JDavidovits (talk | contribs) References 5 and 6 were identical. I deleted ref. 6 and added more recent scientific references from independent international scientific teams. |
|||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
National Association for Science, Technology and Society (NASTS) and the Federation of Materials Societies, USA, awarded him the Gold Ribbon Award in 1994.<ref>See at http://www.geopolymer.org/category/library/technical-papers , article in pdf #3: GEOPOLYMERS Inorganic polymeric new materials, NASTS award 1994 Presentation at the national "Real Advances in Materials" Symposium, Washington DC, Sept. 26,1994 GEOPOLYMERS: Inorganic polymeric new materials by Joseph Davidovits published in ''Journal of Materials Education'', Vol. '''16''' (2,3), pp. 91-138 (1994)</ref> |
National Association for Science, Technology and Society (NASTS) and the Federation of Materials Societies, USA, awarded him the Gold Ribbon Award in 1994.<ref>See at http://www.geopolymer.org/category/library/technical-papers , article in pdf #3: GEOPOLYMERS Inorganic polymeric new materials, NASTS award 1994 Presentation at the national "Real Advances in Materials" Symposium, Washington DC, Sept. 26,1994 GEOPOLYMERS: Inorganic polymeric new materials by Joseph Davidovits published in ''Journal of Materials Education'', Vol. '''16''' (2,3), pp. 91-138 (1994)</ref> |
||
He is the president of Geopolymer Institute, chair of the annual conference Geopolymer Camp, and an active member of several [[scientific societies]] including [[American Chemical Society]], [[American Ceramic Society]], [[American Concrete Institute]], [[New York Academy of Sciences]] and [[International Association of Egyptologists]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.davidovits.info/|title =Extended Biography}}</ref> |
He is the president of Geopolymer Institute, chair of the annual conference Geopolymer Camp, and is presently (or was) an active member of several [[scientific societies]] including [[American Chemical Society]], [[American Ceramic Society]], [[American Concrete Institute]], [[New York Academy of Sciences]] and [[International Association of Egyptologists]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.davidovits.info/|title =Extended Biography}}</ref> |
||
==Archaeological theories== |
==Archaeological theories== |
||
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
Using Davidovits' theory, no large gangs would be needed to haul blocks and no huge and unwieldy ramps would be needed to transport the blocks up the side of the pyramid. No chiseling or carving with soft bronze tools would be required to dress their surfaces and new blocks could be cast in place, on top of and pressed against the old blocks. This would account for the unerring precision of the joints of the casing stones (the blocks of the core show tools marks and were cut with much lower tolerances). Proof-of-concept experiments using similar compounds were carried out at Davidovits' [[geopolymer]] institute in northern France. It was found that a crew of ten, working with simple hand tools, could build a structure of fourteen, 1.3 to 4.5 ton blocks in a couple of days. According to Davidovits the architects possessed at least two concrete formulas: one for the large structural blocks and another for the white casing stones. He argues earlier pyramids, brick structures, and stone vases were built using similar techniques. |
Using Davidovits' theory, no large gangs would be needed to haul blocks and no huge and unwieldy ramps would be needed to transport the blocks up the side of the pyramid. No chiseling or carving with soft bronze tools would be required to dress their surfaces and new blocks could be cast in place, on top of and pressed against the old blocks. This would account for the unerring precision of the joints of the casing stones (the blocks of the core show tools marks and were cut with much lower tolerances). Proof-of-concept experiments using similar compounds were carried out at Davidovits' [[geopolymer]] institute in northern France. It was found that a crew of ten, working with simple hand tools, could build a structure of fourteen, 1.3 to 4.5 ton blocks in a couple of days. According to Davidovits the architects possessed at least two concrete formulas: one for the large structural blocks and another for the white casing stones. He argues earlier pyramids, brick structures, and stone vases were built using similar techniques. |
||
Although his ideas are not accepted by mainstream [[Egyptologists]], in December 2006 Michel Barsoum |
Although his ideas are not accepted by mainstream [[Egyptologists]], several renown material scientists are doing pyramid stones and quarry stones analysis that support him. For example, in December 2006 Michel Barsoum and Adrish Ganguly (distinguished material scientists at Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA) with their French colleague Gilles Hug (a well known electron microscopist from famous French CNRS) published a peer-reviewed paper in the ''Journal of the American Ceramic Society'' stating that parts of the pyramid were cast with a type of limestone concrete.<ref>[http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_46807.shtml yubanet.com] "Concrete Blocks Used in Great Pyramids Construction" Drexel University </ref>. Despite the opposition of Dipayan Jana, a [[petrographer]], who had made a presentation to the ICMA (International Cement Microscopy Association) in 2007<ref>http://www.cmc-concrete.com/CMC%20Seminars/2007%20ICMA%20Pyramid.pdf The Egyptian Pyramid Enigma - large pdf file</ref> in which he concludes "we are far from accepting even as a remote possibility of a 'manmade' origin of pyramid stones", other material scientists continued their researches on the topic and published new evidences supporting Davidovit's idea. In April 2008, the famous Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT, Boston, USA, released a study supporting the re-agglomerated stone (geopolymer concrete) pyramid theory. At MIT, Professor Hobbs and two colleagues and students had experimented the construction of a small scale pyramid, published in the Boston Globe newspaper in an article of April 22, 2008 titled "A new angle on pyramids Scientists explore whether Egyptians used concrete"<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/04/22/a_new_angle_on_pyramids/?page=1</ref>. In 2011, a new scientific analysis demonstrated the artificial nature of Egyptian Pyramid stone. The article titled: ''Were the casing stones of Senefru’s Bent Pyramid in Dahshour cast or carved? Multinuclear NMR evidence'' was published <ref>''Materials Letters'' 65 (2011) 350–352</ref>, by an international team of material scientists involving Kenneth J.D. MacKenzie (MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand), Mark E. Smith, Alan Wong, John V. Hanna (Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7Al, UK), Bernard Barry (Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences, Lower Hutt, New Zealand) and Michel W. Barsoum (Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA). The abstract of this paper reads: ''A comparison was made of the solid-state 29Si, 27Al and 43Ca MAS NMR spectra of the outer casing stone from Snefru’s Bent Pyramid in Dahshour, Egypt, with two quarry limestones from the area. The NMR results suggest that the casing stones consist of limestone grains from the Tura quarry, cemented with an amorphous calcium-silicate gel formed by human intervention, by the addition of extra silica, possibly diatomaceous earth, from the Fayium area.'' In 2012, another international team of scientists, Igor Túnyi from Geophysical Institute SAS – Bratislava (Slovak Republic) and Ibrahim A. El-hemaly from National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics – Cairo, Egypt, used for the first time a spectacular method on pyramids and natural blocks, namely [[paleomagnetism]]<ref>Igor Túnyi and Ibrahim A. El-hemaly, (2012), Paleomagnetic investigation of the great egyptian pyramids, ''Europhysics News'' '''43'''/6, 28-31. The pdf file may be downloaded at http://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/pdf/2012/06/epn2012436p28.pdf</ref>. They concluded: ''The analysis of a limited set of paleomagnetic samples provided the following results. The paleodirections of three sampling locations (2 from Khafre and 1 from Khufu pyramid) exhibit the common north-south orientation, suggesting that they may have been produced in situ by a concrete technique''. |
||
origin of pyramid stones." |
|||
===Summary of evidence=== |
===Summary of evidence=== |
Revision as of 16:13, 18 March 2013
Joseph Davidovits (born 1935) is a French materials scientist known for the invention of geopolymer chemistry. He posited that the blocks of the Great Pyramid are not carved stone but mostly a form of limestone concrete or man-made stone. He holds the Ordre National du Mérite, is the author and co-author of hundreds of scientific papers and conferences reports, and holds more than fifty patents.
Career
Dabidovits obtained Diplôme d'Ingénieur in chemical engineering from Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Chimie, Rennes, France in 1958, and Dr. rer. nat. in macromolecular chemistry (PhD) from University of Mainz, Germany in 1960. Between 1962 to 1972, he researched in organic polymers for the textile industry in France. In 1964, he received Annual Award from the French Textile Chemical Society for his work on linear organic polymers.
In the aftermath of various catastrophic fires in 1970 in France involving inflammable organic plastics, he decided to carry out research into new heat-resistant materials in 1972. The French private Research Company Cordi (SA) (called later Cordi-Géopolymère SARL), a family owned company, was also created. All publications related to the research from 1972 to 1979 on alumino-silicate solid-state chemistry are pertaining to the patent literature.
The geopolymer concept was created and published in 1979, together with the foundation of the non-profit organization Geopolymer Institute.[1] In 1983, he was appointed as the Adjunct Professor of Chemistry at Barry University, Miami, Florida, and there he founded the Institute for Applied Archaeological Sciences (IAPAS) to study worthwhile ancient technology and advance the clarity of ancient history. Between 1983 and 1989, in collaboration with Lone Star Industries, Inc., USA, geopolymer cement and blended cements (PYRAMENT) was developed.
National Association for Science, Technology and Society (NASTS) and the Federation of Materials Societies, USA, awarded him the Gold Ribbon Award in 1994.[2]
He is the president of Geopolymer Institute, chair of the annual conference Geopolymer Camp, and is presently (or was) an active member of several scientific societies including American Chemical Society, American Ceramic Society, American Concrete Institute, New York Academy of Sciences and International Association of Egyptologists.[3]
Archaeological theories
Davidovits was not convinced that the ancient Egyptians possessed the tools or technology to carve and haul the huge (2.5 to 15 ton) limestone blocks that made up the Great Pyramid. Davidovits suggested that the blocks were molded in place by using a form of limestone concrete. According to his theory, a soft limestone with a high kaolinite content was quarried in the wadi on the south of the Giza plateau. It was then dissolved in large, Nile-fed pools until it became a watery slurry. Lime (found in the ash of ancient cooking fires) and natron (also used by the Egyptians in mummification) was mixed in. The pools were then left to evaporate, leaving behind a moist, clay-like mixture. This wet "concrete" would be carried to the construction site where it would be packed into reusable wooden molds. In the next few days the mixture would undergo a chemical hydration reaction similar to the setting of cement.
Using Davidovits' theory, no large gangs would be needed to haul blocks and no huge and unwieldy ramps would be needed to transport the blocks up the side of the pyramid. No chiseling or carving with soft bronze tools would be required to dress their surfaces and new blocks could be cast in place, on top of and pressed against the old blocks. This would account for the unerring precision of the joints of the casing stones (the blocks of the core show tools marks and were cut with much lower tolerances). Proof-of-concept experiments using similar compounds were carried out at Davidovits' geopolymer institute in northern France. It was found that a crew of ten, working with simple hand tools, could build a structure of fourteen, 1.3 to 4.5 ton blocks in a couple of days. According to Davidovits the architects possessed at least two concrete formulas: one for the large structural blocks and another for the white casing stones. He argues earlier pyramids, brick structures, and stone vases were built using similar techniques.
Although his ideas are not accepted by mainstream Egyptologists, several renown material scientists are doing pyramid stones and quarry stones analysis that support him. For example, in December 2006 Michel Barsoum and Adrish Ganguly (distinguished material scientists at Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA) with their French colleague Gilles Hug (a well known electron microscopist from famous French CNRS) published a peer-reviewed paper in the Journal of the American Ceramic Society stating that parts of the pyramid were cast with a type of limestone concrete.[4]. Despite the opposition of Dipayan Jana, a petrographer, who had made a presentation to the ICMA (International Cement Microscopy Association) in 2007[5] in which he concludes "we are far from accepting even as a remote possibility of a 'manmade' origin of pyramid stones", other material scientists continued their researches on the topic and published new evidences supporting Davidovit's idea. In April 2008, the famous Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT, Boston, USA, released a study supporting the re-agglomerated stone (geopolymer concrete) pyramid theory. At MIT, Professor Hobbs and two colleagues and students had experimented the construction of a small scale pyramid, published in the Boston Globe newspaper in an article of April 22, 2008 titled "A new angle on pyramids Scientists explore whether Egyptians used concrete"[6]. In 2011, a new scientific analysis demonstrated the artificial nature of Egyptian Pyramid stone. The article titled: Were the casing stones of Senefru’s Bent Pyramid in Dahshour cast or carved? Multinuclear NMR evidence was published [7], by an international team of material scientists involving Kenneth J.D. MacKenzie (MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand), Mark E. Smith, Alan Wong, John V. Hanna (Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7Al, UK), Bernard Barry (Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences, Lower Hutt, New Zealand) and Michel W. Barsoum (Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA). The abstract of this paper reads: A comparison was made of the solid-state 29Si, 27Al and 43Ca MAS NMR spectra of the outer casing stone from Snefru’s Bent Pyramid in Dahshour, Egypt, with two quarry limestones from the area. The NMR results suggest that the casing stones consist of limestone grains from the Tura quarry, cemented with an amorphous calcium-silicate gel formed by human intervention, by the addition of extra silica, possibly diatomaceous earth, from the Fayium area. In 2012, another international team of scientists, Igor Túnyi from Geophysical Institute SAS – Bratislava (Slovak Republic) and Ibrahim A. El-hemaly from National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics – Cairo, Egypt, used for the first time a spectacular method on pyramids and natural blocks, namely paleomagnetism[8]. They concluded: The analysis of a limited set of paleomagnetic samples provided the following results. The paleodirections of three sampling locations (2 from Khafre and 1 from Khufu pyramid) exhibit the common north-south orientation, suggesting that they may have been produced in situ by a concrete technique.
Summary of evidence
Davidovits cites primarily evidence related to his profession as a materials scientist, re-interpreting the observations of conventional Egyptology within this light. Briefly, his points include:
- The thin layer of 'mortar' found at the top of casing blocks is actually the result of settling and water percolating to the top of the block while drying; the layer found would be too weak to bind the massive blocks together
- The humidity inside the pyramids is much higher than would be expected in a desert environment; this is caused by the moisture released into the halls and galleries while the blocks cure
- The arrangement of fossils within the blocks is jumbled, rather than stratified, pointing to the blocks being crushed, then poured while casting rather than deposited in layers as would conventional sedimentary rock
- Certain blocks have elongated air pockets, caused by the cement hardening while air bubbles were in the process of rising to the top
- Ancient descriptions of the pyramids being built featured the use of short blocks of wood, conventionally seen as levers or cranes; Davidovits suggests their use as frames to mold the blocks
- Lines were also found on the blocks; the lines are wavy (characteristic of most types of concrete) and not horizontal (characteristic of natural limestone)
See also
Sources
Books
- Davidovits, Joseph (1988). The Pyramids: An Enigma Solved. New York: Dorset Press.
{{cite book}}
: Unknown parameter|coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (help) - Davidovits, Joseph (1983). Alchemy and the Pyramids. Saint Quentin, France: Geopolymer Institute.
- Davidovits, Joseph (2002). Ils ont Bâti les Pyramides: Les Prouesses Technologiques des Anciens Egyptiens. Paris: J.-C. Godefroy.
- Davidovits, Joseph (2005). La Bible avait raison, Tome 1: L’archéologie révèle l’existence des Hébreux en Égypte. Paris: J.-C. Godefroy.
- Davidovits, Joseph (2006). La Bible avait raison, Tome 2: sur les traces de Moïse et de l’Exode. Paris: J.-C. Godefroy.
- Davidovits, Joseph (2006). La nouvelle histoire des pyramides. Paris: J.-C. Godefroy.
- Davidovits, Joseph (2008). Geopolymer Chemistry and Applications. Saint Quentin, France: Geopolymer Institute.
- Davidovits, Joseph (2009). De cette fresque naquit la Bible. Paris: J.-C. Godefroy.
- Davidovits, Joseph (2009). Why the Pharaohs Built the Pyramids with Fake Stones. Saint Quentin, France: Geopolymer Institute.
References
- ^ http://www.geopolymer.org
- ^ See at http://www.geopolymer.org/category/library/technical-papers , article in pdf #3: GEOPOLYMERS Inorganic polymeric new materials, NASTS award 1994 Presentation at the national "Real Advances in Materials" Symposium, Washington DC, Sept. 26,1994 GEOPOLYMERS: Inorganic polymeric new materials by Joseph Davidovits published in Journal of Materials Education, Vol. 16 (2,3), pp. 91-138 (1994)
- ^ "Extended Biography".
- ^ yubanet.com "Concrete Blocks Used in Great Pyramids Construction" Drexel University
- ^ http://www.cmc-concrete.com/CMC%20Seminars/2007%20ICMA%20Pyramid.pdf The Egyptian Pyramid Enigma - large pdf file
- ^ http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/04/22/a_new_angle_on_pyramids/?page=1
- ^ Materials Letters 65 (2011) 350–352
- ^ Igor Túnyi and Ibrahim A. El-hemaly, (2012), Paleomagnetic investigation of the great egyptian pyramids, Europhysics News 43/6, 28-31. The pdf file may be downloaded at http://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/pdf/2012/06/epn2012436p28.pdf
External links
Pro-Davidovits
- Are Pyramids Made Out of Concrete?
- Concrete Blocks Used in Great Pyramids Construction
- The Surprising Truth Behind the Construction of the Great Pyramids