The Real Alignment of Dec 21 2012

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by storm2012
 


this alignment is claimed from ancient scriptures

Ok. It's still nonsense.
It's not going to happen.
edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by storm2012
 

You mean an object can orbit a more distant and smaller object which is orbiting a larger and closer object instead of that larger and closer object. That must be a pretty interesting looking orbit.


You mean something like this?



What a roller-coaster ride!



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
The sun does not orbit Alcyone, and Alcyone does not orbit Sirius.

First, neither star existed when the sun and our solar system formed. Their ages are less than 100 millions years, and the sun is over 4.5 billion years old.

Second: Alcyone is almost 400 lightyears distant. The total mass of that star is not enough allow the sun to orbit it. Not when the sun is moving 220 km/s. Sorry.

Third: Alcyone is not orbiting Sirius (nor is the sun, even though we are literally hundreds of light years closer to Sirius than we are Alcyone), for the same reasons regarding mass, distance and speed).

Last: as Phage pointed out, it's impossible for our 3 stars to align in the way the OP says, because neither of those stars lay withing the galactic plane in a way that would allow us to do that.



Why do people keep trying to insist on this stuff? Insisting that ancient people had knowledge that was sometimes advanced is fine. Insisting that they knew astronomy better than we do to day is utter tripe.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by storm2012
 


I have thought this was a possibility to change, not 'BOOM' end of time...
and I think it would be nice for the change to give us the ability to see thoughts, minds,'souls'? of each other and no lies would be able to be hidden and all thoughts would be almost visible



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Is this the alignment everyone is talking about?





posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by RocksFromSpace
 

Apparently. But it isn't going to happen.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by storm2012
 



OP,

I pose this question to you because you seem to be a bit more versed in the cosmos than I. I'm not looking for an answer because as you stated to dear Phage, no one can possibly know what's out there except by what they've read. So I'm asking for your opinion...............do you believe its possible that Sirius might be our Sun's companion?

I like this thread. Thanks



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
The sun does not orbit Alcyone, and Alcyone does not orbit Sirius.

First, neither star existed when the sun and our solar system formed. Their ages are less than 100 millions years, and the sun is over 4.5 billion years old.

Second: Alcyone is almost 400 lightyears distant. The total mass of that star is not enough allow the sun to orbit it. Not when the sun is moving 220 km/s. Sorry.

Third: Alcyone is not orbiting Sirius (nor is the sun, even though we are literally hundreds of light years closer to Sirius than we are Alcyone), for the same reasons regarding mass, distance and speed).

Last: as Phage pointed out, it's impossible for our 3 stars to align in the way the OP says, because neither of those stars lay withing the galactic plane in a way that would allow us to do that.



Why do people keep trying to insist on this stuff? Insisting that ancient people had knowledge that was sometimes advanced is fine. Insisting that they knew astronomy better than we do to day is utter tripe.


Do you think what you wrote above will hold up 200 years from now?
Don't you think it's possible that we're still getting it wrong just as much as our ancestors did? I don't care that we now have telescopes such as WISE or the Hubble. There's still a very good chance, based on theories we proposed in the past, that we're STILL misinterpreting data.
Science is no more wiser (not smarter) than we were 500 years ago but man is still as arrogant.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Do you think what you wrote above will hold up 200 years from now?

In case you didn't notice. We're talking about 24 hours from now.

Go look at Alcyon and Sirius. Are they lining up?

Do you think they're going to suddenly jump across space and time to do so? On second thought don't bother answering that. You'll just come up with some more irrelevant nonsense.
edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


First, you're assuming that people know things simply because they read what someone else wrote. That people, like me, are not actually out there doing those things.

That, someone like me, can't use a telescope and measure parallax of a star over the years to help determine it's distance (what do you think they did all those years before Hubble and WISE?).

That means you are assuming that I can't do math or trigonometry. That I don't know how to shoot the stars and verify declination and right ascension coordinates.

That Sirius, being not only the brightest stars in our skies, is also one of the closest and is wonderful for measuring parallax.

Not all knowledge is just from books. Where do you think that knowledge that is in those books came from?

From people like me that actually do those things.

Will everything be the same in 200 years?

No. No they won't, because like us, other stars are in motion too.

Our solar system takes 1,500 years to go 1 light year. In 200 years we will have moved 0.13 light years from where we are right now.
In 200 years, Sirius will be slightly closer to us, and that means slightly brighter too. In fact, in about 60,000 years it will be a LOT brighter than it is now. Don't worry though, because it's path and the sun's path is different at after that it will spend the next 200,000 years moving away and getting dimmer.

Will we discover new things out there in the next 200 years? You bet! With the rate of discovery that we've had over the last 150 years, I would imagine we will discover many things. But there's a good reason we've discovered the things that we have over the past until now.

Ever since the Renaissance period, humans have been learning quite a lot. We actually created things like calculus, physical laws and how to put them to use to discover even more things. We've gotten to where we know what we know now, because we were able to build upon that knowledge over time, collect data over time, and increasingly being able to measure things even better and better over time.

You're able to post on this forum using an electronic media device not because someone said: Hey! Let's just throw out everything we know and make up a bunch of new things!
No, you're able to post on this forum because we've be able to take things that we do know and keep building on them, and following the scientific method.
Sometimes "theory" becomes fact. And sometimes "Theory" stays as "Theory" because we can't prove that it's fact. And sometimes "Theory" get's thrown out because there is a new, and better "Theory".

However, if you're going to change everything we know, then you'd better have something that can be proven......else it's not even a theory.....heck, it's not even a hypothesis at that point. It's only wild speculation.

So....if you want our sun to orbit a star that is almost 400 light years away, and if you want that star in turn to orbit another star that is only just over 8 light years away, then prove it.

All the tools are there. Math is not a theory. Trigonometry is not a theory. Calculus is not a theory. Certain physical laws are not theories anymore either as we've been able to prove that they work, such as many parts of gravitation and orbital mechanics.

Don't believe that? Then I guess your GPS system and satellite TV system are working on "magic" instead.

The tools are there. Anyone can use them to either prove or disprove something. Or at the very least if some of you were to actually pick up these tools and try to use them you might actually.................

Learn something.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Do you think what you wrote above will hold up 200 years from now?

In case you didn't notice. We're talking about 24 hours from now.

Go look at Alcyon and Sirius. Are they lining up?

Do you think they're going to suddenly jump across space and time to do so? On second thought don't bother answering that. You'll just come up with some more irrelevant nonsense.
edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Phage you are not an a scientist or an astronomer, please refer to the video I posted and just listen to it once see if you understand it. This guy in the video, has studied so much, that the knowledge you or me have is nothing compared to what he has. He has meditated for years on the Himalayas. He has achieved enlightenment. Also he says this alignment will not cause any harm but a new age for humanity.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by storm2012
 

You described the "alignment" quite well. I don't care who said it is going to happen or what they say it means. It isn't going to happen.

I suggest you go outside and look at Sirius and Alcyone. They are easy to find and they are not lining up with the Earth.

In rereading my posts I realize I misspoke earlier though. The Sun does not cross the line between Sirius and Alcyone every day. I should have said every year...in May.
edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:10 PM
link   
As much as these sorts of things interest me (and as oftentimes my skeptical mind wants to disagree with Phage and find information to disprove what he's saying), I don't see any of this theory making much sense. Even if it did, an alignment is just an alignment. It has no effect on anything, gravitational, spiritual, or whatever the case may be.

I'd love to believe that an alignment would occur and we would all live in peace and harmony from here on out, but I'm afraid it wouldn't be that simple.

Instead, use your inquisical mind and thirst for knowledge to seek within yourself change, don't seek some celestial event to do it. You must first change yourself, that is a much more difficult task than changing the world. Once you do that, making the world a better place is a piece of cake.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ManjushriPrajna
 

Good point. Isn't Hindu doctrine that there are no shortcuts? That it must come from within?

Is this non-alignment supposed to provide some sort of karmic shield for the planet?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I know a bit about Hinduism, but not a lot. I've ventured into it being a Buddhist, to understand the bedrock of Buddhism, and how they differ from one another. But a lot of modern Hindu philosophers don't believe in a literal pantheon of gods, or Kali Yuga, or anything like that.

To my understanding, no. There's no shortcuts, because it's all pretty simple when you break it down: Keep dreaming, or wake up. There's lots of complicated practices and traditions in both Hinduism and Buddhism, but they all basically boil down to that.

And no to your second question. Karma isn't a physical force or a tangible thing. Some believe it's a kind of judgement system, like great tally marks written in the cosmos. Karma just means action, or more specifically, intent behind actions. Karma can't protect you from anything.

I kinda wish it did. Maybe that box that fell on my head and nearly broke my neck two years ago wouldn't have hurt so bad.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ManjushriPrajna
 

Like you I'm not well versed in Indian religion but it was my impression that karma was something to be avoided, to lose, in order to end rebirth. I meant a sheild against karma. Could be wrong though.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


@Phage (& other "modern" skeptical/scientific people here in ATS forum) : with all due respect, have you at least ever be open-minded to, again at least, consider of how the Mayan's civilization's knowledge of astronomy was far more advanced back then, even -surprisingly- much more than our "modern" Western or European astronomy today?

Here are some articles about it that at least you can perhaps consider again:



The Maya are well known for their precise calendar and astronomy. The four surviving written documents (which are called the Dresden, Madrid, Paris, and Grolier Codices) that they have left behind include an ephemeris that charts the heliacal risings and settings in the synodic cycle of the planet Venus and an eclipse warning table based on observable lunar and solar cycles. The astronomic complexes in important Maya cities, are called "E Groups", after the E group in Uaxactú Structure E-VII, "Temple of the Masks", north viewUaxactún, in Petén, Guatemala. One of the most notable series of buildings at the site is that E Group in Uaxactún, the 3 small temples, E1, E2, E3, mark the solstices and equinoxes and the stela is the observation marke, from the Masks templeformed by Structures E-1, E-2, and E-3, which are aligned north-south and form an astronomical observatory, the first found in the Maya world. From a observation point on a nearby pyramid, named Temple of the Masks or structure E-sub VII, the early Maya could watch the sun rise behind these buildings and mark the summer and winter solstices (the longest and shortest days of the year) as well as the vernal and autumnal equinoxes (when day and night are of equal length).

www.authenticmaya.com...

and then this one:



While the best minds in Europe thought the world was 5000 years old, the Maya were writing accurate descriptions of celestial events that happened nearly 500 million years in the past. They wrote about cycles in the heavens that are longer than the known age of the universe. We don't know how accurate they were. All of these calculations were done by hand, based on observations made without telescope, sextant, protractor, compass, or any other known instrument. The idea that the Maya, essentially a stone age tribe, could produce calculations of such extreme accuracy that Europe could not duplicate them for thousands of years would seem totally incredible were it not so well documented. The Maya astronomical accomplishments are clearly recorded on paper in the Dresden Codex in Germany.

www.atitlan.net...

Even wikipedia also stated this in their article about Maya civilization & their Astronomy:

Uniquely, there is some evidence to suggest the Maya appear to be the only pre-telescopic civilization to demonstrate knowledge of the Orion Nebula as being fuzzy, i.e. not a stellar pin-point. The information which supports this theory comes from a folk tale that deals with the Orion constellation's area of the sky. Their traditional hearths include in their middle a smudge of glowing fire that corresponds with the Orion Nebula. This is a significant clue to support the idea that the Maya detected a diffuse area of the sky contrary to the pin points of stars before the telescope was invented.[28] Many preclassic sites are oriented with the Pleiades and Eta Draconis, as seen in La Blanca, Ujuxte, Monte Alto, and Takalik Abaj.

en.wikipedia.org...

that's only the "ancient" Mayans knowledge,
and I haven't even ventured more into many other "ancient" civilizations, for example, like the Chinese & their even very practical & proven field of Acupuncture , that even today's "Western/European" medical & science field still haven't been able to fully fathom/understand, yet have acknowledged & accepted Acupuncture & thus their so-called "ancient" knowledge.

The point is: just because it's "ancient", doesn't mean that it's foolish, nonsense, or BS.
Even for a skeptic person like me as well, I have honestly observed some aspects of our so-called "modern" science & civilization to be, for lack of better words: lacking.
We don't have any reason to be 100% prideful arrogant, upon those "ancient" civilization, we (and even our increasingly "materialistic" way of life) are not necessarily the 100% correct, and most knowledgeable one, that's for sure.

-regards from Indonesia-
edit on 19-12-2012 by dinkot because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-12-2012 by dinkot because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by dinkot
 


The point is: just because it's "ancient", doesn't mean that it's foolish, nonsense, or BS.

Your point is irrelevant. I never said that the Maya any other ancient astronmers were foolish. I did say that there will be no alignment as described because there will not be. There cannot be. I'm sure the Maya could have told you that. Any ancient or modern astronomer would tell you that. The yogi is obviously not an astronomer. Use your eyes, go look at Alcyone and Sirius yourself. They're easy to spot.
edit on 12/20/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Do the Earth and Sun align on December 21?



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 

Yes.
All day every day.
edit on 12/20/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join