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.
originally posted by: kitzik
a reply to: neutrinostargate
The problem is researchers threw out the Mayan Haab solar year, threw in the Gregorian solar year and arrived at 12/21/21 or 1,872,000 days later. That is 5125.36 years or 5125 years 132 days.
This is not a problem this is the right way to make calculation.
Your calculation going as 1,872,000/365 = 5128,767 or 5128 years 280 days is the number of Mayan Haab years.
But then you are applying this into our Gregorian or Julain calendar reference. This is wrong, you can't add apples with oranges and receive consistent results.
The right way is indeed 1,872,000/365.2425 = 5125.36 Gregorian years
Other method, you can take your Mayan Haab 5128 years but you will need a large correction downward. As in your LA article example it will indeed go somewhat 1245 days ahead of astronomical year. So, if you insist that you want to start your calculation with 5128 Mayan Haab years, in order to get right answer in the frame reference of Gregorian calendar you should subtract 1245 days. And you will receive 21/12/2012.
The date 2016 without this correction is purely Mayan Haab years and not real calendar which all modern world follows. You got it ?
What need to stay constant is the number 1,872,000 days.
So, again. The easier to understand method would be
1,872,000/365.2425 = 5125.36 Gregorian years.
So here is a very basic question. What calendar is best to find out the true end date? The one that includes leap days or the one that doesn't?
It's fourth in line for accuracy behind the Mayan calendar from about 2000 B.C.E. (margin of error: one day in every 6500 years)"
The Gregorian calendar, also called the Western calendar and the Christian calendar, is internationally the most widely used civil calendar. It is named for Pope Gregory XIII, who introduced it in October 1582.
originally posted by: PPFkid
a reply to: neutrinostargate
A little snippet. I hope it helps with your thread.
The Gregorian calendar, also called the Western calendar and the Christian calendar, is internationally the most widely used civil calendar. It is named for Pope Gregory XIII, who introduced it in October 1582.
originally posted by: kitzik
a reply to: neutrinostargate
It's fourth in line for accuracy behind the Mayan calendar from about 2000 B.C.E. (margin of error: one day in every 6500 years)"
I think you are more an expert in the matters of Mayan calendars than the author of this ridiculous claim
originally posted by: kitzik
So here is a very basic question. What calendar is best to find out the true end date? The one that includes leap days or the one that doesn't?
Theoretically if all you need is to count exact 1,872,000 days it doesn't matter
But you need to do it right. Apples with apples and oranges with oranges.
Since our start date August 11th, 3114 BC expressed as Gregorian date it seems to me easier that you convert 1,872,000 days into number of Gregorian years.
August 11th, 3114 BC Gregorian + 5128,767 Haab Years != automatically some date in Gregorian calendar. You still need to make correction for leap days into meaningful Gregorian date. It doesn't matter that Maya didn't used leap years. We can make calculations with Gregorian or Julian or even Haab date as long as we adding apples with apples and making correct adjustments, such that 1.872,000 days is constant.
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
originally posted by: PPFkid
a reply to: neutrinostargate
A little snippet. I hope it helps with your thread.
The Gregorian calendar, also called the Western calendar and the Christian calendar, is internationally the most widely used civil calendar. It is named for Pope Gregory XIII, who introduced it in October 1582.
Um what? LOL I quoted that on this thread earlier. So what is your point? I already know that and doesn't help with my thread. kid
"They always forget about leap year. Now calculate out 5126 years divided by four adds another 1282 days, divide by 365 days and it is clear that we have another 3.5 years to go before the end. Whew, what luck, I have my last car payment due then. Start your real planning now."
originally posted by: PPFkid
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
originally posted by: PPFkid
a reply to: neutrinostargate
A little snippet. I hope it helps with your thread.
The Gregorian calendar, also called the Western calendar and the Christian calendar, is internationally the most widely used civil calendar. It is named for Pope Gregory XIII, who introduced it in October 1582.
Um what? LOL I quoted that on this thread earlier. So what is your point? I already know that and doesn't help with my thread. kid
Sorry LOL. I must of missed that post. As I was flicking and reading threw the thread. Son.
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
originally posted by: kitzik
So here is a very basic question. What calendar is best to find out the true end date? The one that includes leap days or the one that doesn't?
Theoretically if all you need is to count exact 1,872,000 days it doesn't matter
But you need to do it right. Apples with apples and oranges with oranges.
Since our start date August 11th, 3114 BC expressed as Gregorian date it seems to me easier that you convert 1,872,000 days into number of Gregorian years.
August 11th, 3114 BC Gregorian + 5128,767 Haab Years != automatically some date in Gregorian calendar. You still need to make correction for leap days into meaningful Gregorian date. It doesn't matter that Maya didn't used leap years. We can make calculations with Gregorian or Julian or even Haab date as long as we adding apples with apples and making correct adjustments, such that 1.872,000 days is constant.
We have to use start date Sept 6th, 3114 BC and not August 11th, 3114 BC.
Sept 6th, 3114 BC is Julian Day Number (JDN) = 584,283 or that many days from Jan 1st, 4117 BC (Julian). There is no such thing has a beginning date in the Gregorian for that. It is plain and simply Julian day. The Julian Day Number is the count in the amount of days using a Julian period which is 7980 years. The Julian period incorporate the Julian calendar or 365.25 solar days.
So in theory, August 11th, 3114 BC is wrong for the Mayan start date.
Since there is no such thing as a Gregorian beginning date or Jan 1st, 4117 BC (Julian) being a Gregorian date, August 11th, 3114 BC is irrelevant and it would be the wrong GMT correlation as well.
That is why this calculator tool uses Sept 6th, 3114 BC as the beginning Mayan date and 1,872,000 days later is Dec. 21st, 2012 (Gregorian) or more correctly, Dec. 8th, 2012 (Julian).
Sept 6th, 3114 BC (Julian) plus 1,872,000 days = Dec. 8th, 2012 (Julian)
www.msevans.com...
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
So going straight Julian to Julian.
Sept. 6th 3114 BC (Julian) which is the correct GMT correlation date of 584,283 and not August 11th, 3114 BC (Gregorian) plus 1,872,000 days = Dec. 8th, 2012 (Julian).
There is a 1284 day leap year difference from 3114 BC to 2016...
originally posted by: Box of Rain
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
So going straight Julian to Julian.
Sept. 6th 3114 BC (Julian) which is the correct GMT correlation date of 584,283 and not August 11th, 3114 BC (Gregorian) plus 1,872,000 days = Dec. 8th, 2012 (Julian).
There is a 1284 day leap year difference from 3114 BC to 2016...
Wouldn't all of this only be true if the Gregorian or Julian Calendar began diverging from the Mayan Calendar back in 3114 BC?
The way it seems to me, If the Gregorian calendar was in sync back in 1582 with astronomical observations, then any divergence from the Mayan Calendar would have only been starting in 1582, not thousands of years earlier.
That's like saying if I start using a calendar today with only 365 days in this year (2016) instead of the 366 days due to the leap year, then I would not be off by only one day come Dec. 31, but I'd be off by 100 days since the year 1916. However, it wouldn't be true that my calendar is off by 100 days come Dec. 31 this year, because I only started using that calendar this year, not 1916, so it only started diverging this year, not since 1916.
Unless you can explain why you are talking about the divergence of the Julian or Gregorian Calendar relative to the Mayan Calendar back in 3000 or 4000 BC, before the Julian or Gregorian calendars even exited (how can a calendar diverge if it doesn't exist?), then I'm going to have to think that there is something wrong with your methodology.
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
originally posted by: Box of Rain
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
So going straight Julian to Julian.
Sept. 6th 3114 BC (Julian) which is the correct GMT correlation date of 584,283 and not August 11th, 3114 BC (Gregorian) plus 1,872,000 days = Dec. 8th, 2012 (Julian).
There is a 1284 day leap year difference from 3114 BC to 2016...
Wouldn't all of this only be true if the Gregorian or Julian Calendar began diverging from the Mayan Calendar back in 3114 BC?
The way it seems to me, If the Gregorian calendar was in sync back in 1582 with astronomical observations, then any divergence from the Mayan Calendar would have only been starting in 1582, not thousands of years earlier.
That's like saying if I start using a calendar today with only 365 days in this year (2016) instead of the 366 days due to the leap year, then I would not be off by only one day come Dec. 31, but I'd be off by 100 days since the year 1916. However, it wouldn't be true that my calendar is off by 100 days come Dec. 31 this year, because I only started using that calendar this year, not 1916, so it only started diverging this year, not since 1916.
Unless you can explain why you are talking about the divergence of the Julian or Gregorian Calendar relative to the Mayan Calendar back in 3000 or 4000 BC, before the Julian or Gregorian calendars even exited (how can a calendar diverge if it doesn't exist?), then I'm going to have to think that there is something wrong with your methodology.
Good question, well technically the Gregorian calendar started to diverge from the Julian on 325 AD. Then 1582, they removed 10 days from the calendar, since there was a 10 day difference between the Gregorian and Julian at that time. Since 1582 AD, there has been an additional 3 day difference. It is 1 day divergent every 133.33 years between Gregorian and Julian.
originally posted by: Box of Rain
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
originally posted by: Box of Rain
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
So going straight Julian to Julian.
Sept. 6th 3114 BC (Julian) which is the correct GMT correlation date of 584,283 and not August 11th, 3114 BC (Gregorian) plus 1,872,000 days = Dec. 8th, 2012 (Julian).
There is a 1284 day leap year difference from 3114 BC to 2016...
Wouldn't all of this only be true if the Gregorian or Julian Calendar began diverging from the Mayan Calendar back in 3114 BC?
The way it seems to me, If the Gregorian calendar was in sync back in 1582 with astronomical observations, then any divergence from the Mayan Calendar would have only been starting in 1582, not thousands of years earlier.
That's like saying if I start using a calendar today with only 365 days in this year (2016) instead of the 366 days due to the leap year, then I would not be off by only one day come Dec. 31, but I'd be off by 100 days since the year 1916. However, it wouldn't be true that my calendar is off by 100 days come Dec. 31 this year, because I only started using that calendar this year, not 1916, so it only started diverging this year, not since 1916.
Unless you can explain why you are talking about the divergence of the Julian or Gregorian Calendar relative to the Mayan Calendar back in 3000 or 4000 BC, before the Julian or Gregorian calendars even exited (how can a calendar diverge if it doesn't exist?), then I'm going to have to think that there is something wrong with your methodology.
Good question, well technically the Gregorian calendar started to diverge from the Julian on 325 AD. Then 1582, they removed 10 days from the calendar, since there was a 10 day difference between the Gregorian and Julian at that time. Since 1582 AD, there has been an additional 3 day difference. It is 1 day divergent every 133.33 years between Gregorian and Julian.
No. The Gregorian Calendar was not around in 325 AD, so it wasn't diverging at that time.
When the Gregorian Calendar went into effect on October 15, 1582, it was in sync with astronomical observations at that time, so it wasn't diverging from anything. The fact that the day before according to the previous Julian calendar was October 4, 1582 is not relevant, because the Gregorian calendar did not begin until the next day -- at which point the Gregorian Calendar synchronized itself with astronomical observations, and told us that the day was October 15, 1582.
So on the day when the Gregorian Calendar began, it was correct with astronomical observations at that time and accurate and precise as written to continue to be in sync with astronomical observations.
Actually, it isn't exactly precise and accurate as written to continue to be in sync with astronomical observations; there is one issue. Over a period of a few thousand years, the calendar would slowly accrue another extra day. One proposal to correct this would be that years divisible by 4000 (the year 4000, 8000, etc.) would be common years instead of leap years. Right now, any year divisible by 100 is NOT a leap year (a non-leap year is called a "common year") EXCEPT if that year is divisible by 400....
So the years 1700, 1800, 1900, 2100, 2200, 2300, 2500, etc would NOT be leap years, but the years 2000, 2400, 2800, etc. would be leap years. This is where your "every 133.33 years" comes from, which may be true as an average, but it isn't true in practice/not the way the calendar is enacted. The Gregorian calendar is enacted in such a way that it diverges from the Julian calendar one day every 100 years -- but for only 300 years out of 400. That may avergae out to one day every 133,33 years", but nothing special happens on the calendars "every 133.33 years". Rather, the actual divergence on the calendars happen (as I said) every 100 years, but only 300 years out of 400).
This skipping of centennial leap years 300 years out of 400 years is the way the Gregorian Calendar fine-tunes its precision and accuracy, just like the proposal (made by astronomer Sir John Herschel) to add years divisible by 4000 to the list of common years in order would fine-tune the Gregorian Calendar even further.
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
In 1582 they removed 10 days from the calendar (the divergent from the Julian year to the tropical year from 325 to 1582 AD) to help the Gregorian match the tropical year and precession better. Then at this time, there has been a 3 day difference until now in which the Gregorian and Julian have drifted away from each other, but the Gregorian year is still more correct dealing with the tropical year then the Julian year.
When dealing with longer periods of time, the Julian year compared to the tropical year drifts 1 day every 128 years. The Gregorian year compared to the tropical year drifts 1 day every 3236 or some years. I think I have showed this before.
And every 133.333 years, the Gregorian and the Julian drift away from each other. That is a fact.