Astrophysics in Ancient times: ET technology?

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
You're right, I have noted this since the 5 years I've been on this forum, that hard and solid evidence like this does not excite people, as much as ambigious evidence does. I guess because hard and solid evidence leaves little room for discussion,

Your right... a skeptic cannot debunk hard facts so they stay away... and when skeptics don't debunk, believers cannot argue back keeping the thread alive where real interested people can find it This is their tactic... say nothing and maybe it will go away.

Works really well here at ATS

Also posts like THIS say it all in a nutshell

Originally posted by merka
Trying to read makes about as much sense as Google translate. Its impossible to tell what it really says so we have to take the article writers word for it...

Talk about trying to deny ignorance... it's a lost cause

:shk:

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
You're right, I have noted this since the 5 years I've been on this forum, that hard and solid evidence like this does not excite people, as much as ambigious evidence does. I guess because hard and solid evidence leaves little room for discussion,

Your right... a skeptic cannot debunk hard facts so they stay away... and when skeptics don't debunk, believers cannot argue back keeping the thread alive where real interested people can find it

This is their tactic... say nothing and maybe it will go away.

It's not a "tactic." It's the absence of a response.

Most skeptics have been run off from this board, as you certainly know quite well.

I'm a skeptic myself, but I'm not that skeptical about this use of prisms in Common Era India.

The "instrument" has nothing to do with astrophysics (as far as I can tell) and is not capable of imaging the (mere) three divisions of light that it is capable of separating.

Very interesting, but not exactly shocking. Most likely it's true.

So what?

Harte

Originally posted by Harte
Most skeptics have been run off from this board,

They have?

Funny... I see all those on my side of the fence have 'vanished' as well... oh well, perhaps I should take up farming

Forgive me for not seeing how "aliens"'fit in with this lost knowledge. If anything, it strongly supports the idea that entire civilisations have existed, had knowledge at the level that we have now, then came crashing down for some particular reason such as sudden cataclysmic events, planet wide warfare, or even from the belief of a minority of people that were psychopaths like we are seeing today, or even that God came to judge mankind.

So no, whilst the information is very interesting and wondrous, it just proves (to me anyway) that we are yet on another go-around on this planet. To suggest that "aliens" were involved denies mankinds God given intelligence.

I know, just my opinion.

Originally posted by zorgon
Your right... a skeptic cannot debunk hard facts so they stay away... and when skeptics don't debunk, believers cannot argue back keeping the thread alive where real interested people can find it

This is their tactic... say nothing and maybe it will go away.

So you think. They can debunk even the hardest evidence existing so far. And therefore, it is officially debunked because when they do so, it is officially false! That's called right thinking, making up reasons why it could not be true and believing your reasons as the absolute fact. Way to go skeptics! [/Sarcasm]

As for the article: TL;DR, I read from OPs summary but I cannot call it the hardest evidence of alien interaction with ancestors (maybe because I haven't read all and no time to read all), There is better evidence about interaction. Either way it's nice to have another clue for the idea that such relations may have existed, as opposed to what many 'I dont believe anything' say.

Originally posted by Harte
... The "instrument" has nothing to do with astrophysics (as far as I can tell) and is not capable of imaging the (mere) three divisions of light that it is capable of separating.

Why does this instrument have nothing to do with astrophysics, or more specifically why is it not applicable to astrophysical research? Please define "imaging" as you've used it above. Do you have another idea of what this object/device might have been used for, if anything?

Very interesting, but not exactly shocking. Most likely it's true.

So what?

What's most likely true? The device being used for what they say? That civs knew much more than what we generally give them credit for? You don't find it shocking/exciting that some ancient civs may have given technical data how they may have obtained details of the cosmos on par with contemporary understanding?

Your post/thoughts seem contradictory and spuriously dismissive. If you are an expert then would you clarify your position and support your conclusion a little better?

Also, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the data presented by Dr. Brophy ( The Origin Map )concerning the megalithic alignments at Nabta Playa? I think the data is impressive and far more than just coincidence.

Originally posted by Flux8

Originally posted by Harte
... The "instrument" has nothing to do with astrophysics (as far as I can tell) and is not capable of imaging the (mere) three divisions of light that it is capable of separating.

Why does this instrument have nothing to do with astrophysics, or more specifically why is it not applicable to astrophysical research? Please define "imaging" as you've used it above. Do you have another idea of what this object/device might have been used for, if anything?

Infrared and ultraviolet light are invisible to us but can be made visible through the use of certain media. In particular, think of IR cameras and UV sensitive flourescents (the latter were actually mentioned in the text.)

As far as I can tell from the text, the "use" was for discovering that there are at least three different kinds of light, which was what the text was also about. There is no particular use for IR or UV light separated from a white light beam.

If you check out what a spectrometer actually is, you will see that this device is not one. Spectrometers measure the wavelength of impinging light. This device only separates light, exactly like a triangular prism, only in a more sophisticated fashion that allows the user to note the presence of the invisible spectrum (a regular prism doesn't splay the light out wide enough for this to be all that evident.

Very interesting, but not exactly shocking. Most likely it's true.

So what?

Originally posted by Flux8
What's most likely true? The device being used for what they say?

It is likely true that the device existed.

Originally posted by Flux8
That civs knew much more than what we generally give them credit for? You don't find it shocking/exciting that some ancient civs may have given technical data how they may have obtained details of the cosmos on par with contemporary understanding?

There's nothing about the "cosmos" in that text. Also, dude... you need to re-examine your use of the word "ancient" here. The linked article explicitly states that the idea dates to somewhere between 780 and 825 AD.

Originally posted by Flux8
Your post/thoughts seem contradictory and spuriously dismissive. If you are an expert then would you clarify your position and support your conclusion a little better?

Please point out any contradiction. I gave my opinion after reading the article. You appear not to have read it. If not, why are you even commenting?

Originally posted by Flux8
Also, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the data presented by Dr. Brophy ( The Origin Map )concerning the megalithic alignments at Nabta Playa? I think the data is impressive and far more than just coincidence.

I have very serious doubts about this, since you ask.

I think it's total blather, if you really want to know.

But it's off-topic in this thread, isn't it? Anyway, I kind of doubt that nomadic herdsmen in the seventh millenium in Egypt had a strong knowledge of physics and a knowledge of astronomy equal to (or greater than) our own. You wouldn't expect such people to sacrifice cattle in the middle of their astronomical observatory. Nor would you expect them to make their living following cattle around Africa.

Obviously, that's just my opinion. But you asked.

Harte

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d507532ca5a1.png[/atsimg]

Here is a screen capture of one page from the pdf.


David Grouchy

Originally posted by Harte
As far as I can tell from the text, the "use" was for discovering that there are at least three different kinds of light, which was what the text was also about.

The main article also suggested "they knew the properties and methods of preparation of materials useful in such radiation studies" and they "also knew the theory and practice of this and other four types of spectrometer." (pg 627)

The other article listed discussed the astrophysical possiblities of the device.

Originally posted by Harte
There is no particular use for IR or UV light separated from a white light beam.

Well, there is use in astronomy. Problem is our atmosphere blocks most of those wavelengths. Still, they may have been able to observe some wavelengths if they climbed a high enough mountain,... say, in the Himalayas.

Originally posted by Harte
If you check out what a spectrometer actually is, you will see that this device is not one. Spectrometers measure the wavelength of impinging light. This device only separates light, exactly like a triangular prism, only in a more sophisticated fashion that allows the user to note the presence of the invisible spectrum (a regular prism doesn't splay the light out wide enough for this to be all that evident

It is a spectrometer/monochromator (use of collimating lenses) of unique design. What it is not is a spectrometer of modern design, which does the measuring for you. The function is still the same. It may become clearer how the wavelengths were displayed and measured in the other article that I will post.

Originally posted by Harte
There's nothing about the "cosmos" in that text.

You are right! My mistake.

It does mention it in the other article on this object. I must have gotten the two mixed up when responding to your post. This article just describes a more detailed description of it's possible construction. The other article describes not only that, but argues what this device was most likely used for, which was astrophysical research.

Originally posted by Harte
Also, dude... you need to re-examine your use of the word "ancient" here. The linked article explicitly states that the idea dates to somewhere between 780 and 825 AD.

... Dude... the linked article explicitly states in the conclusion that "the nature and properties of the ultraviolet, visible and infrared radiations were well known in Ancient India. Pg 627
Their words, not mine. And it is listed as such in other articles.

Originally posted by Harte
Please point out any contradiction. I gave my opinion after reading the article. You appear not to have read it. If not, why are you even commenting?

I read the article, and more so. I asked you to clarify your opinion/position and challenged you to support it a little
better, that's all. I'm not allowed to do that?

Originally posted by Flux8
Also, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the data presented by Dr. Brophy ( The Origin Map )concerning the megalithic alignments at Nabta Playa? I think the data is impressive and far more than just coincidence.

Originally posted by Harte
... But it's off-topic in this thread, isn't it? Anyway, I kind of doubt that nomadic herdsmen in the seventh millenium in Egypt had a strong knowledge of physics and a knowledge of astronomy equal to (or greater than) our own. You wouldn't expect such people to sacrifice cattle in the middle of their astronomical observatory. Nor would you expect them to make their living following cattle around Africa...

Off topic, hmmm. That depends. If you accept the other supporting article as being part of the subject of discussion, then I don't think so. It suggests it was an astronomical device. But yeah, your right, maybe we should leave the Origin Map idea out of discussion... too many details that would distract from the main point. Thank you for your general opinion on it, though...


Spectroscopy in Ancient India
An application of spectroscopy to astrophysics
www.new.dli.ernet.in...

Originally posted by Flux8

Originally posted by Harte
As far as I can tell from the text, the "use" was for discovering that there are at least three different kinds of light, which was what the text was also about.

The main article also suggested "they knew the properties and methods of preparation of materials useful in such radiation studies" and they "also knew the theory and practice of this and other four types of spectrometer." (pg 627)

The other article listed discussed the astrophysical possiblities of the device.

Using the criteria we are discussing for this instrument, a plain triangular prism is also a "spectrometer."

Originally posted by Flux8

Originally posted by Harte
There is no particular use for IR or UV light separated from a white light beam.

Well, there is use in astronomy. Problem is our atmosphere blocks most of those wavelengths. Still, they may have been able to observe some wavelengths if they climbed a high enough mountain,... say, in the Himalayas.

Without being able to image the results, there is no use for the UV or IR wavelengths. Such light can be used to determine many things about bodies in the cosmos. But not if you can't image them.

Besides, the article shows that sunlight impinges on the instrument at the top. This collection of prisms absolutely could not gather enough light from other stars to let the operator view a useable spectrum thereof, regardless of the claim in the paper, IMO. There is no mechanism or design element that can be used for gathering starlight other than a pinhole at the top. That is the equivalent of looking at a star. You would need more light than that. This is accomplished today by large lenses or even larger parabolic mirrors, both of which (presumably) were know to this culture at the time, yet none appears in this instrument.

Originally posted by Flux8

Originally posted by Harte
Also, dude... you need to re-examine your use of the word "ancient" here. The linked article explicitly states that the idea dates to somewhere between 780 and 825 AD.

... Dude... the linked article explicitly states in the conclusion that "the nature and properties of the ultraviolet, visible and infrared radiations were well known in Ancient India. Pg 627
Their words, not mine. And it is listed as such in other articles.

The fact that these authors get overexcited about the instrument is not an excuse.

Ancient, if you have to draw a line, means before the fall of Rome, technically. In normal usage, with respect to history, it usually indicates a B.C.E. date. Of course, the term does get misused. For example, my Grandmother was ancient.

Originally posted by Harte
Please point out any contradiction. I gave my opinion after reading the article. You appear not to have read it. If not, why are you even commenting?

Originally posted by Flux8
I read the article, and more so. I asked you to clarify your opinion/position and challenged you to support it a little better, that's all. I'm not allowed to do that?

Sorry, of course you are "allowed." If you say you read the thing, I believe you. However, you did state that my post seemed "contradictory." If such a contradiction has been cleared up for you (without you pointing it out for me,) then fine.

Originally posted by Flux8

Originally posted by Harte
... But it's off-topic in this thread, isn't it? Anyway, I kind of doubt that nomadic herdsmen in the seventh millenium in Egypt had a strong knowledge of physics and a knowledge of astronomy equal to (or greater than) our own. You wouldn't expect such people to sacrifice cattle in the middle of their astronomical observatory. Nor would you expect them to make their living following cattle around Africa...

Off topic, hmmm. That depends. If you accept the other supporting article as being part of the subject of discussion, then I don't think so. It suggests it was an astronomical device. But yeah, your right, maybe we should leave the Origin Map idea out of discussion... too many details that would distract from the main point. Thank you for your general opinion on it, though...

I'm no Mod. I don't really care at all if you want to bring up the Origin Map. But I can't really see a connection here with Nabta Playa, given the vast geographical and temporal differences between the two cultures.

Harte

Originally posted by WhoKnows100
Forgive me for not seeing how "aliens"'fit in with this lost knowledge. If anything, it strongly supports the idea that entire civilisations have existed, had knowledge at the level that we have now, then came crashing down for some particular reason such as sudden cataclysmic events, planet wide warfare, or even from the belief of a minority of people that were psychopaths like we are seeing today, or even that God came to judge mankind.

So no, whilst the information is very interesting and wondrous, it just proves (to me anyway) that we are yet on another go-around on this planet. To suggest that "aliens" were involved denies mankinds God given intelligence.

I know, just my opinion.

If you read the ancient indian texts you would understand. It is only western society that has a hard time accepting these facts. Go and ask an Indian about Vimanas and they will know right away what you are talking about, and accept the fact that many thousands of years ago people were much more advanced than we are now.
You should also read the texts to understand the "aliens" part. These "aliens" were actual physical beings with very high technology.

Originally posted by SKUNK2

If you read the ancient indian texts you would understand. It is only western society that has a hard time accepting these facts. Go and ask an Indian about Vimanas and they will know right away what you are talking about, and accept the fact that many thousands of years ago people were much more advanced than we are now.

Your statement still does not support an alien influence. Also, according to Clive Hart, "The Prehistory of Flight", (Berkeley, 1985),

the Mahabharata compliments "the all-knowing Yavanas" (sarvajnaa yavanaa, said to mean the Greeks), as the creators of the vimanas[4]: The Yavanas, O king, are all-knowing; the Suras are particularly so (sarvajnā yavanā rajan shurāz caiva vishesatah).[5]

See this Wiki article

Harte

reply to post by Harte

Originally posted by Harte
Using the criteria we are discussing for this instrument, a plain triangular prism is also a "spectrometer."

The other article suggested they were conical prisms which split the light radially.

Originally posted by Harte
Besides, the article shows that sunlight impinges on the instrument at the top. This collection of prisms absolutely could not gather enough light from other stars to let the operator view a useable spectrum thereof, regardless of the claim in the paper, IMO. There is no mechanism or design element that can be used for gathering starlight other than a pinhole at the top. That is the equivalent of looking at a star. You would need more light than that. This is accomplished today by large lenses or even larger parabolic mirrors, both of which (presumably) were know to this culture at the time, yet none appears in this instrument.

Good point. Starlight would have to be amplified. If whatever they used to amplify that light was an external seperate piece of equipment, I would think it would be mentioned close by in the texts describing these "5 spectrometers". Even then, it's hard to imagine a person (or people) trying to focus a distant star through a telescope like device onto a little prism with any degree of stability enough to study their spectral lines. It would be an exercise in frustration. It would have to be a "novel" light amplifying device in itself.

But still, I find it interesting if it's true.

"The wavelengths corresponding to kaksya data (1 kaksya = 10^-4 radian) fairly tally with that of Fraunhoffer's lines right from A to K, covering almost the whole visible range of solar radiation and the format of symbolic names (sanketa) goes parallel to the modern spectroscopic classification of star types."

Originally posted by Flux8
reply to post by Harte

 

Originally posted by Harte
Using the criteria we are discussing for this instrument, a plain triangular prism is also a "spectrometer."

The other article suggested they were conical prisms which split the light radially.

Yeah, I got that.

My point was, this instrument splits light using prisms into a spectrum, including the IR and UV. Any prism does this, to a greater or lesser extent, yes, even the IR and UV parts.

So, if this is a spectrometer, then any prism is also a "spectrometer."

Apparently, this device does this in a way that allows for more precise measurement of these wavelengths, by way of a user implementing a measuring stick. The device itself, IMO, provides a larger version of the spectrum than one would get from a typical triangular prism, facilitating this more precise measurement. However, the device itself merely splits the light, exactly like a plain prism does.

Harte

reply to post by Harte

No, a prism is not a spectrometer. Yes, a prism is a part of older spectrometers, but it is not the only part. Lets see some definitions and resolve this lexical impass.

Spectrometer

Per Merriam-Webster
www.merriam-webster.com...

1: an instrument used for measuring wavelengths of light spectra
2: any of various analytical instruments in which an emission (as of particles or radiation) is dispersed according to some property (as mass or energy) of the emission and the amount of dispersion is measured

Per Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org...

A spectrometer (spectrophotometer, spectrograph or spectroscope) is an instrument used to measure properties of light over a specific portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, typically used in spectroscopic analysis to identify materials...

... Early spectroscopes were simply prisms with graduations marking wavelengths of light. Modern spectroscopes generally use a diffraction grating, a movable slit, and some kind of photodetector, all automated and controlled by a computer...

... In the original spectroscope design in the early 19th century, light entered a slit and a collimating lens transformed the light into a thin beam of parallel rays. The light then passed through a prism (in hand-held spectroscopes, usually an Amici prism) that refracted the beam into a spectrum because different wavelengths were refracted different amounts due to dispersion. This image was then viewed through a tube with a scale that was transposed upon the spectral image, enabling its direct measurement.

physics.kenyon.edu...

Two-arm Spectrometers

The basic spectrometer has a light source S illuminating a slit that acts as an object for lens C. This produces a parallel beam of light illuminating the prism P. After refraction by the prism, the light is focussed by lens O on cross-hairs R. The eyepiece lens E is then used to examine the various images of the slit in the various colors present in the source.

(This last one gives a good overview of older spectrometers)

Originally posted by Harte
Apparently, this device does this in a way that allows for more precise measurement of these wavelengths, by way of a user implementing a measuring stick. The device itself, IMO, provides a larger version of the spectrum than one would get from a typical triangular prism, facilitating this more precise measurement. However, the device itself merely splits the light, exactly like a plain prism does

Hence... it is part of a spectrometer, albeit an older one. What is your definition of a spectrometer?

Im not sure this is proof of ancient aliens. Just because it is potentially 1000 years old does not mean that some inquisitive minds could have dedicated their lives to gaining knowledge. Just because they are ancient does not make them stupid. Similar arguments go for the pyramids at Giza, Stonehenge, etc etc...

Awesome find! although it was mostly foriegn language, chemistry and mathmatics rendering the entire document 'its all greek to me'

Originally posted by Flux8
Yes, a prism is a part of older spectrometers

SNIP

Originally posted by Harte
Apparently, this device does this in a way that allows for more precise measurement of these wavelengths, by way of a user implementing a measuring stick. The device itself, IMO, provides a larger version of the spectrum than one would get from a typical triangular prism, facilitating this more precise measurement. However, the device itself merely splits the light, exactly like a plain prism does

Originally posted by Flux8
Hence... it is part of a spectrometer, albeit an older one.

Seems we are in agreement, the instrument is an array of prisms and does not perform the function of a spectrometer. That was my point when I said that if this thing is a spectrometer, then a single triangular prism is also a spectrometer.

As a matter of fact, I can't remember any reference to any sort of measuring function nor any measurements associated with the given Sanskrit names for the various "types" of light the article claims the instrument could discern. I'm just assuming they were based on measurement. I supposed they could just as easily be based on hue (and, of course, fluorescence and temperature - The UV and IR.)

Originally posted by Flux8What is your definition of a spectrometer?

What you posted looked good to me.

Harte

Originally posted by Harte
Seems we are in agreement, the instrument is an array of prisms and does not perform the function of a spectrometer. That was my point when I said that if this thing is a spectrometer, then a single triangular prism is also a spectrometer.

We are not in agreement that the device is just an array of prisms. That's one of the points I was trying to make. According to the article discussing the connection with astronomy the prisms were supposedly part of it, and were conical, not triangular. Supposedly it also contained the slits and collimating lenses, and all of these components were mounted on swiveling plates. The whole thing, (configuration of components) made this a "novel spectrometer/monochromator", not just because it used prisms.

Originally posted by Harte
As a matter of fact, I can't remember any reference to any sort of measuring function nor any measurements associated with the given Sanskrit names for the various "types" of light the article claims the instrument could discern. I'm just assuming they were based on measurement. I supposed they could just as easily be based on hue (and, of course, fluorescence and temperature - The UV and IR.)

The text of Amsu Bodhini further describes and enumerates various radiations (tama) with their symbolic names and their respective measures expressed in terms of an ancient appropriate unit of angle kaksya (1 kaksya = 10^-4 radian) related to their corresponding deviation produced due to the dispersion through the prism.

By observing radiation (Tamasa) in terms of angles denoted by graduated marks, it's measurement is possible.

... the sine formula of refractive index is divided into such two parts which are compatible to Cauchy's formula, which may prove easier and useful for experimental determination of wavelengths by a prism spectrograph.

Spectroscopy in Ancient India