, which can fully represent it in its essential form and notation!

And as I was able to represent in my hypothesis of spiral and anti-spiral, the Vortex can be traced back to the Φ, a whirlwind that forcefully gathers, feeds, destroys! All the word "pyramid" needed was to be translated as "fire in the middle."
A simple screw can give an idea of its penetrating capacity, but to imagine its power, thinking of a cyclone might not be enough.
In this ex­per­i­men­tal pho­to based on a Tes­la coil, tak­en in 1979 with a Kirlian cam­e­ra, you can no­tice the move­ment of the ver­ti­cal en­er­gy flow in a dou­ble he­lix, which also brings the thought back to DNA.

The Squaring of the Circle is not only a geometric need but an instinctive, or rather esoteric, need, translated for centuries into the alchemical search for the Philosopher's Stone, lapis philosophorum, secret conversion factor be­tween the creature and its vital source; about which you can read the most learned nonsense on the web, as always from those who feel obliged to label what they do not know or understand - let it be said to warn those who are not prepared.

By the way, the Energy is not the origin, but is a manifestation of the Supreme CONSCIOUSNESS.
This is taught by the superior dictate of the CRISTO with those defined by LUI as 9 LETTERES, historical and cognitive documents that at the very least we should call LETIONS, which I have had the privilege of re-editing to the state of the art, as well as illustrating passages of them in a refined gallery of 800 Tweets.

8.10 Science presents the universe as being matter possessing consciousness but the truth is: 8.10.1 The universe is CONSCIOUSNESS which has taken on the appearance of matter as a result of a descent into the lower frequencies of vibration of consciousness. This is the true reality of existence - nothing else.
3.102 Before I continue with this account of my life on earth, I want to stress again that
everything in the universe is a particular and individualised
STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS made visible.
excerpts from the 9 LETTERS OF CHRIST – dictated by HIS ENTITY in 1998
Squaring the Circle is a miracle and a vehicle of the Motivating Force, the Prime Mover of Existence that induces particles to the density and form[ation] of elements and governs their motion.
The mathematical and geometric realization, Intelligences of Creation, Φ, is con­cre­tized [meta]physically speaking all here: configured and applied in a functional way in the pyramidal structure that has been given to us.

In light of these premises, it is much more difficult to ascertain what the task assigned to the Great Pyramid was, than its certain and virtual meas­ure­ments. There is an almost global disagreement on both postulates; but if there is a given relationship that emerges unassailable and eloquent, here it is in the Divine Golden Triangle.
The first critical and determining aspect, so to speak, which led me here, is the fact that one of its oblique sides ×4 is equivalent to the circumference that cir­cum­scribes it, dulcis in fundo it is the seed of the π; for me the constant , Platinum.
I have already illustrated several times how within the circle of diameter=1 the perimeter of its base:
0.97173654351329135636572775178908 multiplied by × 4 sides, is
= 3,8869461740531654254629110071563
and equals its height, which is the radius of the circle to be squared
0.61803398874989484820458683436564 × 2 multiplied
× 3,1446055110296931442782342932803
= 3,8869461740531654254629108214067
perfect up to the 23rd decimal place, justifying the calculation limits im­posed by the computer. Can we ask for more, or refuse such evidence?
It is the only possible and real Squaring of the Circle, as real and reliable as π 3.14460.
None of this or anything else can be emulated by π 3.1416, and the ar­chi­tec­ture of the pyramid is evidence of this, I should add, unfailing.
Since without it, the recognition of the true π would not have been achieved.

repetita iuvant

Why pyramid?
asking and answering this question could be the first step to grasp its resonance, not only architectural; it is not this in fact that captivates the world in its unbearable silence that makes everyone talk, since there is no shortage of buildings surprising for their beauty and original ex­traor­di­naryness.
What will be its ‘extra gear’ today, when we no longer see it shining in the sun like a star?
Let’s retrace its surface character.
Our pyramid is directional, has a base and apex, or vice versa high and low, vertical and horizontal. It therefore obeys a gravitational field.
Let us observe the Tetrahedron, on the other hand, which although itself a regular pyramid is the opposite example: it is a pivot of life, of the zodiac symbiosis and of DNA, but unlike the great pyramid it has neither head nor tail, almost like a sphere; it can be observed from any side or placed on any face as a base, without any dynamic difference.
To penetrate the reason that leads to the almost universal choice of the reg­u­lar pyramid shape with a square base as a functional apparatus, that fun­da­men­tal statement is at the forefront.

  • The area of a square hav­ing as a side the height of the pyr­a­mid was e­quiv­a­lent to the area of each o­rig­i­nal face, that is to say the height of the pyr­a­mid was the hinge of the sur­face of each face, a ver­ti­cal cor­re­spond­ence that strength­ens the sym­bi­o­sis of the 4 sides with the vor­tex men­tioned above, which I will revisit later with fewer numbers and more de­scrip­tions, related to the π:
    in our circle in fact it deals with
    Φ×Φ × Φ = Φ
    that is, the square root of:
    (0,48586827175664567818286387589454 [½ base]
    × 0,78615137775742328606955857332008) [height]
    = 0,3819660112501051517954131595499  [Φ²]
  • In this way the base perimeter is equivalent to the circumference with ra­di­us equal to the height Φ ×Φ ×8 = Φ ×2 ×π
    from which π results as the ratio between perimeter and diameter
    π = ( Φ ×Φ ×8) ÷ (Φ ×2) = Φ ×4
    equal to 3,1446055110296931442782342932802.
  • While we are at it, we can also verify that the area of the same circle is equivalent to the area of the rectangle with height equal to its diameter and base equal to the py­ram­i­dal section; a solemn integration of Kep­ler's triangle, given that from each of its sides we can calculate the area of the circle with the same radius.
    With the right π, in the numerical case a­dopt­ed a­bove, sim­pli­fy­ing the ge­o­met­ric cal­cu­la­tion to a quar­ter of the two ar­e­as, we can in fact  play it like this:
      Φ×Φ ×Φ = Φ2 × Φ
       BASE ×HEIGHT
       RECTANGLE
     |  R2 × ¼π
     CIRCLE
    or with the Pythagorean theorem:
    Φ-Φ2 ×Φ = Φ2 × Φ = 0,30028310, figure
    already commented on the page: squaring-the-circle-with-the-true-pi
    and anyway, in homage to the geometric view which can be much more explicit than arithmetic, Φ2 seen as a side of the square in blue shading, generates a square whose area will be cut out at 0.78615% by the arc of a circle which has its side as its radius.
    To translate it into full numbers:
    Rettangolo: 0.971736 × 2 × 0.618034 = 1.20113242400
    Circle: 3.14460 × 0.6180342 = 1.20113242400
    By clicking on the figure you can even see the perfect intersection of the circle of diameter = 1 (which circumscribes the triangle) together with that of the blue circle (of radius Φ), with the side of the rectangle.
    Of course with π = 3.14159 even this correspondence of areas and pe­rim­e­ters would not be found.
All this can only reinforce how the area of the circle to be squared is con­nect­ed to the triangle, positive catalyst, by the number 4, since if that rec­tan­gle which is equivalent to a quadrant of the circle is cut diagonally by one side of the triangle, its left half corresponding to the other half of the same, clearly indicates that every quadrant or ¼ circle is equal to the area of a Golden Triangle having as its height the radius (R and base R ××2).
This is demonstrated even better, if it were nothing more than a whim, by ap­ply­ing the same diagonal cut to the double-height rectangle, and com­plet­ing the figure on the right side to highlight the multiplication of four equal gold­en triangles.
On the side, a distribution of the four could not be missed, circular and sym­met­ri­cal on the circle, since they highlight how the double-hatched green square, whose sides cross the intersections of the circle with all 4 triangles, is exactly the one that squares the circle itself.
It follows that the segment joining the two intersections of the blue circle with the sides of the triangle, extended to the perpendiculars to the two ends of the base, is the side of that square centered in the equivalent circle.
One last minor curiosity – the red one which has the same area, rotated until the vertices coincide with the ba­ses of the triangles, also touches the vertices of the perimeter green in­ter­secting the rectangle with them. The 4 profiles should not be confused with the faces of the pyramid.
If bu luck the first statement does not use π, leaving the burden of absolute correspondence to Φ and this allows us to ascertain the exact value of π from the equality between the circumference with radius, height of the pyr­a­mid and its base perimeter – the absolute relationship between the four faces and the function of squaring or quartering the circle is maintained, from the moment in which for each triangle inclined towards the apex, the ratio be­tween ½base ÷ its height is Φ, and therefore the square of the con­stant ratio that we will see, between ½base ÷ height of the pyramid.
This inverse relationship means that if in our pyramid profile inscribed in a circle with diameter = 1 and circumference = π, the height of the pyramid is Φ, the height of the faces is Φ, that's to say 0.78615, which ideally configures four rays that make up the π, departing from the vertex to frame and distribute its effect up to the four cardinal directions, or cyclical phases mentioned several times in my articles, to which the base of the solid con­struc­tion is oriented.
The same four rays that delimit the section profile two by two on the North­-South and East-West axes In other words, it is the same ½base that start­ing from the center of the square of the base, in the pyramid profile relates to 0.78615¼π on the oblique side, while starting from each of its corners in the 4 faces it relates to 0.78615¼π as their height!
This is valid for any type of square-based pyramid, but in this one the dom­i­nant ones are the π and that exchange of values for which if in the sec­tion of the pyramid Φ is the height, in each face ½base ÷ height is Φ.
In short, or should I say in sum, π and Φ they are modalized in the four fa­cades that at the vertex (energy) join the hinges of the slowed mass, in i­de­al balance for each side or phase of the construction.
Does it make sense to imagine something casual in all this unrepeatable per­fec­tion? The above example means that any ratio between the height and ½ base side of the pyramid, [ for us:
0,61803398874989484820458681467588
÷
0,48586827175664567818286387589454 ]

that is actually divergent from the Φ, say 1.2720196495140,
due to the variation of the height or the side, will not allow the equality of circumference and perimeter; which in fact inevitably occurs with the π = 3.1416 even respecting the aforementioned ratio for the areas.
I know I'm just repeating myself, but it will serve to highlight that in some respects it is the numbers that decide… even the meanings.

THE CUT OF THE GEM
If in the case of the circle of unit diameter everything is immediate, since the constant is the very measure of the sides, on the open ground, in short, two axioms define the cut of this precious 'stone', in the perspective of sim­ple proportions, but at the same time of in-depth ponderation:
  1. The area of the triangular faces as height squared, when the ratio ½base ÷ height of the pyramid is the constant 0.78615 ( Φ).
    Note that this ratio ‘½base ÷ height of the triangles of the faces’ is Φ, that is the above ratio squared.
    The area of each face erected on half the base gives rise to a golden rec­tan­gle; so the equality of the areas can be reduced to the formula:
    ½base2 × φ = height2
  2. The equality of the base perimeter and circumference with radius the height, which reduces to:
    base × 2 = height × π | from which we obtain in all its splendor: |
    π = base × 2 ÷ height,
Only if this double relationship between the measures of the pyramid is re­spected, we have access to the true effect of the π; since the piv­ot-col­umn of the combination, like a gravitational spindle that guarantees the π in its func­tion, is the height of the pyramid as the radius of the maximum circle and side of the squares that virtually intersect and identify with each façade; im­ag­ine the hinge of a revolving door with 4 square leaves.
The real keystone and still the first secret to be understood does not reside only in an architectural fact, and it is so rich and powerful as to make the e­mo­tion in retracing it like a flow of current.

Measurements can also be attributed to the construction such that the base perimeter corresponds to the circumference having radius its height, the hy­pothe­ses of measures are many to trample on each other but without an­y­­thing that is de­mon­stra­ble; no real relationship with the golden section, and all this wonder falls to pieces. What I have found from Gantenbrink's CAD, and from further prospects speaks too clearly to be ignored.

This scheme taken from the Upuaut, which we can consider the most in­dic­a­tive, is accompanied by various profiles which, although differing from each other by a few units or fractions - apart from the arrangement of the known or unknown internal spaces, of which I would not exclude further con­nec­tions, but which do not concern the present discussion - gravitate a­round the magic triangle, confirming it sufficiently, even without having grasped its fundamental geometric importance and that is, its essence, an im­mu­ta­ble truth that no one had yet before their eyes.

The more I try to focus my work on the most certified data available, the more I see the tide of articles increasing, committed to defining and re­de­fin­ing every stone, every crevice and inclination, submerged by a catalogue of measurements of which I can only observe the descriptive curiosity, since they overlook the most certain and essential factor, sometimes climbing up the mirrors to endorse one or another mystery.
Studies and graphs are developed based on the studies of others, schemes upon schemes, with the most disparate theories, in search of something new to reveal, but always bypassing the most important real data.
The measures are discordant, or there would be no need for such a flow; but whether the series 232/148 or 230/146 is more realistic, what I have tried to explain will retain only one meaning: the necessary Golden Pro­por­tion between the components is the first virtual key to understanding the Pyr­a­mid of Giza, its construction and the intent held within it.
Not being able to solve this is like chasing more or less tortuous paths, but always blindly, for a puzzle without a solution; so much wasted effort.

I will reproduce some of the most reliable classical schemes, with a graphic comparison of the golden triangle in superposition, to facilitate the visual evaluation of how little is needed to make them almost equal and at the same time all different, leaving each single theory as if on a raft at the mer­cy of the waves.
Also to verify how many more worthy authors have conformed to the actual ratio, the only one that responds to all the requirements with impeccable accuracy.
So much so as to make the Great Pyramid of Giza a true
treasure chest of the Golden Section and the π which is its root,

Whatever one thinks about it, the canons that I have proposed are those that guarantee a prototype of a perfect pyramid in all the senses examined and described by history, even for those who do not consider them applied to the pyramid of Giza.
Which could also be older than 10,000 years, and have lost part of its mass, however maintaining in evidence the proportions likely guaranteed by its own energetic and gravitational field.
The measurements of the Divine Triangle, multiplied by any modular unit re­spect­ing its ratio, are therefore those to be adopted for the construction of scale models, with or without solid facades, provided they are correctly o­ri­en­ted.
However, in my opinion, a more exciting consideration exists, and it is the one introduced on the previous page, which invites you to experience its effects on well-being by practicing the 5 so-called Tibetan Rites, a true Squaring of the Circle in your multidimensional body.
It might also help us understand the Great Pyramid in a new way,
Anyone who had the privilege of staying even for twenty minutes inside the king's chamber, in the heart of the pyramid, should have experienced upon exiting the unexpected sensation of suddenly finding oneself in a sort of dis­ap­point­ing and imperceptibly nostalgic emptiness; only to then return to nor­mal­i­ty shortly after, but retaining an indelible memory of it over time.
An inverse effect of the energy field in which he found himself, and which instead he probably will not remember, not having had immediate awareness of it, all the more out of breath after having climbed that corridor to be able to reach it.

Can we perhaps glimpse in the π the essence of the prime mover?
It is for sure the center of every circle, or sphere, and as such guarantees the balance of any gravitational field.
The vision described so far places it at the top of the pyramid, the center of the circle that will become square at the base; and the value 3.14460 sup­ports this assumption, although the cognitive sources have been lost.

As for these sources, the much-quoted Herodotus would not seem so re­li­a­ble, if he declares that side and height measure equally 800 feet:
“Its base is square, each side eight hundred feet long,
and its height is the same”
Herodotus Histories 2.124-125, translation by A.D. Godley
One can only assume, given the apparent paradox, that hasty re­-trans­la­tions, or the damage of original documents, have altered the descriptive mean­ing of a height equal to the radius of a circle's base.
11 The story of the daughter of Cheops is on par with that of the daughter of Rhampsinitus; and we may be certain that Herodotus never received it from the "priests,"
whose language he did not understand, but from some of the Greek "interpreters,"
by whom he was so often mislead.
Notes (By Sir Henry Rawlinson) – Extract from Herodotus - c, 430 BC. 'The Histories', Vol II: 124.
I'm also leaving out:
"A Letter from Alexandria on the Evidence of the Practical Application of the Quadrature of the Circle, In the Configuration of the Great Pyramids of Gi­zeh","authors":"H. Agnew","pub_date":"1838", not so much because the Author used a sextant made by his own hand, certainly admirable,
My instrument was a sextant of 2t feet radius, made of well-seasoned wood, and accurately adjusted with proper sights, and a plummet suspended by a fine silk thread from the centre. It was mounted on a frame of convenient height, and the whole apparatus was solid and heavy. With this instrument I could measure angles of altitude with great convenience
but because even his tables and hypotheses all based on the current π are flawed at the root and therefore useless. In the liight of the above state­ments and their non-approximate solution, everything else is nothing but a superfluous debate.


Some historical overview
However, I propose to browse through some cases, among the vast range of images and project schemes distributed everywhere, verifying how much the base÷height ratio of the current measurements deviates from the key con­stant 0.78615, ie Φ. In the publication of the study on the geometry of the pyramid by Christopher Bartlett, of which I will omit the more sub­jec­tive propositions, 21 measurements of the pyramid are listed, carried out from 1840 to 2012, of which only the first (Howard Vyse) is 232.8 × 148.2 (I use this notation of side base × height); for the most part the others, al­though different by minor fractions, are around 230.3 × 146.7, probably re­fer­ring to the current measurements of the monument, stripped of its im­por­tant casing.
The difficulty in measurement results from the Arab destruction of nearly
the whole of the fine sloping blocks of casing, about 3 feet thick (0,9144 mt,),
thus leaving the inner core of masonry in steps…
https://www,nature,com/articles/116942a0
To tell the truth, less than 2 meters of difference do not seem to cover more than half of the gap that appears in the various diagrams, between the vir­tu­al perimeter complete with casing and that of only core of masonry in steps, but I do not take this into account, having noticed some differences, where the external triangular profile is the only reference goal for the decisive calculations.
I've already mentioned Piazzi Smyth and John Taylor.
In 1865, Piazzi Smyth made the first largely accurate survey of the Great Pyramid, which he published in several books and articles. Piazzi Smyth obtained official permission to carry out this work from the viceroy of Egypt, Ismail Pasha, and received assistance from the Egyptian Antiquities Service and the governor of Giza.
These permissions are described in his publications, including his 1867 book.
1867 – Life and Work at the Great Pyramid (vol, 1, pp, ix, 4-8, 29-30).
His two-time measurements at 232.8672 × 148.1328 match our π until the thousandth, as is 3.1440.
The red dotted profiles superimposed on the images are all the same Great Golden Triangle and show very well the almost absolute correspondence of the construction, leaving those small decimal deviations to fight with the mo­ments and the survey instruments. What I try to reiterate is that more or less all the declared measurements – unless they are very far from the i­de­al ratio, and some, especially the more modern ones, are not lacking – con­tri­bute to delineating the basic profile with differences that together with the effects of external agents, can be considered occasional fractional ap­prox­i­ma­tions with respect to the overall mass.
Among the many authors, I would compare some more dedicated to re­search than to narrative.
YearSourceSideHeightside /2 /heightπ (sd *2 *hg)
1840Howard Vyse232,8148,20,78542510123,141700405
1865Piazzi Smyth, John Taylor232,8672148,13280,78600753,14403
1883Flinders Petrie230,348146,710,78504532753,14018131
1925J, H, Cole230,363146,7310,78498403,139936346
1971Livio Stecchini230,363146,5120,78615744793.144629791
Doctor Stecchini, who in the February issue of ABS has related the original alphabet with a previous divinatory numerical system, summarizes here the results of the research on the origin of the measurements. The world's measurement systems probably have a common root in ancient Mesopotamia.
In some cultures they had a religious aura; in Greece they gave rise to the dispute between Protagoras, according to whom “man is the measure of all things,” and Plato, according to whom “God is the measure of all things.”
In the modern world, many theoretical misunderstandings arise because
scientists and humanists have forgotten the true nature of measure.
https://journals.sagepub,com/doi/abs/10,1177/000276426100400706
1997Mark Lehner (estimation)230,33146,590,78562657753.14250631
2000Roger Hersch-Fischler230,4146,60,78581173263,14324693
Herz-Fischler presents a variety of charts on these relationships for the observed and measured quantities found within each theory. Fortunately for the reader,
decimal places are only taken out to the thousandths place.
NEXUS NETWORK JOURNAL - VOL, 3, NO 2, 2001 197
It would be fun to point this out to Pi Day enthusiasts!
2001John F. Pile (no inspection) 230,356146,6490,78539915043.141596601
If any other researchers did not disdain some artifice in order to see a legend fulfilled, they did nothing but make a hole in the water. We see in fact that John F. Pile, photographer and interior design expert is the only one to achieve the optimal result 3.141596601; he produced it at the table, with: “no inspection” and perhaps even proposing to endorse the theory of π!; and it was practically copied
by Farid Atiya up to the 9th decimal place…
2007Zahi Hawass230,37146,590,78576301253,14305205
2009Farid Atiya (F, Pile copy)230,356146,6490,78539915043.141596601
2010Stephen Brabin230,348146,590,78568797333,142751893
From the elliptical circumference of the Earth with the right π the base would increase, with a ratio even closer to 3.1446 – «The_Incomplete_Pyramids» by Stephen Brabin
2014Christopher Bartlett (trial)230,363146,5150,7861413503,14456540
Its total average that from 230,478 /146,726 *2 leads to a π of 3,14161, can only affirm assorted ad hoc measures, including duplicates and excluding other cases, perhaps still with the intent to privilege the theory of π, despite the frustrating evidence that such a value cannot satisfy both basic postulates being in disagreement with the golden section; and it is really not the case to console oneself with the first three decimals.
If it makes little sense for the present research to calculate the average of the lengths of the 4 sides, it makes even less sense to calculate the average of the lengths attributed by various authors over the decades. Even more so if they are reworked by worthy writers on the basis of the few official ones, in order to publish and sell one of their book.

Rest assured that the Great Pyramid is a finished, perfect cosmic device still full of secrets, to which the creativity of researchers will neither add nor take away anything, whatever their point of view.
As for those inevitable desecrators who like to boast of sarcasm, they do not de­serve too much attention; sometimes the court jesters were allowed to mock even the kings.
After all, if it can be difficult to argue on the basis of cer­tain notions, it is even more difficult to attempt it on notions that one does not have.

Only the environment and the human rage over the centuries have removed from sight those measures that can never be recovered in solid; but they have not prevented it from transmitting to us the most important messages, first of all the access to the Divine Triangle and from this to the true π.

Although two of the earliest and most accredited explorers of the Great Pyramid came less close than others, for the 1925 measurements Petrie reports better:

That of King Sneferu at Meydum immediately preceded the Great Pyramid,
and was planned on a similar system of measures.
Both have the proportion resulting from the height being the radius of a circle
equal to the circuit of the base, the angles found being
By π theory51° 51' 14" ·3
Khufu's pyramid  51° 50' 40" ±1' 5"
Sneferu's pyramid51° 52' ±2' ?
The dimensions found are:
Khufu's,  height 7, circuit 44, x 40  cubits.
di Snefru ''7,'' 44, x 25  cubiti.
December 26,1925 – NATURE – Petrie Surveys_116942a0.pdf

Even if we limit ourselves to very spartan figures,
from 3.1402 here we are at 44 ÷7 ×2 = 3.1429!
In 1883 it must have been even more complicated, either by protractor and level, or by stop angle or steel square, but always by eye and cross;
24. To obtain the original height of the Pyramid, we must depend on the observations of its angle.
THE PYRAMIDS AND TEMPLES OF GIZEH. BY W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE, LONDON [1883]
I put this passage in clear view which high­lights com­pro­mises and un­cer­tain­ties, so that what is im­por­tant is to take note that meas­ure­ments have al­ways been the ob­ject of de­duc­tive cal­cu­la­tions, re­lat­ing them rather than to thousandths, to a continuously variable status quo for the estimated angle, to which he himself will add in 1925 a ±1' 5"; all vol­a­ti­le arguments with respect to a basic theoretical framework.
Measurements however destined to crystallize as fixed and certified data, to which all those who consider them the only reliable ones refer, but which are only indicative. Among the most historic and reputed therefore, from which many have drawn to offer them to the public:
By Sir W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE, F.R.S. – © Nature Publishing Group
1881 1925
N. side9069”4 - 3' 20"230.36276| 9065”1 - 2' 23"230.25354
E. side9067”7 - 3' 57"230.31958| 9073”0 - 5' 30"230.4542
S. side9069”5 - 3' 41"230.3653 | 9070”5  - I' 57"230.3907
W. side068”6   - 3' 54"230.34244| 9069”2 - 2' 30"230.35768
  MEAN 9068”8 - 3' 43"230.34752| 9069”4 - 3' 6" 230.36276

Of course, there is no shortage of those who have developed their own - apart from the not insignificant problem of converting the cubits, which leads Petrie himself to give up on finding them destined for a "mass of theories, which extend from good reason into a morass of impossibilities,"; and given that he expressed himself in this way in 1925 in “Surveys of the Great Pyramid” quoting J.H. Cole, we can also imagine his comment if he had come across the Web a century later!
Although all traces of the original project have been lost, the vestiges periodically retraced with different approximations cannot but lead back to that dominant construct which is the imperative Golden Triangle, the matrix and soul of the construction.
There is no escaping its presence and its mathematical priorities, to which this work of mine is directed, having been its beginning and now its goal.

The following update, more or less interesting in this context, for its reference to planetary orbits, from «Planetary Correlation of the Giza Pyr­am­ids», although not far from my research for the astroseismic discipline that I started in 2011, given the care taken in the technical-graphic format, it offers me an additional opportunity to verify the correspondence of the pyramid profile to the Golden Triangle, superimposed in yellow. From W. M. F. Petrie 1965 and Today, in the year 2014

Cross section of the original state of the Great Pyramid with details of the "Mars position" and its environment (upper inset) during the astronomical events in the year 3088 AD. The levels of the courses were measured by W. M. F. Petrie [6, Map VIII]. The shape of the blocks of stone around the opening of the southern air shaft is taken from a drawing of Maragioglio and Rinaldi [9, part IV, map 2, Fig. 2]. This drawing, where we find also the numbers of the courses, was published in 1965. Today, in the year 2014 some more blocks have been removed around the mouth of the air shaft. So, the reader can compare the state of 1965 with the situation at present.

While a proportional reduction in profile might fit the due ratios, I will not dwell on current pyramid proposals that do not support the presence of the π; nor could they demonstrate an effective squaring on the basis of different measurements from one side to the other, from one period to the next, or the resulting average.
The ratio between the measurements of Howard Vyse in 1840 with a single decimal (0.785425), would seem to deviate from the constant 0.78615 with a deviation of -0.000726, such a difference from that of Stecchini (1971) and Verner (1998) much closer to the truth π would be significant enough to invalidate the thesis, even if for differences of only centimeters.
Observing the image in full screen, a careful eye will be able to notice that the [black] base of the triangle tends to imperceptibly recede with respect to the overlapping red sides. This denotes extreme accuracy in the drawing, which although approximate confirms very well the division base÷height with a quotient slightly less than 0.78615.
I find it very interesting, however, that
Vyse has been accused by some people of having forged the Khufu cartouche, most notably by Zecharia Sitchin. In his book The Stairway to Heaven, Sitchin accuses Vyse (and his assistants Mr. Hill and Mr. Perring) of perpetrating the forgery because of Vyse's "determination to obtain a major find as time and money were running out".[13] However, the forgery claim is given no credence by historians and Egyptologists such as Selim Hassan,[14] Zahi Hawass,[12] Jaromir Malek,[15][16] Professor Rosalie David[17] or Bill Manley, or major museums such as the British Museum[18] and the Egyptian Museum,[19] all of whom accept that Khufu was the builder of the pyramid and by implication that Vyse's cartouche is authentic.
https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Richard_William_Howard_Vyse
and this is because none of the guarantors is able to demonstrate that Cheops was the builder of the pyramid, from Zahi Hawass to the various museums around the world, which can only 'accept it' but not ascertain; whereas sources and motivations worthy of attention date its construction to several millennia before, setting a threshold beyond which none of the said list could successfully venture.
In 2014, however, this kind of concordat had to be reset, the adventurous dis­cov­ery of two archaeology students from the University of Dresden, hav­ing been able to ascertain in the laboratory that the pigment used for the car­touche – a sample of which was stolen – is recent and was applied to the o­rig­i­nal blocks only with a subsequent intervention on the plaster.

Nevertheless, the base and height measurements according to H. Vyse seem to be the only ones that take into account the complete dimensions of the py­ram­i­dal structure and are therefore close to those of the Upuaut in­stru­men­tal CAD; although it must be taken into account that any external profile attributed to the structure today is only a deduction, which may not repeat with total precision the dimensions of the base - and of which base, if they are all dif­fer­ent? - given the sides increasingly deprived of their casing.
If I remember correctly, way back in 2002 I directly converted the meas­ure­ments obtained from Gantembrunk's CAD from decimetres to pixels, and since then I have been using them in the same format, meditating on which I de­rived the first four golden circles and which I stick to for this as the only ma­trix, although aware that a total correspondence to the current stones would not be realistic, but only theoretical.

It remains obvious that π it is not the result of an arithmetic average, but it is irreplaceable perfection, and as such must be integrated into the project plan.
We must start from the assumption that the solution to the geometric mysteries of the pyramid does not lie in the units of measurement, even if these offer a priority to certain experts, but in the true π and, if anything, in the way in which these reproduced it; which involves first of all knowing its true value.
The disconcerting side of the whole issue is the insistence on praising an 'ex­treme­ly accurate' precision, so close to ideal calculations by the ancients, in­stead of realizing and admitting that our calculations are the result of a ge­o­met­ric compromise for the incomprehensible π, while they, whoever they were, have set out it ex­act­ly, with colossal and incomparable magnificence (and appealing to chance would make us sink ever deeper into backward reticence) since they have served it to us on a silver platter of 5.75 million tons, or rather of a Gold that for at least a century we have not been able to acquire, due to mere ac­a­dem­ic conditioning; and in the background e­gyp­to­log­i­cal.
It would be enough to suspect for a moment that the π bestowed by the pro­por­tions of the Great Pyramid right from its section profile is the right one – and there is no real reason that prevents it – to fully realize the actual splendid mas­ter­piece that adorned the earthly soil in its luminous adamantine guise.
Once this has been officially acknowledged and recognized as erroneous beyond any doubt, all calculations applied to the pyramid and in general re­ferred to the inaccurate π, as well as the related planetary and astronomical theories, will have to be revised and upgraded. It will not be painless, no growth process is, but it will certainly be a harbinger of greater satisfaction and exhilarating conquests.

It is recognized that Egyptian hieroglyphics were written on three cognitive levels, whose redefinition can vary greatly depending on who interprets it.
In short: the common one, for those who knew how to read and administer, the cultured one with more erudite content, and the hieratic one intended by those who were initiated.
In his book “The Egyptian Hieroglyph Metaphysical Language”, Moustafa Gad­alla refers to them as Imitative, Figurative, Allegorical; but his is also a cur­rent metaphysical interpretation, not priestly, or in any case aimed at un­in­i­ti­at­ed people.

If my descriptions on this site make sense to the reader, it is likely that the holders of certain energetic and astrophysical truths, in building the pyramid, did not believe they had to or could transmit certain knowledge to the ex­ec­u­tive designers, since these were notions that went far beyond the funerary or building cult, and that could not have been received and appropriately safe­guarded if not by adepts.
Likewise, pyramid scholars pay most attention to the architectural layout from a constructional point of view, drawing for the study of boulders and tunnels from available sources and papyri, translated according to a current ter­mi­nol­o­gy, certainly not hermetic; this does not exclude the possibility that meas­ure­ments and hieroglyphic figures were cleverly converted into enigmas, as­sum­ing that the occult necessity was felt beyond the mere executive functions.
On the other hand, the most reliable source is the Great Pyramid itself, with a specific grandeur that provokes and inspires every kind of interpretation, above all other similar ones.

The parabola of 22/7 however (later called Archimedes' constant, probably because he heard about it) exhumed by Petrie in 1925, could have been indicative at a low level, but no golden construct, or definitive calculation of the circle could have been derived from it, although its quotient 3.1429 is closer and more suitable to the π than the current one.
In other words, although 3.1429 was more promising than 3.1416, there would be no reason to accept its replacement, remaining completely alien to the brightness of the golden recurrence, whose multiple implications do not allow for any approximations.
However, reviewing his report more carefully, one notices a rather significant detail that Petrie has aired:
For the whole form the π proportion (height is the radius of a circle = circumference of Pyramid) has been very generally accepted of late years, and is a relation strongly confirmed by the presence of the numbers 7 and 22 in the number of cubits in height and base respectively ; 7 : 22 being one of the best known approximations to π. With these numbers (or some slight fractional correction on the 22) the designer adopted 7 of a length of 20 double cubits for the height ; and 22 of this length for the half-circuit. The profile used for the work being thus 14 rise on 11 base. The form and size being thus fixed, the floor of the main chamber of the building-the King's Chamber-was placed at the level where the vertical section of the Pyramid was halved, where the area of the horizontal section was half that of the base, where the diagonal from comer to comer was equal to the length of the base, and where the width of the face was equal to half the diagonal of the base.* The Queen's Chamber was placed at half this height above the base; and exactly in the middle of the Pyramid from N. to S.
He must have had a reason for specifying the correction right on the 22, I mean because the base is easier and safer to measure live than the height.
In reality he, like that designer, with his not unfounded deduction had al­ready introduced the greatest matching to π 3.14460; in practice 22.0122 /7 = 3.1446 would be enough to correct many scientific inaccuracies; but since from 1925 to the present this wouldn't lead to appreciable deductions, the detail was underestimated, if not ignored.
Nor could the simple 22÷7 bare and raw be privileged in the construction (while it could have been by a scribe or on a papyrus), since certain golden ratios, on which there are no mathematical or geometric roundings, and no ratio between integers can define it (just as the Fibonacci sequence will NEV­ER be able to do), appear to be fulfilled in the proportions and de­scrip­tions of definite areas, first and foremost the King's Hall whose volume would be equivalent to 5 ×1000 cubits.
However 22.01223857720 or even just 22.01224 would have been sufficient to emulate the true π in all respects: here is the “slight fractional correction on the 22”, much more precise and suitable than 21.99115, which generates the π adopted by the establishment. .

Since it seems that there is no stone in this mountain of wonders, whose placement has no reason to exist, it deserves at least some diagram of what has been described, naturally sticking to the profile already defined, in scale 10px = 0.1 m, with perfect harmony of data and results..
The scholar Petrie has described with essentiality and precision significant details, which find precise confirmation in the model that I present; but will they find the same in all those that differ in the measures? How many authors will have taken the trouble to verify it?

It should be kept in mind that each perimeter is primarily indicative, an abstract linear composition, devoid of consistency if not theoretical and rep­re­sent­a­tive, which delimits an area that is instead form and substance.
I will try to adapt the analysis to Petrie's descriptive tone, reporting the numerical results for verification purposes on my own graphic layout.
Let's start from

“the floor of … -the King's Chamber- … at the level where
the vertical section of the Pyramid was halved,”
The vertical section of the Pyramid (½ base × height)÷2, has an area:
2329,134 /2 * 1481,352 = 1725133,654584 /2 = 862566,827292
( with inverse operations we would have:
2329,134 *2 / 1481,352 = π 3,14460 )
To calculate the height of the halved vertical section I will apply to the height the ratio between the two areas reduced to virtual bases (by the constant 0.707101) from which:
862566.827292 ÷ 1725133.654584 × 1481.352 = 1047.474, or
know­ing the side of the minor square: 1725133,655 /1646,9464 = 1047,474
This gives the distance of the floor of the King's chamber from the base of the pyramid: 1481,352 - 1047,474 = 433,8779 /1646,9464
What a graphic check confirms in a single eye-catching move:
“where the area of the horizontal section was half that of the base”
Drawn a square for the area 2329,1342 = 5424865,189956 (the text colors are those of each specific profile, to facilitate the view) on the base of the pyramid, I duplicated it in a square with halved area, which in short has the side of 1646.94644569
Positioned at the horizontal centre of the large triangle, it intersects its sides at a height of 433.8779 from the base, at the two points and the segment that joins them exactly delimits the floor of the King's Chamber.
Rotated by 45°, since its area is halved, its right and left vertices will at least touch the sides of the square in red, which shows that
“the diagonal from comer to comer was equal to the length of the base”
It is a completely natural relationship between the two figures, but it can ac­quire new value if referred to the cross of the Elements already con­sid­ered.
Unlike the 4 sides, the diagonals are two, they cross in a single center and particular relationships emerge between those of each square and the oth­er, like planes connected from the specific vertical arrangement inside the pyramid.
Needless to say, all this will only be valid in a perfect pyramid model, which excludes the angle arranged for descriptive purposes according to common parameters.
To better understand them, it would be good to visualize them as two sep­a­rate planes, but layers of a unique process, the square at the base and the one under the king's chamber, potentially rotated by 45°, so that its di­ag­o­nals point to the 4 cardinal points, to which the faces of the pyramid are oriented. It is an aspect that will escape but that could inspire the in­ter­pre­ta­tion already mentioned.
In turn, the scholar adds that ½diagonal of the basic square is equivalent to the base that each face would have, delimited by the new floor up to the ver­tex. This is because in practice ½diagonal is like the side of ½square.
It must be said that if the plane of the King's Chamber is located at a key point of the height in this pyramid, for reasons unknown to us but certainly not cas­u­al and without specific relevance, and the same is true for the place­ment of the Queen's Chamber, with the base at the center of a basic force field be­tween two particular planes, and the dome at the circumcenter of the large tri­an­gle, the relationships between squares and diagonals are not at all spe­cial, but rather geometrically common to any case with these proportions.
Reducing the side to the width of the face, of which it is the base, leaves the impression that Petrie wanted to em­broi­der it a bit, accentuating some suggestive but not very ef­fec­tive aspects as such; however, it could establish a con­nec­tion between the 4 semi-diagonals of the base and the four sides of the upper square, perhaps based on frequencies for res­o­nances of crossed wavelengths.
A synergy between sides and corners that could be part of a pyramidal vortex, re­peat­ing the reduction process in continuous wind­ing from the base to the apex; but it's just a passing idea.
However, it remains to be seen how he was able to deduce this relationship between the areas of squares which have sides different from each other, moreover without counting the external covering, if not with rounding and intuition. Of course it would make little sense that someone who cut and placed stones with such precision as to leave no space for a razor blade, and sculpted and polished the inside of a red granite ‘sarcophagus’ (see below) with techniques that are still very difficult to hypothesize today, for some purpose more suited to vibrational than funerary implications, could have indulged in approximations on any measure whatsoever.

Its creators were able to project the Quadrature of a Circle of radius Φ onto three dimensions by creating a pyramid that had for its height its radius, and ½base of length equal to the radius × its square root: Φ × Φ, thence
½base × Φ ÷ Φ = Φ, an e­qual­i­ty that even the most advanced cal­cu­la­tors struggle to achieve.
The basic model is one and tran­scen­dent, like the ratio Φ/φ = Φ, and that ½base × 4 ÷ Φraggio è π , even if we have no way of dem­on­strat­ing it.
For any real radius, the formula switches to: ½base = radius ÷ φ.

It seems that it is the zeros that suggest the limit of definition necessary for a fairly correct use of the most common irrational constants, such asΦ: 0.61803 e φ: 1.61803, φ2: 2.61803, Φ: 1.27201.
The exception is Φ: 0.7861513777574232860, for only 1 millionth, however engaged with the 5 most significant decimals ×4 in the formation of the absolutely eloquent π 3.14460.

There is nothing else in this world that leads us to such a direct comparison with the Squaring of the Circle and the π, and to leave out such a test bench would be an irreparable loss; and then you would have to explain to your­selves for centuries why with the π = 3.14460 all the calculations add up per­fect­ly, while none with the other.
On the other hand, even if this gap of the π is now felt in many ways, and at least its treatment in this domain should help to raise it, the real problem is not or will not be of a scientific nature, but rather pragmatic, since the technical, historical and formal implications will be endless, overwhelming and very long to unravel.

To tell the truth, the same Fire Power of the Great Golden Triangle will still struggle to be fully understood today, and all that is mysterious and has been widely propagated over the centuries and partly proven, remains the object of different lines of observation; but the times are evolving towards a higher vibratory level of human consciousness. As I have already underlined, Kepler himself had only half the sense of it.

The basic problem that technically persists derives in all cases from having to rely on a π re-set in modern times, which has the capacity to invalidate any in-depth verification, with figures of at least 24 decimal places allowed by mod­ern calculators, sufficient to guarantee the effective coexistence of π and φ in the proportions, even if virtual, of the monument.
It is clear that by superimposing the Great Golden Triangle on the drawings of talented scholars over the centuries, we see it correspond to the naked eye with satisfactory precision, even if from drawings made by hand of which the lines themselves can mask the minimal differences in the measurements, but sufficient to give up the vaunted numeral magic.

After all, it is unthinkable that having depicted 230 real meters in a publication from two centuries ago would distinguish those differences that oscillate from 3.1416 to 3.1446; however, only in certain more recent graphs, too im­pro­vised or arbitrary, the superposition does not correspond even on a visual level.
At the same time I find it impossible to have conceived this colossal project on the basis of approximate notions, in this case an enormous geometric stilt house, but whose hypnotic correspondence would have come to stir such an endless range of hypotheses… all without a definitive connection.
Nevertheless, even if it were, this would have offered, or reopened to the un­der­signed the way to the Great Triangle, the 'third treasure of geometry' with all its essential contents, developed in this and other Web domains of mine, up to the π capable, precisely ad hoc, of closing the circle of such notions, even if a posteriori.

So I take up the graphic scheme of the Vyse 1839, this time published by Piazzi Smyth (which I left intentionally large, for a wide screen) and its view with the red triangle superimposed here, as a further example of how even greater differences have visible and consequently measurable effects that are minimal, compared to the gap that makes a π = 3.14159 in­com­pat­i­ble with the true value of 3.14460!
I have shown on the previous page how it is all too easy to con­fuse or o­ver­lap hypothetical methods of calculating the circumference based on 3.1416 or 3.1446 (revealing the defect of the first, and me for the first); even among mul­ti­ple conversions of sacred and profane units of measurement, dating back to an era in which a few decimal places were already too many to respect.

Today the question in front of the graphs produced and compared is always the same: is a nearly invisible gap in the paths sufficient to evade the es­sen­tial model? or rather does it reconfirm it, with the tolerance limits as­sumed?!

Furthermore, it is not clear how all the authors can verify millimeters of meas­ure­ment, if not as signs of presumed calculations or ones adapted to their own reference models, certainly more than to actual instrumental e­quip­ment or on­-site measurements.
One might object that the present study does the same, but here the model is impartial and unequivocal; it derives from surveys carried out with advanced equipment; the CAD is an ideal tool for architectural and mechanical projects, so much so that it allows the eyes of logic to confirm that it has immediately revealed the ideal pyramid, the perfect ark of π and Φ, which have not been concealed, as some people ironically say to exclude their presence, but exposed with absolute transparency.

I must once again apologize to those who have had the patience to read me up to this point, for the inevitable repetitions and possible oversights in some part of the text. All this research has only amplified itself, multiplying the di­rec­tions and data to discover and compare, often returning to the top­ics al­ready introduced, rethinking them and reviving them where nec­es­sary.
I have not written a book to sell, even if the effort expended could justify it together with the contents; nor do I seek fame; I have already accumulated e­nough of it in the past centuries. Above all, I already know that the time nec­es­sary to reorder the writings in a corpus planned a posteriori, would be sub­tracted from further questions of no less importance, which are already on the horizon, or rather introduced in the following paragraph, precisely because they emerged between folds and the findings of the case, each of which sug­gests others, and in the meantime time flies.

A final note, personal one. Any more or less qualified scholar could entrench behind the idea that all this work is nothing more than a dream of mine, dis­tinct from the actual reality of the monument. An opinion that I would not fail to respect, but not without having pointed out that, if that were the case, it would still be a geometrically and mathematically impeccable dream.
A dream that probably developed from having lain down inside the "sar­coph­a­gus", a few thousand years ago, or perhaps in a dream.
That ark without a lid, sounding like a bell, of which the volume of the void is equivalent to the volume of the full (content and container), a de­sign criterion which suggests that a lid would have been superfluous, which in turn should prove that it was not intended to house a mummy, from which it is clear that Pharaoh Cheops was not intended for it, much less that he was its creator: all con­ven­tions, which have never been proven.

from π to Apophis
At the end of this discreet overview, in a last attempt to verify if and how much the π problem was notorious, a truly unexpected case appears, at the time a last amenity, but which in hindsight gave rise to a further laborious chapter of research and verifications, which I could not avoid.
According to a group dedicated to communicating with extraterrestrial entities, which reels off occult knowledge and technologies according to which a certain Billy, based on the fact that “in the entire universe there are 280 elements after Guido obtained this data through calculations”, would have “calculated that the original height of the Pyramid of Giza was 152.955347 meters” and that “the current height of about 136.8 meters is due to the fact that the ancient Egyptians, etc., removed so much material from the pyramid that it was consequently reduced.
Well, earth scientists say that the Great Pyramid of Giza originally had a height of 146.6 meters, which, however, according to my calculations and your statements, does not correspond to the truth at all.”

A series of rather disconnected improvisations, but connected by a singular narrative magic. What calculations is he talking about? We have seen that the only way to calculate the height of the pyramid is to have measured it at least in part, naturally taking into account that not the ancient Egyptians (absurd supposition), but the Arab looters in the last seven centuries had stripped it as much as they could, up to the most recent building ap­pli­ca­tions.
Although many terrestrial scholars attribute to the Great Pyramid of Giza a height of 146.6 meters, they do not claim that it originally had it, if anything the more known 148+, nor especially that the current height is 136.8 m., given that the minimum formulated from 1840 to today exceeds 146.
It seems that the writer does not know what he is talking about, or wants to ensure that others do not know.

Without prejudice to the irrefutable Great Golden Triangle as a model of pro­por­tions, if the pyramid had ever decreased in height by more than 10%, the base itself would have had to shrink equally and for the same causes, unless it is demonstrated how much and what material could be con­ven­ient­ly re­moved from the top only; but 10% at the base means a good 23 meters, while the stone facings were not 11 meters thick.

One of the largest stones left at the bottom is about 1.5 x 2.4 m high at the base, and weighs about 14 tons. Some calculations sug­gest that all the facing stones in place would have the effect of gigantic mirrors, re­flect­ing a light so intense that it would be vis­i­ble from the moon as if it were a shining star on earth.

Strabo describes them as making the pyramid appear: “a building brought down from the sky, untouched by human hands”.
It seemed that the dash of explanations that follow, both descriptive and ap­par­ent­ly demanding, but undocumented (except by ‘Contact Reports’ not in the public domain and without demonstrative foundation) went beyond our topic, except to the point where Mr. Guido Moosbrugger, member of the “Central Nucleus of 49”, the first to calculate the correct value of π, is introduced.
Authoritative comments follow by

Ptaah:
This calculation is really surprising, but it is still too early to be able to add more detailed and more precise information about it.
Billy:
we feared this answer,
but we just wanted to try.
Ptaah:
Sure, I understand, but I really have to stick to what I said.
If I were to go into more detail about it, then I would be violating our guidelines,
but we don't do that.

‘surprising calculation’ 4/ φ /2 ? ‘too early for more detailed and precise in­for­ma­tion’, about what? It would seem like watching a school play, if it were not for the fact that the features of the deception will later emerge.
Then on the pyramid:
The original height actually amounted to 152.955347 meters, which, transposed into kilometers, corresponds exactly to the distance Earth-Sun
First of all, what would be the Earth-Sun distance in an elliptical orbit to be adhered to in order to define the original height of the pyramid ‘in reality’ and in spite of the actual measurements? and why the maximum radius of the aphelion?
YearPerihelionDistanceAphelionDistance
20243 gen   1.38147.100.632 km5 lug   7.06152.099.968 km
20254 gen 14.28147.103.686 km3 lug 21.54152.087.738 km
20263 gen 18.15147.099.894 km6 lug 19.30152.087.774 km
20273 gen   3.32147.104.592 km5 lug 7.05152,100,481 km
20285 gen 13.28147.100.687 km4 lug   0.18152.093.129 km
* All aphelion/perihelion times are in local Pisa time.
even so the numbers don't add up, not even when revised with the π 3.14460; the gap is too big, in fact it seems to be closer to the perihelion.

In any case there was very little to calculate, and still no surprising cal­cu­la­tions: the manuscript on paper reports with a simple division that pre­-es­tab­lished ratio present for 10 thousand years between the base and the height of the pyramid, according to what tradition has handed down since the first Egyptian and Greek speakers; but who knows why it confirms it with ar­bi­trary measurements not corresponding to what was detected in­stru­men­tal­ly, and nevertheless aligned to 9 decimals (the last one is wrong) with the π deducible from the Great Triangle.
It can be deduced that since the author could not have invented them and since they were not motivated in his autographed writing, they were passed to him from an external source, to then present them as the surprising result of alleged astronomical calculations on the distance from the Earth to the Sun, certainly easier to calculate than the real height of the monument; perhaps to ensure a primacy on a proportional data already outlined by var­i­ous authors, but forever present in the Great Pyramid due to the clear know­ledge of the builder.

In any case, there would not be much to “violate”, except the intelligence of the reader. If the member Moosbrugger is not enough, this new precursor is introduced: Harry Lear, who in turn makes it an object of alarm for sci­ence – the only just and noteworthy cause – but does not at all dem­on­strate the error of the value 3.14159, nor the absoluteness of π 3.14460.
He also proposes a series of ideal analogies by applying the π 3.1446 to the comparison of 3.1416, always losing; but these are only some certifications on his part, out of who knows how many other possible ones.
Although copyrighted, which is not allowed for any mathematical pro­ce­dure, no absolute demonstrations take place. This is attested by the simple fact that even if only one were really so, there would be no need for the others.
Perhaps this is why at the end he invites anyone who wants to ex­per­i­ment with cutting a milled multilayer model with a diameter of one meter.
Incidentally, I kindly contacted him following the invitation on his site, but my comment was trashed.

The circle is transcendent and it is transcendence: it can inscribe or cir­cum­scribe in any dimension, but there is no possibility of converting it directly into any alternative geometric figure. Likewise, I think the π cannot be dem­on­strat­ed one-way, it can only be chosen, once focused it suf­fi­ciently.
Or better yet, grasp its essence by trusting in modern atomic physics, which gives us the 0.78615 applied to the speed of light, universal constant which if multiplied by four it generates π, and squared Φ 0.618 which – I must stress this one last time – is the true Golden Section.
As I have already exposed in detail, if the area of the square is Φ, that of the circle of equal perimeter is its square root 0.78615.

Whoever assumes the number φ 1.618 as the Golden Section incurs a double oversight: first of all 1.618 cannot be defined as the golden section of 1, since the value and concept itself of any “section” cannot be greater than unity; and then because 1.618 acts as a screen that precludes the correct vi­sion­-in­ter­pre­ta­tion of the aforementioned genesis of π 3.14460 and its ratio with quarter circles and wave phases, established by the universal val­ue 0.78615 which I call or Platinum, from which the golden ratio itself comes, as well as the only genuine π. It's nothing but the magical combination of 1 + Φ = 1 ÷ Φ. I have already talked about it on some articles, but since it's time to go into more detail than has ever been done before, I have dedicated a very special page to it:

An in-depth conception of the Golden Section

The number 1.2720 is just the result of .φ, it does not seem to be in itself a sig­nif­i­cant constant like it is 0.78615 .Φ; let's say that it is at the opposite pole of the path; I see it as a kind of dead end, devoid of indications, which does not sup­port phenomenal reality as such.
It is only made useful by dividing the unit.

After all, all my research up to the true π came from focusing the golden cir­cles from the outside to the center of the pyramid vertical section, in sym­bi­o­sis with that Divine Triangle whose sides represent all of this to the highest degree.
I would like to reiterate my opinion that it is the golden ratio that de­rives from π, of which ¼ (according to common usage) ie is in any case the root, the prime mover, not the opposite, even if it is or will be dis­covered later.
Can anyone give me a good reason to prefer the artificial π 3.14159 to 3.14460? or prove to me at this point that the first is mathematically more valid and reliable?


In compensation for the expository sobriety of the surprising manuscript, we can enjoy a blackboard full of abundant calculations entitled "Meas­ure­ment of Pi by Square Root of the Golden Section" and dedicated to none other than the President of the USA and for information, to 26 personalities from the scientific and managerial environment.
The hint over the image found in their Italian website says: “Pi symbol with a black­board full of calculations in the background”.
It is a tacit example of the relationship not between π and Φ, but between blowing smoke in the eyes of the unprepared, and the most linear truths.
In place of the silly calculations which it is full of, the only relevant and possible ones would in fact be all here: π = Φ×4  where  Φ =(5-1)÷2.
I reproduce some passages among the most suitable for examination.
Note: NASA states that the distance from the Earth to the Sun, 1 AU (Astronomical Unit), is equal to 149,597,871 km, but in reality it is 152,955,335.7 km.
For the second time a precise accusation is made to the scientific community, supported by the expression "in reality". An unpardonable and unjustified lightness. The 28th General Assembly of the In­ter­na­tion­al Astronomical Union has defined since 2012 (6 years before the letter) the astronomical unit [AU], with the value of 149 597 870 707 m, which re­pre­sents the average distance between Earth and Sun.
The 152,955,335.7 km “in reality” are only referable to the maximum distance between the Earth and the Sun, the Aphelion, and are already different from the 152,955,347 declared by the same FIGU “exactly” for the height of the pyr­a­mid.
Of course, for those who calculate the planet's elliptical orbit with the formula of a circle – a formula that they will illustrate in detail to scientists called to an alarm for collision of orbits – the term and meaning of "average distance" has no reason to exist.
As you know the circumference of a circle (like the orbits of the Earth and Apophis) is calculated by the simple equation C = d x p, where C is Circumference,
d is the diameter of the orbit and π is a constant.
All the more so since it proceeds with the kind concession to NASA of the value in use, to apply to it a relationship without a definitive mathematical con­clu­sion, with­out realizing that the average Earth-Sun distance has no value with respect to a precise time and place of hypothetical orbital impact of the as­ter­oid, to calculate which only the actual celestial mechanics would be valid; but he does not do any of these calculations..
Note that those who are able to navigate interstellar space obviously have a technology that allows orbital predictions which are necessary for their pur­poses, nothing transcendental or prophetic about an asteroid.
Naturally NASA noticed Apophis when it entered its range of interest.
All this seems to be of no importance for those who rely on a
Bulletin followed by about 29,000 scientists and other interested sectors why Meier and the Plejaren have previously and consistently provided correct astronomical and scientific information (editor's note: by publishing very precise data in this Bulletin), in which scientists from all over the world are very interested.
Scientists moreover called to an alarm case for collision of elliptical orbits.

I would not see, however, that this Apophis exploit has had gained any re­nown among 29.000 scientists etc., perhaps because this shaky approach and its con­clu­sion, cinematic rather than mathematical, with the
suggesting a solution…
let's simply move Apophis out of its current orbit,
instead of helping to recognize the epochal weight of π and Φ, has had the opposite effect. He writes to President Trump:
…brought my mathematical proofs to the Plejarens and the Plejarens stated (with some amazement and excitement, …) that, although they were not authorized to physically interfere in Earth affairs, my mathematical proofs and calculations regarding the true value of π were absolutely correct.
A series of statements without head or tail, just for effect:
‘mathematical proofs’ consistent?‘physically interfere’??

Mathematical cal­cu­la­tions and dem­on­stra­tions about which 23 pages by Guido Moos­brug­ger are cited as well, never exposed on the web as such.
Besides the fragment re­pro­duced above as a relic, of his book I only see news in­dexed on UFOs and al­ien en­coun­ters, which prompt­ed me to stum­ble upon Bil­ly Meier with his flaunted 'He­noch proph­ecies '.

A discovery that un­for­tu­nate­ly will introduce a long series of research and evaluations for an ex­treme­ly critical report, destined to be extrapolated in a specific report, since it goes beyond this discussion, but is now made public by this same study to which it is connected..

Above all this, the truth π = Φ × 4 has always and steadily shone in the con­struct of the pyramid, the leitmotif of the current discussion, which plac­es it be­fore the eyes of those who want to see and examine it thor­oughly.

As for the asteroid Apophis, at the century ‘99942’, for the Egyptians deity of chaos, destruction and antagonist of Ra the sun, it has been estimated that such a large body comes so close to the Earth only once every 5 thou­sand/10 thousand years…
Well, the problem could not be limited to an impact, con­sid­ered more prob­a­ble just recently, but in my opinion extend to gravitational ef­fects and oth­ers, due to the interaction of its repeated pas­sage (2029-2036) with the Earth's gravitational field, capable of interfering with the polar e­qui­lib­ri­um.
The 10,000 years, which could make one think of the 11,500 years long as­so­ci­at­ed with the shifting of the poles, are upon us,
I would not like to venture hypotheses that go beyond my preparation, but in my four-year commitment to astro-seismology (2011-2014), in which I cal­cu­lat­ed and related daily orbital relations in the solar system with earth­quake events (like this one or this, still systematic objects of thousands of con­sul­ta­tions since 2014 by scholars, certainly not bloggers), not without various predictions that hit the mark, also addressed to INGV via Twitter, despite its small size of 375 km it should not be overlooked that Pluto, in my ex­pe­ri­ence in astro-seismology, despite being the farthest from Earth and only about 6.32 times larger than the asteroid, has always been one of the most dangerous presences, when involved by precise aspects in geocentric con­fig­u­ra­tions; I have always thought of wave issues, or of resonance even more than gravity; but then I dealt with something else. The first passage in 1929 could therefore be only preparatory to the one 7 years later; not of "an enormous cosmic catastrophe" but rather of the un­post­pon­a­ble end of a world that the time has come to renew; even if the in­ter­ven­tion of the de­stroy­er Apophis was only symbolic.


All this stimulates me to leave you with another game, an eloquent and pleas­ant puzzle, which I offer precisely to take you back on my steps as I write.
You will be amazed if you patiently observe this wonderful sequence and the correspondences of these circles, all drawn starting from the external red [1] according to a progressive golden reduction of their diameters; except one, the smaller one in blue dashes [2], which has a diameter equal to the radius of the primary, with two of its golden reductions at the base.
It will lead directly to a double quadrature, already summarized at the end of the home page, but not explained except within the site.
The circle [1] has radius Φ [0.618].
We want to draw a circle with radius = 0.5 [golden ratio monad], passing through its center, and see how they interact.
You will recall from the parent figure of the Great Triangle, that the center of the new circle will be lo­cat­ed at the point of the radius Φ which is distant from the circumference ½Φ3 [0.118]; the in­ter­sec­tion with any ra­di­us [here vertical] of a circle Φ2, will divide the radius into two parts, of which the center of the small­er will be the center to draw the circle [3], in the se­cond figure.
With a ruler and compass it could also be obtained by joining the in­ter­sec­tions of two circles of radius Φ3, one tangent to Φ4 and to the base of Φ1 [1], the other centered at the low­er end of the radius; among other things it will be exactly inscribed in the triangle abd that I describe be­low. As you can see, it is also the cen­ter of the second reduction ×Φ of the circle [2], which is always equal to ½Φ3 with perfect bilateral tan­gency.
I would just like to point out the in­cred­i­ble series of correspondences that manifest a hidden but pervasive harmony of every functional con­nec­tion.
Having drawn the circle [3] from its center C and radius extended to the center of the circle [1] then = 0.5, the segment bd that joins the in­ter­sec­tion points of this [3] with the circle [1] performs several tasks.
First of all it outlines the Quadrature [green] of the Circle [1], which o­ver­laps sym­met­ri­cal­ly precisely through its ex­tremes; then it is the base of the golden triangle bda in which each side in­tro­duces the squaring of the circle [3], and finally the base of the same triangle abd which, rotated by ap­prox­i­mate­ly 76°352 on the vertex b becomes a side of the larger Golden Triangle bcd, pertaining to the circle [1] and endowed with new special com­bi­na­tions with the general golden plan, for the unexpected cor­re­spond­ences of intersections, and those qualities of tan­gen­tiality which led to its discovery.
I then added to fig. 2 a golden triangle rotated -90°, with the base adjacent to a vertical side of the square, in such a position that the vertex corresponds to the intersection of the base of the square with the radius that joins the 2 cir­cles (an effect of the bitmap pixels reduces the precision, which however is clearly visible in the PDF, the stimulating exploration of which I leave to the reader who is as curious as I am): and I discover that it is tangent to the circle Φ2; at its point of intersection with the golden triangle.
Immediately next to it, it crosses the intersection of two other circles: the main Φ2 with the one inscribed in the golden triangle obtained, the base of the golden triangle reduced to 50% (pink), and inverted at the center of the golden triangle of the circle [3], which together develops tangentiality and con­nec­tions at the vertices with three other significant circles [blue].
This is just a small sample of what Φ can do!
Being just an illustrative whim, I didn't program everything in PostScript, so it may not be perfect in some details, but it is not lacking in accuracy and self­-prov­ing validity.

As for my personal work in this space of mathematics, it has been done not to appear as a discovery, exclusive or not, but to urge men to finally un­der­stand and receive the precious inheritance they have received.

And to begin with, to correct the π, for the good of all.

Antonio Alessi © The Watch Publisher, 2003-24

[ back || or to the main page ]