Re: 448-yrs/5541 moons Re: Jumbled jig-saw Re: Confusion Re: Patterns Re: Short & simple Re: (235+6Adhika) Re: ...

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

Re: 448-yrs/5541 moons Re: Jumbled jig-saw Re: Confusion Re: Patterns Re: Short & simple Re: (235+6Adhika) Re: ...

Karl Palmen

Dear Brij and Calendar People

 

Thank you Brij for your reply.

 

Brij’s addition of the six 19-year cycle to the 334-year cycle tallies for both years and moons as shown in his calculation.

 

I have pointed out that the 896-year cycle of 11082 months is about one day or tithi out. This is because too many 19-year cycles have been added to the 334-year cycles to form the 448-year cycle.

 

For lunisolar calendar, Brij could consider the 3712-year cycle of 45911 months  mentioned by Kaldarhan and equal to 29 128-year cycles.

It is listed in http://the-light.com/cal/Lunisolar128.html or one of the other cycles listed  there.

 

The 3712-year cycle is made of 11 334-year cycles (see trunc column) to which only two 19-year cycles have been added.

Years: 3712  = 11*334 + 2*19

Moons: 45911 = 11*4131 + 2*235

 

The 26880-year cycle listed is made up of 79 334-year cycles with 26 19-year cycles added, which is less than one per 896-year sub-cycle.

Years: 26880  = 79*334 + 26*19

Moons: 332459 = 79*4131 + 26*235

 

I expect the Hindu calendar would produce cycles of 334-years with a small number of 19-year cycles added or removed. These cycles do not form part of the rules of the calendar, but are a product of the calendar.

 

Karl

 

16(08(10

 

 

From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Sent: 04 April 2017 21:32
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: 448-yes/5541 moons Re: Jumbled jig-saw Re: Confusion Re: Patterns Re: Short & simple Re: (235+6Adhika) Re: ...

 

Resending this mail, returned by server since from my [hidden email] account.

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ

Tuesday, 2017 April 04H13:51 (decimal)
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 4, 2017, at 1:25 PM, "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Karl, list sirs:

On further thinking, I would suggest to use a combination of 448-years=(334-years+6 cycles of 19-years); this is (4131+6x235) =5541 moons, satisfying the required lunar moons in 448-years. NO adhik or deficient moons [of 11/19- nineteen Year cycle] aiming to get Mean Lunation =(896-yrs+1 Tithi)/ No.of Tithi in (11082x29 1/2) moons =29d 12h 44m 2s.9887 possibly closest to current value of Lunation, as discussed earlier, sir!

896-years have 2 cycles of 334-years; with 12 cycles of 19 years (8362+2820=11082 moons).

To day is Ram Navami , a revered day for Lord Rama- also a day to remember my late father who was dedicated to HIM. 

Regards,

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ, Author

Brij-Gregorian Mofified calendar

Tuesday, 2017 April 04H13:41 (decimal)

 

Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 4, 2017, at 9:57 AM, Brij Bhushan metric VIJ <[hidden email]> wrote:

Karl, list sirs:

>I can now guess the missing part of the description:
>"The resulting 23 19-year cycles are >followed by 11 years with no moons making ><a href="x-apple-data-detectors://5">11/19 = 0.578946367 of a 19-year cycle."
>If this were added to the description, the >conclusion following it would be correct.

I thank you, Karl for 'explaining the jumbled jig-saw, with your Astro-mathematical expertise'. I have only tried to use the exactness of 19-year Harappa cycle, I believed, could be used counting (437+11)-years to count 5541-moons in (896/2=448-years). 

19-year cycle, as you know, may have 235-moons/6932 1/2 Tithi; each Tithi of 1 338/326919 day in my 896-years with Mean Year=365.2421875 days; and (with an EXTRA tithi) getting Mean Lunation=(327257

+1) days/326919 Tithi=29d 12h 44m 2s.9887. Be kind to reconcile that 896-year cycle is a complete lunisolar cycle!

Regards,

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ, Author

Brij-Gregorian Midified calendar 

Tuesday, 2017 April 04H09:94 (decimal)


Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 4, 2017, at 5:40 AM, Karl Palmen <[hidden email]> wrote:

I can now guess the missing part of the description:
"The resulting 23 19-year cycles are followed by 11 years with no moons making 11/19 = 0.578946367 of a 19-year cycle."
If this were added to the description, the conclusion following it would be correct.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Harappa Astronomy Re: 448-yrs/5541 moons Re: Jumbled jig-saw Re: Confusion Re: Patterns Re: Short & simple Re: (235+6Adhika) Re: ...

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Karl, list sirs:
>Brij’s addition of the six 19-year cycle to >the 334-year cycle tallies for both years >and moons as shown in his calculation.

 

>I have pointed out that the 896-year cycle >of 11082 months is about one day or tithi >out. This is because too many 19-year >cycles have been added to the 334-year >cycles to form the 448-year cycle.

I thank you, Karl for reconciling with my calculations pointing to my (2x448)-years/11082 moons falling short by 1-Tithi/day to get right Mean Year & Mean Lunation for desired, discussed earlier also.

I recall some discussion about 3712-years cycle of 29*128-year cycle; and my calculations of 29 cycles of 896-years taking care of 'Absorbed/Extra moon' in arriving at my results, we talked.

Hindu calendar may adopt/verify my calculations; or the combination of several other 'permutations'. But You may possibly agree to credit my 448-years/5541-Lunation to be "yet another lunisolar cycle" linked to my aimed calculations for approaching current Astronomers' Aversge MY & ML values, approaching Harappa/my calculated Tithi of 1 338/ 326919 day, sir. The value is simple: One Tithi=No.of days in 896-yrs/No. of Tithi in (11082x29 1/2) moons; also

pointing to 'exactness of 19-year cycle' known to ancient Indus people! I thank you again, sir!

Regards,

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ

Brij-Gregorian Modified calendar 

Thursday, 2017 April 06H09:14 (decimal)


Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 6, 2017, at 8:09 AM, Karl Palmen <[hidden email]> wrote:

Brij’s addition of the six 19-year cycle to the 334-year cycle tallies for both years and moons as shown in his calculation.

 

I have pointed out that the 896-year cycle of 11082 months is about one day or tithi out. This is because too many 19-year cycles have been added to the 334-year cycles to form the 448-year cycle.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

19-year cycle & 896-years Re: Harappa Astronomy Re: 448-yrs/5541 moons Re: Jumbled jig-saw Re: Confusion Re: Patterns Re: Short & simple Re: (235+6Adhika) Re: ...

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Karl, list sirs:

>as the Old Lufkan cycle, >because it was used in an old >version of fictional Lufkan >calendar. 

I thought of changing the 'thread'  but it seems. I have some difficulty with my iPhone- not being conversant still in handling. My not choosing your suggested 'Tithi' durations was from two reasons: (1) Your desire of a simple definition of this complicated number; and (2) my linking Harappa Tithi, as I expect, known to Indus people with 29 1/2 (29.5 markings) tithi AND not Days - popularly announced! 
I recall having sent you "a .pdf" file of Fairsetvis' Harappan Lunar Calendar, from E.J.H. Mackay 'Further Excavations at Mohdnjo-Daro (Delhi 1938), Plate CXLIII' observations; along with some of my calculations! Further, while in Delhi I had some exchange of information, I had shown my contributions since mid-70's to Prof. Romila Thapar, last year. I reproduce my calculation of 19-years:
1 335/326919 day x 6932.5 Tithi divide 365.242189669781 =19.00000618327503 years! 
My value 1 338/326919 equally good for this and EXACTLY fit 896-years cycle. Adding one Tithi make my calculation getting Mean Lunation= 29d 12h 44m 2s.9887
>Brij has suggested a Vij tithi 
>value of 1 338/326919 days, >which gives 11082 lunar >months to 896 years. I have >suggested 1 339/326918 >days, which gives one less 
>tithi to the 896-year cycle >and so makes it more >accurate.
Karl's accuracy is for 'a day extra' i.e. 1 339/326918 x 326919 Tithi=[337258 days (896-years+1day)]; while my Tithi is worked for 'exactly 896-years' and the EXTRA Tithi/day is for the self compensation of "absorbed moon" over 29 cycles, [1 338/326919 x 326919=327257 days or 896-years], also discussed earlier!
My exactness for 19-year cycle is due to my adjustment of Harappa Tithi (if used with (1 335/326819 day), sir! 
As for other variants, I shall leave it to the judgement/ acceptable accuracy of astronomers, without reference to Hindu thought/Tithi values used in Hindu panchangs. 
My regards, 
Brij Bhushan metric VIJ, Author
Brij-Gregorian Modified Caldndar
Friday, 2017 April 07H14:19 (decimal)

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 6, 2017, at 9:08 AM, Brij Bhushan metric VIJ <[hidden email]> wrote:

Karl, list sirs:
>Brij’s addition of the six 19-year cycle to >the 334-year cycle tallies for both years >and moons as shown in his calculation.

 

>I have pointed out that the 896-year cycle >of 11082 months is about one day or tithi >out. This is because too many 19-year >cycles have been added to the 334-year >cycles to form the 448-year cycle.

I thank you, Karl for reconciling with my calculations pointing to my (2x448)-years/11082 moons falling short by 1-Tithi/day to get right Mean Year & Mean Lunation for desired, discussed earlier also.

I recall some discussion about 3712-years cycle of 29*128-year cycle; and my calculations of 29 cycles of 896-years taking care of 'Absorbed/Extra moon' in arriving at my results, we talked.

Hindu calendar may adopt/verify my calculations; or the combination of several other 'permutations'. But You may possibly agree to credit my 448-years/5541-Lunation to be "yet another lunisolar cycle" linked to my aimed calculations for approaching current Astronomers' Aversge MY & ML values, approaching Harappa/my calculated Tithi of 1 338/ 326919 day, sir. The value is simple: One Tithi=No.of days in 896-yrs/No. of Tithi in (11082x29 1/2) moons; also

pointing to 'exactness of 19-year cycle' known to ancient Indus people! I thank you again, sir!

Regards,

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ

Brij-Gregorian Modified calendar 

Thursday, 2017 April 06H09:14 (decimal)


Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 6, 2017, at 8:09 AM, Karl Palmen <[hidden email]> wrote:

Brij’s addition of the six 19-year cycle to the 334-year cycle tallies for both years and moons as shown in his calculation.

 

I have pointed out that the 896-year cycle of 11082 months is about one day or tithi out. This is because too many 19-year cycles have been added to the 334-year cycles to form the 448-year cycle.