Astronomy

From Alternative Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Book sources[edit | edit source]

2nd century AC[edit | edit source]

4th century AC[edit | edit source]

5th century AC[edit | edit source]

6th century AC[edit | edit source]

The stopped sun[edit | edit source]

Both in the Bible and in the history of Charles the Great there plays out a familiar theme of the stopped sun. An idea to place the centre of the world in the sun, in other words to bring to THE SUN TO A STOP appeared in the XVI-XVII cc. when the Books of the Bible were being written and edited [6]. The famous words in the Book of Joshua ben Nun about the SUN that STOOD IN THE SKY 10:12-14, in a poetic way reflect that deep impression made on people when the heliocentric model was first revealed. Quite unexpectedly it turned out that IT IS POSSIBLE TO STOP THE SUN. Contrary to all evidence! As the sun is continuously moving across the skies and 'never stops'.

The editor of the bible of the XVII century attributed to bringing the sun to a standstill to Joshua Ben Nun [6v1], ch.5. I.e. to the conqueror of the epoch of the Ottoman conquest of the 'Promised Land'. But it was in the XVI century when there originated the idea of the heliocentric model finally and conclusively formulated by Tycho Brahe (Hipparchus) and Nicolaus Copernicus [3v1].

Thus, the discovery by Brahe and Copernicus revolutionized people's minds. The scientists 'made the Sun stand still', i.e. placed it in the centre of the universe and made all the planets, including the Earth, revolve round it. Prior to that Ptolemy's system was predominate, where the stars revolve round the Earth [3v1], ch.11:7.6.

In the 'most ancient' Bible the Sun was brought to a standstill allegedly during a battle, which was Joshua Ben Nun's revenge for a prior defeat.

In the well-known Mediaeval epic poem 'The Song of Roland' the Sun was brought to standstill during the battle which was Charles the Great's (the Great King) revenge for the defeat of his rear guard.

Pic. 65

Pic.65 shows an unusual symbol which can be seen in 'The Triumphal Arch of Maximilian I' by Durer [PE]. The oblique Andreevsky cross surrounded by the four symbols of the stopped sun. The sun while moving across the skies stumbles against the czar's crown and comes to a standstill. We see that the discovery of the heliocentric model was depicted on the coat of arms of the Horde Empire. On 'The Triumphal Arc' there is also the image of the stopped sun, boxed in between the two czar's royal crowns. Such images are also present in both 'The Triumphal Procession', pic.66, and in a A.Durer's gravure 'Large Triumphal Carriage' [PE].

When the symbols of the constellation of stars and their names were invented[edit | edit source]

We are being told that the constellations of the stars depicted on the Mediaeval and modern star maps were invented in the deepest antiquity. There were some changes occurring over the course of time, but as we are told, on the whole, the starry sky was divided into the constellations a long time ago. They claim, for example, that the star signs appeared 'possibly as early as 2500 years ago'. See the details in [3v2].

The figures of the constellations of Serpent-bearer, Gemini and Orion, for example, appeared allegedly long before AC. And naturally long before Christianity. So allegedly there are no Christian symbols there, let alone the symbols connected to the events in the Middle Ages. And thus there is allegedly no connection with the Biblical events.

However, it is not true. A fresh approach to the ancient celestial maps uncovers some incredible connections, for example, with the biblical history. The sky atlas turns from something 'very ancient' and half-forgotten into a selection of bright illustrations on the history of the XI-XVII cc. It is, in short, an 'illustrated textbook'. The pictures-hieroglyphs, i.e. the celestial figures, reflected major events of that epoch [3v2], ch.9. Later all of this was forgotten.

The most ancient fragment of the celestial map is the Zodiac. The figures of the zodiacal constellations acquired their final form not earlier than the XII century. The first half of the Zodiac represents the biblical events of the XII century. The second half the story of Georgi Pobedonosets (George the Conqueror) = the Russian-Horde czar-khan Georgi Danilovich = Genghis Khan. I.e. the events of the XIV-XV cc., the creation of the Great Empire and the seizure of Czar-Grad in 1453.

The celestial maps of the Northern and Southern skies were finally created in the XV-XVI cc. There are, in particular, depicted on them the events of the late XV century: the voyage of Columbus = Biblical Noah = 'ancient' Jason crossing the Atlantic Ocean; the discovery of America = 'India'. The striking images of the Biblical Apocalypses written in 1486 also reflected in the map of the Southern sky [1v], ch.3 and [3v2], ch.9.

The Almagest by Cladius Ptolemy[edit | edit source]

Of course as it has already been said, the important result of the New Chronology is as follows. The star catalogue of the famous 'Almagest' by Ptolemy was created in the interval between year 600 to year 1300, and by no means in the II century [3v1].

The dating method which we suggested was successfully tested on a number of the well-known star catalogues, in particular those of - Ulugh Beg, Al-Sufi, Tycho Brahe and Johannes Hevelius. In all cases the traditionally known dating of the old catalogues – with the exception of the Almagest catalogue – were confirmed by our method. The Almagest catalogue turned out to be the single exception. It means that the traditional dating of Ptolemy's life contains an error of several hundred or even more, a thousand years.

Almagest is an encyclopaedia, where several hundred years' worth of astronomical observations are collected. The earliest of them date to the epoch not earlier than the X century. The observations up until the XVI century could have been included in the Almagest. This encyclopaedia reflects the current and changing state of astronomical science. The final version was published in the XVI century.

Editions of the Almagest prior to the XVI century, even if they existed, didn't reach us. In the XVII century, during the falsification of history, the Almagest, which was important for the chronology, was significantly re-worked. It was published 'post factum', listing erroneous dates. It included the fabricated 'ancient observations', which in fact were the results of the THEORETICAL CALCULATIONS ACCORDING TO THE MEDIAEVAL ASTRONOMICAL THEORY OF THE XVII CENTURY. It is presented in the Almagest. Thus one of the whales of the Scaligeraian chronology was created.

The coordinates of the planets, position of the Sun, the Moon and etc. were calculated into the past. Then the calculated astronomical phenomenon were declared to be 'observed' and were included into the Almagest: 'A such-and-such astronomer in a such-and-such (calculated!) year observed this and that'. But as the astronomical theory of the XVII century was not so precise as today, the evaluations made according to the modern formulas reveal the fraud. As was discovered by the well-known astrophysicist Robert Newton [3v1].

So, THE ALMAGEST AS WE KNOW IT TODAY WAS CREATED IN THE XVII CENTURY. Its creators presented this book to be 'ancient' in order to lay it as a foundation of the Scaligerian chronology which was in the process of being created in precisely that very epoch. THAT IS WHY THOSE ASTRONOMICAL PHENOMENA WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN COMPUTED INTO THE PAST ACCORDING TO THE THEORY OF THE XVII CENTURY WERE DATED IN THE ALMAGEST ALREADY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHRONOLOGY OF SCALIGER. Naturally, with the precision which could have been achieved with the flawed astronomical theory of the XVII century. That is why it is necessary to refer to Almagest data with great caution, when we wish to use it for the purpose of chronology. Only the data which could not have been computed in the XVII century should be used. For example the solar eclipses, the precise phases of the lunar eclipses, the star positions. However, the falsifiers of the XVII century naturally did their best so there were no such possible data left in the Almagest at our disposal. For example, 'for some reason' no solar eclipses are mentioned in the Almagest.

Going forward. The famous 'classical' astronomer Hipparchus, who lived allegedly in the II century BC [797], p.307 – is, to a great extent, a phantom reflection of the famous astronomer Tycho Brahe, who lived in the XVI century. In the beginning of the XVII century, when filling the 'distant antiquity' with the phantoms of the Mediaeval events, the historians 'split' Tycho Brahe into two as well. One of the versions of his biography was cast away into the past and there was created the 'great astronomer Hipparchus'. Besides, in [VAT], part 1, ch.1. we show that the life description of Hipparchus also includes the ancient information about the astronomer from the XI century.

Ptolemey's Almagest was finally edited and finished only AFTER Tycho Brahe, in the epoch of Johannes Kepler (1571-1630). I.e. the Almagest, including its star catalogue, was being edited up until the beginning of the XVII century. As a result the following picture is forming.

  • At first there emerged a comparatively small catalogue of Tycho Brahe – the most ancient among the star catalogues which survive to the present time.
  • Followed by – a more complete 'ancient' catalogue of Claudius Ptolemy, to be more precise – its surviving version.
  • Then – the even more complete catalogue of Johann Hevelius.
  • And finally the even more complete catalogue of John Flamsteed.

The catalogue of Tycho Brahe appears to be the earliest and therefore the most sparse from the point of view of the quantity of stars recorded in it. Then Ptolemey or the editors of his catalogue increase the number of the observed stars. And only after that an even larger quantity of stars appear in the catalogues of Hevelius and Flamsteed.

Can we date the Almagest based on the Ptolemy's descriptions of the 21 lunar eclipses? They allegedly were observed by the astronomers in the duration of 850 years. The serious analysis of these lunar eclipses was conducted by Robert Newton [3v1]. He discovered a lot of evidence supporting the fact that MOST OF THEM ARE FORGED. Therefore we cannot consider the lunar eclipses from the Almagest to be trustworthy material for astronomical dating. Most likely this forged 'ancient list' was manufactured in the XVI-XVII cc. in order to lay the grounds for the Almagest's 'antiquity'.

THE CONCLUSION. The surviving version of the Almagest was created not by some single author-observer, but is a collective 'textbook on astronomy'. It is a collection of many individual observations, various theories, calculations and exercises on chronology belonging to different astronomers of the XI-XVII cc. The star catalogue could have been compiled by one observer in the epoch of the X-XIII cc. But the final text of the Almagest is by other authors of the XVI-XVII cc.



The flourishing, stagnation and reflourishing in the history of Astronomy[edit | edit source]

The Scaligerian history claims that 'ancient' astronomy enjoyed an unprecedented rise. However later, 'during the next three centuries after the death of Hipparchus, it was as if the history of astronomy became enshrouded in darkness' [65], p.63. Purporting that the epoch of the greatest stagnation has started. Practically the only outburst during 300 years in the 'darkening' Greek astronomy is considered to be Ptolemy's Almagest. Today he is regarded as the 'last chord of ancient astronomy'. IT IS FOLLOWED BY A PERIOD OF PROFOUND SILENCE AND DARKNESS IN THE SCALIGERIAN HISTORY OF ASTRONOMY.

They write: 'CLASSICAL CULTURE IN DECLINE'. After the breath-taking rise of the classical culture there began a PROLONGED PERIOD OF SOME STAGNATION AND, IN SOME CASES, REGRESSION in the European continent – a timespan of more than 1000 years, which is commonly referred to as the Middle Ages… AND OVER THESE 1000 YEARS THERE WAS MADE NO SIGNIFICANT ASTRONOMICAL DISCOVERY' [395], P.73.

Our thought is simple. These 'dark ages', 'dips', 'centuries of complete silence', 'global catastrophes' appear only because the historians of the science use the incorrect chronology. In which there exist the 'ancient' mirage-reflections and the 'dark ages' between 'Classical Antiquity' and the 'Renaissance'. The new chronology removes these 'gaps' and 'sinusoids' in the development of the science and culture. So.

In the Scaligerian history of astronomy there occurs a strange phenomenon: a magnificent blossoming of the 'ancient classical' astronomy, followed by a deep millennial regression, followed by the repeated rise beginning with the XIII century.

We are assured that practically all the main breakthroughs in astronomy of the XIV-XVI cc. have been 'already discovered' more than 1000 years prior to that, in the 'Classical antiquity'. But later in some mysterious way were forgotten. Let's list the fundamental ideas allegedly discovered a long time ago by the 'classical ancient' astronomers.

Ecliptic and equatorial coordinates, methods of their calculation. Determination of the principal elements of the relative planetary inter-motion in the Solar system. Heliocentrism - essentially the heliocentric theory of the planetary system. Calculation of the relative distances in the Solar system – Earth – Moon – planets – stars. The forecast of the Lunar eclipses. Compilation of star catalogues. Celestial globes design. Discovery of precession. Professional astronomical instruments: astrolabe, etc. Computing the length of the sidereal year and the tropical year. Allocation of the constellation of stars, recording of their 'image'. The question of the existence of proper motion stars.

These discoveries were made in the XII-XVII cc. But later their duplicates were dated back into the past by the incorrect chronology. There were no major 'regressions' in the history of science and culture.


Geocentrism, or the Ptolemaic system and the heliocentric system by Tycho Brahe (and Copernicus)[edit | edit source]

Fig.90

The World system according to Tycho Brahe is shown in fig.90. In the centre of the world there is the Earth around which revolves the Sun. However, the rest of the planets are already revolving round the Sun. This is the reason why today Tycho Brahe's (Tychonic) system is called Geo-Heliocentric [395], p.132. BUT IT IS PERFECTLY CLEAR, THAT IT DIFFERS FROM THE 'COPERNICUS SYSTEM' ONLY BY THE CHOICE OF THE ORIGIN OF THE COORDINATES. That's all! For, as we know from school, change of origin does not change the system of bodies in motion. Only the coordinate system changes, the point at which the observer is placed. The 'picture' changes, but not the core of the matter [3v1], ch.11.

From the point of view of kinematics, the system of Tycho Brahe (Hipparchus) is quite heliocentric. But only the centre of the coordinate system is placed at Earth. After all, the centre of the coordinates can be connected with any astronomical body of the system. IF WE MOVE THE STARTING POINT OF THE REFERENCE SYSTEM ON TYCHO BRAHE'S CHART INTO THE SUN, THEN WITHOUT ESSENTIALLY CHANGING ANYTHING WE WILL GET A 'COPERNICAN' SYSTEM'. Earth will start revolving around the Sun. Where all the other planets, according to Tycho Brahe, already revolve around the Sun. All that's missing to complete the picture according to Kepler is only the mild orbital ellipticity. Brahe still has his planets' orbits as circular. As, incidentally, does Copernicus. But this is the 'second order' effect. That is why, we will repeat, Tycho Brahe's system is in fact as good as the Copernican system. But with a different starting point of the reference system. The observer is placed at Earth, but not at the Sun.

It is clear that the idea by Tycho Brahe (Hipparchus) preceded or co-existed with the idea by Copernicus. The 'Copernican system' evolutionally follows the system by Tycho Brahe or is contemporary to it, but not at all preceding it. The final 'model' of the heliocentric system was most likely suggested only AFTER TYCHO BRAHE, in the epoch of his student Johannes Kepler. And Copernicus of the XV-XVI cc. was accredited with its invention post factum. Thus the true chronological order of the 'world system' is as follows.

First – the Ptolemy's geocentric system. Its complex model of epicycles was formed most likely in the XV-XVI cc. Earth was placed at the centre of the universe. Based on the idea of the epicycles, stating that Earth is a fixed point, it was necessary to create a complex model of the epicycles in order to explain the movement of the planets visible from Earth. This world system was based on the 'royal' star catalogue of the XII century. Its creation is connected with the Birth of Jesus Christ in the XII century and with the flaring up of the supernova circa 1152, i.e. the Star of Bethlehem. It is possible that the first astronomers created the star catalogue in honour of Jesus. Hence the origin of the great authority of the catalogue. It existed in its more or less unchanged form until the epoch of the XVI century.

The star catalogue included by Copernicus in his book and called 'Copernicus' star catalogue', IS IN FACT THE VERY SAME PTOLEMAIC STAR CATALOGUE, HOWEVER MODIFIED FOR ANOTHER EPOCH BY CHOOSING A DIFFERENT LONGITUDE REFERENCE POINT. The Astronomy historians became aware of this fact a long time ago [395], p.109. This indicates that the astronomers of the Middle Ages kept shifting zero longitude, moving the 'catalogue date according to precession' into the epoch they required, for one reason or another. In the XV-XVI cc. the astronomers made the next step and began to develop the theory of the planets' motion, Earth and the Sun. The 'Ptolemaic system' appeared. The historians of astronomy note, that 'according to its composition the book by Copernicus GREATLY RESEMBLES the Almagest' [395], p.105. It's all correct. It was in the epoch of the XVI-XVII cc. when the final edition of the Almagest was created.

1) Simultaneously with Ptolemy's concept, in the second half of the XVI century the system of Tycho Brahe = 'ancient Hipparchus'. It is practically heliocentric. The planetary motion, apart from the Moon, is circular with the Sun in the centre. The coordinate origin is connected to Earth.

2) And finally, the heliocentric system with the coordinate origin in the Sun. There is a new idea here, but it has nothing to do with the crux of the matter. The idea is that it is not necessary to place the coordinate origin at the very same point where the observer is located. I.e. on the Earth. It could be the Sun. For the public and school education the 'picture' was simplified.

This system entered the astronomical practices possibly in the XVII century, in the epoch of Kepler. It was attributed post factum to the astronomer of the XV-XVI cc. by the name of Copernicus. He was most likely a remarkable astronomer. He could have been the first to express in its 'raw' form the heliocentric idea with the zero point at the Sun, and not at the Earth. However, today it is very difficult to be sure what exactly he was doing. The only thing to go by on Copernicus' life and work are the XVII century texts, i.e. written 60-100 years after his death.

Most likely, both systems – by Claudius Ptolemy and by Tycho Brahe – belong to the same epoch. The systems were in competition with each other and were discussed by the astronomers. Until finally they realised that the heliocentric system by Tycho Brahe is the only correct one. However the historians unceremoniously took this fundamental discovery from Tycho Brahe and attributed it to the 'earlier' Copernicus.

History[edit | edit source]

2nd century BC[edit | edit source]

Astronomy emerges in African Kingdom in 2nd century BC. At first, it is intended to serve the ecclesiastical calendar and to observe seasonal changes in weather and climate.