Correction to 448-year cycle RE: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: ...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Correction to 448-year cycle RE: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: ...

Karl Palmen

Dear Brij and Calendar People

 

I see below that Brij corrects the 448-year cycle, which is less accurate than the 334-year cycle by adding 1 tithi of 2/59 month every two cycles.

He does not explicitly refer to this correction. It just appears in one of his calculations ‘896-years + 1 tithi’. Given the mean year of the 128-year cycle 365.2421875 days, without the correction one would get a mean month of about

29 days 12 hours 43 minutes 55.1922 seconds

With the correction he gets

29 days 12 hours 44 minutes 02.9887 seconds

 

However, I do not see how this correction could be applied in a calendar. Brij needs to explain how this would be done in detail, so we understand how it would affect a calendar using this cycle. If not, I’ll conclude that Brij has not given thought to this and the correction not practical for a calendar.

 

Karl

 

16(09(29

 

From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Sent: 23 May 2017 22:04
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: Interval Cycles of Interval Cycles

 

Karl, Walter sirs:

>Years: 23*19 + 11 = 448

>Leap months: 23*7 + 4 = 165.

>This can have the leap month years spread >as smoothly as possible so ensure that the >new year moves no more than one month >back and forththrough the seasons.

image1.JPG

Excellent, this is in line with my 'original post' for aligning 448-years/5541 Lunation, short of 1/2 Tithi, in half my 896-years/11082 moons needing an 'extra' day getting Mean Lunation: 29d12h44m2s.98863. 

My 37,36,37,36 moons per 100-years & remaing 17 moons in 48-years to leap 165-moons- in (448x12+165=5541 moons) make the sense. But, leaving other 'parameters'; as I said, I have no reservations with Astro-experts!

I thank you Karl for considering my input,as yet another option - bridging cultures.

Regards,

Ex-Flt Lt Brij Bhushan VIj, Aughor

Brij-Gregorian Modified Calenfar

Tuesday, 2017 May 23H14:05 (decimal)

 

Sent from my iPhone


On May 23, 2017, at 5:04 AM, Karl Palmen <[hidden email]> wrote:

Years: 23*19 + 11 = 448

Leap months: 23*7 + 4 = 165.

This can have the leap month years spread as smoothly as possible so ensure that the new year moves no more than one month back and forth through the seasons.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re-verifying Re: Correction to 448-year cycle RE: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: ...

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Karl, Walter list sirs:
>29 days 12 hours 43 minutes 55.1922 seconds

>With the correction he gets

>29 days 12 hours 44 minutes 02.9887 seconds

 

>However, I do not see how this correction >could be applied in a calendar. Brij needs to >explain how this would be done in detail, so >we understand how it would affect a >calendar using this cycle. If not, I’ll >conclude that Brij has not given thought to >this and the correction not practical for a >calendar.

Permit me to assume, Karl is aware of the One 'self-consumed' Lunation over 29 cycles of 896-years; we discussed long ago.

(896*29=25984-years=331377 moons; & 11082x29=331378 moons). I draw advantage of THIS self-consumed moon over 448*58=25984-years. This 'half' Tithi used 58-times make the required Mean Lunation of 29d12h44m2s.98863.

    "      My investigation has revealed the Mean Year =(7*128)=896-years (with or without Leap Days/Leap Weeks, have MY (365+31/128) =7*(52+159/896)=7*(52+1/6+ 29/2688)=365.2421875 days.

Mean Lunation={(327257+1) /326919) = 29.530590146183 days} i.e. 29d 12h 44m 2s.98863. 

(896x29)=25984-years x 365.242189669781=9490453 days =321377 Lunation; while (11082x29=321378 moons). It is this One self-consumed moon in (321378- 321377) moons over (448*58=321378) which is used as 1/2 Tithi 'every 448-years or 1 Tithi every 896-years' cycle.

My calculation  

'borrow NOT to return', 

the half Tithi once every 448-years to achieve result in my 448-years/5541 Lunation (5541*29 1/2=163459 1/2+0.5 =163460 days /5541= 29.50009023641942 Tithi x 1+338/326919=Mean Moon of 29d12h44m2s.98863.

I am sure Karl knew, this calculation and desired, me to have this re-verified".

Regards,

Ex-Flt Lt Brij Bhushan VIJ, Author

Brij-Gregorian Modified Calendar

Wednesday,2017May24H14:30 (decimal)


Sent from my iPhone

On May 24, 2017, at 5:01 AM, Karl Palmen <[hidden email]> wrote:

29 days 12 hours 43 minutes 55.1922 seconds

With the correction he gets

29 days 12 hours 44 minutes 02.9887 seconds

 

However, I do not see how this correction could be applied in a calendar. Brij needs to explain how this would be done in detail, so we understand how it would affect a calendar using this cycle. If not, I’ll conclude that Brij has not given thought to this and the correction not practical for a calenda


image001.jpg (223K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re-verifying Re: Correction to 448-year cycle RE: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: ...

Karl Palmen

Dear Brij and Calendar People

 

Thank you Brij for your reply and stating the calculation for the correction.

 

Brij said:

My calculation  

'borrow NOT to return', 

the half Tithi once every 448-years to achieve result in my 448-years/5541 Lunation (5541*29 1/2=163459 1/2+0.5 =163460 days /5541= 29.50009023641942 Tithi x 1+338/326919=Mean Moon of 29d12h44m2s.98863.

I am sure Karl knew, this calculation and desired, me to have this re-verified".

 

I don’t doubt the correctness of the calculation. It too reckoned by different means the same result for adding half a day to the 5541 lunar months of the 448-year cycle with mean year.  

(448*365.2421875 + 0.5)/5541  = 29.530590146… days = 29d 12h 44m 2.9886302…. s.

 

What I do doubt is the idea that this correction can be applied to a calendar.

 

This is because if you add half a day if one adds half a day (or tithi) to the 5541 months one must also add half a day (or tithi) to the 448 years. I now do the calculation for the resulting year:

(448*365.2421875 + 0.5)/448 = 365.2433…. days.

 

I think Brij wants to add half a day (or tithi) to the 5541 months without adding it to the 448 years, but in such a calendar, it is impossible. The years are tied to the months by the 448-year cycle rule, which determines how many lunar months occur in a year.

 

Brij also mentioned

(896x29)=25984-years x 365.242189669781=9490453 days =321377 Lunation

This is a modification of the 448-year cycle (doubled to 896 years), which has one month less than 29 doubled 448-year cycles:

29*2*5541 – 1 = 32177.

 

This is seven times the 3712-year cycle listed in

http://the-light.com/cal/Lunisolar128.html

and mentioned by Kaldarhan Kambar.

 

25984/7 = 3712 years

321377/7 = 45911 lunar months

9490453/7 = 1355779 days.

 

This has a mean year of exactly 365.2421875 days and

a mean lunar month of 29.5305918… days, which is about 29d 12h 44m 3.13 seconds.

One can get a slightly shorter mean month by raising the 29 in the calculation to 30 or 31 and these two cycles are also listed in the link as having 210 or 217 128-year cycles respectively.

 

However all these cycles are so long that they’ll cease to be accurate long before one cycle has passed.

 

Karl

 

16(09(30

 

From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Sent: 24 May 2017 22:21
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re-verifying Re: Correction to 448-year cycle RE: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: ...

 

Karl, Walter list sirs:

>29 days 12 hours 43 minutes 55.1922 seconds

>With the correction he gets

>29 days 12 hours 44 minutes 02.9887 seconds

 

>However, I do not see how this correction >could be applied in a calendar. Brij needs to >explain how this would be done in detail, so >we understand how it would affect a >calendar using this cycle. If not, I’ll >conclude that Brij has not given thought to >this and the correction not practical for a >calendar.

Permit me to assume, Karl is aware of the One 'self-consumed' Lunation over 29 cycles of 896-years; we discussed long ago.

(896*29=25984-years=331377 moons; & 11082x29=331378 moons). I draw advantage of THIS self-consumed moon over 448*58=25984-years. This 'half' Tithi used 58-times make the required Mean Lunation of 29d12h44m2s.98863.

    "      My investigation has revealed the Mean Year =(7*128)=896-years (with or without Leap Days/Leap Weeks, have MY (365+31/128) =7*(52+159/896)=7*(52+1/6+ 29/2688)=365.2421875 days.

Mean Lunation={(327257+1) /326919) = 29.530590146183 days} i.e. 29d 12h 44m 2s.98863. 

(896x29)=25984-years x 365.242189669781=9490453 days =321377 Lunation; while (11082x29=321378 moons). It is this One self-consumed moon in (321378- 321377) moons over (448*58=321378) which is used as 1/2 Tithi 'every 448-years or 1 Tithi every 896-years' cycle.

My calculation  

'borrow NOT to return', 

the half Tithi once every 448-years to achieve result in my 448-years/5541 Lunation (5541*29 1/2=163459 1/2+0.5 =163460 days /5541= 29.50009023641942 Tithi x 1+338/326919=Mean Moon of 29d12h44m2s.98863.

I am sure Karl knew, this calculation and desired, me to have this re-verified".

Regards,

Ex-Flt Lt Brij Bhushan VIJ, Author

Brij-Gregorian Modified Calendar

Wednesday,2017May24H14:30 (decimal)

 

Sent from my iPhone


On May 24, 2017, at 5:01 AM, Karl Palmen <[hidden email]> wrote:

29 days 12 hours 43 minutes 55.1922 seconds

With the correction he gets

29 days 12 hours 44 minutes 02.9887 seconds

 

However, I do not see how this correction could be applied in a calendar. Brij needs to explain how this would be done in detail, so we understand how it would affect a calendar using this cycle. If not, I’ll conclude that Brij has not given thought to this and the correction not practical for a calenda

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re-verifying Re: Correction to 448-year cycle RE: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: ...

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Karl, list sirs:
>I don’t doubt the correctness of the >calculation. It too reckoned by different >means the same result for adding half a >day to the 5541 lunar months of the 448->year cycle with mean year.   

>(448*365.2421875 + 0.5)/5541  = >29.530590146… days = 29d 12h 44m >2.9886302…. s.

 

>What I do doubt is the idea that this >correction can be applied to a calendar.

I thank you Karl, for understanding my calculation.
The 'hidden mistake' lies in the EXACTNESS of durations we consider for Mean Year & Mean Lunation. 
448-years=163628.5009720619 days; 5541-lunar moons=163628.99287326 days. It is this 0.491901198112 day difference, which I compensate by using HALF a day/Tithi out of the missing (self-absorbed) Moon over (448x58)=25984-years.
However, you are a better Astro-mathematician to comment further. 
25984-years=9490453.05637959 days =321377.0338740069 Lunation;
11082x29=321378 lunar moons, get arithmatically accounted, supporting the calculation - in 448-years/5541 Lunation cycle. Is there any other way to consider an astronomy cycle?
Regards,
Ex-Flt Lt Brij Bhushan VIJ, Author
Brij-Gregorian Modified calendar
Thursday, 2017 May 25H06:54 (decimal)

Sent from my iPhone

On May 25, 2017, at 5:17 AM, Karl Palmen <[hidden email]> wrote:

I don’t doubt the correctness of the calculation. It too reckoned by different means the same result for adding half a day to the 5541 lunar months of the 448-year cycle with mean year.  

(448*365.2421875 + 0.5)/5541  = 29.530590146… days = 29d 12h 44m 2.9886302…. s.

 

What I do doubt is the idea that this correction can be applied to a calendar.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re-verifying Re: Correction to 448-year cycle RE: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: ...

Karl Palmen

Dear Brij and Calendar People

 

The issue here is not the reason for the calculation, but in whether the calculation can be implemented in a calendar.

 

I have another idea, which I’ll let Brij know in private, so he can think about it while I’m away for a few days.

 

Karl

 

16(09(30

 

From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Sent: 25 May 2017 14:33
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Re-verifying Re: Correction to 448-year cycle RE: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: ...

 

Karl, list sirs:

>I don’t doubt the correctness of the >calculation. It too reckoned by different >means the same result for adding half a >day to the 5541 lunar months of the 448->year cycle with mean year.   

>(448*365.2421875 + 0.5)/5541  = >29.530590146… days = 29d 12h 44m >2.9886302…. s.

 

>What I do doubt is the idea that this >correction can be applied to a calendar.

I thank you Karl, for understanding my calculation.

The 'hidden mistake' lies in the EXACTNESS of durations we consider for Mean Year & Mean Lunation. 

448-years=163628.5009720619 days; 5541-lunar moons=163628.99287326 days. It is this 0.491901198112 day difference, which I compensate by using HALF a day/Tithi out of the missing (self-absorbed) Moon over (448x58)=25984-years.

However, you are a better Astro-mathematician to comment further. 

25984-years=9490453.05637959 days =321377.0338740069 Lunation;

11082x29=321378 lunar moons, get arithmatically accounted, supporting the calculation - in 448-years/5541 Lunation cycle. Is there any other way to consider an astronomy cycle?

Regards,

Ex-Flt Lt Brij Bhushan VIJ, Author

Brij-Gregorian Modified calendar

Thursday, 2017 May 25H06:54 (decimal)

 

Sent from my iPhone


On May 25, 2017, at 5:17 AM, Karl Palmen <[hidden email]> wrote:

I don’t doubt the correctness of the calculation. It too reckoned by different means the same result for adding half a day to the 5541 lunar months of the 448-year cycle with mean year.  

(448*365.2421875 + 0.5)/5541  = 29.530590146… days = 29d 12h 44m 2.9886302…. s.

 

What I do doubt is the idea that this correction can be applied to a calendar.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Brij Tithi Re: Correction 0.5 Day (not Tithi) Re: Thanks Re: Not Sure Re: Re-verifying Re: Correction to 448-year cycle RE: The Best option Re: 19-years/7 Leap months Re: ...

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
In reply to this post by Karl Palmen
Karl, sirs:
Karl suggested to increase lunar length, Molad, to:
>So let’s have a molad whose interval is >exactly: 163629/5541 days = 
>29 <a href="tel:&#43;%202940/5541" dir="ltr" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="telephone" x-apple-data-detectors-result="1" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">+ 2940/5541 days.

>The first day of each month occurs on the >day of a its molad.

     This may change the value of my "used Tithi=1 338/326919 day"; to 1 339/336919 day; as earlier also shown by Karl - during his checking upon my results. He had the 'right to twist my mind, sirs'. 

I recall having pointed to such correction, in my attached hand worked calculation!

However, I reproduce my re-worked figures:

image1.JPG

     The point, not becoming clearer by me (due language) was, the last Tithi in 5541st moon i.e. 163460th in 448-years; instead of "half Tithi needed to be increased (by 0.5 day) to 1.000516947623112 day", so the completed 5541th moon, and 448-years would give Mean Lunation=163629/5541 i.e. 
29d12h44m2s.98863.
     The above 'photo' shall obviously clear this, I hope. 
Regards,
Ex-FltLt Brij Bhushan VIJ, Author
Brij-Gregorian Modified calendar
Friday, 2017 June 02H14:39 (decimal)

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 2, 2017, at 2:07 AM, "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> wrote:

So let’s have a molad whose interval is exactly

163629/5541 days = 29 + 2940/5541 days.

The first day of each month occurs on the day of a its molad.