On Jan 31, 2006, at 10:07 AM, doctor_gabby_savy wrote:

Thanks. I will explore that. Indeed I may be missing something. Yet no

one has found any factual or logic flaws in the 8 points I listed, or

explained the cites I provided that report the slow retreat of the

date of the vernal equinox -- and the long-term weather cycles caused

by precession. To date eveeryone says the conclusion is wrong because

"its wrong". No coherent explanation as to why, countering the

evidence has been presented.

Well, it was jumping to another set of questions from the one being discussed. We can only answer so many questions at a time, but here goes:

1) vernal equinox occurs once a year when day and night lengths are
equal and when the sun rises at true east.

The vernal equinox is the time closest to the equinocial point (where earth cross the celestial equator). This actually contains a number of fallacies, namely the equal day and night myth. Different things occur at different latitudes.

Much of this can be explained in a few moments with a globe and a light bulb, it's much more difficult to explain in words.

Also you need to understand that the sun is a lousy timekeeper, thus astronomers use the "equation of time". Some days it's more than 24 hours, other days it's less.

2) "precesion of the equinox" means that the position of the sun at
the vernal equinox, relative to the constallations, "retreats" one
degree every 72 years, making a full cycle around the zodiac
of 12 constellations every 26000 years.

Yeah, approximately. This is caused by the obliquity of the ecliptic. It changes over time.

3) Even with precession of the equinox, from an earth view, the sun
will always rise at due east at the vernal equinox, thus the
precession does not effect orientations of buildings to true east or
the path of the sun relative to buildings (from a year of observations
 starting at the vernal  equinox.)

Yes, it's just that the constellation the sun is in at any moment will change over time. Eventually sun will enter aquarius at this time.

4) The precession - the postion of the sun at vernal equinox --
travels through each constellation about every 26000/12 = 2160 years.
In 60 BC, the sun at vernal equinox was just on the cusp of Aires
moving into Pisces. Around 2100, the the postion of the sun at vernal
equinox will move from Pisces to Aquarius (aka the "age of aquarius").

Yes, sidereally.

5) The sun annually transits 360 degree , a full "circle" around the
constellations. Each month roughly corresponds to the suns position in
each constallation.

No. Different constellations have different widths. This only works if you arbitrarily place a 12 x 30 degree gripd on the sky. Then, again, keep in min. the sun does not move at a constant rate (thus the equation of time) so even that is not exact. Also consider as did Kepler, the orbits are not perfect circles.

6) In summer months, the hemisphere one habitats is closer to the sun
(due to its 23.5 degree tilt -- relative to its "eleptic" path around
the sun). Thus in summer it is warmer and days are longer. In Winter
the hemisphere is further  from the sun, thus its colder and days are
shorter. At the equinoxes,  matched longitudes in each hemishperes are
  the same distance from the sun. Day and night are each 12 hours.

No. Long story.

7) The precession - the postion of the sun at vernal equinox --
travels to its opposite constallation every 13000 years. In 13000
years, the postion of the sun at vernal equinox will be in Virgo, 180
 degrees from its present position in Pisces.


8) When the sun is in virgo, around September, the tilt of the earth
relative to its path around the sun gives fall weather for the
northern hemisphere, and spring weather in the southern hemisphere.


I have found in jyotish circles, where long time practicioners often

have some strong understanding of celeestial mechanics, still get it

wrong when confronted with very long range phenomenon. What works, and

assumptions of what is reasonable over a 100 year span often don't

work or are not valid over a 20,000 year span. While this is not a

proof of my conclusion, it is a caution to those seeped in good

astronomical knowledge in the 100 year frame.

To the critics, if it is so clear my conclusion is so wrong, simply

point out the error in my 8-points. And provide a convincing 

explanation for the trend towards an earlier VE, as well as the

precesson-caused  the long term weather cycles.

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to:
and click 'Join This Group!'

Maharishi university of management Maharishi mahesh yogi Ramana maharshi


Reply via email to