TrueLife - HISTORY: FICTION or SCIENCE # 7

Episode Date: June 21, 2021

One on One Video Call W/George https://tidycal.com/georgepmonty/60-minute-meetingSupport the show:https://www.paypal.me/Truelifepodcast?locale.x=en_US🚨🚨Curious about the future of psychedelics? Imagine if Alan Watts started a secret society with Ram Dass and Hunter S. Thompson… now open the door. Use Promocode TRUELIFE for Get 25% off monthly or 30% off the annual plan For the first yearhttps://www.district216.com/Transcript: https://youtu.be/TO1vP6IeFp0Speaker 0 (0s): Welcome back ladies and gentlemen, thank you for returning participating and that hopefully enjoying this phenomenal series by Anatoli flamenco FICTION or SCIENCE. What is this thing? We call history. We are on the seventh reading chapter two, astronomical. Datings the strange leap of parameter D in the theory of lunar motion. Nowadays, we have special calculation tables. The so-called cannons whose compilation was based on the theory of lunar motion. They contain the date of each eclipse, the area to be covered by the lunar shadow, the phase, et cetera. See the famous, astronomical Canon of Gunzel. For instance, if an ancient text describes some eclipse in enough detail, we can determine what characteristics of the eclipse had been observed. The phase, the geographical area, that the shadow passes over, et cetera. The comparison of these characteristics to the referential ones contained in the tables may give a concurrence with an eclipse possessing, similar characteristics. If this proves a success, we can date the eclipse. However, it may turn out that several eclipses from the astronomical Canon fit the description. In this case, the dating is uncertain. All the eclipses described in the quote, ancient unquote and medieval sources have been dated by the following method. To some extent, at least nowadays the datings of the ancient eclipses are occasionally used in astronomical research. For instance, the theory of lunar motion has the notion of the so-called parameter D the second derivative of lunar elongation that characterizes acceleration. Let us remind the reader of the definition of elongation figure 2.1 figure 2.1 shows the solar orbit of the earth and the Tellerik orbit of the moon. The angle between the vectors, IES and EMS called lunar elongation, D D the angle between the lines of sight drawn from the earth to the sun and the moon. Apparently it is time dependent and example of the elongation of what Venus can be seen in the picture on right. Maximal elongation is the angle where the line of sight as drawn from earth to Venus touches the orbit of Venus. One has to know that the orbit in figure 2.1 are shown as circular while being elliptic in reality. However, since the eccentricity is low here, the ellipses are schematically drawn as circles. Some computational problems related to astronomy require the knowledge of lunar acceleration as it had been in the past. The problem of calculating parameter D over a large time interval as a time function was discussed by the Royal society of London and the British academy of sciences in 1972, the calculation of the parameter D was based on the following scheme. The equation parameters have lunar motion, including D D R taken with their modern values, and then varied in such a way that the theoretically calculated characteristics of ancient eclipses coincide with the ones given for day-to-day eclipses in ancient documents, parameter D is ignored for the calculation of actual eclipse dates. Since the latter are a rougher parameter, whose calculation does not require the exact knowledge of lunar acceleration alterations in lunar acceleration affect secondary characteristics of the eclipse, such as the shadow track left by the moon on the surface of the earth, which may be moved sideways Speaker 1 (4m 54s): A little, Speaker 0 (4m 56s): The time dependence of D was first calculated by the eminent American astronomer. Robert Newton, according to him, parameter D can be defined well by the abundant information about the date scattered over the interval from 700 BC until the present day Newton calculated 12 possible values of parameter D having based them on 370 ancient eclipse descriptions since Newton trusted scholar, Jurien chronology completely. It is a little wonder that he took the eclipse dates from Skalla Jerian chronological tables, the results of our nutrient combined with the results obtained by Martin, who has processed about 2000 telescope observations of the moon from the period of 1627 to 18 60 26 values altogether have made it possible to draw an experimental time dependency curve four D according to our Newton, the most stunning fact is the drastic drop in D that begins with 700 and continues until about 1300. This drop implies the existence of a square wave in the osculating value of D such changes in the behavior of D in such rates of these changes cannot be explained by modern geo-physical theorists. Robert Newton wrote an entire monograph titled astronomical evidence concerning non gravitational forces in the earth moon system. That was concerned with trying to prove this mysterious gap in the behavior of D which manifested as a leap by an entire numeric order. One has to know that these mysterious non gravitational forces failed to manifest in any other way at all, having studied the graph that was drawn as a result of these calculations. Our Newton had to Marc that between the years, the value of D remains the lowest as compared to the ones that have been observed for any other moment. During the last 1000 years, Newton proceeds to tell us that these estimations combined with modern data tell one that D may possess amazingly large values, and that it has been subject to a drastic and SUD and fluctuations over the last 2000 years, to such an extent that it's value became inverted around 800 and a quick summary, the D value drops suddenly, and this leap by an entire order begins in the alleged fifth century. Ady beginning with the sixth century and on the values of parameter D become more or less constant and close to its modern value in the interval between the alleged fifth and 11th centuries, a D one find D values to be in complete disarray. The strange fact has a natural explanation within the paradigm of the new Kronos. What would you say those of you that are just listening? Think of D if you want to get a mental of what D is, how they're studying it, think of a protractor that is at 120 degree angle or better yet, you could think of a clock with the large hand at 11 and the small hand at three. So say 2 55. And what they're measuring is the, if you have that, that clock and you drew a circle right at the point where those hands are meeting on the bottom down there, that angle that he drew a little half circle between the big hand at 11 and the small hand at three, that little angle right there that a 120 degree that will half-circle angle would be D oh, if that helps for those that are just listening, are the ancient and medieval eclipses dated correctly, 2.1, some astronomical data. Let us give a brief digest of the information that shall ensure a better understanding of the current share. When the moon gets into the comb of Teleric shadow, one can observe a lunar eclipse on earth, more civically on it's nocturnal hemisphere, the one that faces the moon. And if you are a dummy like me and had to look up the word to Lurik then, or if y...

Darkness struck, a gut-punched theft, Sun ripped away, her health bereft. I roar at the void. This ain't just fate, a cosmic scam I spit my hate. The games rigged tight, shadows deal, blood on their hands, I'll never kneel. Yet in the rage, a crack ignites, occulted sparks cut through the nights. The scars my key, hermetic and stark. To see, to rise, I hunt in the dark, fumbling, fear. through ruins maze, lights my war cry, born from the blaze.

The poem is Angels with Rifles. The track, I Am Sorrow, I Am Lust by Codex Serafini. Check out the entire song at the end of the cast. Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for returning, participating, and hopefully enjoying this phenomenal series by Anatole Famenco. fiction or science, what is this thing we call history? We are on the seventh reading chapter two, astronomical datings, the strange leap of parameter D in the theory of lunar motion.

Nowadays, we have special calculation tables, the so-called canons, whose compilation was based on the theory of lunar motion. They contain the date of each eclipse, the area to be covered by the lunar shadow, the phase, etc. See the famous astronomical canon of Ginzel, for instance. If an ancient text describes some eclipse in enough detail, we can determine what characteristics of the eclipse had been observed. The phase, the geographical area, that the shadow passes over, etc. The comparison of these characteristics

to the referential ones contained in the tables may give a concurrence with an eclipse possessing similar characteristics. If this proves a success, we can date the eclipse. However, it may turn out that several eclipses from the astronomical canon fit the description. In this case, the dating is uncertain. All the eclipses described in the quote, ancient, unquote, and medieval sources have been dated by the following method to some extent, at least. Nowadays the datings of the ancient eclipses are occasionally used in astronomical research. For instance, the theory of lunar motion has the notion of the so-called parameter D,

the second derivative of lunar elongation that characterizes acceleration. Let us remind the reader of the definition of elongation. Figure 2.1. Figure 2.1 shows the solar orbit of the Earth and the Teleric orbit of the Moon. The angle between the vectors ES and EM is called Lunar Elongation D, the angle between the lines of sight drawn from the Earth to the Sun and the Moon. Apparently, it is time-dependent. An example of the elongation of Venus can be seen in the picture on the right.

maximal elongation is the angle where the line of sight as drawn from Earth to Venus touches the orbit of Venus. One has to note that the orbit in figure 2.1 are shown as circular while being elliptic in reality. However, since the eccentricity is low here, the ellipses are schematic. dramatically drawn as circles. Some computational problems related to astronomy require the knowledge of lunar acceleration

as it had been in the past. The problem of calculating parameter D over a large time interval as a time function was discussed by the Royal Society of London and the British Academy of Sciences in 1972. The calculation of the parameter D was based on the following scheme. The equation parameters of lunar motion, including D, are taken with their modern values and then varied in such a way that the theoretically calculated characteristics of ancient eclipses coincide with the ones given for dated eclipses in ancient documents.

Parameter D is ignored for the calculation of actual eclipse. dates, since the latter are a rougher parameter whose calculation does not require the exact knowledge of lunar acceleration. Alterations in lunar acceleration affect secondary characteristics of the eclipse, such as the shadow track left by the moon on the surface of the earth, which may be moved sideways a little. The time dependence of D was first calculated, by the eminent American astronomer Robert Newton. According to him, parameter D can be defined well by the abundant information about the dates scattered

over the interval from 700 BC until the present day. Newton calculated 12 possible values of parameter D, having based them on 370 ancient eclipse descriptions. Since Newton trusted Scaligerian chronology completely, it is little wonder that he took the eclipse dates from Scaligerian chronological tables. The results of R. Newton combined with the results obtained by Martin, who has processed about 2,000 telescope observations of the moon from the period of 1627 to 1860, 26 values altogether, have made it possible to draw an end.

experimental time dependency curve for D. According to R Newton, the most stunning fact is the drastic drop in D that begins with 700 and continues until about 1300. This drop implies the existence of a square wave in the osculating value of D. Such changes in the behavior. of D and such rates of these changes cannot be explained by modern geophysical theorists. Robert Newton wrote an entire monograph titled Astronomical Evidence Concerning Non-Gravitational Forces in the Earth-Moon System. That was concerned with trying to prove this mysterious gap in the

behavior of D, which manifested as a... leap by an entire numeric order. One has to note that these mysterious non-gravitational forces failed to manifest in any other way at all. Having studied the graph that was drawn as a result of these calculations, R. Newton had to mark that between the years, the value of D remains the lowest as compared to the ones that have been observed for any other moment during the last 1,000 years. Newton proceeds to tell us that these estimations combined with modern data tell one that D may possess amazingly large values

and that it has been subject to drastic and sudden fluctuations over the last 2,000 years, to such an extent that its value became in number. converted around 800 AD. A quick summary. The D value drops suddenly, and this leap by an entire order begins in the alleged 5th century AD. Beginning with the 6th century and on,

the values of parameter D become more or less constant and close to its modern value. In the interval between the alleged 5th and 11th, centuries a d one finds d values to be incomplete disarray this strange fact has a natural explanation within the paradigm of the new chronology for those of you that are just listening think of d if you want to get a mental picture of what d is how they're studying it think of a protractor that is at a 120 degree angle. Or better yet, you could think of a clock with the large hand at 11 and the small hand at 3.

So say 255. And what they're measuring is the, if you have that clock and you drew a circle, right, at the point where those hands are meeting on the, bottom down there. That angle. If you drew a little half circle between the big hand at 11 and the small hand at 3, that little angle right there, that 120 degree little half circle angle would be D. I hope that helps for those that are just listening. Are the ancient and medieval eclipses dated correctly? 2.1. Some astronomical data. Let us give a brief digest of the information that shall ensure a better understanding of the current chapter. When the moon gets into the cone of Tulluric shadow,

one can observe a lunar eclipse on Earth, more specifically on its nocturnal hemisphere, the one that faces the moon. And if you are a dummy like me and had to look up the word Tulluric, then or if you lied to yourself and you said you knew what that word was like me allow me to look it up for you Tulluric means from the earth an energy of the earth on a fun side note

a Tulluric current is a current of the earth it is an electric current which moves underground or through the sea. Toloric currents result from both natural causes and human activity. And the discrete currents interact in a complete complex pattern. The currents are extremely low frequency and travel over large areas at or near the surface of the earth. I think that's something Tesla was tapping into in his later days.

Let us get back to the book. lunar eclipse can be observed from any point of the Earth's nocturnal hemisphere, an eclipse does not last longer than three hours, and is only possible during a full moon. However, due to the irregularity of lunar motion, it does not happen every time the moon is full. The repetition of lunar eclipses is roughly and approximately periodic and confronts to the so-called Saros cycle. A Saros period equals about 18 years. 28 lunar eclipses occur over this time, so one can find an eclipse that falls over virtually every given year.

A Soros is easily determined over 50 to 60. years of systematic observation, and might have already been known at the dawn of astronomy. The prediction of lunar eclipses based on the sorrow cycle is nevertheless somewhat uncertain, not only due to the imprecision of the sorrow cycle, but also because of the fact that the eclipse might occur when the hemisphere, where the observer is located, is illuminated by sunlight, which renders the moon invisible. A solar eclipse occurs when the observer gets into the cone of the lunar shadow. If the solar disk is completely covered by the moon,

the place where the eclipse can be observed becomes darkened to the extent of making the stars visible. This is a full eclipse, whose duration does not, exceed eight minutes in the equatorial zone and six in moderate latitudes the lunar shadow moves across the surface of the earth at the speed of about 110 meters per second forming a narrow line the width of this line does not exceed four degrees the track of the umbral shadow is bordered by stripes of the penumbral shadow whose width is counted from the center of the umbral shadow comprises about thirty degrees in moderate latitudes and about fifteen degrees near the equator

the observer in the penumbral shadow only sees a partial covering of the solar disk by the moon a partial eclipse the maximal degree of the covering of the solar disk by the lunar shadow is called the depth or the phase of the eclipse. The estimations of the phase are usually expressed by the B value that is calculated by the formula B equals 12H. H being the ratio between the shadow covered part of the solar diameter and the entirety of the latter. Hence a total eclipse of the sun will have a phase value of 12, A solar eclipse becomes visible as a darkening of the solar disk, starting with the phase values of 3 to 4 inches.

The lunar eclipse phases are calculated differently, namely another item that is proportional to the duration of the eclipse if the latter is more than full is added to the phase value of 12 inches. Thus, the phase value of a lunar eclipse might reach up to 22.7 inches. In cases of solar eclipses, there may be situations when the cone of the moon's umbral shadow does not reach the earth. In this case, an annular solar eclipse is possible. When no stars are visible, as is the case with all partial solar eclipses, a solar eclipse is only for, possible when the moon is new. However, not every new moon is marked by a solar eclipse, since the Earth may slip past the cone of the lunar shadow due to the incline of the lunar orbit towards the ecliptic or the plane of the Tulleric orbit, this is why there are only

two to seven solar eclipses happening every year. Every geographical area of the Earth gets an eclipse with a minimal phase value of six inches in the span of 10 to 20 years from any date. Predicting solar eclipse is a truly formidable task due to the complexity of the lunar motion that is defined by a large number of external factors. One may attempt to predict solar eclipses by the Sorrows cycle that includes about 43 solar eclipses. 15 of them being partial, 14 annular, two belonging to the category of the so-called total annular, and 12 total. However, the eclipses from the sorrow cycle

can occur in different areas of the earth. And so a prediction for a given location is true in one case out of 400 in general. That is to say, the probability of a correct prediction based on the sorrows cycle equals one in 400. In theory, the so-called triple sorrows, whose duration is 24 years, should be more precise. However, the probability that it may give a correct prediction equals about one in 100. So it is of little practical utility from the astronomical point of view.

the empirical triple sorrows can only be discovered as a result of long-time solar eclipse observations. Due to the low recurrence rate of the eclipses, separated by the triple sorrows, let alone the problems of mathematical processing of the empirical data necessary for the calculation of an undefined recurrence rate, any such discovery would imply a well-developed system of natural sciences. A more or less certain prediction of solar eclipses is apparently only made possible by the existence of a sufficiently advanced theory of lunar motion that would at least account for the principal irregularities of the latter.

Thus the prediction of solar eclipses remained a de facto impossibility a hundred years after Copernicus. We should thus treat the eclipse prediction reports preceding the 16th to 17th centuries with the utmost caution or even suspicion. The discovery of an interesting effect, an unprejudiced astronomical dating, shifts the dates of the ancient eclipses to the Middle Ages.

Dealing with certain celestial mechanics, issues in the 1970s, the author of the current book discovered the possibility of a link between the alleged gap in the value of D and the results of N.A. Morzov's research concerning the datings of ancient eclipses. A study of the issue and a new calculation of parameter D attains an altogether different quality, namely, one sees the complete, elimination of the mysterious leap parameter D. Parameter D appears to be subject to minute fluctuations around one

permanent value, coinciding with the current value of this parameter. All of this can be summed up as follows. The previous calculation of the parameter D was based on the dates of ancient eclipses used in the consensual chronology of Scalinger Patavius. All the astronomers' attempts to explain the strange gap in D did not get anywhere near the issue of the correctness of datings

considered ancient and early medieval nowadays. In other words, in how far the parameters of the eclipse described in the chronicle correspond with the calculated parameters of the real eclipse that Scaligerian chronology suggests to be described in the chronicle in question. The following method of independent astronomical dating was proposed. Obtaining all of the characteristics described in the chronicle, such as the phase, the time, geographical observation, location, etc., and copy. all of the eclipse dates fitting these characteristics from the reference tables mechanically in A. Morozov discovered that the astronomers have been under the pressure of Scaligerian chronology and so only considered the dates that Scaligerian chronology had already ascribed to the eclipse in question

and the events related thereto. As a result in many cases, astronomers failed to find Eclipse corresponding to the chronicle description in the required century and had to resort to approximations. Without the merest thought of questioning Scaligerian chronology and indicating eclipses that would fit the chronicle description partially. Having revised the datings of the eclipses considered ancient, Morozov found that the reports of these events fall into two categories. Brief and nebulous accounts with no details given. In many cases, it is altogether unclear whether the event described as an eclipse at all. The astronomical dating in this category either has no meaning whatsoever or give so many possible solutions that they can basically fit any historical epoch at all.

Exhaustive detailed reports. Two, exhaustive, detailed reports. The astronomical solution for those is often singular, or there are two or three solutions at most. Apparently, all the eclipses, which detailed descriptions falling into the period between 1,000 BC and 500 AD, get independent astronomical datings that differ significantly from the ones offered by Scaligerian. chronology and belonged to a much later epoch, namely the interval between 500 and 1700 AD.

Being of the opinion that Scalinger chronology was correct about the interval 5800 AD, for the most part, Morozov did not analyze the medieval eclipses of 500 to 1700 AD, assuming that no contradictions would be found there. Let us dwell on this for a short while. Morozov didn't possess the sheer deliberation needed for the realization that Scaligerian chronology had been erroneous up until the epoch of the 11th through 13th century. He stopped with the 6th century, AD, assuming more recent chronology to be correct in the form offered by Scalinger and Patavius. His erroneous presupposition naturally affected the analysis.

of the ancient eclipses. We see today that Morozov's analysis was not completely objective, since he had obviously been reluctant to alter the post-6th-century chronology. This isn't hard to understand, as the transition from the artificially extended scalligerian chronology spanning millennia to a much shorter one, beginning with the 6th century AD, looked absurd even to Morozov. For instance, Morozov

discusses one of the eclipses that is today ascribed to the fifth century, being of the opinion that its scaligerian dating is confirmed. However, it becomes obvious that no confirmation of the scalligerian chronology could have possibly taken place. The description of the eclipse is quite nebulous, and the use of comets for dating purposes is impossible due to reasons that shall be related in the chapter of Cron 5, where we consider comet lists specifically. Being certain that Scaligerian history was following the correct chronology ever since the 5th century AD. Morozov was inconsistent in his analysis of post-5th century eclipses. Had he encountered an equally nebulous description referring to the pre-forceding.

century eclipse, he would have justly considered it a description that cannot be proved astronomically. Morozov made a similar mistake in his descriptions of other eclipses dated to the alleged 5th and 6th century. He treated them a lot more benevolently, he treated them a lot more benevolently than their pre-4th century precursors. The eclipses of the 6th through 9th century were not checked by Morozov at all, since he had believed the Scaligerian datings to have been satisfactory. Unlike Morozov, we have continued with the critical research, having covered the post-5th century period up until the 17th century,

and discovered that Morozov should not have stopped with the fourth and 5th century. The datings of the eclipse descriptions that are ascribed nowadays to the 10th through 13th centuries contradict astronomy to just as great an extent as those preceding the 4th century. In cases where there's a concurrence of sorts, one almost always discover that the eclipsees have been calculated a posteriori, that is, affixed to a certain point in the past by the medieval chronologists of the 16th through 17th century in order to confirm Scaligerian chronology, whose nascent occurred around that time. Having calculated the dates for certain lunar eclipses of the past, scaligeriae chronologists included them.

in the ancient chronicles, that they were creating in order to give, quote, solid proof, unquote, to the false chronology. It is, of course, possible that the odd, occasional, voracious description of the 6th through 13th century eclipses would reach the chronologists of the 16th through 17th century. However, it would surely have to pass. The filter of the scaligerian. version and be brought into accordance with the correct dates. Thus, continuing the research that began, the author of this book conducted an analysis of other medieval eclipses in the interval between 400 and 1600 AD.

It turned out that the transfer effect, affecting the ancient eclipses as described, also applies to those usually dated to 400,900 AD. This either means that there are many possible astronomical solutions which make the dating uncertain, or there are just one or two, in which case they all fall in the interval between 900 and 1700 AD, only starting with approximately 1,000 AD and not 400 AD, according to Morozov. Does the Scaligerian dating begin to concur with the result of Morozov's methods satisfactorily enough,

becoming more or less certain by as late a date as 1300? Let us give a few extremely representative examples demonstrating how the ancient eclipses and the chronicles that describe them become a great deal younger.