Gantenbrink und der Wettbewerb
[ Archiv-Startseite ] Geschrieben von Gitta am 01. Mai 2001 00:15:23: Nachstehendes Posting flatterte bei de.soc.kultur.aegypten rein:
Will Mr Gantenbrink sully the Great Pyramid of Guizeh ?
During his first investigations in 1993, Mr Gantenbrink made several
fundamental errors of conception which could have been totally harmful for
any future investigation.We can quote these ones:
M Gantenbrink certainly imagined that the shafts of the pyramid were as
regular as those in plexiglas in which he realized his tests. But he chose
to conceive a robot distant of only some millimeters from the ground. This
failure in the conception, by an engineer who has been on the site, cannot
be understood and could have make the project fail in the first meters. This
lack of conception was making any slightest unforeseen obstacle fatal to the
project, as it almost was the case with Dixon's bars. Let us remind that Mr
Gantenbrink was conscious of the lacks in his material and that he preferred
to abandon the visit of the north shaft. In the south shaft, the slightest
fragment of stone could become an " unbridgeable obstacle ", as he
recognized himself during the video report.Besides, the running of the hydraulic jack was thought for uniform shafts,
that means without any extension nor shrinkage. The robot was found stuck in
the south shaft and Mr Gantenbrink had to use the same technique as a
century before, by putting end to end simple iron small strips to free it.
This defect of conception is despicable for a self-claimed scientist who,
let's just remind, had worked on the site and had noticed that the paving
stones were not homogeneous.Without any surprise for lucid observers, the robot was stuck only some
meters away, and it became necessary for its brilliant designer to bring it
back with a high professional skill: by pulling hardly the electrical cable.
Obvioulsy the Egyptian god of luck was with him that day, because, in spite
of a fall of 30 metres, the robot was still able to work.We were very impressed by the intelligent system of navigation, which
proved its interest and its aptness since all the investigation was made
manually. Nevertheless, this process was in the conditions of the contract
and Mr Gantenbrink could increase his demands of subsidies to occupy his
students while the sponsors were paying.Today, Mr Gantenbrink still hasn't taken advantage of his mistakes and
starts again the same way.According to the informations in his site, he decided to raise the robot a
few centimeters above the ground. It is still not a machine that can go
anywhere but still a machine that can't pass through the Dixon's bars at the
turn of the north shaft. Moreover that robot could become itself an obstacle
for the future investigations. Will it be necessary to create a robot to
free Mr Gantenbrink's one ?And even if the robot could reach the blocking stone, would really Mr
Gantenbrink be eager to pass through this obstacle? No way. After having
laughed about Bauval and Hancock's theories, he called " Starwars ", Mr
Gantenbrink shows that he prefers Indiana Jones. His explanations about
using of gas under pressure, to measure the volume of the hypothetical room
behind the paving stone, seem to be impossible in a scientific view.
Besides, this experiment could be risky if there were fragile objects or
frescoes behind the stone. In the way to irresponsibility, why not using
explosive to estimate the volume thanks to the shock wave?Mr Gantenbrink's second proposition is to lift the paving stone before
pushing it to send a visual system of investigation. But nobody knows the
thickness of this paving stone, so we consider that there is a risk the
paving stone breaks, even on the robot, blocking definitively the shaft and
any future investigation. We want to remind Mr Gantenbrink that where he
plans to operate is not a platform test made of plexiglas but the last still
intact antique wonder of the world which deserves all our respect and a real
scientific approach.So, we accuse Mr Gantenbrink of wasting the subsidies he perceived and all
the help brought by serious and honest scientists.We accuse him of mortgaging the chances of future explorers capable of
serious and scientific researches.We accuse him of making a technical and human adventure become simply a
media support for his own image.Finally, we accuse Mr Gantenbrink of failing due to a lack of reflection and
imagination, and of persisting when all the elements show that he chose the
wrong way.In an interview, Mr Gantenbrink says that he is now ready to give his robot
to a new research team. We postulate to benefit from this robot which would
allow us to get lower-price pieces.Today, us, OSIRIS (Specialized Organisation in Robotic Investigation and
Intervention on Site) are ready to take our turn on scientific bases with an
open-minded team, to make a rigorous and complete investigation of the Great
Pyramid.
Antworten:
[ Archiv-Startseite ]