This is something I came across the caught my interest though I had a bit of trouble comming acorss any informaiton on it, that stated plainly just what it was or its suspected significance, I was able to find some detailed information upon it too much to post here but I will share links.

There is a theroy that the Pyramids of Gaza were build according to a single Vanishing Point, becasue of the way in which they are perfectly allined with each other and ther surrounding enviroment.

Here is a bit from one of the articles I found about it, at the bottom I will post links for my continued deatiled informaiton.

I took a lively interest in the Pyramids of Giza in the mid 70's and through the 80's. At that time I was finishing up my Master of Fine Arts and looking back, I consider that although I had less ability to focus than now, I was certainly a whole lot sharper and perhaps more insightful.
In any event, after considerable study I started to form what regular Egyptologists might consider 'unconventional' opinions about the Giza Pyramid complex. Acquiring a survey map of the Giza Complex, I realized almost at once that the three pyramids invited a three dimensional effect; it was as if the three pyramids were to be viewed as spatial, that Kefre and Mycerinous (2nd & 3rd pyramids) were not smaller, merely receding.

The vanishing point is a hypothetical point seen from a visual perspective. One may observe the pyramids as seen from above, treating the actual ground surface as non-existent. The result is a sequence of receding objects suspended in space (Cheops, Kefre and Mycerinous). Follow the recession, and you come to a vanishing point, a point from which the perspective originates. Place this overlay against the actual ground and see if there are any correlations.

The Three Pyramids at Giza must be considered as a whole - one continues plan. It is notable that each pyramid built by the succeeding pharaoh was a smaller construction. If the basic thrust of pyramid building was merely to evoke awe by the very nature of their size, then surely each successive pyramid would have been bigger, not smaller. It can be observed that in many extinct civilizations there was a tendency to build ever more ambitious structures, ultimately putting too much of a burden on available resources, resulting in the eventual and inevitable collapse of that civilization.
Were size the main consideration of the Giza Pyramid construction, a Pharaoh would surely loose face if he builds a pyramid next to his predecessors which, when it comes to size, simply is not up to scratch. Surely, better to build it somewhere else so that obvious and painful comparisons cannot be drawn.
Then there are the interior rooms and corridors of the Pyramids to consider. None of them are inscribed or painted with the essential funerary decorations that Ancient Egyptians seem to have considered a 'must have' item if you were going to make it into the After Life. None of this exists in these pyramids; just limestone walls.
For funerary monuments, the Giza Pyramids exhibit a notable lack of bodies. To be sure, large stone containers found in various rooms are in evidence, but this does not mean one has to put a dead body in them. Indeed, no bodies other than an intrusion burial from a later date was ever found in the Giza Pyramids.

These facts got me to thinking:

Here is a civilization that we can't even pinpoint a date to its origin. By the time the Giza Pyramids were going up, this civilization could have had uninterrupted growth for as much as 700 to 1000 years.
A civilization can learn a lot about the nature of the World in that stretch of time, especially if they have record keeping (which they did) and social stability (which they had).

I asked myself, what if, during this stretch of time, they came upon what they considered a great truth, so awe-inspiring and mind-boggling that they felt it simply could not be lost. How would they make such a truth manifest? Answer: Make a diagram. A BIG diagram. A big diagram that could stand up to the test of time.

What if the pyramids meant nothing in themselves, but are to be considered as a whole?
This would satisfy the ego of the successive pharaohs; building smaller did not mean inferior capacity, because they knew they were completing a single entity; an unified complex.

By NOT having yourself buried in it, you are also passing on a message to posterity. By this act you force the future observer to consider it something other than a funerary monument.

We know that the Pyramids of Giza were built with great attention to measurement and orientation. Precision in design and construction was done with such care that fractional measurements hold up over great distances. As if in proof, the procession of surveyors that have been drawn to the complex are evidence of the fact that the Giza Pyramid Complex begs to be measured.
The three pyramids in themselves are marvels of mathematical prowess, design and achievement. Many adventurers and scholars have already trod this path and the fruits of their labor are for all to see *.
It is as if the builders are saying to us through the mists of time, "All right, you figured out that the pyramids in themselves are pretty nifty...now try and put 'em together to get the bigger picture."

And this is what John Legon and I have tried to do. I think we can at this point say with little doubt that the complex was intended to be viewed as a single entity, the proof of which is contained in John Legons computations. What lies ahead? Further mathematical discoveries? Does the evidence justify excavation at the 'bent' South Wall, at the vanishing point? What might be buried at the vanishing point? The future will tell.

http://goodfelloweb.com/giza/for.html

http://goodfelloweb.com/giza/041687.html

http://www.legon.demon.co.uk/vpoint.htm

http://www.legon.demon.co.uk/vpupdate.htm