The Giza Power Plant Read Free

the features found in this object. I then described the various disciplines involved in the creation of the laser. It required physicists, optical engineers, mechanical engineers, materials and electrical engineers, and a host of crafts people building equipment to their specifications. There were quite a few careers involved in the creation of this seemingly simple cartoon character.
    To envision this laser-cut object, think of a talented artist drawing freehand with a pencil. The lines where the laser has cut through the material are as thick as a pencil line. Using the law of Occam's razor, where the simplest solution is probably the correct one, it could be assumed that a talented artist created this stainless steel character by guiding a handheld laser. I then produced the other cartoon character and placed them together so that each feature overlaid the other perfectly. Now, I told the class, because the human hand and eye are incapable of producing two objects that have complex features with such precision, the scope broadens. There were obviously other disciplines and careers that had a hand in the cutout. There had to have been some mechanical device to guide the laser along its path. There had to have been controls to turn the laser off—as it passed over the metal—and on again to punch a hole through the metal and begin once again cutting the intricate lines. We need electronics engineers, machine tool designers and builders, and computer engineers and programmers, I explained, to build the computers and write the codes that guide the machine tool and control the laser. Besides introducing the class to the hidden work opportunities that are behind the most simple artifacts, my point was to teach the students that a tool is neither created or used in isolation. What I did not tell them was that the same analytical skills and analyses that are readily accepted when applied to modern artifacts can be equally beneficial whenanalyzing artifacts from ancient times. The difference is that the tools that created modern artifacts are still in existence, while those that created many ancient artifacts are not.
    It has been the practice of archaeologists to study the artifacts of a civilization and determine the minimum resources necessary to create them. Generally the primitive tools archaeologists uncover are sufficient to explain these artifacts. There are exceptions, however; and Egypt has an abundance of artifacts that still need to be evaluated correctly. Attempts have been made to explain some of these artifacts, but they fall short of determining how we could actually re-create the artifacts themselves. Part of this problem among academics is a persistent barrier in their beliefs which has resulted in their unwillingness to consider ancient civilizations as being advanced. It is my contention that until scholars select the methods that accurately replicate some of these artifacts under study, they will continue to underestimate ancient achievements and fail to learn their true significance.
    Because so many Egyptian artifacts, including the Great Pyramid itself, cannot be explained adequately or fully by anyone theory, the field of Egyptology is rife with controversy and speculation. There is no shortage of theories regarding the construction and meaning of the Great Pyramid—and the believers of a particular theory have a tendency to hold it passionately and religiously. In order to present my own view, I will address other theories and identify where they fall short. My purpose, however, is to promote cooperation between multidisciplined researchers in the quest for knowledge about our prehistoric ancestors. No single discipline is capable of analyzing and presenting the entire truth regarding the Great Pyramid. It requires experts from many different fields. And Egyptology is only one of them. The fact is that from laypeople to senior research scientists, the old theories are being rejected, and there