The Great Pyramid–Speed of Light Correlation: Coincidence or Design?
A popular meme recently caught my eye, one that calls attention to the curious numerical correlation between the Giza pyramid complex and the speed of light. Not surprisingly, the meme is somewhat inaccurate, adding fuel to the fire of the skeptic's extravaganza that inevitably accompanies the appearance of this meme in the comment sections of social media posts. There is one undisputed fact that serves as the basis for this and similar memes though: the latitudinal coordinate 29.9792458° N, whose digits correspond precisely to the speed of light in meters per second, passes through the Great Pyramid of Giza about 10.4 meters (roughly 2 car lengths) north of its apex. The reasonable question that arises from that fact is: where does it fall on a scale from coincidence to design?
When I say "reasonable," I am referring to those who would speak in terms of ranges on such a scale, as opposed to an absolutist position. Unfortunately, though not surprisingly, many people will entrench themselves with an absolutist position, which is often that the Great Pyramid–speed of light correlation (hereby the "GP-c correlation") is definitely, without a doubt, a coincidence. On its face, and just like the extreme position at the other end of the spectrum, this is a weak, unreasonable, and almost completely indefensible position. Anyone countering it is automatically gifted the entire range of probability – likely, unlikely, fifty fifty, etc. – to argue from. I often find myself arguing for the mere plausibility that this is more than a coincidence, which is an easily defensible position. Here, I'm going to go a bit further.
As a framework for this article, I would like to respond a short piece written by Alex Kasprak for Snopes, which lays out, in six points, some of the most typical arguments that you will find from one side of the debate. The notion that the GP-c correlation is anything other than a coincidence is boldly labeled with the absolute term "false" at the top of the article, even though their rating system includes several levels in-between the absolutes of true and false, such as the far more reasonable "unproven." It's also stated in the article's subtitle that this is "nothing more than coincidence," so it's clear that we are dealing with yet another absolutist position.
We will start with the points that deal with the question of whether or not the ancient pyramid builders could have deliberately made the GP-c correlation, following which we will address the points and other matters relating to the overall context. Let's begin, then, with Kasprak's point that, "The unit of measurement on which the speed of light is based in this meme -- meters -- was not defined until 1771, making it a highly anachronistic one for the ancient Egyptians to have been referencing." Because he cites a date here, one might be fooled into thinking that the author did his due diligence of research and that this statement holds some degree of credibility. However, not only is the date he was apparently trying to cite incorrect (it should be 1791—the year the meter was officially adopted by the French National Assembly), but more importantly, he also failed to acknowledge that the meter had an earlier precursor – the length of the seconds pendulum – which even cursory research should have revealed. From there, it's not too difficult to trace the seconds pendulum to ancient Sumer. We can precisely gauge via physical evidence that their double kus or double barley cubit was about 99.9 cm, and 240 one-second beats of a pendulum of this length equals 1/360th of a day, or the Sumerian unit of time transliterated as ges or gesh. As the Egyptians and the Sumerians have a well-established history of trade and cross-cultural connections, the Egyptians would have certainly been familiar with the double barley cubit.
The constant debunking of the "modern meter" canard has grown tiresome, but why is this false idea so prevalent? I understand that metrology is not the most interesting field of study, but we supposedly live in an information age. It should be common knowledge by now that the meter, and the second of time for that matter, go back at least as far as ancient Sumer. The reason, I will suggest, has to do with mind-blowing revelations that tie directly into knowledge of Sumerian metrology, and how such revelations establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the current understanding of ancient history that one might dub the "mainstream consensus," but which should really be understood as flowing from the gatekeeping centers of power, is fundamentally flawed and grossly incomplete. There very much seems to be an agenda of suppression regarding any such information that would upend the current status quo of understanding, especially when it threatens the reputation and stability of certain longstanding institutions. A full exploration into the various reasons for this disturbing practice is extremely important and definitely warranted, although largely off topic for our purposes here.
The next point I will address from Kasprak's article states that, "Although the Great Pyramid of Giza was constructed around 2550 BC, the notion that light 'traveled' at all (though discussed theoretically in ancient Greek times and by early Arab scholars) was not firmly established until the first estimate of the speed of light was made in 1676." This point clouds what is really at issue here, which goes well beyond the mere requirement that the ancients understood the nature of light. They would have needed to know the measurement of the speed of light – fairly accurately – which almost certainly requires a high level of scientific advancement (our most advanced method to date involves laser interferometry). And despite the language of certainty used by the author in making this point, our advancements over the last few centuries in measuring the speed of light have no solid evidentiary bearing on whether or not the speed of light was somehow accurately measured in the ancient past. What would have an evidentiary bearing on this matter is if it could be shown elsewhere that the ancients had fairly accurate knowledge of the speed of light, which it can.
We return to Sumerian metrology and the revelation previously alluded to, the understanding of which first requires that you know that the Sumerians essentially revered the number 60. As I discuss at length in The 60 Pattern documentary, not only did the Sumerians have a base-60 numeral system, but they also equated the number 60 with their supreme deity, An or Anu (leader of the Anunnaki). Having established that, look at what happens when we start to measure significant values using Sumerian units of measurement. Significantly, all of these measurement values are within one percent of being the following "perfect" Sumerian numbers: the speed of the Earth (60 × 10³ Sumerian kus per second), the orbital disc diameter of the Earth, or 2 astronomical units (60 × 10¹⁰ Sumerian kus), and the weight of the Earth (60 × 10²³ Sumerian double-manas1). Now let's look at the speed of light, and I highly stress the significance of the fact that, once again, this is within one percent of being a "perfect" Sumerian number: 60 × 10⁷ or 600,000,000 Sumerian kus per second! Due to the consistent, high percentages of concordance, coupled with compounding probabilities, the chance that this would all happen randomly is extremely minuscule. Of course, the ancient world is chock-full of evidence suggestive of high levels of technology, especially concerning megalithic building practices like the exactitude of cutting, moving, fitting, and placing megalithic stones. The idea that the speed of light might have been known in ancient history is not farfetched to those who have conducted an honest, thorough, and fair-minded assessment of the larger body of available evidence. And given the above, it really starts to seem unreasonable to suggest that the ancients didn’t, at some point, possess or have access to some level of advanced science and technology.
The last of three points in Kasprak's article dealing with the question of whether or not the pyramid builders would have been capable of deliberately planning the GP-c correlation reads, "Our system of referencing locations on the globe via latitude didn't come into being until long after the construction of the Great Pyramid of Giza. And decimal degree mapping at the level of precision implied by the meme relies upon exacting measurements of our globe that were not possible until the late 1900s." My previous responses have already set the stage for the counter-argument to this point. The meter and the second teach us that our "modern" ways may well have underlying ancient roots that history has (perhaps deliberately) forgotten. And here it is readily noted that the coordinate system of measurement is based on the Sumerian convention of dividing the circle into 360 degrees. As far as the capability for making "exacting measurements of our globe," it must be pointed out that the GP-c "design hypothesis" is necessarily a "package deal" that would also involve the capability for making "exacting" measurements of the speed of light, which I have supported with the evidence above. Simply put, if they were capable of doing one then they were almost certainly capable of doing the other.
While the previous point leverages the "exactitude" of the GP-c correspondence against the design hypothesis, the following point, in a rather convoluted way, leverages the "inexactitude" of the GP-c correspondence towards the same end: "If the apex of the pyramid were meant to represent an homage to the fundamental laws of the universe, the correct latitude would actually be closer to 29.9791750 N, which would bear less resemblance to the speed of light in a vacuum expressed in meters per second." Although he provides coordinates, he does not provide any other information to enable the audience to accurately conceptualize the exact nature of the GP-c correspondence. Let us then take a few moments to fully examine the nature of the correspondence from a few different angles.
The line of latitude 29.9792458° N, whose digits correlate precisely with the speed of light in meters per second (hereby, the "c-coordinate"), passes 10.4 meters north of the apex of the Great Pyramid of Giza, which is located at 29.9791524° N. The correlation, while extremely close, is still imprecise—being accurate to three out of seven decimal places. As a value for the speed of light, 299,791,524 m/s would be 99.9997% accurate. I also find it useful to visually see where the "c-coordinate" passes with respect to the overall dimensions of the Great Pyramid when viewed from above (Figure 4, above). Expressed numerically, the "c-coordinate" is over 9/10 of the way from the Great Pyramid's north edge to its apex. So even with respect to the dimensions of the Great Pyramid itself, the proximal correlation between the apex and the "c-coordinate" is fairly impressive. But how does the correlation fare when we examine its greater context?
A pertinent question to have answered is this: what are the odds of this happening randomly? Asked in a more specific way, what are the odds that a randomly selected point on the Earth's surface aligns with the latitudinal "c-coordinate" in the same way as the apex of the Great Pyramid? To qualify, the random point should fall no more than 10.4 meters away from the "c-coordinate," which means that we are looking at a window of about 20.8 meters that is centered on that line of latitude. We will similarly include the southern "c-coordinate" of 29.9792458° S, giving us two windows to consider, and we will exclude the largely uninhabitable latitudes from the 60° parallels to the poles. A line of longitude extending between the 60° parallels averages 13,343,391 meters, and the average amount of land coverage therein would thus be about 3,869,583 m (13,343,391 × 0.29). For lines of longitude where land is located at these two "c-coordinates," the odds of a random point falling 10.4 meters or less from one of them is 1 in 93,144—impressive, though not astronomical. It must be noted, however, that this figure is only a starting point. From there, the probability of correlation only increases with more refined calculations that take into account, for example, land areas that are unsuitable for construction. Still, this gives us a more quantifiable perspective that has been heretofore absent from this discussion.
Before we conclude with how the Great Pyramid itself adds tremendous context with respect to all of the above data, let us dispense with the remaining two points from Kasprak's article, beginning with this doozy: "If a point of latitude's merely crossing a structure at any point is the bar to meet for revealing a hidden meaning to its location, then the latitudes between 29.980150 and 29.978150 (all of which intersect the same pyramid) also fit the bill, leaving a coincidence-monger roughly 2,000 numerical latitude formulations to choose from with respect to the Great Pyramid of Giza." This "argument" is extremely obfuscating and fallacious. No reasonable person would subscribe to the if-clause of his conditional statement, which is generalized and illogically formulated as "a point of latitude" instead of what is actually at issue here—the nature of the proximal correlation between two specific points of latitude. While it's important to consider this correlation with respect to the dimensions of the Great Pyramid itself, I have literally illustrated the proper way to do so above (Figure 4). Kasprak's consequence or "then" part of this conditional statement is irrelevant, misleading nonsense, and even includes a derisive-sounding label to help drive the point home in a way that appeals to the baser instincts. The last of Kasprak's points to address here may be summarized as suggesting that the Egyptians would have been more likely to measure the speed of light in cubits. This is a fair point, though hardly a strong one. And while I do agree, I would caution that there's still a tremendous amount that we don't know about the Great Pyramid and its construction.
The compelling, enigmatic context provided by the "star of the show" itself, the Great Pyramid, is often overlooked in this discussion. One of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, the Great Pyramid has been described by engineers as the most precisely built and accurately aligned structure in the world, and that's definitely not hyperbole. The Great Pyramid was built within tolerances that significantly exceed those required by modern engineering standards. For example, the descending passage is within 0.02 inches of being exactly straight over its entire 150-foot length. Limestone casing stones were cut within 0.01 inches and fitted together with a gap of 0.02 inches. The Great Pyramid is actually a concave, 8-sided structure, but this fact can only be observed from a plane or drone, and only at dawn and sunset on the autumnal and spring equinoxes! There are many, many more examples, but let us consider the potential relevancy here. The unexplained, immense precision of the Great Pyramid seems consistent with the level of technology needed to precisely measure the speed of light, and it's important to remember that the "apex value" for the speed of light is an impressive 99.9997% accurate. To account for this, the coincidence hypothesis must necessarily postulate compounding coincidences, which weighs in favor of the respectively simpler design hypothesis.
One major factor holding me back from a fuller endorsement of the design hypothesis is that it necessarily involves the use of numbers in place values that we express after a decimal point. The Egyptians, and the Sumerians and Babylonians for that matter, are not known to have done this. However, it is pertinent to note that throughout much of history, society has been characterized by a distinct division, whereby so-called "upper" and/or priestly classes deliberately withheld knowledge and practices from the wider population. This persists to this day in certain sectors of society. Due to this sequestering of knowledge and other agenda-driven factors, much of history is incomplete or inaccurate, and we mustn't lean on any particular piece of historical evidence with our full weight. In any regard, the contemporary historical view of Egyptian mathematics, such as their convoluted practice of dealing with fractions, hardly seems consistent with the extreme precision of the Great Pyramid.
If I were to make a commitment at this moment, I would lean slightly more towards supporting the design hypothesis. However, I am aware of some new studies and research on this subject, such as those pertaining to the hypothetical and/or demonstrable use of advanced mathematical concepts embedded in pyramid design, which may further change and refine my position. In light of any new evidence, I endeavor to remain balanced with open-mindedness and skepticism towards it, freely admit if I was wrong, and always adapt my theory to fit the evidence—never the other way around. I encourage all who are reading this to do the same.
Also transliterated as “manu” or “mina,” the double form of which has the same basis as the kilogram.
Hi There. Very interesting read. I had a thought about the location of the apex. The African plate is moving towards Europe (North) at a current rate of 1cm per year. I do not know if that is slower or faster than 4 thousand years ago, but it certainly suggests that when the Great Pyramid of Giza was built, the location of the apex was further to the south. Fun to think that it may have been exactly where the latitude in decimal degrees is the same as the speed of light in m/s.