“Unwarranted assumptions” is the wording that can most accurately explain Piazzi Smyth’s strange conclusions as derived from his meticulous scientific work, as far as the Great Pyramid is concerned, since he accepted Egyptian chronology, and did not question the presumed antiquity of the Bible.

We will provide only one fact regarding English measurements: the length of the mile was established by statute as late as 1592 A. D.

Two basic numbers that any novice researcher of the Great Pyramid will have at his disposal is the length of the pyramid and the length of the King’s chamber. By simple division, one finds the ratio of the chamber’s length to the pyramid’s length as one to twenty two. Upon this discovery, one should continue this progression downwards, by dividing the chamber’s length by 22, and dividing this result by 22; and upwards, by multiplying the pyramid length by 22, multiplying this result by 22.

One degree at the equator is approximately equal to 484 lengths of the Great Pyramid. This reasonably indicates the architect knew the circumference of the equator and divided it into 360 equal segments or degrees. As far as the external dimensions of the Great Pyramid are concerned, there is no indication of dividing the degree into minutes, and minutes into seconds. The reasoning of dividing a degree in 484 parts (22×22) indicates an occult, rather than a scientific, mindset.

The current English mile, when divided by seven and eleven, provides the rough height and approximate base length of the Great Pyramid.

The suggested distance of one degree at the equator is equal to 69 1/7 “pyramid miles” and 24,891 3/7 “pyramid miles” is the indicated circuit of the equator. A “pyramid mile” can be understood as the length of the Great Pyramid multiplied by seven.

We acknowledge the difficulty of using two prime numbers, seven and eleven, for construction and for geography. However, we suggest that due to the lack of being evenly divisible by half, this system provides a type of self correcting mechanism that would not be readily available if a base twelve or base sixty were utilized. The researcher expects whole numbers or multiples of ten and is, instead, confronted with fractions of sevenths and degrees divisible by 484 units. Encountering unexpected results forces the researcher to either accept these strange numbers and ratios, or devise alternate numbers and “theories” more to his liking, a la Crowley and Smyth.

An example of such a “self correcting mechanism” would be a “cubit” length of 233 units, a large prime number, whose arbitrary basic unit consists of 11 subdivisions per “inch”, resulting in a measurement of 21 2/11 “inches”. We note that a conversion of 2.5454… centimeters per inch is equal to 28/11 inches exactly.

We are aware that the astronomer Smyth accepted the spherical earth, whereas the Bible adhering Smyth never mentions the multiple references and inferences of a Biblical flat earth.

Piazzi Smyth’s pyramid inch derives from the calculated, not measured, polar diameter of the earth. This “polar diameter” can be calculated on a flat earth, as the theorist only needs the distance from the north pole to the equator and presumes a spherical earth.

We caution the Gentle Reader that great minds do not suffer from the affliction commonly described as being inconsistent.

We have provided the basic data regarding the Great Pyramid and we will forgo any definitive conclusions. If one accepts both the Anno Domine system of dating as promoted since the 16th century, and the opinions regarding the chronology of Egyptology, then one could reach the reasonable conclusion that Great Pyramid is an ancient mystery, holding clues to the antiquity of English measurements, and is a divinely inspired creation revealing the secrets above the earth, upon the earth and below the earth.

Alternately, upon rejecting, or being cautious in accepting these two assumptions, the Great Pyramid could be the reasonable result of medieval science and constructed by religious adherents who opposed depictions or images of animals and mankind. Unlike buildings that are indisputably Egyptian, whose interiors are filled with hieroglyphs, the chambers and passageways of the Giza plateau are without inscriptions. This fact provides the most convincing evidence that the Great Pyramid was not built by the Egyptians who oversaw the construction the other lavishly adorned monuments found in Egypt.

Of course, if the Egyptians did not construct the Great Pyramid, then ancient aliens could possibly have built it at any time before literacy and the advent of photography. This timeframe could range from a few centuries to millennia.

We will not offer our opinion regarding the likelihood of an advanced civilization traveling untold light years to build pyramids on earth, yet we offer the following general observation.

Should extraterrestrials desire to leave a monument whose origin is unambiguous, that is, completely beyond both medieval and modern human construction techniques, the pyramid base length should be a mile (1/484 of an equatorial degree) with a corresponding height of 3,360 feet (the ratio of 7/11), and this single pyramid would dominate the Giza plateau. If the ancient aliens could not pour the required amount of cement, then the pyramid should have been constructed with the knowledge of an advanced and otherworldly metallurgy- a pyramid constructed entirely of metal. Either construction would be evidence, and a clear indication, of alien technology and capabilities. Therefore, the purpose, the origin, and age of the Great Pyramid all remain ambiguous.

We suggest that the “ancient alien” explanation can only thrive, or be viable, because of an unwarranted assumption: an incorrect chronology.

To fail to achieve one's goals is not unexpected, but to consistently be incapable of meeting the meagre societal expectations is a cause for concern. To be unable to meet either is unacceptable.

In conclusion, it is our fervent desire that the Aspiring Apprentice, the Gentle Reader, and the Gentle Researcher should always refer to original sources before offering extraordinary explanations that are only supported by a handful of mundane facts and a corresponding multitude of unwarranted assumptions.