Requiem for Relativity

Thanks for the update. Good luck on your stormshelter fight!

Thanks for your support!

There are at least two indications from crop formations, that the true date is tomorrow, Oct 12.

First, it recently was reported on Linda Howe's earthfiles.com, that sometime in the first week of September, a typical crop formation (large, complex, well laid out, stems bent aboveground) was found near the Hopewell mounds in Ohio. Howe displays excellent aerial photos, one of which is almost perfectly overhead. The Hopewell site is somewhat analogous to Stonehenge: possibly built to honor crop circles of long ago. The formation has 43 circles, but 7 of these are conspicuously hollow, not filled in. If the formation were made Sep. 2, then Sep. 2 + (43-7) = Oct. 8. The 7 hollow circles might signify extra days to give a range Oct. 8 - 15, as if the circlemakers do not know the date exactly. The very last meaningful crop formation of this season in England, which I discuss in an earlier post, also suggests this range, because according to my interpretation, it showcases a timeline between Oct. 8 and Oct. 15 (which I recognized as the new moon).

Second, from cropcircleconnector.com, I learn of a crop formation at Cheesefoot Head (1), near Winchester, Hampshire, reported Aug. 9. Despite the many distracting interpretations offered, this is the most obvious illustration of the number 64 that it is possible to make. The "fancy work" of the formation merely serves the purpose of the fancy work on printed money: redundancy and authentication. Aug. 9 + 64 = Oct. 12. This formation hardly could have gone undiscovered even one day, because it is near a paved highway and also a very populated area (county fair?) as appears on aerial photos.

Dr Joe, I still think the problem is within the model. Why not research the model and find out why so many false conclusions are generated? You can keep moving stuff around and get new dates I guess and why not? Everyone does it.

Oct. 3, Oct. 8, Oct. 18 and Dec. 21: alternative "first days of winter"

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />...Why not research the model and find out why so many false conclusions are generated? ...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Thanks for the post Jim; it inspired me to try harder to do this. A famous fragmentary inscription of Seti I, discussed in mainstream archaeology journals, ominously mentions "the first day of winter" as "the beginning of eternity" of "Year One". What is "the first day of winter"?

First alternative for "first day of winter". Our tradition is, that the first day of winter is the winter solstice, which is Dec. 21 this year, the end date of the approximately 5125 yr Mayan calendar cycle.

Second alternative. The longstanding ancient Egyptian calendar had a 365-day year (no leap year) divided into twelve 30-day months plus 5 extra days at the end. These twelve months were divided into three, not four, seasons: summer, winter and spring. My own research (building on the work of Prof. Eduard Meyer) suggests that originally, the ancient Egyptian year began at the summer solstice. So, our "first day of winter" this year, if we were ancient Egyptians shipwrecked on Gilligan's Island without our records, and starting fresh, would be June 20 + 120 days = Oct 18.

Third alternative. Suppose instead that we were ancient Egyptians and had not lost our records, and were not starting fresh. We likely would know that our calendar had begun 6339 years ago (my best estimate discussed on this messageboard for several years now, building on the work of Prof. Meyer) and that the seasons had been redefined several times in addition to several other irregularities in the calendar over the centuries. Therefore we might define the "first day of winter" as a whole number of 365-day years, after the winter solstice of 6339 years ago:

As in previous posts, I'll adopt Clemence's 1946 version of Newcomb's cumulative precession, together with (see last term) Van Flandern's correction:

50.23819"*T + 0.0001108"*T^2 + 0.00000000017"*T^3 + 0.0136"*T

which gives a precession of 87.323deg from 4327BC to 2013AD.

According to the JPL ephemeris, the J2000 heliocentric ecliptic longitude of the Earth-Luna barycenter will be 89.8133 & 102.8474 at the Dec 2012 solstice & Jan 2013 perihelion, resp.; the eccentricity determined from the peri- and aphelia that year, is 0.016685, implying that Earth lags about 0.438 days at the solstice, due to noncircularity of Earth's orbit. Because the JPL ephemeris doesn't go back earlier than 3000BC, I had to make reasonable extrapolations from the JPL values, to find Earth's eccentricity for 4327BC as 0.018986 and perihelion 83.2293. For a solstice then at 89.813+87.323 = 177.136, Earth would be ahead in its orbit about 2.202 d. The time for a circularized orbit between the 4327BC and 2012AD solstices is 76.47 d modulo 365 d. So the 365 day count date from the 4327BC winter solstice, would be

Dec 21.467 - (76.47 + 2.202 + 0.438) = Oct 3.36

Fourth alternative. Let's apply day lengthening to the third alternative. The Oct 3 date becomes 17:23 GMT Oct 8 (my best estimate from crop formations) with a day *shortening* (!) of 6.3 ms/cyr. This is not impossible, in view of the USNO chart showing a fairly steady change in day length of -2ms (yes, minus!) from 1973 to 2011AD (see tycho.usno.navy.mil/leapsec.html ).

*** Thus perhaps the crop formations have been encoding, simply the date and time this year that is a whole number of 365-day Egyptian years, after the winter solstice of 6339 years ago.

*********

The crop formations also seem to be referring to the Oct 18 date (i.e. 120 days after the summer solstice; what I call the "second alternative" above). Oct 18-10 = Oct 8. At least one recent crop formation, which I discuss above, on this thread, refers to Oct 12. Another, made Oct 14, which I have not yet discussed, seems to encode simply the number one, and hence refers to Oct 15. Oct 12-8 = 4; Oct 15-12 = 3. So the formations might be referring to Oct 8+4+3+2+1 = Oct 18.

Dr Joe, You got the best model in the world at JPL for generating orbital details. I am hoping you will look at the basic idea at JPL about the barycenter. It seems to me in the real world the barycenter moves in a much different way than the generator indicates it does. The generator has the barycenter orbiting the sun in strict accordance with Kepler. But, in the real world that would mean the moon pushes the Earth toward the sun at full moon and away from the sun at new moon. Makes no sense-right? Anyway, this is just a few meters or so and it averages out to zero over the whole orbit of the moon from nm to nm or whatever. But, for very fine detail like you do it makes a mess of it.

Circlemakers offering statistical information?


The normal distribution occurs in physics as, for example, the Gaussian wave packet and as complementary gaussian Heisenberg uncertainty curves. It's likely that the circlemakers are able only to give such a normal distribution for the expected time of the catastrophic event.

Following the "CRC Handbook of Tables for Probability & Statistics", 2nd ed., p. 125, the "standardized random [normal] variable" is

1/sqrt(2*pi) * exp(-x^2/2)

The circlemakers likely would prefer this variable for the same reasons that human mathematicians do, and would presume that humans prefer it.

Interpolating linearly in the above tables, I find that the half-maximum occurs at x = 1.1776. Another salient abscissa is 0.7832; this is the abscissa at which x = F(x), i.e. the area under the curve to the left of x, equals the area of a rectangle orthogonal the coordinate axes, whose corners include the origin and (x,1).

The ratio of these two abscissae is 1.1776/0.7832 = 1.5036. Of all the crop formations, the most unequivocal and compelling presentation of a number, is the "64" chessboard formation of Aug. 9 in Hampshire, which I discuss in a previous post; 64/1.5036 = 42.565. The Ohio formation, variously reported as early or mid September, has 43 circles, 7*6 = 42 around a small central one, suggesting 42 and a fraction. These two formations together, 64, and 43 (or 42 and a fraction), suggest the ratio 1.5, and hint that 64 days is the half-maximum of the normal curve for the predicted time of catastrophe.

The last formation of this year, on cropcircleconnector.com, was in Wiltshire on Oct. 14. Its layout suggests that Oct. 14 is 3 "standard deviations" or similar measures, before the peak of the probability distribution, i.e. the maximum likelihood. If it refers to the 42 day interval, then Oct. 14 + 3*42 = Feb. 17, 2013, is the date of maximum likelihood. The half-maximum likelihood is reached Feb. 17 - 64 = Dec. 15, 2012. Three "half-maximum likelihood half-width" intervals before this February peak, would be Feb. 17 - 3*64 = Aug. 9, the date of the "chessboard". Also, Oct. 14 - 42 = Sep. 2, is a plausible date for the Ohio formation.

The much emphasized Oct. 8 date, is the date on which the number of days before the maximum likelihood, equals the reciprocal of the cumulative probability. Oct. 8 is 132 days before Feb. 17, i.e. 132/64 * 1.1776 = 2.4288 standard deviation units before it; the cumulative probability left of this point is 1/132.025, according to the "tail-end z-table", online at

users.ece.gatech.edu/~hughes/ece4000/Ztable.pdf.

For any number of days, N &gt; 2, before the maximum, there will be a value of the standard deviation, which makes the cumulative probability on that day equal to 1/N, but if, as here, the half maximum must be exactly an integer, the equation becomes Diophantine with only a few approximate solutions such as Oct. 8.

Comment and summary. The circlemakers aren't trying to confuse us. They don't know the date of the catastrophe, but do know the normal probability distribution for it: the peak likelihood is Feb. 17, 2013, and the standard deviation is 64/1.1776 = 54.35 days (about two sidereal, or better, draconic, months). The half-width, half-maximum of the curve, has been indicated by the "chessboard" in Hampshire, to be what we are to assume is exactly 64 days; the chessboard formation appeared Aug. 9, 64*3 days before Feb. 17. There is another simple measure of the spread of a normal distribution, which is almost exactly 1/1.5 times the half-width half-maximum; this "x = F(x)" spread would be about 42.6 days, and indeed is indicated by the Oct. 14 formation in Wiltshire, which indicates three units of 42 days, to either side of Feb. 17. The September formation in Ohio indicates 42 plus a fraction and may well have appeared 42 days before the Oct. 14 Wiltshire formation.

Oct. 8 comes exceptionally close to satisfying a Diophantine equation: the area under the tail to the left of Oct. 8, i.e. -132.0 days, given that the half-width, half-maximum is 64.0 days, is almost exactly 1/132.0. No one, especially a preprogrammed computer that has traveled for thousands of years to get here, could do much better than this, to tell us the mean date and the width of a normal distribution, without knowing our language. Also, as I mention in previous posts, redundancy and a slight puzzle-like quality are defenses against interference and disinformation.

The mathematics is all from high school or from introductory college courses. The circlemakers are making it about as simple as it can be made. Don't be misled by fanciful religious or hyperspecialized mathematical explanations.

Why are no good maps of the crop circles available? Online, it's rare to see anyone attempt to measure angles, and because they don't show their work, even those are hardly reliable. Only one researcher, a German, routinely puts a "North" arrow on his diagrams. Aerial views of crop circles never are from high altitude, never indicate the height or direction of the view, nor the time of day nor which way is north: so, angles never can be found exactly. Yet crop circle investigators occasionally remark on the presence of Royal Air Force craft over the circles on the morning they appear. So, the government has precise, professional-quality maps of these crop circles but never shares those maps with the public.