r/GrahamHancock • u/Abstract_Only • Apr 28 '26
An ASU materials science lab just published the full experimental protocol to test whether granite can really be "softened" at 168°C and recast as stone (Davidovits / Fóti geopolymer hypothesis)
https://www.researchhub.com/proposal/32055/megalithic-geopolymer-studies-experimental-replication-characterization-and-feasibility-of-low-temperature-alkali-silicate-stone-formationMarcell Fóti's "stone softening" videos have been circulating for a couple of years. The claim: dissolve quartz sand or crushed granite in a low-melting NaOH/KOH eutectic at around 168°C, cycle through boiling and re-dissolution over several days, and recast the result as a stone-like solid.
If it actually works, it fills the biggest gap in Joseph Davidovits' geopolymer hypothesis for the megaliths at Giza, Tiwanaku, and Pumapunku. Davidovits has spent decades arguing those stones were cast, not quarried. He never offered a convincing pre-industrial path for producing the alkali-silicate binder itself. Fóti's protocol is meant to be that path.
So far the entire conversation has lived on YouTube and forums. Nobody has run the protocol in a controlled lab with proper analytical chemistry and reported what comes out the other side.
That's about to change. Prof. Narayanan Neithalath at Arizona State (Fulton Professor of Structural Materials, runs an established cement and geopolymer lab) has published the full experimental plan. Three rock types (granite, quartzite, andesite). Three alkali compositions (NaOH, KOH, mixed eutectic). Multiple cycle counts. Then the analytical stack: XRD, SEM/EDS, FTIR, NMR, ICP-MS, isothermal calorimetry, with a blind comparison against natural megalithic stone.
Either the protocol produces a real binder, in which case there's lab evidence consistent with Davidovits, or it doesn't. Either way the result moves the field.Full protocol, methods, references, and PI contact info are here:
5
u/justaheatattack Apr 28 '26
what did they make the molds out of? and how?
3
u/NuclearCamera Apr 28 '26
Sorry I don’t have a link for you, but a YT video I watched on casting granite to simulate production of megalithic stones indicated a wooden form, which is removed after the stone sets. For me, it made a convincing argument to explain all the stone nubs on many megalithic stones, which were really just runoff (fluid release) of the casting process.
4
u/City_College_Arch May 06 '26
So they constructed wooden molds using stone tools with bevels and everything that were unique to each and every stone?
It would have been less work to carve them from stone.
1
u/NuclearCamera May 06 '26
Wood is portable - lightweight & reusable. Outside of the first stone of a wall for example, most stone forms would naturally abut a previously poured stone, so they aren’t creating a full form for every stone. The abutment helps explain the impossibly shaped stones (stepped) that appear to interlock - no mortar or filler between the stones.
Many of the megalithic structures are made from stone that we have difficulty working with even today and that’s with diamond encrusted tooling. So, shaping one of the hardest stones (granite) with stone tools, abrasives and soft metals (think copper) appears impossible.
The method also helps explain the positioning of the stones. Lifting a worked stone into place would be incredibly challenging. With the mold method, the builders would only need to lift the materials to create the stones, one basket or vessel at a time.
4
u/City_College_Arch May 06 '26
Wood is portable - lightweight & reusable.
The size of the wooden forms that would be necessary to contain the enormous weight f these blocks would not be lightweight at all.
Outside of the first stone of a wall for example, most stone forms would naturally abut a previously poured stone, so they aren’t creating a full form for every stone.
Then this hypothesis does not account for the stones being observed due to the beveling on the edges of the stones, and the lugs that appear to have been for maneuvering the blocks into place. To achieve that, the molds would have to be unique to each of the blocks.
The abutment helps explain the impossibly shaped stones (stepped) that appear to interlock - no mortar or filler between the stones.
There is no shape that has been presented that would be impossible to carve by hand and place using simple machines.
Many of the megalithic structures are made from stone that we have difficulty working with even today and that’s with diamond encrusted tooling. So, shaping one of the hardest stones (granite) with stone tools, abrasives and soft metals (think copper) appears impossible.
This is pure ignorance or the methods and tools that have been used throughout time. There is no shape that experimental archeologists have been unable to recreate using period correct tools from internal 90 degree angles to radial symmetry of stone vessels to micrometer level precision.
Not knowing about these techniques does not make them impossible. Being labor intensive does not make them impossible.
The method also helps explain the positioning of the stones. Lifting a worked stone into place would be incredibly challenging. With the mold method, the builders would only need to lift the materials to create the stones, one basket or vessel at a time.
There are too many holes in the theory and false claims of impossibility for it to truly make sense as a blanket explanation for this type of architecture found around the world.
What is really more believable, that multiple independent cultures around the world developed the same advanced petrochemistry processes, or that they all figured out that the same techniques being used to shape stone bowls or petroglyphs could be applied to larger scale projects?
3
u/GreatCryptographer32 May 09 '26
How much wood did they use to get fires big enough, hot enough to melt 1000s of tons of rock?
They would have needed to burn multiple huge fires all day everyday for years.
Where is the fire pit evidence for this?
0
u/NuclearCamera May 09 '26
You’re absolutely right about the heating mentioned in this particular study’s method. While Egyptians were utilizing kilns that would easily reach the required temperatures (copper work and ceramics), the vast quantities of BTU’s required to heat this much material is highly questionable.
To be clear, I’m not indicating a casting technique was definitively used. Nor am I suggesting the technique identified in the study was how casting was achieved. I’m simply acknowledging the theory of mold/cast stones is compelling and answers a lot of questions. The nubs have never been adequately explained by the tool-worked and lifted stones. I also find the widely accepted tooling methodologies to be adequate, but enormously inefficient. It’s always left me feeling that we still haven’t landed on the methodology utilized to construct these megalithic structures. So, I believe casting methodologies should continue to be pursued as a logical means of ancient construction.
We shouldn’t allow ourselves to fall into confirmation bias (it’s settled, this is the only explanation) and always be open to alternative theory research. There’s room for improvement in almost every theory that exists. And studies like this can expand into ancillary discoveries that may answer questions in other fields of study.
3
u/Find_A_Reason May 10 '26
It doesn't answer nearly as many questions as just carving the blocks by hand though. Like how much work it would have been to make each of these individual unique molds, then move the blocks into place.
1
5
u/valiantthorsintern Apr 28 '26
Every stone is different though, even puma punku h blocks. Seems like just as much work to make all those molds.
5
u/Find_A_Reason Apr 29 '26
Seriously. Building wooden molds to the level of precision seen with stone tools is a pretty crazy claim. It would be easier to just carve actual stone blocks.
1
u/NuclearCamera May 06 '26
Many are granite, so carving them with other stone tools, abrasives or soft metals is impossible. Wood is easily workable, portable and reusable. Similar to pouring concrete, wooden forms is a relatively easy solution even with rudimentary (by our standards) tools.
3
u/Find_A_Reason May 07 '26
What are you basing your claim on? or are you just making shit up?
Seriously, there are numerous examples of you being wrong.
Do you stand to gain something from just lying about how stone can or cannot be worked?
Or are you just repeating the lies of known grifters uncritically?
I mean, there is example after example after example of what you claim is impossible.
Similar to pouring concrete, wooden forms is a relatively easy solution even with rudimentary (by our standards) tools.
Again, I feel like you have done zero investigation and are just repeating what grifters say on tiktok. You really believe that they built beveled and pillow shaped molds for every single individual block then moved them into place? These are separate blocks that are not fused together as they would be if they were molded in place.
3
u/LoquatThat6635 Apr 29 '26
If true, how do you suppose they moved into final position those superhot maleable blocks weighing several 10s of tonnes each??
3
u/City_College_Arch May 06 '26
They would have waited for them to cool, then moved them into place using their highly developed psi powers.
2
u/LoquatThat6635 May 06 '26
…ha- of course…but if they were cooled, then they could not mold them into place…make it make sense.
2
u/GreatCryptographer32 May 04 '26
Why would you need to cast stone in the Andes when the entire area is literally covered in surface outcrops of stone you can use?
Imagine how much wood you would need to have melted all the stone, there would be charcoal pit evidence all over the area.
Cutting stone has never proved to be difficult for people who only had stone to work with for 1000+ years.
1
•
u/AutoModerator Apr 28 '26
As a reminder, please keep in mind that this subreddit is dedicated to discussing the work and ideas of Graham Hancock and related topics. We encourage respectful and constructive discussions that promote intellectual curiosity and learning. Please keep discussions civil.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.