Re: Pending Decipherment of Indus Script Re: Yet another 968/967 day Re: ...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pending Decipherment of Indus Script Re: Yet another 968/967 day Re: ...

Karl Palmen

Dear Brij and Calendar People


Thank you Brij for your reply.


From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Sent: 27 June 2017 05:28
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Pending Deciphermrnt of Indus Script Re: Yet another 968/967 day Re: Molar vs Tithi Re: Historic Contribution Re: ...


Karl, cc all Sirs:



Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 26, 2017, at 10:55 AM, Karl Palmen <[hidden email]> wrote:

It does give exactly 5541 lunar months in 448 years of 365.2421875 days, but after the 'extra duration =0.49287326' day is added to the lunar months, we no longer have exactly 5541 lunar months in 448 years and so it all seems pointless to me.                                    

I submit:

Why does 'this seems' pointless, to make the last Tithi longer by 0.49287326 day in 30th Tithi of 5541st Moon?  Even after adding this duration, THIS last Tithi is still smaller than 1 338/336919 day!


KARL REPLIES: I see 5541 moons have 163459.5 tithis. This half tithi is extended by 0.49287236 days and after that is still less than a whole tithi of 1 338/3269219 days.

But it is still a half tithi. The next half tithi must be added to it for it to count as a whole tithi. Then we have a whole tithi of 1 338/326919 + 0.49287326 days = 1.493907155… days.


This would also make 5541 months last 0.49287326 days longer than 448 years and so not equal to 448 years.

Therefore we don’t have 5541 months = 448 years, which is the point of the tithi of 1 338/326919. This is why I see it as pointless.




I do not believe the Harappa calendar ever used tithis of that length or ever used an 896-year cycle, which would not have been so accurate in Harappa days. Brij needs to provide evidence of his beliefs about the Harappa calendar, otherwise, I’ll just regard them as wishful thinking.

Karl may be right, that Harappa Tithi of 966/965 day was 'never' used by Harappans; or this would not have been so accurate or precise. I have never claimed that Harappa people knew about 896-year cycle; BUT demonstrated that this 896-year/327257 Day/46751 week/close to 11082 moons cycle is my INVENTION; [half of which is 448-years/5541 Lunation] under review/discussion has MY=365.2421875 days & ML=29d12h44m2s.877504, on lengthening the last -5541st- Moon by 0.49287326 day. 


KARL REPLIES: This assertion that the 896-year cycle of 11082 moons is purely Brij’s invention was contradicted by Brij’s statement in his previous note

I wonder why did you suggest that I DUMP my investigated "phase/Tithi" value, I believe to have been in vogue in Harappa calendar!

The tithi I advised Brij to dump is the tithi of length 1 338/326919 days which is equivalent to the 896-year cycle of 11082 moons, which is Brij’s invention.



BRIJ CONTINUED (first quoting me):

The tithi of 968/967 would provide a short mean lunar month of 29.53050672… days, which is little better than the tithi I advised Brij to dump.

My providing this alternate value is to 'satisfy' Karl's quriosity that my working although started with 966/965 day; to 2L/59th day; 138W/965 day or my Exactly fitting developed Tithi for 886-years i.e. 1 338/326919 day; and now suggesting 968/967 Day are all near precision values. The last being in view of DUMPING due to Karl's suggestion. What is expected of me....'dump & sleep, sir'. I have demonstrated via my calculations and stuck to defend - as a soldier does in battlefields. 


KARL REPLIES: I did calculate that 29.5*5541 of those tithis of 968/967 days would last 73/1934 days more than 448 years of 365.2421875 days, but this result was not interesting enough to show in my previous note.


I expect Brij to choose an more accurate tithi value.


Here are some decimal tithi values:

1.001037 days -> lunation 29.5305915 days

1.0010369 days -> lunation 29.53058855 days

1.0010368 days -> lunation 29.53058656 days

1.0010365 days -> lunation 29.53057675 days


One could instead use simple fractional tithi values such as:

965/964  = 1 1/964 days -> lunation 29.53060166… days

2896/2893 = 1 3/2893 days -> lunation 29.53059108… days

4827/4822  = 1 5/4822 days -> lunation 29.53058897… days

6758/6751 = 1 7/6751 days -> lunation 29.53058806… days

1931/1929  = 1 2/1929 days -> lunation 29.53058580… days

966/965 = 1 1/965 days -> lunation 29.53056995… days


If Brij wants a tithi value linked to his 896-year cycle, then he could use

1 339/326918 days, which I have previously suggested and gives one tithi less than 11082 lunations to one 896-year cycle. Its lunation is 29.53090240… days. Alternative values could be found by fixing the number of tithis in a year, which is around 364.864 and then dividing the mean year of 365.2421875 days by the number of tithis in a year. My suggested value has 364 774/896 tithis per year.


It is important to remember that the mean synodic month changes slowly with time. Amos said it was getting shorter by one second per 3000 years. Therefore any tithi value chosen would have be changed every few thousand years (for every future tithi) and so need not have a very complicated value. Also a value good for today might not be good for Harappa times.



BRIJ CONTINUED (first quoting me):

Brij had earlier suggested 966/965 days, which provides a mean lunar month of 29.53056995… days and has that advantage of placing exactly 965 tithis in 138 weeks.

This suggestion was based on my long back discussion with Prof. BV Subbarayyapa, now living in Bidar - close to Chenai (India).  


KARL REPLIES: Thank you Brij for letting me know about this.

In Harappa times, a tithi of 965/964 days, which makes a mean month of 29.53060166… days = 29.5d 12h 44m 3.9834… s, would have been more accurate.

How does it make a difference, what made sense - then or now; the point I make is the pointing & developed demonstration/ calculations provided? It is my claim, sirs, that I ask on the basis of my 896-year cycle - conceived some over 25-years ago! 


KARL REPLIES: I’ve said  many times that the mean synodic month and mean tropical year are slowly changing.



I am visiting Niagara with my children/family and folks from home as a 'children's re-union after long'.


Ex-Flt.Lt. Brij Bhushan Vij (Retd.), Author

Brij-Gregorian Modified Calendar

Tuesday, 2017 June 27H00:44 (decimal)


sent from my iPhone