[Aztlan] 13 BAKTUN Date

[vgray (gotsky)]

Hi Sid and others on this list

I would point out here that the 584,285 JDN correlate works when dealing 
with Lunar Series dates, while the 584,283 correlate fails consistently (see 
Linda Schele's Texas Note 29).

However, the 584,283 correlate works better for tropical station dates but 
this is a more elusive aspect of the debate, and further is in agreement 
with prevailing ethnographical evidence.

This dichotomy between the two correlates has never been resolved 
satisfactorily and points to something deeper than a mere 2 day difference 
between the two correlation constants. The only reason the difference is 
perceived as only 2 days is because a New Moon lunar cycle base is assumed, 
and it is assumed that Mayan dates possess no inherent calendric structure 
in their makeup. In other words the correlation constants are applied in a 
simple manner with NO offsets of any kind entertained.

The trend today is ever increasing towards the 584,285 correlate because 
this gives readable Lunar Series dates, but if Mayan dates are accorded an 
inherent fixed structure, then the 584,283 correlate becomes usable with 
impunity with the advantage that it agrees with prevailing ethnographical 
evidence.

One could just as well argue for an effective 17 day offset between the two 
correlates, using a Full Moon lunar cycle base for the '83-GMT correlate, 
and assuming Mayan dates possess a definite calendric structure. In essence 
any given Long Count date actually speaks for two event objects - the Long 
Count itself and a secondary offset date 17 days into the future used for 
astronomical and lunar dates. What is compelling with this solution is that 
virtually all GMT anomalies disappear, and offers a means of dispelling the 
competing correlation constants in new ways not possible before.

Such an approach quickly rejects the 584,285 correlate on the basis of 
resolving the outstanding GMT anomalies in evidence.

It is becoming increasingly evident that Mayan dates exhibit calendric 
structure, and a simple application of a correlation constant alone is not 
sufficient.

So both the GMT constants are correct and both are wrong when applied simply 
as you propose below. How is one to resolve this dichotomy if not by 
inherent calendric structure?

Cheers
Clifford Emeric

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sid Hollander" <sid.hollander at gmail.com>
To: "AZATLAN" <aztlan at lists.famsi.org>
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:06 AM
Subject: [Aztlan] 13 BAKTUN Date


> Depends on what the correlation factor is.   Correlating dates between
> calendars are accomplished by passing through a 'standard' calendar called
> the Julian Day Number.  This count, Invented by a fellow named Seeger was
> named in honor of his father (Julius).  This is merely a numbering of the
> days (much like the Maya LC.  It started on at noon of Jan 1, 4712 BC. 
> The
> starting point was selected by coordinating 3 other cycles and projecting
> backwards to a point in the past prior to any other calendar systems.
>
> So if you  imagine the count sequencing  1, 2, 3,...98,99,  100.  If on 
> that
> hundredth day a Maya in Meso America woke and said, Today I will start the
> Maya Long Count and define today as day 0.  (No days have elapsed.  On an
> aside, we currently use elapsed and non-elapsed time concept.  Consider 
> the
> following statement. "The time is 1 o'clock A.M. on July 1"  In the first
> part One hour has elapsed and IN the 2nd hour of the day.  In we are IN 
> the
> first day of the month ).  So the two systems are in parallel but off-set 
> by
> 100 days. From this you get  the AHAU EQUATION..
>
> JDN - 100 = MAYA  LC    or             MAYA + 100 = JDN
>
> So the whole deal is based upon the "100",     The coefficient of
> Correlation.   For sure it was not 100.  Depending upon who you ask you 
> will
> get different numbers.  Most will select either 584,283  or 584,285  and
> there-in is your two day difference.
>
> If you are doing this as a commercial type thing then I'd use the one that
> will be most popular and that is the one that falls on 21st.  i.e "Ending 
> on
> the equinox"   On the other hand you can give user the option of which
> correlation to use.
>
>
>
> -- 
> Sid Hollander
> Merida, Yucatan
> _______________________________________________
> Aztlan mailing list
> Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
>