Conflicting Essays in scholarship which have been the most engaging research job I have ever done. I have also added, over the years, queries about our "dated" geology with their "computerized" confirmations together with climate changes denied since 1963. The Ten-O'clock News have been telling us to change our clocks for DSL and back again BUT no one as noticed it has been changed, more than a few years ago, from March 31 and October 31, to a week or so earlier or even a week or so later.

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

Star-Dragons and Maya Calendars

China 1985:
Two Fire Dragons Battle over a Ball of Fire
or Two Comets AND an Exploding Nova
 or Two Sky Ball Players
O
Our Constellations. (Winter/Summer)
Our Spinning Earth as Earth Orbits
Around the Sun.

Why is the math not workin for the. Maya Calendar Systems? There is no way for such complex calculus to work, even when it has proven itself to be the most time-saving and efficient way to go backwards in time. the is no modern astronomy record that shows a complete life of any one star or nebula. No astronomer has  lived long enough to study a single sky element. Now stars or star events are discovered daily by one or another person. Since a star event can take hundreds of years to become what it is meant to be; that is hundreds of years of recording the same information year after boring year.

The problem is in ancient times changes that range from 445-days to correct the agricultural year [Caesar's solution]; or the 38-year difference between Spain and Portugal [that allowed Columbus to sail with Vespucci] thus giving Vespucci the privilege of naming our lands and Columbus the privilege of discovering half of it.], a telescope allows no time for dawdling. There must be money made available for upkeep and if nothing is different for such a long time, supporters disappear.

Math to investigate past eras do not keep people interested either. Providing past data has to be accurate also. Dating errors all around the world when explorers tried to prove they had "discovered" the remains of the oldest humanoid in the world; to our computer generated time alteration [a 'nano' second] That will take eons to become viable.

The Julian Calendar that count backward into time may be the best way to create an ancient record, but unless all the date changes over time are accounted for, how can anyone ensure real dates are being generated?

One problem that arises is that One Imix was given to the meso-american people by the Church as their date for the first day of the New Year.  The European calendar day of that glyph was February 8, 1584 but it became the January 1st of that year.

Since no month names had ever been given, the Church decided that such names would assist researchers later to compare the two systems. As it is, The Book of the Years by Edmonson stated:

"Mixtec Month Names remain linguistically' undocumented." (1968, 211)

Zero Pop was given as the name of the first month of the year as July 26. 1583. Yet, it also became the first month (January) of 1584 in Mexico by Church mandate.

H.m.m.m.m Between February 8 and July 26 is almost six months. Six months are 180 days for one-half a year. It appears to me that is where the missing 120 might be hiding in just one more twisted idea of adjusted time. 

The TRECENA is a paltry, insignificant error in compiling information about dates. Even so, with the gross obvious difference of saying that the number 52 equaled Years; not Weeks, as it should have been.

First: To use the Madrid Codex Serpent pages calendar as a Trecena starting place it only leads to even more improbable errors.

If one would work out the whole thirteen numbers as intended vertically; it becomes obvious that even the 20 day count does not coincide with meso-american date clearly post-1583 AD since One  Imix is the first day of the 52-WEEK cycle. The actual first day should have remained IK, not IMIX.

Secondly: If one would do the 4-day weeks, as in the Madrid, using the Trecena as inferred there, its vertical layout gives you [starting with Imix to the left of IK] three sets of four days down ending in Ahaw. This competes 12 lines down. The 13th line then becomes the first line so it creates a contiuous loop [in computer terminology]. It is the beginning of a new twelve-week of "year bearers," for want of a better name.

As the 13th line repeats the line starting with Imix to repeat the cycle to the third set again. . . . and . . . again. . .  just as many three-year elements you care to compute. The first year is for slash and burn; the second year is for planting and caring for the milpas; while the third year if harvest and celebration times. In Norway, Greenland, Finland and Sweden, it is called Swidden agriculture.

This automatic repeat function then adds the first row of a year by repeating the Imix row again across the page horizontally which creates a "monster year."

In this instance to use the 13 count against the day names has no value as a counter of days. If the counter was more accurate----with a twelve-count repeated normally----it would not help in the 360-day [as a 6.9-day week] year  or during a 365.25-day year [as a 7.1-day week] year.

A true 7-day week inferred 90-day quarterly count is not possible in a 30-day month of 20-days plus 10. The Julian Calendar System then would always be more accurate. If it is accurate to begin with. But which accuracy is counted, Hebrew, Muslim, or any one of the multiple Emperors, kings and queens around the world, all of whom [or most of whom] created their own calendar based upon their birthday or the most lucky stars that came after that faulty reading on the days of thier births.

Think, research, and write. .  . Good luck









No comments: