Through time, there have been many theories as to how the pyramids were built. In the current century, many opinions have surfaced that have changed the questioning of how these magnificent creations were built. During scientific research in the recent decades, evidence has arrived that challenges alternate theories of how the pyramids were constructed. The results include the discovery of new chemical compounds found in the stone of the temples that lead to an entirely different approach of how the pyramids were built. The theory that will be further discussed in this document is perhaps the most loathed among archeologists. It depicts that the pyramids were built by pouring one of the earliest types of cement cast from synthetic material into wooden molds. It is supported through the knowledge of the technology at the time, the characteristics of the stone and supported speculations and discoveries. This theory is much more logical than thousands of men pushing stone blocks up an angular temple that is several hundred feet high. This notion could dramatically change Egyptian and engineering history.
The first substantial piece of evidence that sparked this theory is when scientists invented a technology that was capable of processing the materials from the ancient pyramids. The results were astonishing. They had found “traces of a rapid chemical reaction which did not allow natural crystallization.” This reaction would be illogical if the large stone blocks had been quarried, but leads to the possibility that they had been cast in a concrete-like form. It is believed that the blocks were formed with crushed limestone and natural binding chemicals. These chemicals were readily available to ancient Egyptians. They would then carry wet sacks of cement up the platforms of the pyramid and pour the wet cement into square wooden molds. This would also explain how it is possible that the stone blocks had been placed so close together. Before this discovery, it...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document