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: