Further Evidence Points to Giant Columns Beneath the Pyramids of Giza

This just blows my mind.
https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/392763/further-evidence-points-to-giant-columns-beneath-pyramids-of-giza

Further evidence points to giant columns beneath Pyramids of Giza


Describing their find as "groundbreaking", the team reportedly discovered eight vertical cylindrical structures extending
2,100 feet beneath the ground and even more unidentified structures descending a further 4,000 feet below that.
------------------------------------

the read is short and sweet.

@Earl-of-Trumps said
This just blows my mind.
https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/392763/further-evidence-points-to-giant-columns-beneath-pyramids-of-giza

Further evidence points to giant columns beneath Pyramids of Giza


Describing their find as "groundbreaking", the team reportedly discovered eight vertical cylindrical structures extending
2,100 feet beneath the g ...[text shortened]... urther 4,000 feet below that.
------------------------------------

the read is short and sweet.

Thanks, that was good.

@Earl-of-Trumps said
This just blows my mind.
https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/392763/further-evidence-points-to-giant-columns-beneath-pyramids-of-giza

Further evidence points to giant columns beneath Pyramids of Giza


Describing their find as "groundbreaking", the team reportedly discovered eight vertical cylindrical structures extending
2,100 feet beneath the g ...[text shortened]... urther 4,000 feet below that.
------------------------------------

the read is short and sweet.

Okay, it seems I was right.

Here's a post about it on X.

https://x.com/i/grok/share/2I4col5QJXINYNvzImMiT6gSl

"The claim that Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) has recently revealed massive structures hundreds of meters deep beneath the Great Pyramid of Giza likely stems from a 2022 study titled "Synthetic Aperture Radar Doppler Tomography Reveals Details of Undiscovered High-Resolution Internal Structure of the Great Pyramid of Giza" by Filippo Biondi and Corrado Malanga, published in Remote Sensing. This study used SAR data from the COSMO-SkyMed satellite system, combined with a novel Doppler tomography method, to analyze micro-movements caused by seismic waves. The authors claimed to have reconstructed a 3D image of the pyramid’s interior and subsurface, identifying previously unknown structures.

"However, SAR’s penetration capabilities are limited. As I explained earlier, penetration depth depends on frequency and material properties. The study used COSMO-SkyMed, which operates in the X-band (8-12 GHz). At this frequency, penetration in dry materials like sand or limestone is typically limited to a few centimeters to a meter—far less than the "hundreds of meters" often cited in popular interpretations. P-band SAR (0.3-1 GHz), which offers the deepest penetration, can reach up to 10-50 meters in optimal dry conditions (e.g., desert sand), but even that falls short of hundreds of meters, and COSMO-SkyMed doesn’t use P-band. Dense materials like the limestone bedrock under Giza further reduce penetration, as radar waves are absorbed or scattered.

"The study’s innovation lies in using Doppler shifts from micro-movements, not direct penetration, to infer internal structures. This indirect method might detect cavities or density changes, but claims of massive structures extending hundreds of meters—sometimes exaggerated to 648 meters or 2 kilometers in posts on X or articles like one from gregreese.substack.com—are not supported by SAR’s physical limitations. These depths exceed what’s plausible with current radar technology, especially through solid rock.

"More credible recent discoveries near Giza, like the 2024 find of an L-shaped structure and deeper anomaly in the Western Cemetery (published in Archaeological Prospection), used ground-penetrating radar (GPR) and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), not SAR. These were shallow, with depths of 2-10 meters, and interpreted as possible tomb entrances—consistent with known archaeology.

"In short, while SAR can reveal surface or near-surface features and the 2022 study offers an intriguing method, claims of "massive structures hundreds of meters deep" under the Great Pyramid are likely overstated or misinterpreted. The technology’s penetration depth doesn’t support such findings, and no widely accepted archaeological evidence corroborates structures at those depths. Critical examination suggests this is more speculation than fact."


Furthermore, from the same article is this, more about the technical aspects of this radar:
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) penetration depth depends on several factors, including the radar's frequency (or wavelength), the type of material being penetrated, and environmental conditions. Here's a breakdown:

Key Factors Affecting Penetration:

Frequency/Wavelength:
SAR systems typically operate in different frequency bands, such as X-band (8-12 GHz, shorter wavelength), C-band (4-8 GHz), S-band (2-4 GHz), L-band (1-2 GHz), and P-band (0.3-1 GHz, longer wavelength).
Lower frequencies (longer wavelengths, like P-band) penetrate deeper into surfaces, while higher frequencies (shorter wavelengths, like X-band) are more reflective and penetrate less.

Material Type:
Dry materials (e.g., sand, dry soil): Longer wavelengths (e.g., P-band or L-band) can penetrate several meters, sometimes up to 10-50 meters in extremely dry conditions like deserts.
Vegetation: L-band and P-band can penetrate forest canopies to some extent (a few meters), while X-band and C-band mostly reflect off the surface.
Water/Ice: Penetration varies—L-band can penetrate dry snow or ice up to a few meters, but wet materials or liquid water absorb radar waves, limiting penetration to centimeters or less.
Rock/Concrete: Penetration is typically shallow (centimeters to a meter) unless the material is very dry and low-density.

Moisture Content:
Wet surfaces or materials with high water content (e.g., damp soil, wet vegetation) significantly reduce penetration because water absorbs radar waves. Dry environments allow deeper penetration.

Resolution vs. Penetration:
Higher resolution (achieved with higher frequencies) comes at the cost of reduced penetration depth. Lower-frequency SAR systems sacrifice resolution for deeper penetration.

Typical Penetration Depths:

X-band (8-12 GHz): A few centimeters to tens of centimeters, mostly surface-level imaging.
C-band (4-8 GHz): Up to 1-2 meters in dry conditions, less in vegetation or wet soil.
L-band (1-2 GHz): Up to 5-10 meters in dry soil or sand, 1-3 meters through vegetation or ice.
P-band (0.3-1 GHz): Up to 10-50 meters in optimal conditions (e.g., dry sand or permafrost), though rare in practical use due to larger antennas and regulatory constraints.

Real-World Examples:

Archaeology: L-band and P-band SAR have been used to detect buried structures under dry sand (e.g., in deserts), penetrating several meters to reveal ancient ruins.
Military: SAR can detect shallow-buried objects (e.g., mines) in dry soil, typically within 1-2 meters using L-band.
Ice Mapping: L-band SAR on satellites like NASA’s NISAR can penetrate dry ice or snow up to a few meters to study glacier structure.

In summary, SAR penetration depth ranges from a few centimeters to tens of meters, with the deepest penetration (up to 50 meters) occurring in ideal conditions using low-frequency P-band systems in dry, non-conductive materials. For most practical applications, penetration is limited to a few meters or less.

@Suzianne

That's a post...? lol, that's a novella

@Earl-of-Trumps said
@Suzianne

That's a post...? lol, that's a novella

@diver said
Interesting. More detail here

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-15364653/Hidden-shafts-beneath-Egypts-Giza-pyramids.html

I found in another source that at least 3 of the columns are hollow. Amazing, if true.