pennkenn U do bring some good logic to the table but if the mayan's abreviated there long count to five decimal places the only problem is you got
the math WRONG and so did the authors of whatever book u read
the mathematic change from 13.13131 five decimal places to 13.131313... repeating is not as dramatic as this faulty math u used claims it is changing
something from 13 to .000000013
if u had 13.13131 times 1000 it equals 13131.13131
if u had 13.13.....repeating times 1000 it equals appox 13132.0
which is pretty much the same ( although when decided over a period of thousands of years the difference can be as great as a few hundred DAYS
which bring u closer to the real end date OCTOBER 28, 2011
the mayan calander was a calander based in SPIRITUALITY NOT astronomy
the following is an excerpt from the below link either click it or read below
www.experiencefestival.com...
most compelling is that the exact Long Count beginning date ultimately is calibrated based on the date of solar zenith in Izapa, which occurs on
August 12. (Izapa is the ancient Mayan site in southern Mexico where the Long Count was first devised.)
This solar zenith day was since long, long before the Long Count was implemented, considered as the day of the year when ?time began? and considered
as a holy date in the location of Izapa. There is thus every reason to believe that the solar zenith was the reason the initial day in the Long Count,
4 Ahau 8 Cumku, was set on this day, although obviously the date of solar zenith in Izapa has nothing to do with the real beginning of the
corresponding divine creation cycle. (But to change this date would have been considered as heresy. We may make the comparison with the date of
Christmas, which was taken from old solstice celebrations, and has not been changed, despite the fact that few, if any, believes that Jesus was born
then).
The end date of the Long Count falls on December 21, 2012 is thus just a necessary logical consequence of the beginning date chosen by the Izapans and
not something that the Maya had intentionally targeted. The creation cycles described by the Maya, including the tzolkin, are fundamentally of a
spiritual, non-astronomical, nature. Thus, any theory that implies that the Mayan Long Count would have been designed to reflect astronomical
phenomena, be it the precession of the earth or a solar zenith, is a warning signal that its originator is off the mark. It should be obvious that if
the Mayan calendar is a prophetic calendar describing cosmic energy cycles of a universal nature then the particular date at which the sun was in
zenith in the particular location of Izapa is totally irrelevant for us who live today and must be considered as nothing but a result of a tradition
too strong to be changed.
Another equally compelling reason why December 21, 2012 cannot be the true date of completion of creation is that this day is 4 Ahau in the tzolkin
count. Since the Long Count consists of exactly 7200 tzolkin rounds then the true end of creation must fall on a day that is 13 Ahau in the tzolkin
count so that the tzolkin rounds even out. If we want to find out what is the real date of ending of the creation cycles we must therefore look for a
day around the year 2012, which is 13 Ahau in the tzolkin count. The inscriptions in Palenque, written about a thousand years later than the Long
Count was devised in Izapa, seem to indicate that the date of relevance is October 28, 2011, which in fact is 13 Ahau in the tzolkin count.
The issue of the exact correlation between the creation cycles and physical time may not have been as critical in the age of the Maya as it is to us,
since creation is currently operating at a 400 times higher frequency. A discrepancy of a year or so may have meant less earlier than it does to us
who live today. If we make a mistake of 420 days in calibrating the end date of the creation cycles we will
[edit on 30-7-2006 by cpdaman]