Several methods of fabrication of the polygonal masonry using clay/gypsum replicas, a topography translator, reduced clay models of the stone blocks, and a 3D-pantograph are described in the article “Fabrication methods of the polygonal masonry of large tightly-fitted stone blocks with curved surface interfaces in megalithic structures of Peru” (DOI: 10.20944/preprints202108.0087.v7). UA-cam does not allow a direct link. Search by the article title.
Whoever built Monuments with it would probably never had thought that thousands of years later people trying to figure out how he did it lmao. Would be so neat to learn about how they thought Future must be looking like.
Personally I think ancient masons had a bad ass overlay technique because so many structures that weren't finished you can see the sequence of building. Idk. I'd love to see it for myself someday. As a cement mason of 16 years, ancient masonry fascinates me
To my regret I haven't investigated this topic but have been fascinated by these structures. I have done several types of masonry over the years. I'm not very knowledgeable on chemistry but I read here someone tried acid to shape surfaces. It didn't work that well and couldn't be applied in a detailed enough manner to get smooth serfaces. I agree, and since stone is variable in it's composition it becomes unlikely one could achieve an even enough serface for joints so fine as was achieve historically. Softening the stone on a large scale, without destroying the binding properties of certain minerals is what is necessary. Acid tends to do the opposite, destroying the binder while only doing so at the top few thousandths of an inch. Leaving loose particles without much affecting the shape. I doubt what we generally define as an acid would be the correct method. Here is something relevant- Some years ago the house I lived in had a concrete porch. Someone cleaned out a vehicle apparently, and left various containers in one place. After removing them I discovered toy astonishment, a soft spot had developed. Acid will remove the calcium to leave sand- this was NOT that! The patch, about 6" x 10" was like rubber ! There was NO deterioration of the binding agent . You would have a hard time putting your finger through it, but would sway like jello with the pressure of a foot. This is exactly the property needed for these megalithic structures. I've cleaned concrete with acid before, it only attacks the serface and destroys the integrity, you could not soften a stone without dissolving it. The was different, like turning into a marshmallow, yet retaining it's shape and structure. What it witnessed was that it would spring back after pressure was applied. Not returning it to it's poured state, like a liquid. The bottles I removed included motor oil, BRAKE FLUID, differential fluid ( which is just heavy oil, 90 -120 weight), windshield washer fluid,( ammonia and detergent) , TRANSMISSION FLUID, and possibly a hydraulic jack One of these was the culprit, and I don't know which. There was originally a stain appearing to be oil-like although I don't recall there to be a film or residue. It took some time to soften, maybe a week, and longer to re-harden, maybe 6 months. This would be IDEAL to achieve the result we see in these structures. I don't know the thickness of this layer but judging from the deflection I'd guess at least 2 inches. It would depend on the thickness of the concrete as I'm sure it wasn't more than 4-6 inches with filler underneath, which may have settled beforehand, thus contributing to the elasticity.
That's really interesting, I would guess the brake fluid is the culprit. Also, Brake fluid, mixed with motor oil or even other hydrolic oils may also be the ultimate reason, you should experement and see if you can replicate the effect and send a vid to SGD to see if he can help figure it out...
Science is make a hypothesis. Take the tools you show then make it. That's science. If you can't make it think of a new theorem. It just takes one experiment. You are right. But you must leave you computer and go outside.
I loved this, I live in Ireland and I've found loads of massive structures buried in forests, the roots can't get into the ground and when its been windy the trees have uprooted and exposed the blocks underneath, its everywhere, could I send you some photos you'll be amazed and nobody pays any attention they think it's just rocks.
I agree. I want to see photos! I am discovering an outpost of an ancient city in Brazil that was explored by British explorer Fawcett. The outpost is a ruin that Colonel Fawcett discovered when he was acting alone in Bahia, and whose location has not been made public.
@@chan-n2t Look at a town called Carrickfergus in North of Ireland, there's an old small village on its outskirts called Eden and a cul de sac there called the Garden of Eden, in that area there's a castle called Dobbs Castle, hes been head of the Irish judiciary for the last 400 years, the bible says Israel will experience 400 years of slavery, put Ireland in there instead, the first Magistrates court is on their old land its called Dalways Bawn, its hidden as a dairy in His Story. Google those places and see what you can find
During my brief experience using acid to dissolve stone, I quickly discovered that the acid runs right off the high spots and pools in the low spots. The low places were already low but the puddling of the acid made it way worse. It was making my job way harder and I ended up using mechanical abrasion to remove the high spots.
Cool, good point. However in the paper by Helmut Tributsch he brings up chemistry that is above my pay grade to properly understand. He mentions the acid in the mud being affected by pressure, and I guess the mud would stop it from pooling in low points as well now that you mention it.
While there absolutely are stone softening plants in existence I think a more likely explanation is sound..I believe the right resonant frequency will "liquify" stone to the degree it becomes maleable.. a plant extract would have to literally penetrate the stone entirely to have any kind of moldability.. subsonic frequency would.. look at the scoop marks on the huge stone at balbek.. think about how soil can "liquify" during an earthquake Another I think more plausible method would be a geopolymer as it would be the easiest way to go
20:20 - these people are applying some natural greenish paint so they can see their inscription lines better for the next working steps. steel workers often use e.g. Prussian blue for the very same purpose. - so here the audio track and the imagery aren't that much in sync.
*Industry note. Acids are commonly used in the stone industry from the weakest to the strongest solutions. To clean igneous stone like granite and as a finishing tool to very lightly surface texture calcitic stone. In stone restoration acid damage consists of staining or light etching which is simply polished out. Using acids for reductive carving processes is complete nonsense as they are not aggressively fast-acting enough and neutralize too quickly.
Cheers. I had the fan on and it ruined the first narration so I had to redo. Forget to mention second time around that the amount of time and acid needed to take off a mm or two would be crazy compared to just doing it the conventional way. Let alone all the other problems that go along with it. Even with Hydroflouric acid if something like that was even available to them , the vapors alone can be deadly without the issues of storage and transportation. It's like designing a jet airliner, and all the associated infrastructure, to cross a 30 ft ravine. The problems it creates are much more than the problem they are trying to solve.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded hydrofluoric acid isn't naturally occurring and has to be formulated, even then, not practical. Hydrochloric acid on calcitic stones is far more corrosive comparatively than hydrofluoric on granites, and yet is only practical for incremental surface etching. People forget or neglect efficiencies in choosing one technology over another to get the job done.
@Grober Weisenstein Also granite and most other igneous rocks being composed of different minerals with various properties means that an acid, even if it could dissolve all the minerals, will not dissolve them at the same rate. HF acid is the only one that dissolves quartz, but it still does it much slower than silicates (feldspar, mica). As a result, it would leave a very unsatisfactory, weakened surface.
@@tomszabo7350 wouldn't have to dissolve all the minerals at equal rates since just compromising one mineral compromises the entire mineral matrix bond. Igneous stone is granular and the dissolved grain size being displaced determines the layer depth removed. The remaining surface texture would be plus or minus the average corresponding grain size. Similarly, thermal flame finishing causes specifically quartz minerals to spall taking adjoined other minerals with them. Bottomline, chemical reduction is too slow and impractical given more efficient methods available.
@Grober Weisenstein Yes I understand that but according to the hypothesis the acid is supposed to be a sort of smoothing or flattening step not merely aid in the removal of material. It definitely doesn't create a flat or smooth finish (in rocks containing quartz), which was my point. Also thermal shock fractures the quartz grains specifically (when the surface is heated to a shallow depth) as I pointed out in another video but the state of the crystal matrix would determine the extent to which the entire surface structure would be compromised. For example in some rocks with smaller discrete quartz phenocrysts in a fine-grained groundmass you would get more of a pitting not spalling or falling apart of the entire surface layer (though that is possible, especially over time). I believe stonemasons preferred precisely this sort of rock for its workability whether they used only the basic techniques or also applied thermal shock for final shaping or smoothing. In either case what you want is a material that has small crystals that shatter easily (quartz) without chipping so that you could first break those quartz crystals up and then quickly pound down the remaining groundmass, which is now much easier due to the pitting left by the quartz, and also you should have the formation of more rock flour instead of angular grains that could create chips or dings in your surface finish. Moreover the rock flour, wetted and containing the crushed quartz, could immediately be used as a polishing agent without any further steps. I believe this is one of the biggest "secrets" of the "ancient architects" ... remove the harder quartz from the stone surface and use it immediately to help smooth and and polish the softer feldspar that remains.
One problem with the plant alkaloids theory is that the massive cultivation that would have been necessary to get enough of the essential oil for construction projects this size would have made it impossible to hide the plants from the general populace the way ancient trade guilds usually did. The pyrite red mud would have never sofened the stone this way.
@@RegentDeMarquis005 Sure, bud. Stonehenge, the Parthenon, Colosseum, stadia, triumphal arches, aqueducts, roads, Hagia Sophia, sewer systems, Baths of Caracalla, Romanesque and Gothic cathedrals all sprang from the ground, when ordered by Europeans. BTW, how are the other schizos in your Moor cult doing? Everyone taking their prescribed meds?
Look at all of the mathematical wisdom encoded into the great pyramid such as the longitude to the kings chamber is exactly the speed of light in a vacuum amongst other advanced calculations, distance from earth to the sun =1 astronomical unit. Polar radius of earth which very only recently were able to calculate. I think we should look deeply into antiquity for instance in sumerian cuneiform exists many tablets scientifically describing how the image of ourselves by design was intentional using existing hominids on earth combined with the essence of the annunaki. So in a sense parts of us did create these monuments.
Why do archeologists twist themselves in knots trying to make engineering and construction methods / details fir their theories? The builders of the polygonal masonry structures built them the way they did because they could. We know that the builders could obviously cut stone so it's just as easy for them to cut stones square and uniform and produce a structure that serves the purpose however they didn't ... they cut polygonal shaped because they could ... it's obviously makes for a superior structure but there are few forces on earth that could justify building in such a manner. So on one hand you can look at these structures and say "Damn these guys were good ... I wonder who did it" or you could come to the conclusion that the Incas did it then justify your theory by figuring they somehow dipped 20-30 ton stones in acid then hurfed them on a wall by some unknown method because they didn't have the tools or skill to cut polygonal shapes or lift 20 ton stones onto a wall. People who spend their time trying to fit 20 tone stones to perfection, whether by dipping them in acid or chiseling away with copper tools when they only really have the technology to pile rough stones on top of each other tend to starve to death ... this is why we don't do stupid shit like this today. Someone built these structures ... it was a comfortable job for them because they did it to perfection ... we don't have a clue who they were but Damn they were good.
I have a theory.... they would cut odd shape stones and then use chalk to draw a rough outline of the odd angles onto a new stone then carve it away until it was a rough approximation of the fit... and then they'd put it in place with water, and then move it back and forth like two men sawing a tree down, periodically washing away the wet dust until it fot better..... that's just my theory
there is also a journal from a british explorer called fawcett (around 1900) and he describes there amazonian birds, that rub a leaf on a stone to make it soft.
Great vid! A thought: having additional material and stopping at the acid at the right time would only be required if they wanted a certain specific shape. Looks to me that was not the case, they only wanted the stones to fit to eachother, not really caring where the seam/joint is exactly. Hoping to find a video where someone actually tries it haha :) Cheers
Acids will neutralize if exposed so you need to apply again if more is needed. slightly vibrating the stone using horns or sound instruments or light strikes will cause the contact points to rub with each other would be a better way i think
Amazing photos presented here. Any shots showing the depth of the shims at Olantaytambo wall? You have shown some overhead angles in other clips and the shims appear, as expected, to be close fitting for several inches. Just wonder if there is any more data on these pieces. (On certain other channels, I am considered stupid when I suggest that earth ramps can be used during construction process.)
The only ones I have of shims from behind come from google street view, will be showing again in the next piece on 'vitrification' as they use the shims as evidence. Protzen's Inca Architecture and Construction at Ollantaytambo Includes good diagrams of what's happening behind the walls. I will need to revisit Ollantaytambo videos as a review (minus the internet drama ;-P ) and show a lot more info from that book. There are a couple of sites where you can download the PDF, i took a bit of a risk since the place i got it from wasn't the usual more reputable ones. Hopefully I won't need a shot for any diseases.
So I took your conclusion to be that no acid is needed and it wouldn’t work anyways. All these stones were carved using harder stone or metal to pound or carve to fit. Right?
Vinegar melts limestone but how did they reform it and add granulated granite in a mud balanced mixed injection moulds that explains the knobs hose block wood frame detachment hoses for geopolymer limestone granite
Excellent work! If I would've been there myself, I would have looked at the walls from all angles, cross-sections and behind. These pictures are never shown by LAHT, I wonder, if anybody deserts them on site, if they sell this shit on their tours? Or they keep their customers on a leash so they're not looking around?
Once they have paid for their tickets the guides don't care I reckon. Impossible to hide once on site but as long as it's not on the youtube video ads then they can catch another group for the next tour?
People who would pay to go on such tours invariably will only see what they "want" to see. So confirmation bias would cloud the experience to reinforce the dubious LAHT claims which have been systematically hammered into them. 😵💫
I still like the hypothesis that the Inca were softening stones with acidic compounds to greatly reduce the amount of labor involved in cutting and shaping them. There's a simple technique for shaping the stones for precise fitment that everyone seems to overlook. Once a stone was fitted into place, a layer of clay would be packed onto the surface(s) to be mated and then that cast would be used to quickly test fit the next stone at the place of manufacture. This would guarantee a perfect fit, and we know they only really focused on the exposed surfaces, so a full cast wouldn't really be necessary, reducing the overall workload.
_Whooomp! There it is...._ 🕺💃 Thus falls the basis of LAHT misrepresentation. As we see using an acidified substance to facilitate a smoothing of a stone surface - or achieving a textured or aesthetic appearance much like potters will apply certain glazes to their products to give them a pleasing look = is not synonymous with "creating" stones using the same. This is not much different from the whole "geopolymer" nonsense whereby Davidovits took a sample of the repair work on Sneferu's Bent Pyramid and extrapolated that as supposedly meaning the Egyptians were fashioning blocks from the stuff. Never mind that the quarries - and even the blocks - reflect the natural bedrock they were hewn from in a systematic manner. Moral of the story: the best conspiracy theories are 10% truth coupled with 90% BS. Then those small kernels of truth lead people to assume all the rest is true via confirmation bias and their desire to believe the specious arguments. Similarly as we see here there are ancient reports of the Inca using "red soil" applied to quarried stones to help smooth them out. As the legitimate papers on the subject show the Inca via their mining activities and natural elements found in their environment might have had access to acidified soil. So LAHT takes a thing and blows it way out of proportion to claim they were "casting stones" or whatever from it = hence 10% truth to suck people in and then a whole lotta nonsense. 😵💫
I remember acid etching on the old car dashes , they use to draw around were the circuit was meant to go then dip it in an acid... When you have a concrete sewer pipe the acid that builds up in there will eat through the concrete an the pipes have to be replaced... I remember a test being done years ago when they softened a stone but I think they had trouble making it hard again So that stone wouldn't of been able to hold a load.... If the stones were a liquid an poured individually there would be a slight join in between its called a cold join... A geopolymer will not be damaged with an acid...... at the end of the day,,,no one really knows .... An thats why you don't take any shit off any one cobba ,,, cause no one really knows.... Im in a different direction to you but I keep everything open an i like watching your show,,,, your time an interest has to be respected....
You say that a concrete pipe will need to be replaced from acid building up and corroding it, but then state that a geopolymer wouldn't be effected by an acid... I'm genuinely asking here, how do you know this, and what do you class as a geopolymer? If natural stone is effected by it, what is special about a geopolymer that it wouldn't be? Again, I'm genuinely asking, not being a dink. Thanks in advance if you reply!
the acid mud theory doesn't hold up. when you do a layer of stone that way it could take a long time for it to do what is claimed. if it worked quickly it would never be smooth or even and what would stop it? it would continue to eat the stone? with the hardness of stones varying even in the same stone this is not viable.
Interesting video. I think that is very important for us to try figure out how people with no written language and no mathematics whatsoever, were able to plan and execute such an outstanding architectural and logistical achievement. And this is not limited just to Peru. The focus is too much on the methods used to carve the stones. The reality is that u cannot execute even a small scale operation like that, without deep understanding of construction techniques, mathematics and material propertier, which by itself requires chemistry.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded thanks for the reply. Do u think that the level of sophistication of the Incas was indeed enough to give them credit for the buildings. I think that people far underestimate the level of knowledge and calculations that are needed in order for those construction to be erected and then withstand eons.
I don't think they poured these for sure. Pouring is actually much harder than people think. Acids to soften them is only a theory that would help you get the rock exfoliated faster perhaps. You can't mold them that way. Because you'd have to re harden it at some point or they'd just erode quickly, or turn into a pancake lol
@cyberpunkspike No. People have never, relied on acid to fit stone. So why here? People thru eons have created ×50 better stonework with just stones, hammers and chisels. No hocus pocus needed
@@hughgrection3052 People throughout the eons normally used mortar, they didn't dry fit stone like this. Getting a 100% perfect fit with the tools at hand isn't possible, getting it close then using acid right before placing stone, would have been enough to do it.
@cyberpunkspike No. You're dreaming up technology to match a conclusion you reached. What would they even transport this extreme acid inside of? Yes, there's many ways to match stones contours. Firstly, it's easier to build chaotic shaped stone walls that to carve each into squares. Most rocks was simply busted, then they round the edges and install them using the cracks they made themselves to now appear on purpose. When this is done it looks alot more complicated than it really is. No. They did have tools to map stones precisely and would fit one the first attempt most times, without acid or lasers. It's called a stone mason Pantagraph tool. It allows you to copy an exact negative of a stone. They use them to even do complicated fitting of broken Greek statues still. It's one of the oldest tools we have, but it's not used enough for the average public to recognize it like let's say a hammer. So without knowing these exist, people dream up other ways it must have been done. Hell they could have even layed a wet hide on blocks and let it dry then use the hide to make a negative block that fits precisely. To leak to an assumption that they used extreme acids don't make sense. Acids would follow gravity anyways, not burn vertically and rely on anti gravity to fit the upper stone anyways, then it would just run down the lower block. There's places here ya go and learn about how they did this. Real channels who actually do the work and show their math so to speak. It's just a few clicks away if ya wanna really truly learn.
They would make a limestone vinegar melted slurry cement mixture and they'd add granulated granite feldspar clay silicate sand quartz and other expoxy geopolymer chemical hardeners in wooden shoring frames
I would be willing to accept a high powerd water jet before i coukd believe they used acid to soften 20 ton boulders and cut blocks to hone surfaces to near perfection.
Cultured quartz synthetic epoxy granite countertops evaporated hydraulic limestone base and chemical epoxy bridges it's epoxy tar cement or bricks or cultured countertops
25:25 I might not be the expert here but why wouldn't they clean up the shape of the natural irregular stone to be more precise? Or maybe just hollow out the back, fit the front edge, and fill it with mud and rubble... Lots of extra work no one will ever see and still not that great either.. Just slap a sheet of marble casing over the thing and get paid.
Yes. That's exactly what they did. The "mystery" types are very careful never to show the rear or side view of these walls where exposed. The exterior stone walls are more like water proofing to protect the packed earth behind. Only a few rare exceptions are stand alone walls and even they have a hollow in the centre. With only the faces being so precisely fitted.
They would turn pure silicate sandstone break it down using acids purify it and then add quartz and hydraulic lime clay phosphates felspar and crushed limestone in cement slurry mixture
My $.02 ..... These stones were probably shaped and laid using "traditional" stone-on-stone shaping, polishing and fitting. If you have a sufficient time, populace/workforce and enough patient, skilled masons and foremen, it can be done. It's possible a huge amount of the "grunt" work was completed by a combination of war prisoner/labor levies from the areas of Incan Conquests...taken in huge numbers. Quarrying and moving the stone would seem like the most difficult part. In comparison, finishing the stone, the slow and steady grinding by thousands of hands seems much easier and logistically less daunting than cutting and transporting massive stone blocks to the building site in the first place. Remember, the Inca didn't use the wheel. The fitting, smoothing and final polishing could also continue 24/7/365 for years on end in one centralized, accessible site. Calculations regarding Human labor, food, shelter, tools and the material infrastructure to complete the finished work could be more easily managed at the actual fixed site itself. The demands of Religious, Ritual and Cultural forces along with the most "brutal" enforcement of working conditions and expectations most certainly played a role in the building process as well.
I posted a video a friend shared on Indian priest talking about fake stone to make sandstone stucco. Technique now lost. Though there are lots of legends about gods making temples overnight and such. Stones like granite are a combination of minerals formed under tremendous heat and pressure. If they are undone they couldn’t go back to original It’s like melting ice cream. You can freeze it again but it’s never going to be the same
Indian temples are geopolymer epoxy limestone granite that's what makes them earthquake proof and water erosion proof that's how places like saccsuauymon geopolymer granite epoxy with hydraulic limestone slurry remained its shape for as long as it has
But you dont take into account that in ancient times these people only had basic copper chisels n saws which people have demonstrated are nowhere near adequte to cut such huge stones, especially since so many are tough stones like granite. Also with such basic tools the surfaces would be rough with chip marks... but theyre super smooth (at least at the front) which would indicate an acid waah of some kind. Not to mention the mystery of what all the strange 'nubs' are on some of the stones and what theyre for n how they were made?
I don’t know man, the hardness of the stone matters. It’s conceivable to get what appears to be alabaster to fit perfect even on a broken face. But andesite? Granite? That takes magnitudes more effort and harder tools. A way more monumental effort. I agree that all this stone softening acid is kind of irrelevant
So wrong. Basket molds filled with granet rubble, volcanic ash, quicklime mud. Collected by all villagers and transported from mud pits in smaller baskets. Very easy method . HF acid (tea) used to scribe stone & plaster in Egypt = Ephedra plant. Different plant in So. America. So much bad info in this , but @ least you tried. Now weave some baskets and haul granet rubble & dust to mixing pit @ kiln area. Cook limestone W/ volcanic ash , then mix w/ mud. Basket forms dissolved by mix over time. Remember to add tree sap in forms to stiffen before filling. Mud brick temporary movable wall forms as needed
one doesn't have to be very bright to understand that acid is not a practical carving method. one does have to be a scam artist if they are keen on promoting it as such.
Heat treated megalithic walls and synthetic buildings have a lot of fractures and cracks the buildings without those impurities are the none heat treated none flyash quartz mixture real geopolymer is dry cast not heat cast
Hola, my friend. Not trying to give u a hard time, but if it’s so easy why did the Inca not continue to build with these techniques? It is impossible to argue against the assertion that the most recent work is on top of the older work? Clearly, especially at M.P., there are much smaller stones heaped into, or on top of, the damaged/missing areas where the polygonal and/or megalithic stones have been moved or dislodged? Also the later builders were clearly attempting to imitate the polygonal masonry, with these fieldstones, because they attempt to crudely ‘interlock’ them in a childlike parody of the preexisting work, correct? So if what I have said is true, and that this type of stonework is “easy,” as u said then where did this extremely easy and common knowledge go? Why do we see 2 if not 3 entirely different levels of mastery, and style for that matter, of stonemasonry clearly visible at many of these sights? If the Inca were the final inhabitants of these structures, b4 the Spanish, and the Inca ‘supposedly’ had an unbroken, or darkageless, civilization then, by your assertion, there should only be grand polygonal masonry at the principle sites, but that ain’t what we see mate? Must be like in Egypt, where all the incredible stone cutting, shaping and megalithic construction took place during the old kingdom and then they just forgot how to do that shit, right professor? Oh yeah, but at least the ‘egyptologists’ get a pass because of the first intermediate period….ah, I see. Just busting your balls roadie, l enjoyed the video as usual and not one vitriol filled rant against any ancient hightechnologist? I didn’t think it could be done…lol. Take care, cheers.
At Machu Picchu the rough stone in the triangle of the roofs on all roofs. Also examples of lower quality below high quality. There are very few areas of the high quality, the water supply and terraces all lower quality. I have a few videos showing the oldest photos comparing to now. HIghlighting the separate buildings with high quality, separated across the site. The high quality stuff very limited and integrated into lower quality stone water systems and such.
Paper by Helmut Tributsch linked in description, he talks about pirate (the mineraal) and Incan mines as a POSSIBILITY. Vinegar and other mild acids will dissolve limestone though, be it very very slowly. Water even more slowly than than. Mudstone, gypsum and volcanic ash based rocks don't do so well with water. Still a huge difference between dissolving and melted to reharden a stone, at least without geological timescales.
You can't melt quarry granite with acid string cutting wouldn't be fast enough either would saws they must of gotten granulated granite for transmuting acid melted mud limestone into granite limestone they either had oxygen concentrator torches and hookah's or burned pure sulfur to melt quarry granite they couldn't of used acids for granite only limestone mineral bonds
I enjoyed some innovative ideas. The gaps at the back of some wall stones disproving the polymers theory was very interstings. However, I make a living building things with my hands, and let me tell you, there is a difference between "could do it" and "would do it". Your theory, I believe, is too labour intensive for something that doesn't need to be.
Reformed mineral clay geopolymer with hydraulic lime and quartz would only need about 2500 degrees it's not that difficult to make a concentrated oxygen torch at 6300 degrees to keep open perfectly cutt holes as geopolymer evaporates and drys
Absolute nonsense. One does not have the necessary knowledge to explain these things. There was a civilization that left only the most durable things, stone buildings. It is not only about the accuracy of the construction, but also about moving multi-ton blocks up to a height of 3000m. Man possessed an ability unknown to us. It disappeared after a great disaster.
@@antoningarcic471 I have in depth videos of all the significant sites and their quarries. Where exactly were stones moved to a height of 3000m? If you mean elevation above sea level then you should mention the elevation of the quarries. Which are all higher than the buildings and from local sources in the case of multi ton blocks the only exception being ollantaytambo and even that “mystery” is obviously solved with the ramp on the hillside the attention mystery seekers all seem to have missed?
I don’t think you ever dissolved anything with acid. Even if you mixed your acid perfectly every time the stone you used may not be perfectly consistent. So there is no way to determine how much to add or for how long. Also there are byproducts of acid burning or whatever you would like to call it. I would say this is not even plausible if you want straight lines.
I’ just by the way you say that I know you are a member of these new age stone pointing cults. You are ignorant of the Inca and basic concepts bedded in reality. I’m not trying to be an asshole. I’m trying to help you. You are in a cult and I mean that in full seriousness, you are in a cult.
@@Agapi-dg7th the Incas ruled an empire than ran from Colombia to northern chile. Also goats introduced after Inca collapse. Do you practice being so ignorant? Move along champ. You’re way out of your league here. Others might celebrate or at least coddle you but not this place.
Several methods of fabrication of the polygonal masonry using clay/gypsum replicas, a topography translator, reduced clay models of the stone blocks, and a 3D-pantograph are described in the article “Fabrication methods of the polygonal masonry of large tightly-fitted stone blocks with curved surface interfaces in megalithic structures of Peru” (DOI: 10.20944/preprints202108.0087.v7). UA-cam does not allow a direct link. Search by the article title.
A link already in description. I reference it in the video. 👍
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Thank you for your interest and attention to my work.
The 10th article edition (DOI: 10.20944/preprints202108.0087.v10) is posted at Preprints. Seek the article by DOI or by title.
Whoever built Monuments with it would probably never had thought that thousands of years later people trying to figure out how he did it lmao. Would be so neat to learn about how they thought Future must be looking like.
I bet your right about that! Pretty cool and hard to imagine any modern structure lasting more than a few hundred years let alone thousands!
Personally I think ancient masons had a bad ass overlay technique because so many structures that weren't finished you can see the sequence of building. Idk. I'd love to see it for myself someday. As a cement mason of 16 years, ancient masonry fascinates me
To my regret I haven't investigated this topic but have been fascinated by these structures. I have done several types of masonry over the years. I'm not very knowledgeable on chemistry but I read here someone tried acid to shape surfaces. It didn't work that well and couldn't be applied in a detailed enough manner to get smooth serfaces. I agree, and since stone is variable in it's composition it becomes unlikely one could achieve an even enough serface for joints so fine as was achieve historically. Softening the stone on a large scale, without destroying the binding properties of certain minerals is what is necessary. Acid tends to do the opposite, destroying the binder while only doing so at the top few thousandths of an inch. Leaving loose particles without much affecting the shape. I doubt what we generally define as an acid would be the correct method.
Here is something relevant-
Some years ago the house I lived in had a concrete porch.
Someone cleaned out a vehicle apparently, and left various containers in one place. After removing them I discovered toy astonishment, a soft spot had developed.
Acid will remove the calcium to leave sand- this was NOT that!
The patch, about 6" x 10" was like rubber ! There was NO deterioration of the binding agent . You would have a hard time putting your finger through it, but would sway like jello with the pressure of a foot.
This is exactly the property needed for these megalithic structures. I've cleaned concrete with acid before, it only attacks the serface and destroys the integrity, you could not soften a stone without dissolving it.
The was different, like turning into a marshmallow, yet retaining it's shape and structure. What it witnessed was that it would spring back after pressure was applied. Not returning it to it's poured state, like a liquid.
The bottles I removed included motor oil, BRAKE FLUID, differential fluid ( which is just heavy oil, 90 -120 weight), windshield washer fluid,( ammonia and detergent) , TRANSMISSION FLUID, and possibly a hydraulic jack
One of these was the culprit, and I don't know which. There was originally a stain appearing to be oil-like although I don't recall there to be a film or residue. It took some time to soften, maybe a week, and longer to re-harden, maybe 6 months. This would be IDEAL to achieve the result we see in these structures. I don't know the thickness of this layer but judging from the deflection I'd guess at least 2 inches. It would depend on the thickness of the concrete as I'm sure it wasn't more than 4-6 inches with filler underneath, which may have settled beforehand, thus contributing to the elasticity.
That's really interesting, I would guess the brake fluid is the culprit. Also, Brake fluid, mixed with motor oil or even other hydrolic oils may also be the ultimate reason, you should experement and see if you can replicate the effect and send a vid to SGD to see if he can help figure it out...
Science is make a hypothesis. Take the tools you show then make it. That's science. If you can't make it think of a new theorem. It just takes one experiment. You are right. But you must leave you computer and go outside.
I loved this, I live in Ireland and I've found loads of massive structures buried in forests, the roots can't get into the ground and when its been windy the trees have uprooted and exposed the blocks underneath, its everywhere, could I send you some photos you'll be amazed and nobody pays any attention they think it's just rocks.
I’d like to see some photos too!
I agree. I want to see photos!
I am discovering an outpost of an ancient city in Brazil that was explored by British explorer Fawcett.
The outpost is a ruin that Colonel Fawcett discovered when he was acting alone in Bahia, and whose location has not been made public.
@@chan-n2t Look at a town called Carrickfergus in North of Ireland, there's an old small village on its outskirts called Eden and a cul de sac there called the Garden of Eden, in that area there's a castle called Dobbs Castle, hes been head of the Irish judiciary for the last 400 years, the bible says Israel will experience 400 years of slavery, put Ireland in there instead, the first Magistrates court is on their old land its called Dalways Bawn, its hidden as a dairy in His Story. Google those places and see what you can find
@@HermesTresmegestus Read my reply and see what you find, connect the dots
During my brief experience using acid to dissolve stone, I quickly discovered that the acid runs right off the high spots and pools in the low spots. The low places were already low but the puddling of the acid made it way worse. It was making my job way harder and I ended up using mechanical abrasion to remove the high spots.
Cool, good point. However in the paper by Helmut Tributsch he brings up chemistry that is above my pay grade to properly understand. He mentions the acid in the mud being affected by pressure, and I guess the mud would stop it from pooling in low points as well now that you mention it.
I left a comment earlier today you might find interesting
@@SacredGeometryDecodedcheck my comment today
While there absolutely are stone softening plants in existence I think a more likely explanation is sound..I believe the right resonant frequency will "liquify" stone to the degree it becomes maleable.. a plant extract would have to literally penetrate the stone entirely to have any kind of moldability.. subsonic frequency would.. look at the scoop marks on the huge stone at balbek.. think about how soil can "liquify" during an earthquake
Another I think more plausible method would be a geopolymer as it would be the easiest way to go
20:20 - these people are applying some natural greenish paint so they can see their inscription lines better for the next working steps.
steel workers often use e.g. Prussian blue for the very same purpose. - so here the audio track and the imagery aren't that much in sync.
*Industry note. Acids are commonly used in the stone industry from the weakest to the strongest solutions. To clean igneous stone like granite and as a finishing tool to very lightly surface texture calcitic stone. In stone restoration acid damage consists of staining or light etching which is simply polished out. Using acids for reductive carving processes is complete nonsense as they are not aggressively fast-acting enough and neutralize too quickly.
Cheers. I had the fan on and it ruined the first narration so I had to redo. Forget to mention second time around that the amount of time and acid needed to take off a mm or two would be crazy compared to just doing it the conventional way. Let alone all the other problems that go along with it.
Even with Hydroflouric acid if something like that was even available to them , the vapors alone can be deadly without the issues of storage and transportation.
It's like designing a jet airliner, and all the associated infrastructure, to cross a 30 ft ravine. The problems it creates are much more than the problem they are trying to solve.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded hydrofluoric acid isn't naturally occurring and has to be formulated, even then, not practical. Hydrochloric acid on calcitic stones is far more corrosive comparatively than hydrofluoric on granites, and yet is only practical for incremental surface etching. People forget or neglect efficiencies in choosing one technology over another to get the job done.
@Grober Weisenstein Also granite and most other igneous rocks being composed of different minerals with various properties means that an acid, even if it could dissolve all the minerals, will not dissolve them at the same rate. HF acid is the only one that dissolves quartz, but it still does it much slower than silicates (feldspar, mica). As a result, it would leave a very unsatisfactory, weakened surface.
@@tomszabo7350 wouldn't have to dissolve all the minerals at equal rates since just compromising one mineral compromises the entire mineral matrix bond. Igneous stone is granular and the dissolved grain size being displaced determines the layer depth removed. The remaining surface texture would be plus or minus the average corresponding grain size. Similarly, thermal flame finishing causes specifically quartz minerals to spall taking adjoined other minerals with them. Bottomline, chemical reduction is too slow and impractical given more efficient methods available.
@Grober Weisenstein Yes I understand that but according to the hypothesis the acid is supposed to be a sort of smoothing or flattening step not merely aid in the removal of material. It definitely doesn't create a flat or smooth finish (in rocks containing quartz), which was my point. Also thermal shock fractures the quartz grains specifically (when the surface is heated to a shallow depth) as I pointed out in another video but the state of the crystal matrix would determine the extent to which the entire surface structure would be compromised. For example in some rocks with smaller discrete quartz phenocrysts in a fine-grained groundmass you would get more of a pitting not spalling or falling apart of the entire surface layer (though that is possible, especially over time). I believe stonemasons preferred precisely this sort of rock for its workability whether they used only the basic techniques or also applied thermal shock for final shaping or smoothing. In either case what you want is a material that has small crystals that shatter easily (quartz) without chipping so that you could first break those quartz crystals up and then quickly pound down the remaining groundmass, which is now much easier due to the pitting left by the quartz, and also you should have the formation of more rock flour instead of angular grains that could create chips or dings in your surface finish. Moreover the rock flour, wetted and containing the crushed quartz, could immediately be used as a polishing agent without any further steps. I believe this is one of the biggest "secrets" of the "ancient architects" ... remove the harder quartz from the stone surface and use it immediately to help smooth and and polish the softer feldspar that remains.
Liked the sculpture. The idea of rock eating bacteria from mines sounded interesting.
One problem with the plant alkaloids theory is that the massive cultivation that would have been necessary to get enough of the essential oil for construction projects this size would have made it impossible to hide the plants from the general populace the way ancient trade guilds usually did. The pyrite red mud would have never sofened the stone this way.
Great presentation proving your points. Ancient man was extremely capable and it's cheap to peg aliens or 5d repltiles for our hard work.
Ummm Europeans don't have ant hard work unless you speaking the Irish that came to the America's in 18th century and worked in south carolima
@@RegentDeMarquis005 😂☝️
@@RegentDeMarquis005 Sure, bud. Stonehenge, the Parthenon, Colosseum, stadia, triumphal arches, aqueducts, roads, Hagia Sophia, sewer systems, Baths of Caracalla, Romanesque and Gothic cathedrals all sprang from the ground, when ordered by Europeans. BTW, how are the other schizos in your Moor cult doing? Everyone taking their prescribed meds?
Who even said Europeans?
Look at all of the mathematical wisdom encoded into the great pyramid such as the longitude to the kings chamber is exactly the speed of light in a vacuum amongst other advanced calculations, distance from earth to the sun =1 astronomical unit. Polar radius of earth which very only recently were able to calculate. I think we should look deeply into antiquity for instance in sumerian cuneiform exists many tablets scientifically describing how the image of ourselves by design was intentional using existing hominids on earth combined with the essence of the annunaki. So in a sense parts of us did create these monuments.
Why do archeologists twist themselves in knots trying to make engineering and construction methods / details fir their theories? The builders of the polygonal masonry structures built them the way they did because they could.
We know that the builders could obviously cut stone so it's just as easy for them to cut stones square and uniform and produce a structure that serves the purpose however they didn't ... they cut polygonal shaped because they could ... it's obviously makes for a superior structure but there are few forces on earth that could justify building in such a manner.
So on one hand you can look at these structures and say "Damn these guys were good ... I wonder who did it" or you could come to the conclusion that the Incas did it then justify your theory by figuring they somehow dipped 20-30 ton stones in acid then hurfed them on a wall by some unknown method because they didn't have the tools or skill to cut polygonal shapes or lift 20 ton stones onto a wall.
People who spend their time trying to fit 20 tone stones to perfection, whether by dipping them in acid or chiseling away with copper tools when they only really have the technology to pile rough stones on top of each other tend to starve to death ... this is why we don't do stupid shit like this today. Someone built these structures ... it was a comfortable job for them because they did it to perfection ... we don't have a clue who they were but Damn they were good.
I have a theory.... they would cut odd shape stones and then use chalk to draw a rough outline of the odd angles onto a new stone then carve it away until it was a rough approximation of the fit... and then they'd put it in place with water, and then move it back and forth like two men sawing a tree down, periodically washing away the wet dust until it fot better..... that's just my theory
Try doing that with something weighing many tons!
there is also a journal from a british explorer called fawcett (around 1900) and he describes there amazonian birds, that rub a leaf on a stone to make it soft.
Another great video. You are really deep into it. Great job!
Glad you think so, thanks
Great vid! A thought: having additional material and stopping at the acid at the right time would only be required if they wanted a certain specific shape. Looks to me that was not the case, they only wanted the stones to fit to eachother, not really caring where the seam/joint is exactly.
Hoping to find a video where someone actually tries it haha :)
Cheers
Acids will neutralize if exposed so you need to apply again if more is needed. slightly vibrating the stone using horns or sound instruments or light strikes will cause the contact points to rub with each other would be a better way i think
Amazing photos presented here. Any shots showing the depth of the shims at Olantaytambo wall? You have shown some overhead angles in other clips and the shims appear, as expected, to be close fitting for several inches. Just wonder if there is any more data on these pieces. (On certain other channels, I am considered stupid when I suggest that earth ramps can be used during construction process.)
The only ones I have of shims from behind come from google street view, will be showing again in the next piece on 'vitrification' as they use the shims as evidence.
Protzen's Inca Architecture and Construction at Ollantaytambo
Includes good diagrams of what's happening behind the walls. I will need to revisit Ollantaytambo videos as a review (minus the internet drama ;-P ) and show a lot more info from that book.
There are a couple of sites where you can download the PDF, i took a bit of a risk since the place i got it from wasn't the usual more reputable ones. Hopefully I won't need a shot for any diseases.
So I took your conclusion to be that no acid is needed and it wouldn’t work anyways. All these stones were carved using harder stone or metal to pound or carve to fit. Right?
Vinegar melts limestone but how did they reform it and add granulated granite in a mud balanced mixed injection moulds that explains the knobs hose block wood frame detachment hoses for geopolymer limestone granite
Excellent work! If I would've been there myself, I would have looked at the walls from all angles, cross-sections and behind. These pictures are never shown by LAHT, I wonder, if anybody deserts them on site, if they sell this shit on their tours? Or they keep their customers on a leash so they're not looking around?
Once they have paid for their tickets the guides don't care I reckon. Impossible to hide once on site but as long as it's not on the youtube video ads then they can catch another group for the next tour?
@@SacredGeometryDecoded I'm still waiting for the youtube-vid of a customer feeling cheated. That would be fun! xD
People who would pay to go on such tours invariably will only see what they "want" to see. So confirmation bias would cloud the experience to reinforce the dubious LAHT claims which have been systematically hammered into them. 😵💫
I still like the hypothesis that the Inca were softening stones with acidic compounds to greatly reduce the amount of labor involved in cutting and shaping them. There's a simple technique for shaping the stones for precise fitment that everyone seems to overlook. Once a stone was fitted into place, a layer of clay would be packed onto the surface(s) to be mated and then that cast would be used to quickly test fit the next stone at the place of manufacture. This would guarantee a perfect fit, and we know they only really focused on the exposed surfaces, so a full cast wouldn't really be necessary, reducing the overall workload.
_Whooomp! There it is...._ 🕺💃 Thus falls the basis of LAHT misrepresentation. As we see using an acidified substance to facilitate a smoothing of a stone surface - or achieving a textured or aesthetic appearance much like potters will apply certain glazes to their products to give them a pleasing look = is not synonymous with "creating" stones using the same.
This is not much different from the whole "geopolymer" nonsense whereby Davidovits took a sample of the repair work on Sneferu's Bent Pyramid and extrapolated that as supposedly meaning the Egyptians were fashioning blocks from the stuff. Never mind that the quarries - and even the blocks - reflect the natural bedrock they were hewn from in a systematic manner.
Moral of the story: the best conspiracy theories are 10% truth coupled with 90% BS. Then those small kernels of truth lead people to assume all the rest is true via confirmation bias and their desire to believe the specious arguments.
Similarly as we see here there are ancient reports of the Inca using "red soil" applied to quarried stones to help smooth them out. As the legitimate papers on the subject show the Inca via their mining activities and natural elements found in their environment might have had access to acidified soil. So LAHT takes a thing and blows it way out of proportion to claim they were "casting stones" or whatever from it = hence 10% truth to suck people in and then a whole lotta nonsense. 😵💫
I remember acid etching on the old car dashes , they use to draw around were the circuit was meant to go then dip it in an acid...
When you have a concrete sewer pipe
the acid that builds up in there will eat through the concrete an the pipes have to be replaced...
I remember a test being done years ago when they softened a stone but I think they had trouble making it hard again
So that stone wouldn't of been able to hold a load....
If the stones were a liquid an poured individually there would be a slight join in between its called a cold join...
A geopolymer will not be damaged with an acid......
at the end of the day,,,no one really knows ....
An thats why you don't take any shit off any one cobba ,,, cause no one really knows....
Im in a different direction to you but I keep everything open an i like watching your show,,,, your time an interest has to be respected....
You say that a concrete pipe will need to be replaced from acid building up and corroding it, but then state that a geopolymer wouldn't be effected by an acid...
I'm genuinely asking here, how do you know this, and what do you class as a geopolymer?
If natural stone is effected by it, what is special about a geopolymer that it wouldn't be?
Again, I'm genuinely asking, not being a dink. Thanks in advance if you reply!
@@billdavis6238 the third paragraph doesn't make sense bill..
Oxygen concentrator torches burn at 6300 degrees enough to make H blocks with perfectly cutt holes
the acid mud theory doesn't hold up. when you do a layer of stone that way it could take a long time for it to do what is claimed. if it worked quickly it would never be smooth or even and what would stop it? it would continue to eat the stone? with the hardness of stones varying even in the same stone this is not viable.
Thank you very much for the analysis!
Interesting video. I think that is very important for us to try figure out how people with no written language and no mathematics whatsoever, were able to plan and execute such an outstanding architectural and logistical achievement. And this is not limited just to Peru. The focus is too much on the methods used to carve the stones. The reality is that u cannot execute even a small scale operation like that, without deep understanding of construction techniques, mathematics and material propertier, which by itself requires chemistry.
They had mathematics. They also kept records but with knots. It’s important to give them credit first what they actually did have.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded thanks for the reply. Do u think that the level of sophistication of the Incas was indeed enough to give them credit for the buildings. I think that people far underestimate the level of knowledge and calculations that are needed in order for those construction to be erected and then withstand eons.
I don't think they poured these for sure. Pouring is actually much harder than people think.
Acids to soften them is only a theory that would help you get the rock exfoliated faster perhaps. You can't mold them that way. Because you'd have to re harden it at some point or they'd just erode quickly, or turn into a pancake lol
No you wouldn't, the acid would neutralize after small amount of time, it would just allow for a tight fit, which is why it was the method used.
@cyberpunkspike No. People have never, relied on acid to fit stone. So why here? People thru eons have created ×50 better stonework with just stones, hammers and chisels. No hocus pocus needed
@@hughgrection3052 People throughout the eons normally used mortar, they didn't dry fit stone like this. Getting a 100% perfect fit with the tools at hand isn't possible, getting it close then using acid right before placing stone, would have been enough to do it.
@cyberpunkspike No. You're dreaming up technology to match a conclusion you reached. What would they even transport this extreme acid inside of?
Yes, there's many ways to match stones contours. Firstly, it's easier to build chaotic shaped stone walls that to carve each into squares. Most rocks was simply busted, then they round the edges and install them using the cracks they made themselves to now appear on purpose. When this is done it looks alot more complicated than it really is.
No. They did have tools to map stones precisely and would fit one the first attempt most times, without acid or lasers. It's called a stone mason Pantagraph tool. It allows you to copy an exact negative of a stone. They use them to even do complicated fitting of broken Greek statues still. It's one of the oldest tools we have, but it's not used enough for the average public to recognize it like let's say a hammer. So without knowing these exist, people dream up other ways it must have been done. Hell they could have even layed a wet hide on blocks and let it dry then use the hide to make a negative block that fits precisely. To leak to an assumption that they used extreme acids don't make sense. Acids would follow gravity anyways, not burn vertically and rely on anti gravity to fit the upper stone anyways, then it would just run down the lower block.
There's places here ya go and learn about how they did this. Real channels who actually do the work and show their math so to speak. It's just a few clicks away if ya wanna really truly learn.
@cyberpunkspike Also btw, no. We dry fitted stones long before "mortar" was invented by Roman's.
If they could evaporate acid from limestone granite slurry that would cause it to reharden into solid
Been waiting for this one.
They would make a limestone vinegar melted slurry cement mixture and they'd add granulated granite feldspar clay silicate sand quartz and other expoxy geopolymer chemical hardeners in wooden shoring frames
An acid epoxy vinegar melted limestone with activator chemical epoxy hardener with 10% wood grain and granulated granite
It's like a tidal wave proof bunker
I would be willing to accept a high powerd water jet before i coukd believe they used acid to soften 20 ton boulders and cut blocks to hone surfaces to near perfection.
What about stone softening thru heat from an Archimedes mirror?
Cultured quartz synthetic epoxy granite countertops evaporated hydraulic limestone base and chemical epoxy bridges it's epoxy tar cement or bricks or cultured countertops
25:25
I might not be the expert here but why wouldn't they clean up the shape of the natural irregular stone to be more precise? Or maybe just hollow out the back, fit the front edge, and fill it with mud and rubble... Lots of extra work no one will ever see and still not that great either..
Just slap a sheet of marble casing over the thing and get paid.
Yes. That's exactly what they did. The "mystery" types are very careful never to show the rear or side view of these walls where exposed. The exterior stone walls are more like water proofing to protect the packed earth behind.
Only a few rare exceptions are stand alone walls and even they have a hollow in the centre. With only the faces being so precisely fitted.
They would turn pure silicate sandstone break it down using acids purify it and then add quartz and hydraulic lime clay phosphates felspar and crushed limestone in cement slurry mixture
My $.02 ..... These stones were probably shaped and laid using "traditional" stone-on-stone shaping, polishing and fitting. If you have a sufficient time, populace/workforce and enough patient, skilled masons and foremen, it can be done. It's possible a huge amount of the "grunt" work was completed by a combination of war prisoner/labor levies from the areas of Incan Conquests...taken in huge numbers. Quarrying and moving the stone would seem like the most difficult part. In comparison, finishing the stone, the slow and steady grinding by thousands of hands seems much easier and logistically less daunting than cutting and transporting massive stone blocks to the building site in the first place. Remember, the Inca didn't use the wheel. The fitting, smoothing and final polishing could also continue 24/7/365 for years on end in one centralized, accessible site. Calculations regarding Human labor, food, shelter, tools and the material infrastructure to complete the finished work could be more easily managed at the actual fixed site itself. The demands of Religious, Ritual and Cultural forces along with the most "brutal" enforcement of working conditions and expectations most certainly played a role in the building process as well.
very interesting!!
What about the indian temples in which they also claim they used plants to soften stone.
I posted a video a friend shared on Indian priest talking about fake stone to make sandstone stucco. Technique now lost.
Though there are lots of legends about gods making temples overnight and such.
Stones like granite are a combination of minerals formed under tremendous heat and pressure.
If they are undone they couldn’t go back to original
It’s like melting ice cream. You can freeze it again but it’s never going to be the same
Feldspar atomically bonds to granulated mineral granite like bubblegum
Awesome information and we the washitaw Say thank you! 🇲🇦🇺🇲🇲🇦⚜️⚜️⚜️🪖🪖🪖🌎🌎🌎🕌🕌🕌🛖🛖🛖🏹🏹🏹⚔️⚔️⚔️☪️🛐🌛🌕🌜
Thank you for commenting, much appreciated.
From acid melted limestone quarry to geopolymer epoxy granite blocks
Indian temples are geopolymer epoxy limestone granite that's what makes them earthquake proof and water erosion proof that's how places like saccsuauymon geopolymer granite epoxy with hydraulic limestone slurry remained its shape for as long as it has
But you dont take into account that in ancient times these people only had basic copper chisels n saws which people have demonstrated are nowhere near adequte to cut such huge stones, especially since so many are tough stones like granite. Also with such basic tools the surfaces would be rough with chip marks... but theyre super smooth (at least at the front) which would indicate an acid waah of some kind. Not to mention the mystery of what all the strange 'nubs' are on some of the stones and what theyre for n how they were made?
Very nice video. Pleasant narriation voice.😊
I don’t know man, the hardness of the stone matters. It’s conceivable to get what appears to be alabaster to fit perfect even on a broken face. But andesite? Granite? That takes magnitudes more effort and harder tools. A way more monumental effort. I agree that all this stone softening acid is kind of irrelevant
So wrong. Basket molds filled with granet rubble, volcanic ash, quicklime mud.
Collected by all villagers and transported from mud pits in smaller baskets. Very easy method . HF acid (tea) used to scribe stone & plaster in Egypt = Ephedra plant. Different plant in So. America.
So much bad info in this , but @ least you tried.
Now weave some baskets and haul granet rubble & dust to mixing pit @ kiln area. Cook limestone W/ volcanic ash , then mix w/ mud.
Basket forms dissolved by mix over time. Remember to add tree sap in forms to stiffen before filling.
Mud brick temporary movable wall forms as needed
They used acid to make the tight fit.
one doesn't have to be very bright to understand that acid is not a practical carving method. one does have to be a scam artist if they are keen on promoting it as such.
It’s just to deceive people.
Heat treated megalithic walls and synthetic buildings have a lot of fractures and cracks the buildings without those impurities are the none heat treated none flyash quartz mixture real geopolymer is dry cast not heat cast
hahaha c'mon man, stop wasting your time.
Stop being logical! You're ruining EVERYTHING! Aliens! Alien acid! Hey, that's a good name for a rock band...
Hola, my friend. Not trying to give u a hard time, but if it’s so easy why did the Inca not continue to build with these techniques? It is impossible to argue against the assertion that the most recent work is on top of the older work? Clearly, especially at M.P., there are much smaller stones heaped into, or on top of, the damaged/missing areas where the polygonal and/or megalithic stones have been moved or dislodged? Also the later builders were clearly attempting to imitate the polygonal masonry, with these fieldstones, because they attempt to crudely ‘interlock’ them in a childlike parody of the preexisting work, correct?
So if what I have said is true, and that this type of stonework is “easy,” as u said then where did this extremely easy and common knowledge go? Why do we see 2 if not 3 entirely different levels of mastery, and style for that matter, of stonemasonry clearly visible at many of these sights? If the Inca were the final inhabitants of these structures, b4 the Spanish, and the Inca ‘supposedly’ had an unbroken, or darkageless, civilization then, by your assertion, there should only be grand polygonal masonry at the principle sites, but that ain’t what we see mate?
Must be like in Egypt, where all the incredible stone cutting, shaping and megalithic construction took place during the old kingdom and then they just forgot how to do that shit, right professor? Oh yeah, but at least the ‘egyptologists’ get a pass because of the first intermediate period….ah, I see.
Just busting your balls roadie, l enjoyed the video as usual and not one vitriol filled rant against any ancient hightechnologist? I didn’t think it could be done…lol.
Take care, cheers.
At Machu Picchu the rough stone in the triangle of the roofs on all roofs.
Also examples of lower quality below high quality. There are very few areas of the high quality, the water supply and terraces all lower quality.
I have a few videos showing the oldest photos comparing to now. HIghlighting the separate buildings with high quality, separated across the site.
The high quality stuff very limited and integrated into lower quality stone water systems and such.
acidic mud? comparing water to limestone does not melt it.
Paper by Helmut Tributsch linked in description, he talks about pirate (the mineraal) and Incan mines as a POSSIBILITY.
Vinegar and other mild acids will dissolve limestone though, be it very very slowly. Water even more slowly than than.
Mudstone, gypsum and volcanic ash based rocks don't do so well with water.
Still a huge difference between dissolving and melted to reharden a stone, at least without geological timescales.
You can't melt quarry granite with acid string cutting wouldn't be fast enough either would saws they must of gotten granulated granite for transmuting acid melted mud limestone into granite limestone they either had oxygen concentrator torches and hookah's or burned pure sulfur to melt quarry granite they couldn't of used acids for granite only limestone mineral bonds
I enjoyed some innovative ideas. The gaps at the back of some wall stones disproving the polymers theory was very interstings. However, I make a living building things with my hands, and let me tell you, there is a difference between "could do it" and "would do it". Your theory, I believe, is too labour intensive for something that doesn't need to be.
Reformed mineral clay geopolymer with hydraulic lime and quartz would only need about 2500 degrees it's not that difficult to make a concentrated oxygen torch at 6300 degrees to keep open perfectly cutt holes as geopolymer evaporates and drys
Soften stones ? Really guys ? Seriously ? And using plants.
Honest now. Did you read the full title, or read the description or watch the video?
Absolute nonsense. One does not have the necessary knowledge to explain these things. There was a civilization that left only the most durable things, stone buildings. It is not only about the accuracy of the construction, but also about moving multi-ton blocks up to a height of 3000m. Man possessed an ability unknown to us. It disappeared after a great disaster.
@@antoningarcic471 I have in depth videos of all the significant sites and their quarries. Where exactly were stones moved to a height of 3000m? If you mean elevation above sea level then you should mention the elevation of the quarries. Which are all higher than the buildings and from local sources in the case of multi ton blocks the only exception being ollantaytambo and even that “mystery” is obviously solved with the ramp on the hillside the attention mystery seekers all seem to have missed?
I don’t think you ever dissolved anything with acid. Even if you mixed your acid perfectly every time the stone you used may not be perfectly consistent. So there is no way to determine how much to add or for how long. Also there are byproducts of acid burning or whatever you would like to call it. I would say this is not even plausible if you want straight lines.
I point that out in the video, I am critical of the idea throughout the video.
please forget completely the idea of stone softening, the rock were cut in place by unknown alien civilization some 18,000 years ago
The Incas didn’t build these structures.
I’ just by the way you say that I know you are a member of these new age stone pointing cults. You are ignorant of the Inca and basic concepts bedded in reality.
I’m not trying to be an asshole. I’m trying to help you.
You are in a cult and I mean that in full seriousness, you are in a cult.
@@SacredGeometryDecodedthe incas build the walls? The goat hurders again?
@@Agapi-dg7th the Incas ruled an empire than ran from Colombia to northern chile.
Also goats introduced after Inca collapse.
Do you practice being so ignorant?
Move along champ. You’re way out of your league here. Others might celebrate or at least coddle you but not this place.
Sorry, it's interesting but your narrating is just not my thing.