Pi, Phi, Ra & the Russian Pyramids
Over the years, there have been different opinions on how to calculate the dimensions of the Great Pyramid. This, in part, is due to the amount of erosion (and perhaps vandalism) that this great monument has endured over the millennia. Some people believe that the builders deliberately integrated pi (3.1415926...) into its dimensions, while others have believed that phi (1.618034...) was used. Pi is defined by the ratio of the circumference of a circle divided by its diameter. In the pi method of calculating the dimensions of the Great Pyramid, the perimeter of the pyramid is pi, and its height is 0.5. This correlates to the perimeter being equivalent to the circumference of the circle, while the height is its radius. This method of calculation would make the slope angle of the Great Pyramid 51.85°. In the phi method of calculation, the height of one of the triangular faces of the pyramid is phi, while the height of the pyramid is the square root of phi:
With the phi method of calculation, the slope angle of the Great Pyramid would be 51.83°. The difference between these two methods of calculation is a mere 0.027°, or 1.6 minutes of arc, which is equivalent to less than 1/16" difference in height for an 8-foot-wide pyramid.
Is there a "perfect" slope angle to make a pyramid the most powerful? I don't believe so. In fact, almost every pyramid in Egypt has slightly different angles, including the three great ones at Giza. There is evidence from the Bent Pyramid that the angles of the pyramids were restricted to a certain shallowness. The Bent Pyramid was originally built to very near the 54.74° slope angle of an equilateral pyramid. But while under construction, it was radically changed to a 43° slope angle at the top. It is likely that the collapse of the Meidum Pyramid during construction of the Bent Pyramid was the reason it was changed.
Up until recently, the dimensions of the Great Pyramid was the most popular one to use for both experiments and to meditate in. Then David Wilcock came along and talked about the benefits of a 72° sloped pyramid. I call these the “Nubian” pyramids because over two hundred of these smaller and steeper-sloped stone pyramids were built back in ancient Nubia, south of Egypt, with most of them having a slope angle between 70° and 72°. The 72° pyramid also has phi integrated into it, with its cross section having the same angle as the top triangle in the pentagram (see the image at the top of the page).
It appears that the pyramids of ancient Nubia were an inspiration for the modern-day Russian pyramids which have amazing experimental claims attributed to them. The actual dimensions of these pyramids have been not well-publicized. I have recently learned that they supposedly determined the angles by taking two adjacent circles, one on top and one on the bottom, and made the diameter of the top circle 1 and the diameter of the bottom one phi, or 1.618034. They then made tangent lines from the two circles, making each of the four triangular sides of the pyramid. This method, if accurate, puts the Russian pyramids at a slope angle of 76.345°, which is even steeper than the Nubian pyramids, and interestingly, is the same angle as the apex angle of the Great Pyramid.
And then there is the Ra collective, that appeared to state that the ideal proportions for a pyramid would be one with where if the height was 1, then its perimeter should be 1.16. This translates to a pyramid steeper than even the Russian pyramid, with a slope angle of about 81.75°, which is pretty much like a steeple, and you would have to make an extremely tall pyramid just to sit inside of it. Perhaps this steep of a pyramid could be effective for miniature ones placed beneath a bed as they have suggested, but I will also point out that the Ra collective has acknowledged at times that due to translation issues, they have misstated numerical quantities in the past. Is it possible that what they really meant to say was that the ideal dimensions would be where if the pyramid had a height of 1, then one side would equal 1.16? In this case, the slope angle of the pyramid is 59.89°, which creates an almost perfect equilateral triangle for its cross section. They also recommend that the apex angle of a pyramid be less than 70°. This particular pyramid would have an apex angle of 60.23°, which fits with their recommendation.
So is there some magical dimension that makes a pyramid special? Just like in the tuning of a radio station, I would not be surprised if specific dimensions of a pyramid will resonate with certain frequencies. I think it simply depends upon what you are looking for. In my own personal experiences, I have found that the steeper Nubian and Russian pyramids seem to have more of a get-up-and-go driving type of energy associated with them. If you need more of a kick start to your day (or your life), those might be better suited for you. On the other hand, I find that the shallower Giza pyramid has more of a calm, peaceful, centering effect. If you feel you are a little too strung out and have a hard time centering and concentrating, then the Giza pyramid might be better. I see them as having different "flavors" of the same pyramid energy. You tune into one station, and you get classical music. You tune into another, and you get bumping dance music. It is not that one is better than the other. It just depends upon what you feel like listening to. And keep in might that these are my subjective experiences, and while I would like to say that there is a universality to the energy in these different pyramids, it is possible that your experiences might be completely different. In the end, I suggest consulting with your inner knowingness to determine what is best for you.