#Egypt #journey Geopolymer, Stone Softening or Purely natural? Puma Punku and the Pyramids of Egypt | Ancient Architects





NEW CHANNEL FROM Ancient ARCHITECTS: “House and Earth” has introduced. Please subscribe now at

My new video clip on the proof presented by Joseph and Ralph Davidovits and Luis Huaman that Puma Punku was make not from carved stone but from a geopolymer combination certainly brought a large amount of dialogue. The proof centred on the fact that there was organic and natural issue found within just the crystalline volcanic andesite employed to make the well known H-blocks, which is particularly exceptional or even extremely hard owing to the heat involved in volcanic rock ahead of crystallisation. On major of this, the crystals on the flat surfaces confirmed no abrasion marks, this means they were being not polished.

But as quite a few have pointed out in the opinions of my previous video clip, the Puma Punku H-blocks are not uniform in form – they are all to some degree exclusive. They therefore could not have been developed by merely pouring a combination into a mould. Brien Foerster also reveals us two unfinished H-Blocks in a video clip that I have joined below.

What sort of Ancient Substantial Know-how are we seeking at? Are the Puma Punku blocks developed from geopolymer concrete, or was a sort of stone softening agent utilized, like Helmut Tributsch proposes for the Pre-Inca stonework in Peru?

In this video clip we also look at the Giza pyramid (Wonderful Pyramid and Khafre Pyramid) main masonry, as effectively as the casing stones of the Bent Pyramid of Sneferu, as we look at the proof for and from them becoming made from produced stone. View now and make sure you subscribe.

Brien Foerster’s video clip exhibiting unfinished H-blocks:

Scientific papers pointed out in this video clip:
Stone Softening by Helmut Tributsch:

The hottest paper by Joseph Davidovits, Luis Huaman and Ralph Davidovits on the andesite stones of Puma Punku:

Their initially paper on sandstone geopolymer at Puma Punku:

The paper on the casing stones of the Bent Pyramid:

Paleomagnetic investigations into the Giza Pyramids:

resource

Related articles

34 Comments

  1. See they not how many of those before them We did destroy?- generations We had established on the earth, in strength such as We have not given to you – for whom We poured out rain from the skies in abundance, and gave (fertile) streams flowing beneath their (feet): yet for their sins We destroyed them, and raised in their wake fresh generations (to succeed them).
    The Holy Quran, Al-Anaam, 6vs6

  2. Are we being sidetracked by a paper by mainstream scientists re Puma Punku?. If you read the paper it includes sideswipes at the ancient alien theorists, why would a serious scientific paper need to do that?. The fact there are biological traces in the stone could be due to hundreds of years (at least 1500) of natural contamination into the samples?. There seems to be a tendency to extrapolate this theory of man made stone blocks to the amazing megalithic construction sites such as the Giza plain, Machu Pichu etc. These sites are awe inspiring and huge in scale and on a par with modern major construction sites. Lost ancient high technology of whatever form makes more sense than the idea of slaves grinding down some 'magic' plants with volcanic ash to create a few blocks, or getting juice out of the plants to melt rock from a mountain. These are mega sites that we would need concrete batching machinery to do these days.

  3. being from a concrete background i have long thought that the old way of these structures were of a composition or form of concrete,,but thats just my thoughts

  4. point 1 you dont use just one mould for all h blocks ,these are smart people ,dont insult their intelligence . point 2 turning hard stone into putty is so far fetched it makes geoploymer look reasonable beyond doubt point 3 whole fossils in geoploymer is possible ,you are forcing lies upon your viewers , shall i go on?

  5. For me it would be even more fantastical that the pyramid stones were cast . For a start where are the modern cast blocks ? . If this material is so superior we would use it all the time . Not one block needed reinforced like we need with concrete . How long does a geopolymer stone take to set before another 10 ton block can be placed on top ? .How much would the raw material need to be worked and mixed before it can set ? How much time would they have to cast before it went off . What machinery would they have high on the pyramid that could mix a ten ton block ? .man power alone would be insufficient to mix that much material together. I think moving and lifting cut stone would have been more achievable than this proposed method.

  6. Brien Foerster has mentioned that the Puma Punku blocks could have rough surfaces due to being exposed to atmosphere. Some of the surfaces are very smooth too, due to being part buried when excavated. A huge percentage of the site, still is today, buried under mud and untouched.

  7. This raw surface of that unfinished block in Puma Punku could be result of unfinished chemical proces of softening or hardening. That unfinished block could be just failur. Beside that the diffrent sizes of these blocks were result of used methodology of locking blocks in one solid construction. Those builders think diffrent than we do. They think organically. The forms of blocks were sizeable. One is sure. Blocks have magnetic activity so they were fully soft not just soften on surface.

  8. If the blocks were quarried on a grid that aligned with the pyramid construction, there should be a high correlation between the magnetic alignments. And if they were geopolymers, it seems to me like they shouldn't be expected to show an overall magnetic alignment unless the materials were heated beyond the curie point and then cooled. But it's late and I'm quite tired, so I could be wrong about all this.

  9. This is my favorite (favourite) episode you've done! I love the updates after you've heard new info about previous topics you've covered. And a big THANK YOU for creating this channel because it's so refreshing listening to a social media personality who is bold and wise enough to evolve your theories (if revelavent) after learning new information!

  10. The "Great Pyramid" at Giza is actually a four-pointed NATO star, and is only a couple hundred years old. The Red Pyramid was the third–and smallest–at Giza. It was moved to Aswan when "Napoleon" built the NATO star atop the courtyard of the actual Great Pyramid (the one with concrete still around the top).

  11. What if? What if whoever built these ancient megalithic structures didn't think, communicate or behave at all, like we like to think they did? Maybe there were no special mathematics to discover or engineering skills to learn and refine. Maybe it came to them naturally like it does to bees and ants building and maintaining their hives. No need to create/discover geometry to align the pyramids if they could actually sense true north within four arc minutes.

  12. Any theory needs explain the highly unusual nubs on the stones. Also unless you differentiate between the types of stone work you are just going around in Circles. It’s silly that the focus is always on the somewhat common limestone blocks and not the really unique solid white quartz and black diorite plazas the surrounds the pyramids. Where does one find solid white quartz anywhere on earth.

  13. if they have found the geomagnetic orientation of the stones when molded then they can definitely determine the age of the pyramids! we know very well the previous positions of geomagnetic north.

  14. they could still be made of a cement aggregate even if not made in a pure mold. they could be roughly molded and then further worked before hardening . thus you could have some blocks not finished before they harden too much to be further worked.

  15. Beer and wine was common even back then. The chemistry to make both are not simple or intuitive. One side effect of making wine is sometimes you make vinegar. Speculating that availability of acids of varying strength translates into industrial stone works is interesting to think about.

  16. So you could have just said it's not known how they were built. But you're not going to say that. Because that would imply that they were in built in the timeline presented by Scientists…

  17. The differences between the blocks does not prove molds were not used, molds could have been subtly changed to produce some visual effect. Sadly, since no one can show us what this site originally looked like we really can't know. I am fairly sure that the original would have provoked as much, if not more, discussion of what it meant and what it was used for.

Leave a Reply