Of the three theories on how the Great Pyramid was built, in descending order of acceptability, the most suitable theory is Clifford Wilson’s followed by Joseph Davidovits’ and Erich Von D”aiken’s argument. Clifford Wilson’s theory is the best because he illustrates how the pyramids were built and provides the evidence to prove his theory, however; this is unlike Joseph Davidovits’ theory because Davidovits does not fully answer questions that arise concerning his theory. The three theories have similar points, but contain very different ideas on the construction of the Great Pyramid. This is obvious in Clifford Wilson’s argument where he is repeatedly disproving Von D”aiken’s theory that the “gods” created the pyramids, whereas in Davidovits theory the pyramids were simply caste d by means of chemically mixing Natron, aluminum and silicon to produce artificial rock. These three individuals express different ideas on the building of the building of the Great Pyramid. Clifford Wilson has the most acceptable theory compared to the other two individual’s arguments.
In Clifford Wilson’s theory, he suggests that the pyramids were built with the “heave-ho” method. With the use of sleds made from wood that is easily imported from Phoenicia and rope, it is an acceptable theory on how the Great Pyramid was built. Wilson has also seen workers, using a single rope and pulley, move stones as the supervisor chants out instructions. One question that arises is how the builders were able to lift the stones into place. Wilson explains that during the construction of the pyramid, a ramp made of earth could be increased as the height of the pyramid increased. Once outer limestone blocks are fitted into place the earth could simply be removed.
Quine advocates semantic ascent, the shift in which the language we use to refer to the world becomes something we talk about in its own right. Semantic ascent is a shift from questions about objects to questions about words or statements. He says we should ‘drop the talk of observation and talk instead of observation sentences, the sentences that are said to report observations’ (The roots of ...
Clifford Wilson clearly verifies his theory with specific details, which displays that his theory is the most logical and suitable explanation of the construction of the Great Pyramid. Although Clifford Wilson’s theory is the best, there are still a few weaknesses throughout his argument. Wilson suggests that by using a system of pulleys, levers and ropes its is possible to construct the pyramid. With recent studies, it has been shown that if using a lever system as Wilson suggests, the fulcrum’s height must be increased, and at certain heights, the whole lever can become unstable.
Another problem that is brought up is with the use of levers and pulleys, it becomes difficult at the apex of the pyramid where there is not enough space to maneuver. Despite Clifford Wilson’s negative aspects, his theory remains the most reasonable compared to the other two arguments. Joseph Davidovits discovered a simple chemical process that turned a putty mixture into stone and argues that this method was used in the construction of the Great Pyramid. Joseph Davidovits explains that the pyramid blocks were simply stone caste d instead of being cut and hauled from the quarry. This is a very probable answer because all the needed materials are available. Davidovits indicates that the use of a ramp, as Clifford Wilson suggests, must have been larger than the pyramid in order to allow a slight angle for the workers to drag the blocks up.
Another problem with the use of the ramp is that three are no murals at the time showing the ramps and sleds that were supposedly used to move the blocks. Davidovits demonstrates a unique method of the construction of the pyramids, but this is not as well as Wilson’s theory because there are problems with Davidovits’ theory. Joseph Davidovits has proved that with the right materials available, it is possible to chemically cast stone. While Davidovits proves his theory with sufficient evidence, many problems are brought up. One problem that faces Davidovits is the fact that there are spaces between each of the stone blocks. If the putty were poured against the other blocks, there would be no spaces at all.
Information theory is a branch of applied mathematics and electrical engineering involving the quantification of information. Information theory was developed by Claude E. Shannon to find fundamental limits on signal processing operations such as compressing data and on reliably storing and communicating data. Since its inception it has broadened to find applications in many other areas, including ...
Researches have also found tool marks on the blocks, and this fact does not cohere properly to his theory because if the blocks were poured into place, there would be no need to shape or cut the blocks to size. Joseph Davidovits illustrates a unique theory of the construction method of the Great Pyramid. Despite this, he does not acknowledge or provide solid evidence to disprove negative points of his argument and because he is a chemist and not a archaeologist, he lacks the historical background that Wilson or Von D”aiken posses. Of the three theories, Erich Von D”aiken has the most unreasonable argument, and this is demonstrated throughout his theory. Von D”aiken does not indicate the positive aspects of his argument, but instead chooses to judge other individuals’ theories and make his own opinions. There are many weaknesses in his theory and the majority of his facts are incorrect.
Von D”aiken states that Egypt had no prehistory and the pyramids were built by extra-terrestrials. This is entirely untrue and there are many facts to disprove this idea. If Egypt had no prehistory it would not explain the other pyramids that still exist. These pyramids clearly show the evolution or technological advancement in the construction of the pyramids. The inside of the pyramids contained vast amounts of murals and drawings as well as writing which indicated the workers names, thus disproving the idea of extra-terrestrials building the pyramids. Von D”aiken argues that Egyptians could not have used wooden sleds or rollers due to difficulties importing wood, this too is incorrect.
As pointed out earlier, Egyptians imported coniferous timber from Phoenicia at the time of Sene fru. Another problem with Von D”aiken’s theory is he states that it is a coincidence that the height of the pyramid multiplied by a thousand million corresponds approximately to the distance between the earth and the sun. This and other calculations are irrelevant because any numbers can be multiplied to provide some number of significance. Von D”aiken’s theory is clearly the worst when compared to the other two arguments, and this is particularly due to incorrect data. Even though Von D”aiken’s theory is the poorest in quality, he still brings up important ideas that need to be examined. For example, the Egyptians knew the distance between the sun and the earth, and the geographical locations of other continents.
The beginning of the universe is explained in the big bang theory. It is proved beyond doubt that our universe had a beginning and that its origin was as a singularity about 13 billion years ago. This singularity was infinitely hot, small and dense. It had undergone a series of changes, which includes expansion and cooling to become the present form of universe. This theory is called the big bang ...
This information could have been thought up, but it is more realistic to consider that Egyptians did have contact with extra-terrestrials. Despite Von D”aiken’s bad theory, he still brings up key issues, but generally his theory is of no use because of the lack of significant data. Of the three theories, Clifford Wilson’s theory remains the most acceptable because he illustrates how the pyramids were built and provides the evidence to prove his argument. Joseph Davidovits on the other hand, does not fully answer questions that arise concerning his theory. Von D”aiken’s theory contains incorrect and irrelevant data that makes his theory the worst when compared to the other two arguments.
In conclusion, Clifford Wilson had many effective points that disproved many Davidovits’ and Von D”aiken’s points.