News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by autokad on Thursday May 16, 2024 @01:16PM (#40380787)
No.

part of it is that its hard for many to believe that civilization can regress for very long periods of time. They were the tallest man-made structures for 3800 years. The engineering and quality of construction was mostly unmatched throughout that duration.

Another issue is that 'scientists' refused to acknowledge that Egypt and most of Northern Africa was lush and green for some time. The people claimed the gods pulled the sun accross the sky and changed the climate. 'scientits' were like "wow you are so stupid, it doesnt work like that, it was never green and you killed what ever green there was by over farming". Turns out, it was a change in Earths tilt.

going along with that theme, we tend to ignore what we are told. The egyptians left depictions of how they did it, by rolling the blocks on large logs and throwing water in front of them, and they left notebooks describing how they sourced the blocks and shiped them down the nile on the river. turns out, after 4000 years, we still don't read the f'ing documentation.

Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by ch4s3 on Thursday May 16, 2024 @01:45PM (#40381132)
"People" didn't lost the ability to build giant megalithic structures and indeed pyramid construction flourished in the Americas until about 600 years ago. The Egyptians stopped building pyramids because it took decades, was insanely expensive, and gave grave robbers an obvious target. From an engineering perspective, ancient people built more complicated things than the pyramids, just not as tall. Why should height be the sole measure of engineering prowess? Consider the coffered dome of the Roman Pantheon.
Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by DiggyJohnson on Thursday May 16, 2024 @03:02PM (#40381880)
For what it’s worth, it’s the height and volume of the pyramids that impresses me. A skinny skyscraper twice as tall but 1/64th the surface area

Obviously we could build bigger if we wanted. I literally work in one of the biggest buildings in the US by volume and it is impressive on a daily basis. But just because I know we are capable of more doesn’t mean the accomplishment of actually doing the world and constructing the pyramids isn’t amazing. Besides the pantheon, what other ancient or modern projects measure up?

Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by AlotOfReading on Thursday May 16, 2024 @08:28PM (#40385057)
Feel free to look at the outline comparison on Wikipedia: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Comparis...

The pyramid of Cholula (larger by volume), the Luxor hotel (smaller, but substantially more useful), and Ryugyong hotel (hobbled by the country building it) are all plausibly comparable projects.

Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by masklinn on Friday May 17, 2024 @12:24AM (#40386372)
> For what it’s worth, it’s the height and volume of the pyramids that impresses me. A skinny skyscraper twice as tall but 1/64th the surface area

Why are you impressed by unusable volume? Do spoil tips awe you?

Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by probably_wrong on Friday May 17, 2024 @06:44AM (#40388438)
There's something inherently impressive about large things.

If you set a 12,600 tonnes concrete cylinder in the middle of a city, eventually someone will give up trying to remove it and turn it into a historical monument instead: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwerbelastungsk%C3%B6rper

Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by DiggyJohnson on Friday May 17, 2024 @08:44AM (#40389279)
Sorry I didn’t finish that sentence somehow. But yes to your first question.
Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by alephnerd on Thursday May 16, 2024 @01:19PM (#40380816)
Read about the person who created the hypothesis GP mentioned (Schwaller de Lubicz).

I'm not disputing the climate change part, I'm disputing the Atlantis part

Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by mcphage on Thursday May 16, 2024 @01:37PM (#40381044)
> The engineering and quality of construction was mostly unmatched throughout that duration.

That's definitely not true. They didn't build pyramids of that size after the Old Kingdom, but they definitely had impressive engineering and crafts. The largest computer ever built was finished in 1963—why don't we build computers that large anymore? Because "largest computer" isn't a useful metric.

Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by autokad on Thursday May 16, 2024 @01:47PM (#40381162)
The grandeur of the Great Pyramids is widely acknowledged as the pinnacle of pyramid construction (pun intended). Despite their impressiveness, other pyramids fell short in comparison (also pun intended).

Your argument suffers from flawed logic by attempting to directly equate the construction of a physical structure with that of a computer. Moreover, the greatness of the Great Pyramids of Giza cannot be solely attributed to their size; they possess other notable aspects as well.

Re:Egypt's Pyramids May Have Been Built on a Long-Lost Branc... by mcphage on Thursday May 16, 2024 @10:21PM (#40385705)
> they possess other notable aspects as well.

Sure, but what other notable aspects are superior to later dynasties, however?