4 ms·

"People" didn't lost the ability to build giant megalithic structures and indeed pyramid construction flourished in the Americas until about 600 years ago. The

by ch4s3 2y ago

"People" didn't lost the ability to build giant megalithic structures and indeed pyramid construction flourished in the Americas until about 600 years ago. The Egyptians stopped building pyramids because it took decades, was insanely expensive, and gave grave robbers an obvious target. From an engineering perspective, ancient people built more complicated things than the pyramids, just not as tall. Why should height be the sole measure of engineering prowess? Consider the coffered dome of the Roman Pantheon.

DiggyJohnson 2y ago
For what it’s worth, it’s the height and volume of the pyramids that impresses me. A skinny skyscraper twice as tall but 1/64th the surface area Obviously we could build bigger if we wanted. I literally work in one of the biggest buildings in the US by volume and it is impressive on a daily basis. But just because I know we are capable of more doesn’t mean the accomplishment of actually doing the world and constructing the pyramids isn’t amazing. Besides the pantheon, what other ancient or modern projects measure up?
- AlotOfReading 2y ago
  Feel free to look at the outline comparison on Wikipedia: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Comparison_of_pyramids_SMIL.svg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Comparis... The pyramid of Cholula (larger by volume), the Luxor hotel (smaller, but substantially more useful), and Ryugyong hotel (hobbled by the country building it) are all plausibly comparable projects.
- masklinn 2y ago
  > For what it’s worth, it’s the height and volume of the pyramids that impresses me. A skinny skyscraper twice as tall but 1/64th the surface area Why are you impressed by unusable volume? Do spoil tips awe you?
  - DiggyJohnson 2y ago
    Sorry I didn’t finish that sentence somehow. But yes to your first question.
  - probably_wrong 2y ago
    There's something inherently impressive about large things. If you set a 12,600 tonnes concrete cylinder in the middle of a city, eventually someone will give up trying to remove it and turn it into a historical monument instead: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwerbelastungsk%C3%B6rper https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwerbelastungsk%C3%B6rper

by ch4s3 2y ago

DiggyJohnson 2y ago

For what it’s worth, it’s the height and volume of the pyramids that impresses me. A skinny skyscraper twice as tall but 1/64th the surface area Obviously we could build bigger if we wanted. I literally work in one of the biggest buildings in the US by volume and it is impressive on a daily basis. But just because I know we are capable of more doesn’t mean the accomplishment of actually doing the world and constructing the pyramids isn’t amazing. Besides the pantheon, what other ancient or modern projects measure up?

AlotOfReading 2y ago
Feel free to look at the outline comparison on Wikipedia: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Comparison_of_pyramids_SMIL.svg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Comparis... The pyramid of Cholula (larger by volume), the Luxor hotel (smaller, but substantially more useful), and Ryugyong hotel (hobbled by the country building it) are all plausibly comparable projects.
masklinn 2y ago
> For what it’s worth, it’s the height and volume of the pyramids that impresses me. A skinny skyscraper twice as tall but 1/64th the surface area Why are you impressed by unusable volume? Do spoil tips awe you?
- DiggyJohnson 2y ago
  Sorry I didn’t finish that sentence somehow. But yes to your first question.
- probably_wrong 2y ago
  There's something inherently impressive about large things. If you set a 12,600 tonnes concrete cylinder in the middle of a city, eventually someone will give up trying to remove it and turn it into a historical monument instead: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwerbelastungsk%C3%B6rper https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwerbelastungsk%C3%B6rper