Inside the Great Pyramid / ScanPyramids
Both discoveries concern spaces within the Great Pyramid, but they are in different places and were studied in different ways. The camera inspection reported in 2023 concerns the north-face corridor. It does not show the interior of the Big Void announced in 2017.
Here is a closer look at the dates, measurements and methods, with the source links kept beside the claims so you can check them for yourself.
Research notes reviewed on 6 October 2026.
Detected through muon measurements; its shape remains unresolved
About 2 × 2 m in cross-section
Reported lengths: at least 30 m and about 9 m. The bars compare these values; they do not show the spaces’ shapes, positions or a connection. The paper’s abstract gives about 9 m for the corridor; CEA reports roughly 9.5 m.
The North Face Corridor is first detected. Later work studies it in greater detail.
CEA’s chronology and Nagoya’s reportThe Big Void finding is published, describing a space at least 30 m long above the Grand Gallery.
The 2017 author manuscriptResearchers report more precise corridor measurements and an inspection with an endoscope.
The corridor paper and institutional reportsThese are reported findings, with the remaining questions kept visible.
Big Void / 2017
North Face Corridor / 2023
Understanding the methods
Muon imaging uses naturally occurring particles that pass through the structure. Researchers compare the recorded particle flux to infer differences in density and the geometry of a space within the stone. In the 2017 work, three detector technologies and independent analyses supported the Big Void finding. Read the 2017 source.
That is evidence for a large low-density space, but it is not a photograph of its interior. The reviewed paper leaves its shape, orientation and function unresolved. The length estimate should therefore stay attached to those limits rather than becoming a detailed picture of an unseen chamber.
The later endoscope work concerns the north-face corridor. TUM describes a camera guided through a joint opening near the chevron, following work with radar and ultrasound. This gave researchers a camera view of the corridor; it should not be described as a visit inside the Big Void. Read TUM’s account.
CEA reports that no connection to the Big Void was detected. It also says a small or blocked connection was not excluded. The careful conclusion is that these sources do not establish a connection, while leaving that narrower possibility open. Read CEA’s explanation.
The 2017 author manuscript was read in full. For the 2023 peer-reviewed corridor paper, only the abstract and bibliographic metadata were verified. The full CEA and TUM accounts and the relevant Nagoya report were read for further context.
This matters because an abstract is a summary, rather than the complete paper. The notes below say which material was available and where each statement can be checked. The institutional reports retain their status as accounts from the participating collaboration.
Read all five source notesThe graphics on this site are original explanatory diagrams. No paper figures or institutional photographs have been reproduced.