[wendy1946]

The pyramid blocks were most likely poured. That is, they took wagon-loads of stone (of a reasonable size) from the quarry, poured same into formers, and then poured some liquid binding agent into the frame so that it hardened into a block. Trying to carve fitting stones from a quarry would waste 2/3 of the material and quickly turn the quarry into a heap of rubble.

The word 'pyramid' is a Greek word, the root part being the familiar 'pyr' (fire) which we also see in words like 'pyrotechnics', 'pyromaniac' etc. They originally had golden tips and acted like lightning rods, generating what you'd call St. Elmo's fire, which served for religious purposes.

[alexander_busek]

The pyramid blocks were most likely poured.

Gee, it seems to me that it should be easy to prove, or disprove, your theory - simply by examining the limestone blocks to see if they are composed of rubble cemented together.

Do you suppose that any archeologists have ever bothered to do that?

Regards,

[allmost]

That is one heck of a pour to last thousands of years. The exterior forms would be ridiculously complicated as well. The exterior shows individual blocks.

[Chode]

i'd love to see a strength test... poured anything with that much weight on top of it and not crumbling