All

The architectural proportions are good though they are not what the pyramids were constructed for. It appears they were constructed to understand what it took millennia for Einstein to discover. Mainly, the difference between the truth and what would eventually become Platonic and Euclidean geometry. The truth as we now know is that the dimensions of space-time are describable as x, y, z -ct. Relativistic four-space. The Egyptians did not know that was the goal of course. They knew, from building houses, that there were three important dimensions--length, width and height--because they constructed many ordinary houses in those proportions and they were very successful. They associated light with God or the gods and with heaven. Obelisks could reach high; they constructed many of them. They built one pyramid for height, one for length and one for width. And for light, they constructed a huge sandstone cat--a lion, and put a man's head on it, placing it so that he would look at the rising sun in the morning, every morning of the year. The Great Pyramid had a hole pipe or tube that would allow sunlight to enter the chamber at the center of the pyramid, and the gods would understand, they supposed, what the light actually was. Of course now we know much more about light, and create many kinds of lamps, lasers, radars, microscopes, telescopes, and many other - well, astonishing things. Keep on trucking, the Egyptians certainly want us to. Michael Lewis

82.96656 Centimeters or 2.722 feet is a Unit used to simultaneously measure Space &amp; Time
It also influences weights &amp; other measures

You set an example proposed, times ago, by some researchers tried to make sense to Giza Pyramids dimensions.
In my opinion, this interpretation of the number is a little bit of a stretch. It is an overall result obtained through an opposite approach, stretching the numbers. For example: 440 = 11x40 or 5x88 or 440x1 or 220x2 etc… the same goes for other monument’s dimensions.
If I wanted to send a distress message, I should not write the story of my life, but simply “HELP!”
So, what does this mean?
This means that Universal Language, i.e. the NUMBER, is the only certainty we have, through which we can trigger a concept
In the last 25 years, many researchers, scientists and people in the limelight, tried to answer to the mysteries of Giza by using the most complex formulas of maths. All that has created confusion, even impeded a new step towards finding a solution to this ancient question.
Pyramids numbers “speak for themselves”, so easily. Why do we want to make incomprehensible the message coming from the past?
For example, the Great Pyramid dimensions are: 440 x 280 E.R.C.
In your opinion, what is the purpose? “Make an effort with your brain”? or simply “Analyze the number, that is my easy message from the past”?

Prime Factor Decomposition:
Great Pyramid: 440 = 23 x 5 x 11 (last prime number) 280 = 23 x 5 x 7 (last prime number)
Third Pyramid: 125 = 52 x 5 (last prime number) 198 = 2 x 32 x 11 (last prime number)
Second Pyramid: 411 = 2 x 137 (last prime number) 274 = 3 x 137 (last prime number).
Prime counting function
Lastly: f (pi) 137 = 33, i.e. 3 x 11 or 11 x 3
Those are certain, undeniable and irrefutable numbers, and they do not need other numbers to catch the pyramid dimension’s value. I apologise for not having gone into much detail on the 137 scientific meaning.
People, who has the aim to do research, must have a clear head, free form stereotypes. That is the only way to go forward.
Regards

Your explanation and tables are confusing. I am not sure what mathematics you applied to obtain the above results. The ratio of height and base of Khufu's pyramid is indeed 7:11 (7x40=280, 11x40=440). However, it is NOT 5:11 in the case of Menkaura's and definitely not 137:137 for Khafre's. Menkaura's has the same 7:11 ratio as the great pyramid (7x18=126 and 11x18=198), and Khafre's is 2:3 (2x137=274, 3x137=411). And, as always in mathematics, simplification always results in prime numbers, no secret here. P.s. I am not a mathematician, either.

Dear Armando,
I dont understand the way of mathematical simplifiction. Is this a system of calculations?
with kind regards

Reinhard