Orbital resonance

My question concerns synodic periods, or circulation periods (these different quantities are lumped together in your book).
Somewhere on the forum I saw a question regarding the synodic period of the Moon: why do you use the value of 29.22 in your calculations in Chapter 13, while all available sources give 29.53. I can’t find this post. Please point me to this post or clarify your doubts.

Next: why in ch. 13, to calculate resonances you use the synodic period of the Moon and in the case of other bodies the period of revolution (sideric)?

By the way, I would like to ask about the remaining unclear values of orbital periods (sideric) for the planets:

  • Mercury according to Tychos 116.88 and according to other sources 115.88
  • Venus 584.4 instead of 583.92
  • Jupiter 4383, instead of 4332.6
  • Saturn 10957.5 instead of 10759.22
  • Uranium 30681 instead of 30685
  • Neptune 60266.25 instead of 60189
  • Plutonium 90582 instead of 90489

Simon if I may,

Matik, within seconds I found the section where Simon addresses this in Ch 13.

quote:
*At this point, some may object that the Moon’s synodic period is 29.53 days, not 29.22 days. That is indeed what an earthly observer may hastily conclude. Yet, that value will depend on the particular time window chosen to compute the Moon’s average long-term (secular) synodic period. …

Which Simon then goes into depth on why the value of 29.22 is used.

You clearly have an axe to grind and you waste Simon’s time asking redundant question where you clearly demonstrate that you have not read the book.

Read the book!

Matik,

You may find the answers to all of your above questions in my book, the full 320-page PDF of which you may now easily download here - free of charge . :slight_smile:

Just use the search function in your PDF browser with any keywords (or ‘keynumbers’) relevant to whatever question you may have. But let me help you out with regards to your above questions:

  • Chapter 8 is where you’ll find answers about Mercury and Venus

  • Chapter 17 is where you’ll find answers about Jupiter and Saturn

  • Chapter 18 is where you’ll find answers about Uranus, Neptune and Pluto

As for the Moon’s TMSP (True Mean Synodic Period) of 29.22, it is explained in Chapter 13. However, let me take this occasion to point out the actual ‘quantitative reasons’ why the Moon’s synodic period can fluctuate over time by roughly 0.5 days (min 29days / max 29.5 days). In fact, I only realized this after the book was published:

As mentioned in Chapter 13, the Moon can transit (at “apogee”) as far as 405504km from Earth - and as close as 363396km (at “perigee”). This maximal oscillation amounts to:

405504km - 363396km = 42108 km (which, remarkably enough, is exactly 3 x 14036km, i.e. the all-important “EAM” - Earth’s Annual Motion - stipulated by the TYCHOS model).

This is because the Moon’s orbit around the Earth is slightly eccentric (not to be confused with ‘elliptical’!). Now, the Moon’s orbital speed is 3656 km/h. In 0,5 days (or 12 hours) it will thus cover:

3656 km/h x 12 = 43872 km

Well, this is 1764 km more than 42108 - which is just about the Moon’s radius of 1737 km, so we may reasonably assume that this apparent ‘discrepancy’ of 1764 km can be ascribed to this fact.

Yes, the Moon’s synodic period is currently estimated to be 29.5 days (its maximal length), but depending on the fluctuating orientation of the Moon’s eccentric orbit vis-à-vis the stars over a full Great Year of 25344 years, there will be epochs / cycles when the Moon will realign with the Sun in only 29 days or so (i.e. 0.5 days earlier). Hence, the TMSP of 29.22 days is the Moon’s correct average synodic period to be used when computing its long-term oscillations in relation to our surrounding planets and stars.

Thank you for the comprehensive information.
Regards

1 Like

You are welcome, Matik.
I would like to add some more ‘historical’ information that should be of your interest in relation to the periods of Mars, Venus and the Moon. As you surely will know, the ancient Maya and Aztec people were exceptionally skilled astronomers. In Chapter 5 of my book, for instance, you may read about the Maya’s remarkable knowledge of the sideral cycle(s) of Mars, namely the so-called “LONG ESI” (Empiric Sidereal Interval) of about 707 days and the “SHORT ESI” of about 546 days. This fact alone - which strangely enough is hardly ever discussed by modern astronomers - roundly falsifies the Copernican / heliocentric model, yet is fully expected and perfectly accounted for by the TYCHOS model.

The Aztecs, on the other hand, were evidently well aware of the correct average synodic period of Venus (584.4 days) and of the Moon (29.22 days). This is described in the below-linked paper by Douglas L. Bundy titled “The Aztec Calendar Stone is not Aztec and it is not a Calendar” (2012). Here are a few relevant extracts from that paper - but it is well worth reading in its entirety:

"“This can be done by dividing the 584.4 days into 20 months of 29.22 days each, which is within hours of the average length of a synodic lunar month of 29.53 days, according to the best modern day calculations.”

“Therefore, one complete revolution of the day-sign ring counts 20 x 29.22 days, or the average Venus year of 584.4 days. Five of these revolutions, each uniquely named in the center quincunx, counts 100 x 29.22 = 2922 days, or five Venus years of 584.4 days each, which is equivalent to eight years of 365.25 days each.”

“By assigning the 20 day-sign symbols to a lunar month of 29.22 days, each month of the Venus year has a unique name, just as the twelve months of our Earth year has, making it easy for the public to mark the months, or “moons,” as they went by.”

Simon, that is a fantastic paper and I think it must have helped you immensely in your quest. I have a book that was printed in 1966 on the Maya and at that time archaeologists had yet to understand that the count was related to Venus, they called it an “enigma”.

What I have come to understand by reading your book is that until one
knows the true period and existence of the (Tychos) Great Year astronomy is doomed to failure! Without the understanding of the complete 25,344 yr circuit of earth’s path, the true synodic periods will always be skewed and seem anomalous to the observer.

I am almost hesitant to admit this but now that there is absolutely no question left in my mind about the correctness of your model, it is almost anticlimactic! Let me amend that slightly, your description of the way the heavens move, leaves no doubt at all in my mind.

Once someone gets their mind wrapped around the geometry the rest just falls right out, as I am sure you can attest. As I have come to fully understand the geometry it became readily apparent to me that earth necessarily has to be moving at a snails pace! All other possibilities can quickly be discarded; we would see something entirely different otherwise. It’s taken about three years to fully understand the Tychos but now I believe that I have a firm grasp of it.

It’s humorous really, the pushback comes not from one’s inability to grasp the geometry, it’s the mind’s inability to let go of its ingrained five hundred year old dogma! It is most likely a form of group thought, an egregore so to speak, that will be nearly impossible for a few, but completely impossible for most to overcome.

1 Like

I, too, needed about three years to understand all aspects of the Tychos and to weave them together into whole cloth. It didn’t help that no other idiot around me knew the slightest thing about the night sky… :blush:

2 Likes

It would be hard to over emphasize the importance that being in a spot where I am able to observe the night sky has had on my understanding of the Tychos.

1 Like

Blockquote It would be hard to over emphasize the importance that being in a spot where I am able to observe the night sky has had on my understanding of the Tychos.

This is at the very heart of the matter…hard to marvel at something you don’t know exists.

1 Like

Simon,

This is such an intriguing paper I reviewed it again today, I have a few selected quotes:

Such an intriguing possibility motivates us to study the stone’s design, not so much from the usual perspective of Maya
calendar intricacies, but rather from the point of view of an unexpected New World capability for prophetic prediction of
actual historical events, similar to those in the Bible, but in the context of mathematical precision, in contrast to the
same, well-known, Old World capability, in the context of poetic expression.

As you can see, the Western bias is ever present. (maybe the ‘new’ world isn’t so new)

However, he then goes on to make a monumental goof…

The basic form of the design of concentric circles and their division into eight major parts, surrounding five special nodes, can be seen in the epitrochoid pattern of the motions of the planet Venus and the sun, generated from the fixed point of view of the Earth, a pattern that has been known from the earliest ages of history.

Now, all of us here are quite aware of the epitrochoidal pattern which can easily be created using the amazing Tychosium. However he makes a glaring false assumption, saying, “the fixed point of view of the earth”. To wit, firstly a non-heliocentric reference is required and then secondly ascribing a stationary earth to said system!

We know clearly, by utilizing the Tychosium, that such a shape would never materialize without a slow 1.6 k/hr movement of earth around it’s PVP orbit! Instead, we would only see one particular pattern traced repeatedly, one on top of the other.

And yet, he comes so near to the truth, but cannot get out of his own way!

… it requires eight orbits of the Sun (really the Earth) to generate this pattern, … :roll_eyes:

With the truth directly in front of him, he cannot escape the confines of the Western dogma and realize that, just perhaps, the Aztec might have known a thing or two!

With the shortsightedness of a westerner’s limited understanding of cyclical time, they never fail to draw the conclusion that ancient cultures have erred in their calendrical depictions. Or to make matters worse, they try to cram our notion of yearly time onto a representation of a vastly larger cycle.

I believe the Toltec Sunstone represents the entire great year!

1 Like

Indeed, dear schoepffer…

Here is how Venus (and Mars and the Sun) is shown to proceed clockwise over time in the Tychosium simulator, as it follows the Earth’s clockwise motion around its PVP orbit (click on the start button> at bottom right of this animated gif image).

Venus_10YEAR_progression