It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A link between the Aztec calendar and elementary particles?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 12:21 AM
link   
Greetings, this is my first post, don't flame me I'm learning

I think the Aztec calendar is based on an elementary 8 dimensional particle, below is why I think that, a link to a picture I made illustrating why, and a link to a video on elementary particles.

Sitting home the other day, on ATS lurking as usual, I came across a very interesting post, which I can't find a link to at the moment, it was about how the reflection of ones eye in a special type of prism looks like the Illuminati symbol. I'm paraphrasing and summarizing quite a bit, if I find a link to the post I'll add it in the edit. That post had a link to a video by Garret Lisi. In the video, Lisi gives a presentation describing what I think are subatomic particles, I don't know much about physics but about 10 minutes into the video they show you what an elementary 8 dimensional particle would look like. Suddenly, it dawned on me. This particle had shapes in it that were really familiar to me. After a moment I realized it; the Aztec calendar! If you look at the circle in the center of the particle, and in the center of the calendar, it's the very nearly the same ratio and proportion, same for the outer ring, same from the inner ring. In fact, in an overlay I did of the two images, so many of the points in the particle matched up with some many point on the Aztec calendar I can not even begin to describe it.

It's like someone had a picture of a subatomic particle, and their kid got a hold of it and played connect the dots with it to make faces and shapes, only we're talking advanced science and ancient civilizations. This particle is the basis of the esthetical design of the Aztec calendar, in my opinion.

If this is true, which as far as I'm concerned there is definitely some truth to it, does this mean that the Aztecs had knowledge of sub atomic particles? We know there is a relation to particles and time it self, but how far does that extend and will unlocking future questions in physics give us more insight into the mysterious ancient people of this Earth? Also, I would like to point out how beautiful it is that the symbol of their culture is based on the building block for everything in existence, if this all is indeed so. Just some food for thought, I'd love to hear others comments!

EDIT: I left this out: On the Aztec calendar, the jaguar hands are said to whole the whole world in place, in the elementary particle 8 dimensional diagram this area is where the gravitons should be. How can it be that not only are they "strikingly similar" but there is hidden meaning in at least the position of one, and likely more, of the sub atomic particles shown in this would be diagram of an 8 dimensional elementary particle better known as the Aztec calendar?


EDIT: OK, ok, ok, so maybe it's all in my head, but seriously you mean to tell me that these two things look so much alike and it's just because in the old days people just made stuff that looked like this? I'm going to work on this more over the next few days and if I can find anything else that is worth mentioning I'll make some HQ pictures and add them to this.


edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: left out a small but important detail

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: some confusion in what i meant on my part

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: just going for perfection, sorry everyone

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: 1st post

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by BO8MARL3Y
 


I agree that there is a striking similarity between the images, but they are hardly the same.

I believe it is an artefact of the symmetry with which the Aztec used in the creation of their calendar wheel and our innate "pattern matching" ability.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 12:38 AM
link   
I don't see it myslef. The only similarity is several rings of concentric circles. With a callendar so very complicated you are bound to see dozzens od correlations between a representation of anyting with such rings.

Try the same trick with a diagram of Stone Henge, you will get the same result. it means nothing.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Shamatt
 


Ok, i agree with some of what your saying but if you have a moment, take another look. The "4 points" going south, north, east and west on the aztec calendar correspond with two distinct points horizontally and four distinct points vertically on the sub atomic particle. Also, consider this, we believe the Aztecs believed that time was cyclical and in general they had a belief that things went around in circles. The calendar, if it is based on an elementary particle, would be measuring a unit of time, time which itself has a relation to particles, so it's kind of ironic in a way because they are all related. Also, if that is so, then the calendar would not only be a tool for keeping track of date but also have a dual purpose as a sort of periodic table for elementary particles. If the calendar is based on the particle, and everything falls into place, the figures on it can have some hidden meaning i.e. the gravitons are where the hands are, then photons are where the "4 points" are, etc.
edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: left something out at the end

edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:04 AM
link   
Interesting idea.

Most of what the guy said went over my head but a good watch anyway.

Have you tried matching up the calendar with the missing particles? anything interesting there?



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:07 AM
link   
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
 


Yeah, the gravitons are where the hands are. O_O



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Shamatt
 


Oh and to the Stone Henge thing, I don't know much about that but if this is true, it's possible they had the same knowledge?



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by BO8MARL3Y
reply to post by Shamatt
 


Ok, i agree with some of what your saying but if you have a moment, take another look. The "4 points" going south, north, east and west on the aztec calendar correspond with two distinct points horizontally and four distinct points vertically on the sub atomic particle.


I'd be much more impressed if there was a 1 to 1 correlation, rather than a 1 to many.


Originally posted by BO8MARL3Y

Also, consider this, we believe the Aztecs believed that time was cyclical and in general they had a belief that things went around in circles. The calendar, if it is based on an elementary particle, would be measuring a unit of time, time which itself has a relation to particles, so it's kind of ironic in a way because they are all related.



Callenders always measure a unit of time, most often subdevided into smaller and smaller units to make the overall peroid covered by the callendar navigable by humans with such small daily attention spans! lol And time is lalways in relation to matter, without it there can be no time etc.....


Originally posted by BO8MARL3Y

Also, if that is so, then the calendar would not only be a tool for keeping track of date but also have a dual purpose as a sort of periodic table for elementary particles. If the calendar is based on the particle, and everything falls into place, the figures on it can have some hidden meaning i.e. the gravitons are where the hands are, then photons are where the "4 points" are, etc.


Idon't see the significance of the the hidden meaning. Gravitons = hands? Surelt Feet would be a better mach?

Also, count out the points. Do they correlate? No:

The callndar has 6 disticnt circles but the particle has al least 7, and they arenot matched in spacing.
There are no more than 28 signifcant feature on the outermost ring of the callender, and over 30 points of light in the particles outermost ring. (This is true for all the rings I have looked at) (I also looked for correlations within specific coulerings but there are none) At every stage there are too many dots of light to batch up with the points of interest on the callendar.
In your own picture you only zoom the particles immage to line up with the second ring in, about 25% of the distance from the edge to the centre, not to the outside edge of the callendar. Why? If you can get this to line up so that the outermosr circle of lights is on the outermost ring of the callendar that would be a good start. At the moment there is no explanation for the idffferent sizes of the immages.

So I don't think this is a winning theory I 'm afraid. Nice try though. Keep looking.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by BO8MARL3Y
reply to post by Shamatt
 


Oh and to the Stone Henge thing, I don't know much about that but if this is true, it's possible they had the same knowledge?


en.wikipedia.org...

Not the work of people who had understanding of subatomic particles, I feel.....



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Shamatt
 


Well your basing everything your saying on my overlay, which is sloppy and I have no formal knowledge of either subject, I could of rotated it a bit more to match it match everything perfectly, I think. I'm asking smart people, like you, to help me look into this more. Maybe the points would be a 1:1 match if it was a 3 dimension rendering of the same thing instead of an eight dimensional, I don't know. I'm not trying to start a theory or get credit, I'm just really bugged out by this. Also, look at the end of the calendar where on the particle it has openings at the end, it does as well on the calendar. I do appreciate what your saying and am really weighing both sides but I'm still convinced there is some relation with deep meaning.
edit on 18-4-2011 by BO8MARL3Y because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by BO8MARL3Y
 


I don't know how your art skills are, but if you are bored, watch the video and pause it when it starts to look like the aztec calendar. Take out a pencil and draw that particle on a piece of paper, it's just like 226 dots, it should take a few minutes. Then look at the calendar in question and try to draw it over those dots. Everythings lines up, as if it's supposed to.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Shamatt
 


I replied this to myself on accident:

I don't know how your art skills are, but if you are bored, watch the video and pause it when it starts to look like the aztec calendar. Take out a pencil and draw that particle on a piece of paper, it's just like 226 dots, it should take a few minutes. Then look at the calendar in question and try to draw it over those dots. Everythings lines up, as if it's supposed to.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Shamatt
 


I agree with you there's no more than 28 significant points in the outer ring, but if you just count spacing by the units we're counting to make that 28... 30 spaces. The same as the particle.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Shamatt
 


Also, I said they had knowledge. Just because you have knowledge of something does not mean you have access to it. I have knowledge of sub atomic particles and look at me, I'm a mess. All I'm saying is this calendar is based on that particle for some reason which I obviously don't know. The picture I made is inaccurate, I just made it in a few minutes it's not like math involved or anything. But maybe some one who knew more about math could school me. I think there is a ratio correlation and as I said before, the spacing is similar if not exact in some points.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by BO8MARL3Y
reply to post by Shamatt
 


I replied this to myself on accident:

I don't know how your art skills are, but if you are bored, watch the video and pause it when it starts to look like the aztec calendar. Take out a pencil and draw that particle on a piece of paper, it's just like 226 dots, it should take a few minutes. Then look at the calendar in question and try to draw it over those dots. Everythings lines up, as if it's supposed to.


You don't see that you just blew your own idea away with this thought?

You just stop a 2 dimensional representation of a notioinal 8 dimensional rendering based on measurments of charge within a subatomic particle "when it starts to look like the aztec callender" and then line up the dots at some arbitary zoom level with some of the more impertant landmarks on the carving in order to back up an idea that there may be a correlation bewteen a callendar carved thousands of years ago and said 2 dimensoinal representation?

I think that was an own goal.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Fascinating thread.



On the Aztec calendar, the jaguar hands are said to whole the whole world in place, in the elementary particle 8 dimensional diagram this area is where the gravitons should be


Perhaps they were showing us knowledge much greater than themselves.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Hmmmmmmm.......

Highly unlikely but there could be something to it.

I would like to see a larger and more detailed image of the calendar overlaid with the dots.
Any chance of you making this happen?

Cheers

(Edit) have you done the same thing with mandalas? watching another thread now that has one and it looks very similar.
edit on 18-4-2011 by IkNOwSTuff because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by BO8MARL3Y
Greetings, this is my first post, don't flame me I'm learning

I think the Aztec calendar is based on an elementary 8 dimensional particle, below is why I think that, a link to a picture I made illustrating why, and a link to a video on elementary particles.


Well, we know about their mathematics and we know about their technology. They did leave books behind and they did leave other writings.

They hadn't a clue about chemistry (which is what you need to know before you can understand elementary particles) although they could make medicines ("by guess and by golly," as we say here in Texas... in other words, they just guessed at amounts.) Concepts of elementary particles and their role requires an understanding of physics and math (to REALLY understand it, where you can rattle off things like "Bohr velocity" and "inelastic energy transfer" and "Collision cascades" and sentences like "state of n spin-1/2 particles which superposes two macroscopically distinct states."

They had no clue.

The calendar is a... calendar. It kept their three calendars (ritual, civic, solar) and it's still used in parts of Central America today (en.wikipedia.org...). The descendants of the people who created it (and who are still using it) know nothing about dimensions or physics or particles. It tells them when feast days occur, when lucky and unlucky days occur, and so forth. They also had a form of lunar calendar.


Lisi gives a presentation describing what I think are subatomic particles, I don't know much about physics but about 10 minutes into the video they show you what an elementary 8 dimensional particle would look like.


You may have misunderstood Lisi's concept. You couldn't draw an 8 dimensional figure, or even sculpt one. Wikipedia has an "okay" article about them. en.wikipedia.org... Notice that when they start talking about higher dimensions they get into things like "manifolds" and so forth. While I think Lisi is probably playing with an absurd (and not correct) version of "string theory" (which is basically a (read this in small chunks) "1-dimensional slice of a 2-dimensional membrane vibrating in 11-dimensional spacetime.)

Not 8 or any other number.

Looked at one way, there are only two major divisions of particles (bosons and fermions):
en.wikipedia.org...

When you break it down to the subsets of particles, there are a LOT of them... but the number doesn't match any of the Mayan numbers:
wyoskies.uwyo.edu...

A huge stone inscribed with particles (that they never heard of and had no concept of) is useless to a people who needed to keep track of time in order to be able to give proper sacrifices to their gods and to know when to plant and harvest and know what date it was and where the planets were.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Byrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
I just noticed that Wikipedia has an overview of Lisi's most recent version of his paper. Unless you're REALLY into math and know what a "Lie Algebra" is (I do, sorta) then it's almost gibberish:
en.wikipedia.org...

"E8" doesn't mean 8 dimensions or 8 particles (en.wikipedia.org...(mathematics)) -- it means a "Lie Algebra" whose "rank" is 8 (248 dimension).
en.wikipedia.org...

Really, this stuff is unbelievably complex. I usually read about four paragraphs and then go bug my favorite mathematician (my husband) to explain the gibberish-looking formulas.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Byrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 11:46 PM
link   
So I read your post, watched the TED video and then checked out the image:




Putting all of those things together, this really is an amazing coincidence, if it's really a coincidence at all!
edit on 18-4-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join