- Thank you received: 0
Requiem for Relativity
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
12 years 4 months ago #13808
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
July 15, 2008 crop formation near Avebury (the Mayan End Date solar system): a fake?
I've discussed this crop formation before on this thread, but today I used my old measurements from the photo by Nick Nicholson which I printed out from www.ConspiracyPlanet.com , and my old corrections for the obliquity of the photo, together with accurate quadratic interpolations of ecliptic longitudes given by the JPL online ephemeris. The longitude differences between the planets and Earth are consistent with
Mercury Dec 20, 2012, 17h GMT
Venus Dec 14 15h
Mars Jan 08, 2013, 10h
Jupiter Dec 24, 2012, 15h
Saturn Dec 27 1h
Uranus Dec 20 19h
Neptune Dec 27 15h
The other planet isn't Pluto: it's a schematic indication of our moon, Luna, with geocentric longitude equal to the heliocentric longitude shown for the object in the crop formation. Simon (sec. 3.4.a.2) gives the mean lunar perigee in coordinates of date, and the lunar perigee shown in the crop formation is consistent with Jan 13, 2013, 07h. Luna ("Pluto") itself is shown at longitude consistent with Dec 16, 2012, 07:30 GMT.
Such inaccuracy is not characteristic of the circlemakers. Luna's rapid change in longitude would have made it easy to depict Dec. 21 rather than Dec. 16 (60 deg difference). Be that as it may, the mean of the nine indicators is
Dec 26, 2012, 03:42 +/- SEM 3d8h
I've discussed this crop formation before on this thread, but today I used my old measurements from the photo by Nick Nicholson which I printed out from www.ConspiracyPlanet.com , and my old corrections for the obliquity of the photo, together with accurate quadratic interpolations of ecliptic longitudes given by the JPL online ephemeris. The longitude differences between the planets and Earth are consistent with
Mercury Dec 20, 2012, 17h GMT
Venus Dec 14 15h
Mars Jan 08, 2013, 10h
Jupiter Dec 24, 2012, 15h
Saturn Dec 27 1h
Uranus Dec 20 19h
Neptune Dec 27 15h
The other planet isn't Pluto: it's a schematic indication of our moon, Luna, with geocentric longitude equal to the heliocentric longitude shown for the object in the crop formation. Simon (sec. 3.4.a.2) gives the mean lunar perigee in coordinates of date, and the lunar perigee shown in the crop formation is consistent with Jan 13, 2013, 07h. Luna ("Pluto") itself is shown at longitude consistent with Dec 16, 2012, 07:30 GMT.
Such inaccuracy is not characteristic of the circlemakers. Luna's rapid change in longitude would have made it easy to depict Dec. 21 rather than Dec. 16 (60 deg difference). Be that as it may, the mean of the nine indicators is
Dec 26, 2012, 03:42 +/- SEM 3d8h
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
12 years 3 months ago #13809
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
June 2, 2012 crop formation at Manton Grove, near Marlborough, Wiltshire: Oct. 8 again
This crop formation, sometimes called the "polar clock", has been noted by crop circle experts to show signs of authenticity in its details of construction. I also show here that in the ingenuity and precision of its astronomical plan, it is typical of other excellent crop formations. Indeed it is an astounding astrometric tour de force.
It indicates the date Oct. 8, 2012. June 2 is 128 days prior to Oct. 8. This is a round number, 128 = 2^7, in the most universal arithmetic, binary arithmetic, so should be dignified by a crop circle. The number 128 participates in these astronomical resonances:
128 tropical Earth years (of 365.242188 d, determined for 2012.6AD from a sidereal Earth year of 365.25636 d, together with Clemence's version of Newcomb's quadratic precession rate polynomial, with Van Flandern's suggested dp1 = +1.26"/century correction)
= 68.053 sidereal Mars years
= 208.07 sidereal Venus years
= 46751.00006 d
On the other hand, 128 sidereal Earth years (of 365.25636 d)
= 46752.8141 d
= 46753 - 66.9/360 d
There is another kind of Earth year, analogous to the draconic month: the time for Earth to make one revolution relative to the regressing node of Earth's orbit on some fixed copy of Earth's orbit such as the J2000 ecliptic. I approximate the frequency of revolution of this node, by numerically differentiating the formula for the node of the ecliptic of date on the 2000.0AD ecliptic (cubic forward, or backward, difference formula from 2000.0AD at 2 yr or smaller intervals) at the bottom of p. B18 of the 1990 Astronomical Almanac. I find that this "nodical year" is
365.25636 * 360deg /(360deg + 8.700") = 365.253908 d
and 128 such years is
46752.5002 d
= 46753 - 179.9/360 d
Earth's year relative to its perihelion, i.e. the anomalistic year, is
365.259635 d (resp. 365.259549 d)
for 1994-2000AD according to Weisstein's online World of Astronomy (resp. adding 25 min to the tropical year, according to the USNO website); 128 such anomalistic years is
46753.2333 d (resp. 46753.2223 d)
= 46753 + 84.0/360 d (resp. 80.0 d) = 46754 - 276.0/360 d (resp. 280.0 d)
and I'll adopt the mean of Weisstein and USNO, 278.0.
The actual perihelia and aphelia of the Earth-Luna barycenter vary considerably due to planetary perturbations; let's find them from the JPL online Horizons ephemeris for Jan 2012AD, Jan 2012-128, July 2011AD and July 2011-128:
perihelia
1884AD Jan 01 23:38.9GMT
2012AD Jan 04 02:59.4
aphelia
1883AD Jul 03 07:59.6
2011AD Jul 05 14:40.0
At the time of this crop formation, the immediate past block of 128 actual (i.e. according to actual Earth-Luna barycenter) perihelion-to-perihelion anomalistic years 1884-2012AD equals
46754 - 309.9/360 d
and the immediate past 128 actual aphelion-to-aphelion anomalistic years 1883-2011AD equals
46754 - 259.9/360 d
Now let's compare these angles to the observed. I measure on a printout of the most perpendicular aerial photo I found online, a photo stamped "WCCSG.COM" and with the crescent "APS" logo. One way (method A) to measure the arcs, is to center the protractor on the center of the central disk, and measure to, say, the centers of the end-segments of the arcs. Another way (method is to extend lines from the end-segments of the arcs, and with a protractor measure the angle between those lines. Evidently these two methods are not equivalent: for example, the best fitting line through the common end segments near 5:00 in my photo, considerably misses the center of the central disk.
I used both methods, and will denote the measurements A and B. In order from inside to outside, the lengths of the arcs, in degrees, are
inside the whole, third, arc (symbolize less than 46753 d):
A 210 B 220.5
expected 179.9 ("nodical")
A 61.67 B 69.67
expected 66.9 (sidereal)
outside the whole, third, arc (symbolize less than 46754 d):
A 247 B 250
expected 259.9 (actual previous 128 aphelion-to-aphelion)
A 273.5 B 274
expected 278.0 (approx. mean anomalistic)
A 320.5 B 319.67
expected 309.9 (actual previous 128 perihelion-to-perihelion)
The "expected" values are according to the various kinds of years giving something less than a whole number of days, when multiplied by 128. The third arc, or ring, of the crop formation symbolizes the tropical year, which gives a whole number of days, when multiplied by 128. Four of the five arcs agree closely with theory, within my evident error (or perhaps rather, ambiguity) of measurement. I hope to make more accurate measurements soon, and to compare my arc measurements with those of other investigators.
Not only are crop circle messages generally vulnerable to random degradation, they are vulnerable to intentional jamming and destruction by adversaries of the circlemakers. The complexity of the codes gives redundancy, and also makes it difficult for adversaries to guess quickly enough, while the circle is being made, how to damage the message efficiently.
This crop formation, sometimes called the "polar clock", has been noted by crop circle experts to show signs of authenticity in its details of construction. I also show here that in the ingenuity and precision of its astronomical plan, it is typical of other excellent crop formations. Indeed it is an astounding astrometric tour de force.
It indicates the date Oct. 8, 2012. June 2 is 128 days prior to Oct. 8. This is a round number, 128 = 2^7, in the most universal arithmetic, binary arithmetic, so should be dignified by a crop circle. The number 128 participates in these astronomical resonances:
128 tropical Earth years (of 365.242188 d, determined for 2012.6AD from a sidereal Earth year of 365.25636 d, together with Clemence's version of Newcomb's quadratic precession rate polynomial, with Van Flandern's suggested dp1 = +1.26"/century correction)
= 68.053 sidereal Mars years
= 208.07 sidereal Venus years
= 46751.00006 d
On the other hand, 128 sidereal Earth years (of 365.25636 d)
= 46752.8141 d
= 46753 - 66.9/360 d
There is another kind of Earth year, analogous to the draconic month: the time for Earth to make one revolution relative to the regressing node of Earth's orbit on some fixed copy of Earth's orbit such as the J2000 ecliptic. I approximate the frequency of revolution of this node, by numerically differentiating the formula for the node of the ecliptic of date on the 2000.0AD ecliptic (cubic forward, or backward, difference formula from 2000.0AD at 2 yr or smaller intervals) at the bottom of p. B18 of the 1990 Astronomical Almanac. I find that this "nodical year" is
365.25636 * 360deg /(360deg + 8.700") = 365.253908 d
and 128 such years is
46752.5002 d
= 46753 - 179.9/360 d
Earth's year relative to its perihelion, i.e. the anomalistic year, is
365.259635 d (resp. 365.259549 d)
for 1994-2000AD according to Weisstein's online World of Astronomy (resp. adding 25 min to the tropical year, according to the USNO website); 128 such anomalistic years is
46753.2333 d (resp. 46753.2223 d)
= 46753 + 84.0/360 d (resp. 80.0 d) = 46754 - 276.0/360 d (resp. 280.0 d)
and I'll adopt the mean of Weisstein and USNO, 278.0.
The actual perihelia and aphelia of the Earth-Luna barycenter vary considerably due to planetary perturbations; let's find them from the JPL online Horizons ephemeris for Jan 2012AD, Jan 2012-128, July 2011AD and July 2011-128:
perihelia
1884AD Jan 01 23:38.9GMT
2012AD Jan 04 02:59.4
aphelia
1883AD Jul 03 07:59.6
2011AD Jul 05 14:40.0
At the time of this crop formation, the immediate past block of 128 actual (i.e. according to actual Earth-Luna barycenter) perihelion-to-perihelion anomalistic years 1884-2012AD equals
46754 - 309.9/360 d
and the immediate past 128 actual aphelion-to-aphelion anomalistic years 1883-2011AD equals
46754 - 259.9/360 d
Now let's compare these angles to the observed. I measure on a printout of the most perpendicular aerial photo I found online, a photo stamped "WCCSG.COM" and with the crescent "APS" logo. One way (method A) to measure the arcs, is to center the protractor on the center of the central disk, and measure to, say, the centers of the end-segments of the arcs. Another way (method is to extend lines from the end-segments of the arcs, and with a protractor measure the angle between those lines. Evidently these two methods are not equivalent: for example, the best fitting line through the common end segments near 5:00 in my photo, considerably misses the center of the central disk.
I used both methods, and will denote the measurements A and B. In order from inside to outside, the lengths of the arcs, in degrees, are
inside the whole, third, arc (symbolize less than 46753 d):
A 210 B 220.5
expected 179.9 ("nodical")
A 61.67 B 69.67
expected 66.9 (sidereal)
outside the whole, third, arc (symbolize less than 46754 d):
A 247 B 250
expected 259.9 (actual previous 128 aphelion-to-aphelion)
A 273.5 B 274
expected 278.0 (approx. mean anomalistic)
A 320.5 B 319.67
expected 309.9 (actual previous 128 perihelion-to-perihelion)
The "expected" values are according to the various kinds of years giving something less than a whole number of days, when multiplied by 128. The third arc, or ring, of the crop formation symbolizes the tropical year, which gives a whole number of days, when multiplied by 128. Four of the five arcs agree closely with theory, within my evident error (or perhaps rather, ambiguity) of measurement. I hope to make more accurate measurements soon, and to compare my arc measurements with those of other investigators.
Not only are crop circle messages generally vulnerable to random degradation, they are vulnerable to intentional jamming and destruction by adversaries of the circlemakers. The complexity of the codes gives redundancy, and also makes it difficult for adversaries to guess quickly enough, while the circle is being made, how to damage the message efficiently.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
12 years 3 months ago #13810
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
The previous message is an important one, for those who are wondering about the significance of crop circles.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
12 years 3 months ago #13811
by Krag
Replied by Krag on topic Reply from
What's going on with the search for Barbarossa?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
12 years 3 months ago #24154
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Krag</i>
<br />What's going on with the search for Barbarossa?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Thanks for asking! Unfortunately, I don't have the time or money, and no one else is looking to my knowledge. Of course there already are the sky survey photos of it.
Are you interested in looking yourself?
<br />What's going on with the search for Barbarossa?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Thanks for asking! Unfortunately, I don't have the time or money, and no one else is looking to my knowledge. Of course there already are the sky survey photos of it.
Are you interested in looking yourself?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
12 years 3 months ago #24155
by Krag
Replied by Krag on topic Reply from
So you are confident it exists and that you have its orbit pretty well figured out? I'm just an interested follower of the story - no ability to search for it myself.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.335 seconds