## Are Earth’s obliquity and axial precession in a long-term 5:8 ratio?

Posted: February 6, 2020 by oldbrew in Cycles, Fibonacci, solar system dynamics
Tags:

Earth’s tilt moves back and forth between about 22 and 24.5 degrees

If there is a mean ratio of 5:8 it would be linked to the known variation of Earth’s tilt, which in turn causes variation in the precession and obliquity periods.

Encyclopedia Britannica’s definition says:
Precession of the equinoxes, motion of the equinoxes along the ecliptic (the plane of Earth’s orbit) caused by the cyclic precession of Earth’s axis of rotation…The projection onto the sky of Earth’s axis of rotation results in two notable points at opposite directions: the north and south celestial poles. Because of precession, these points trace out circles on the sky.

(Axial precession is another term for ‘precession of the equinoxes’).

Our 2016 unified precession post started with this quote from Wikipedia (bolds added):
Because of apsidal precession the Earth’s argument of periapsis slowly increases; it takes about 112000 years for the ellipse to revolve once relative to the fixed stars. The Earth’s polar axis, and hence the solstices and equinoxes, precess with a period of about 26000 years in relation to the fixed stars. These two forms of ‘precession’ combine so that it takes about 21000 years for the ellipse to revolve once relative to the vernal equinox, that is, for the perihelion to return to the same date (given a calendar that tracks the seasons perfectly).

In units of 1,000 years:
21 * (16/3) = 112
112 * (3/13) = 25.846~ (near 26)
25.846~ * (13/16) = 21
That was the number theory of the ‘unified precession’ post, i.e. a 3:13:8*2 ratio.

Where might the obliquity period, known to be somewhere near 41,000 years, fit into that?

Referring to the chart (above, right) and converting decimals to whole numbers:
AY – SY = 328 = 109*3, +1
SY – TY = 1417 = 109*13
AY – TY = 1745 (328 + 1417) = 109*16, +1
[327:1417:1744 = 3:13:16]

So that supports the number theory.

Starting out, I just updated the chart to include an entirely theoretical obliquity period of 8/5 times axial precession, linking it to the other known cycles as suggested by my 2016 comment to the unified precession post, here.

That post was a follow-up to: Why Phi? – some Moon-Earth interactions, which showed how:
The period of 6441 tropical years (6440.75 sidereal years) is one quarter of the Earth’s ‘precession of the equinox’.
Multiplying by 4: 25764 tropical years = 25763 sidereal years.
The difference of 1 is due to precession.

[NB Wikipedia quotes 25772 years (‘disputed – discuss’) for this precession cycle, but as it’s not a fixed number the question is: what is the mean period? Earth is currently around the mid-point of the tilt variation, moving towards minimum tilt i.e a shorter precession period. Astronoo says 25765 years.]

But then I came across two things: a paper by EPJ van den Heuvel, cited in Wikipedia, and another entry in Wikipedia (see below), that together suggested viable alternative numbers but with the same 5:8 ratio.

On the Precession as a Cause of Pleistocene Variations of the Atlantic Ocean Water Temperatures
— E. P. J. van den Heuvel (1965)

From the summary:
‘The Fourier spectrum (Fig. 8) shows two significant main periods, P1 = 40000 years and P2 = 12825 years*. The first period agrees well with the period of the oscillations of the obliquity of the ecliptic. The second period corresponds very well with the half precession period.’
[*But the specific periods found were: 42857, 39474 and 12825 years]

From Wikipedia – Axial tilt – long term (Wikipedia):
‘For the past 5 million years, Earth’s obliquity has varied between 22° 2′ 33″ and 24° 30′ 16″, with a mean period of 41,040 years. This cycle is a combination of precession and the largest term in the motion of the ecliptic.’

41040:12825 = 16:5 exactly. Since 12825 is the half precession period, the full period ratio is 8:5 as in the chart, but with slightly different numbers.

If this is correct, the 25764y period in the chart would need adjusting by a factor of 225/226:
25764 * (225/226) = 25650 = 2 * 12825

The Wikipedia obliquity period of 41040 years is divisible by 19, so is an exact number of Metonic cycles (2160), as is the revised axial precession of 25650 years (1350). So the alternative period equals a reduction of 6 Metonic cycles of axial precession. The idea of a role for the Moon in Earth’s obliquity has been put forward before.

Of course 225/226 represents less than half a percent of correction, so could be argued to be negligible.
– – –
Now something else has turned up, written around the same time as two Talkshop posts already referred to:
The Secret of the Long Count, by John Martineau

In the ‘Long Count’ section of the article the writer also puts forward an argument for a (mean) 5:8 ratio of obliquity and axial (equinoctial) precession, using some historical context (see below).

So at least one other person has been thinking along the same lines. Note that 2,3,5,8 and 13 are Fibonacci numbers.

– – –
The Secret of the Long Count

In the summer of 2012 I visited Carnac, accompanied by Geoff Stray. Howard Crowhurst runs an annual midsummer conference there and we had been invited to speak at the 2012-themed event. Halfway through his presentation, Crowhurst was describing his hunches surrounding megalithic awareness of the 41,000-year cycle, when he casually mentioned a startling fact:

The 41,000-year cycle very precisely consisted of eight Mayan Suns.

I did a double take. Eight suns, but five made precession! Startled, I cornered Geoff Stray. He had already come across the eight Suns figure for the obliquity cycle, but not realised the significance of 5:8, while Howard Crowhurst had been unaware of the fact that five Suns gave a value for Precession. We had cracked it.

One Mayan Sun is 5,125 years.

Five Suns give the Precessional Cycle

5 x 5125 = 25,625 years (current value 25,700 years, 75 years out)

Eight Suns give the Earth’s Obliquity Cycle.

8 x 5125 = 41,000 years (current value 41,040 years, 40 years out)

Five and eight! The two long cycles that most affect the Earth relate as 5:8 and are both encoded by the Long Count. The Maya must have known. No wonder they drew so many pictures of jawbones. Five and eight! The same two numbers displayed by human teeth are the same two numbers as those used by the plants all around us, and these are the same two numbers that connect us with our closest neighbour Venus, and the same two numbers that relate the two long cycles that affect Earth-bound astronomy.

[emphasis by the author]

From: The Secret of the Long Count, by John Martineau

1. oldbrew says:

Let me know if there any duff links or other issues – thanks.
– – –
FYI:
365.242190 days = tropical year (equinox to equinox)
365.256363 days = sidereal year (fixed star to fixed star)
365.259636 days = anomalistic year (perihelion to perihelion)

Apsidal, or perihelion, precession (~112,000 orbits/years per ‘lap’)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apsidal_precession

2. Hifast says:

Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

3. chaswarnertoo says:

Ok, anybody, why ? Resonance?

4. Reblogged this on Climate- Science.press.

5. oldbrew says:

astroclimatelink says: February 6, 2020 at 2:46 pm

Noted, thanks. What the max and min of the axial precession period might be, seems an open question.

Btw the official term is now ‘general precession’ according to Wikipedia.

6. P.A.Semi says:

I’ve been trying recently to calculate gravity and planet orbits in order to interpolate ephemeris 100,000 years ahead and it almost worked, just that Earth after few thousand years traveled out due to rounding errors, because Earth and Moon have fastest changing motion vector due to their mutual 27-day orbit, so it accumulates rounding error fastest… When doing gravity simulation, there is problem, how to integrate attraction force from other planets… It is not possible to calculate attraction at this moment and simply integrate it for one day or one second and step there, because at the end of interval, the other bodies are not at same place and the attraction vector is different at every moment regardless of sub-division of interval. Doing it trivially, the planets soon travel out from orbits. It requires making preliminary position of all bodies during the calculating interval (for example one day or one hour), then encoding it in Chebyshev polynomials and then integrate those polynomials, and then repeat the same with more precise positions of all bodies during whole interval… It somehow works, just Earth, Moon and sometimes Mercury have problem with rounding errors of double-precision floats in CPU, probably regardless of count of sub-divisions of the original interval… (And it is not a physical effect of some future catastrophe of travelling out of orbit, since same happens, if one interpolates into the past… Interpolating past state requires a trick – the present velocity vectors are just made negative and normal forward interpolation follows into the past…)

But I can produce some data from NASA/JPL ephemerides DE431, which have range from year -13,000 to year 17,000 , i.e. it is 30,000 years of planetary positions, their data-file is almost 3Gb in size…
It does not include data for Earth’s rotation axis, so the equinox precession cannot be extracted from it, but the obliquity precession can be…

Here is calculated position of Earth’s Perihelium, Aphelium, and direction of average Angular Momentum vector (which is a normal vector to the orbital plane) during that year…

The chart displays polar angles in current ICRS coordinate system, where Z axis is current north pole and X axis is current vernal equinox, and here it displays two polar angles (RA and Declination) of the vectors :

http://semi.gurroa.cz/Astro/Perihelium_Charts_200207_v2.zip

In that zip-file is txt file “PeriHelium_Stat_-13001..17000.txt”, and there are lines in format:
Name : JD = X,Y,Z ; RaDeg,DecDeg,Dist ; Date ; TimeDist

For example for current year:

Perihelium : 2458852.71891 = -33136223071.025,131488426674.721,57000132528.921 ; 104.145,22.800,147092592393.773 ; 2020-01-04 05:15:14.091 ; +365.28751
Aphelium : 2459035.26539 = 34062250594.196,-136007234549.224,-58958941857.680 ; -75.940,-22.807,152099840862.003 ; 2020-07-04 18:22:09.481 ; +365.11666
AngMoment : 2458943.99215 = 112568728615.395,-1775121117403461.000,4095129195221870.500 ; -89.996,66.565,4463310219969250.000 ; 2020-04-04 11:48:41.786 ; +365.20208

The JD and TimeDist on AngMoment line is just (Perihelium+Aphelium)/2… I’m not sure at this moment, why distance from last Perihelium and distance from last Aphelium differs by almost 0.17 days ?

The lines may be simply split on spaces and commas into individual numbers…
The coordinates are vectors in meters, and angles in degrees, most probably in present ICRS coordinate system with Z axis on current north pole and X axis on vernal equinox, and better than “Date” near the end of line is “JD” at the start of line… (the Date uses proleptic gregorian calendar)
(The file has 4*29998+5+1 = 119998 lines, 29998 data-lines for 3 series, blank line separator between each group, and 5 lines of header, the series may be split by “grep” command…)

I’m just not sure now, how to interpolate period from a small part of a sinusoid, but it surely could be done from the vectors…

7. Chaeremon says:

Re: equinox precession from DE431

You see the effect whenever the equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane have zero inclination to each other, no?

Solex (www.solexorb.it) has commands for that (min/max/zero) which I routinely use.

8. Paul Vaughan says:

Eye Cutest Cousin Day Sea Luke Four Boss Hog Know Ware in Hazard County

“a loaded 6 string on my back” — Bon Jovi

-3# = -6 = -3*2*1

Base IT found Flash back 2 informa11y 4 shadow:
1 / 4622.954538813 = 19J-53S+34(U-N)

“c∞n’s’ be11e-ven” — Φ11ca11UN’s’
Reporpoising tunes heart of west turn pools 4 periodic ‘s’table flight 2 titaneon chopper of just plotaxshhhiom.

Break C’or’e UN

8.45899709823203 = √(29/4)π
16.9179941964641 = √29π
-3062.48816467076 = ⌊(e^√29π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√29π
23.9256568407888 = √58π = (√2)*16.9179941964641
104.000034332275 = ⌊(e^√58π)^(1/4)⌉^4 – e^√58π
29.4469918623897 = |-3062.48816467076| / 104.000034332275

“There is nothing sure in this world” — B√(φ-Φ)11y √(φ-Φ) do 11

14.7353756933431 = √22π
104.001742574386 = ⌊(e^√22π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√22π
29.4707513866861 = √88π
8744.0703125 = ⌊(e^√88π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√88π
84.0761904181162 = 8744.0703125 / 104.001742574386

Te11 Tale C11oo

SisTThematic offset perfect ‘s’wan integer-framing bITe AI-te11 igloo.

√10 = √2√5
√40 = 2√2√5
9.9345882657961 = √10π
104.212132286568 = ⌊(e^√10π)^(1/4)⌉^4 – e^√10π
19.8691765315922 = √40π
8753.38167285919 = ⌊(e^√40π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√40π
83.9958024156794 = 8753.38167285919 / 104.212132286568

The lo(v-e)’n’husky team’s’ampling polar t’reats 4 the cold US ski trek to mayan baseline secure IT.

4 US the sly test twist of west turn Cult.Eur.REM.ΠR states:
“When men on the ches’S’ Bo red get app ‘n’ te11 EU ware 2 go” — J-Sun Air Plain “White Rabbit”

O Sun Surf Face 2 Ott’or’

Open 8 channels 2 mid∞ocean floor 4N_OWe’ll2020.
Magmetic chambers canexpect inclUSions of “whotor?” to d8 numeric clusters.

“l’ IT AI ‘S’i’s’tor ” — Q B √(φ-Φ)

We’11’s’UNlight Bo’L.D.’or’Rays Hazzard: The proof weave no free22e peache’S’imply the number’s’:

√38 = √2√19
13.6938848987677 = √19π (\Sol V-E do’or’/)
1.22231984476093 = ⌊(e^√19π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√19π
19.3660777454134 = √38π
-5650.20361539721 = ⌊(e^√38π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√38π
4622.52465229533 = |-5650.20361539721| / 1.22231984476093

Class Φ N_Owell-past patent proof of my crown O mic “braun death”, BRI11ant B8 “‘S’tar-taggin’!”

Pour 2 stern “IT Sun Ice Day” admir’or’ring miss pe11ed stirboard brew of Cousin Cotter’s We’S’turn Gurage. B11C peace-by-piece west turn-est 4 super √(φ-Φ) ‘or’ stay be11e IT.

“a11 I wanna do
is have sum F(UN)
until the sun comes up
I have a feelin’ The Party has just beg UN” — Share’11 C R O’We’11

171.406220601552 = (164.791315640078)*(84.016845922161) / (164.791315640078 – 84.016845922161)
12.7446413437009 = (171.406220601552)*(11.8626151546089) / (171.406220601552 – 11.8626151546089)
35.5560006640083 = (171.406220601552)*(29.4474984673838) / (171.406220601552 – 29.4474984673838)

Eur. × left slip psych’11’s’ 2 spin 4 just∞rot8shhhUN in the middle of human write’s’N_Oware:

19.8650360864628 = (35.5560006640083)*(12.7446413437009) / (35.5560006640083 – 12.7446413437009)
9.38183132238388 = (35.5560006640083)*(12.7446413437009) / (35.5560006640083 + 12.7446413437009)
18.7636626447678 = (35.5560006640083)*(12.7446413437009)/((35.5560006640083+12.7446413437009)/2)

In O^erred W+π=M eye am B√(φ-Φ)C pentameter WE’V-E now scene ^+π=v lost notes:

⌊ 19.8650360864628 / 18.7636626447678 ⌉ = ⌊1.05869714578364⌉ = 1
19.8650360864628 / 1 = 19.8650360864628
i.e. harmonic of 19.8650360864628 nearest 18.7636626447678 is 19.8650360864628 / 1 = 19.8650360864628
338.432743555957 = (19.8650360864628)*(18.7636626447678) / (19.8650360864628 – 18.7636626447678)

IT’s power ring stabilIT 4 minimAI difference of 2 terms, one exponentiAI and won di\$cretely mon know my AI.

“Cooter would be clean-shaven […] although, for continuity reasons, with the episodes being broadcast in a different order to that which they were filmed, he was not clean-shaven until […]”

⌊ 338.432743555957 / 9.93251804323141 ⌉ = ⌊34.0732070239313⌉ = 34
338.432743555957 / 34 = 9.95390422223403
i.e. harmonic of 338.432743555957 nearest 9.93251804323141 is 338.432743555957 / 34 = 9.95390422223403
4622.95453880858 = (9.95390422223403)*(9.93251804323141) / (9.95390422223403 – 9.93251804323141)

Chris Cornell: “The Prize: IT may never fulfill EU”

Good Ol’ Boys Brake C’or’e UN Codes

“EU can’t deny the pries:
diamonds cut threw hard do’or’men
ch.ange’11’ the game”
— Chris C’or’e’11 “EU No. mine aim”

104 ~= 8744 / 84

“Cooter […] is the Hazzard County mechanic […] he owns “Cooter’s Garage” in Hazzard County Square, directly across from the Sheriff’s Department. Cooter is an “honorary Duke”, as he shares the same values and often assists the Dukes in escaping Rosco’s clutches, or helps them to foil Boss Hogg’s schemes […] left the series for a few episodes due to a dispute over whether the character should be clean-shaven or have a full beard. In his absence, Cooter’s place was filled by several of Cooter’s supposed cousins who were never mentioned before or since […] returned when the dispute was solved […] often starts his CB transmissions with “Breaker one […]”

8728.60455343127 = ⌊(e^√36π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√36π
8753.38167285919 = ⌊(e^√40π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√40π
8741.68506717681 = ⌊(e^√52π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√52π
8744.3150024414 = ⌊(e^√72π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√72π
8744.0703125 = ⌊(e^√88π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√88π
8744.0234375 = ⌊(e^√100π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√100π

=
a DJ
a light show
speaker’s’ putin’ up
as We go

Ware do e come from?
do eye know yearn aim?

does UN really matter?
in this life we’re AI this aim

this way ‘n’ that wei
gettin’ past thin IT
=

104.212132286568 = ⌊(e^√10π)^(1/4)⌉^4 – e^√10π
-103.947369666712 = ⌊(e^√13π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√13π
104.007114381762 = ⌊(e^√18π)^(1/4)⌉^4 – e^√18π
104.001742574386 = ⌊(e^√22π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√22π
-103.999977946281 = ⌊(e^√37π)^(1/2)⌉^2 – e^√37π
104.000034332275 = ⌊(e^√58π)^(1/4)⌉^4 – e^√58π

9. oldmanK says:

Nice to be back to science.
There are a couple of points to which i disagree. There are backward extrapolations that assume that nothing else has any influence. I feel enough has accumulated to prove that other factors predominate.

One point for now: the Long count Mayan calendar. If I recall correctly that was one of several the mayans used (based on Michael Coe’s book on the dicipherment). The LC was not a solar calendar by a straight count of years based on Base20 arithmetic. It was Coe who pointed to 2012 being the end of the then present era, counting to 13Baktun (13x20x20=5200)
I was then looking for hints of past events, which the Dresden Codex seemed to recall. Working backwards then, the start of the counting was around (5200-2012=3188) an indicated disturbance in tree rings at 3195bce and a tectonic rotation locally (plus near Kepler Trigon). One must keep in mind that the first record of a LC date is 36bce (wiki). So what was being recalled, and how remembered, and why from so far back? (One counts FROM an event not to an event; the hype then was from Coe short witty comment).

Second point: From several leads/proxies it appears there were cyclic disturbances that follow the Eddy cycle. Going back from today’s Warming, then following cold periods/disturbances, there is LIA, DACP, ?, ?, 2345bce-Dodwell, 3195-LC start, 4375, 5200(like 3195), 6150-sinking of doggerland;;; Most correspond to a Kepler T. and an evident obliquity change. So the simple extrapolation of a singular maths exercise (as per Stockwell/Newcomb) is misleading. That the Eddy cycle -the roots- correspond to a series of events found from independent sources/leads in no ‘chance’ event. Seven events found independently of each other.

Re obliquity, the ‘Dzhanibekov Effect’ gives an indication of how an imposed planetary torque – KT?- can for a short period, a matter of days or even hours if the moon is also involved, influence the orientation of the earth’s axis.

10. Paul Vaughan says:

Moderators: You’ll find a hidden tip that will fit in context better after 3 more linked tips.

11. oldbrew says:

PA Semi: The JD and TimeDist on AngMoment line is just (Perihelium+Aphelium)/2… I’m not sure at this moment, why distance from last Perihelium and distance from last Aphelium differs by almost 0.17 days ?

How are they measuring? I think I can answer the question myself…

The observational data in the fits has been an evolving set, including: ranges (distances) to planets measured by radio signals from spacecraft,[9] direct radar-ranging of planets, two-dimensional position fixes (on the plane of the sky) by VLBI of spacecraft, transit and CCD telescopic observations of planets and small bodies, and laser-ranging of retroreflectors on the Moon, among others. DE102, for instance, was fit to 48,479 observations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_Propulsion_Laboratory_Development_Ephemeris#Construction

12. P.A.Semi says:

oldbrew: How are they measuring?

I forgot to mention, that my data are for EMB, Earth-Moon-Barycenter, because that orbit is much smoother and does not have the bouncing effect due to moon orbit, so if you want the orbital plane normal vector being smoother, and closest distance to Sun not being affected by newmoon-fullmoon chaotization, it’s better to use EMB.

Then, I used recently their gravity equations and also the more trivial ones in my simulation, and the ephemeris matches quite well, I’m not recalling now by how much kilometers we differed after a millennium… The problem in these ephemerides is estimating initial positions and velocities and weights of individual planets and Sun, these values need to be fit to trajectory observations…And JPL uses some 300 asteroids in addition to planets in their calculation…

For example, there occured transit of Mercury over Sun in 2019-11-11, and it appeared to be most central at 15:25:14 UTC +- cca 1 minute, but in ephemeris DE422 the closest angle is at 15:14:13 UTC. Then adding some 7-8 minutes for light-travel time, it still does not add up by some 2-3 minutes, so the trajectory of Mercury I consider still not exactly precise even for present time…?

About time-distance between Perihelium and Aphelium. Average for Perihelium is 365.247518492285 and average for Aphelium is 365.247506929464. There is one more value in Perihelium average, as the data stopped in between…Their data look like this, the blue lines there are just placed visually by mouse and it seems higher than the calculated average:

So it is probably due to tugs by other planets…?
(The difference of 0.17 days between time-distance of present-year perihelium and aphelium is because last-year time-distance had it oppositely… )

—–
Chaeremon: You see the effect whenever the equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane have zero inclination to each other, no?

As you may see from my charts, there is not a whole cycle of data available. And it somehow vibrates around the sinusoid, so just getting distance between two zero-points is not that much exact anyway…

But the sinusoid could be matched or have interpolated it’s parameters for a closest overall fit…

I’m just lazy or out-of-time to make that interpolation myself, so I offered my extract from JPL dataset for someone, who would like to try matching that sinusoid himself… It is a question, which parameters of those 3D vectors should be matched, it does not need to be those polar angles in present-day polar coordinate system…?

13. P.A.Semi says:

And even more clarification:

My vectors in that data-file and charts are position of EMB relative to Sun, not relative to SSB (solar system barycenter)… Because EMB orbit relative to Sun is more smooth, than EMB orbit relative to SSB, which vibrates with the Sun’s orbit around SSB, unlike with far large planets, which are more smooth relative to SSB than relative to Sun… Sun itself orbits SSB in counter-balance to large planets by some perhaps 1.459e9 meters (1.5 million kilometers), and it drags small planets with itself…

14. oldbrew says:

A 41ky obliquity won’t be affected by small inter-annual variations?

A 5:8 ratio implies a cycle of 5*41ky = ~205,000 years. Some periods about twice that long are said to relate to eccentricity and/or a Jupiter effect (e.g. 413ky or 405ky).

Milankovitch cycles: Orbital eccentricity
The major component of these variations occurs with a period of 413,000 years (eccentricity variation of ±0.012). Other components have 95,000-year and 125,000-year cycles (with a beat period of 400,000 years). They loosely combine into a 100,000-year cycle (variation of −0.03 to +0.02).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles#Orbital_eccentricity

Jupiter and Venus Change Earth’s Orbit Every 405,000 Years
https://www.universetoday.com/139198/jupiter-and-venus-change-earths-orbit-every-405000-years/

Empirical evidence for stability of the 405-kiloyear Jupiter–Venus eccentricity cycle over hundreds of millions of years
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/05/01/1800891115
– – –
Update: there’s a plausible way to explain those Milankovitch numbers, related to obliquity.
Maybe another post – some of it has already been posted here at the Talkshop.

15. Chaeremon says:

@oldbrew, Re: the PNAS paper

Good find. Such Wholesale Returns of Conjecture Out of Such a Trifling Investment of Fact [Mark Twain]

16. P.A.Semi says:

One more chart, that may be interesting… Change in Perihelium and Aphelium distance:

These are two images of Sun placed above each other, showing difference between Perihelium and Aphelium, note the side rim:

Presently, Perihelium occurs on January 4th, we are most near to Sun during northern winter, and Aphelium occurs on July 4th, we are most far from Sun during northern summer. So on southern hemisphere, this effect magnifies the summer-winter difference, and on northern hemisphere it reduces the summer-winter difference, although only a little…

At present year, Perihelium distance is 147092592393 m, decade ago it was 147101604505 m, the difference is shrinking by 9012112 m per decade, one more decade ago it was by 2898218 m, averaged 5.95e6 m per decade… Aphelium distance is 152099840862 m, decade ago it was 152095258927 m, difference is growing by 4581935 m. One more decade ago, the difference was 3458819 m…

I’m not sure, how the trend should be interpreted with regard to the ellipticity, ie. does it presently evolve into more elliptical or more circular orbit? (When I’m thinking, both should grow or both should shrink simultaneously, and not one that and other different?? Probably it heads toward more circular orbit now…) And again it’s part of a sinusoid and it could be fitted, what is it’s period and magnitude…

Difference between Perihelium and Aphelium is presently by 3.4% (152099840862/147092592393 = 1.0340) , and as light energy shrinks by square of distance, the difference in solar energy should be 6.9% between perihelium and aphelium, disregarding effects of atmoshere and inclination etc…

This effect of softening northern winters-summers and magnifying southern winters-summers presently shrinks by some 1.2 permille per decade or less… 5.95e6/(152.1e9-147.0926e9) = 0.001188

How big effect does it make for a global warming / cooling ?

17. P.A.Semi says:

Then, if I read it again, the description does not seem to match the chart with growing/shrinking, if I only considered past two decades…

So here is a more fine chart only for present time (years 1900 – 2100):

18. P.A.Semi says:

So here is another chart, relating 850hPa temperature global average anomaly to perihelium and aphelium distance…

Top panel – 850 hPa temperature global average anomaly. It shows daily difference from average of that day-of-year, in average global temperature, from NOAA/NCEP reanalysis dataset. The pink straight lines are my visual estimate of the trends. Mt Pinatubo was a remarkable volcanic explosion, which is seen as 3-year decrease on most temperature charts …
And there are arrows, when IPCC and Al Gore started their AGW alarming… That linear growing trend does not seem probable, and it started to grow AFTER they started that climate alarmism, not before…
There are various testimonies of unjust fixes in some NOAA temperature data to support the “warming hoax” (for example artificially decreasing past temperatures?), and I think to have their testimony in another dataset, that they have been compeled to that fraud by ruling jews… (an unreal 2°C increase in middle-cloud temperature just during september 2001) It’s hard to tell, what to believe…

The second panel relates January average of that anomaly (blue circles) with negative of distance at Perihelium (black). The black serie is at higher values, when we are more near to Sun, i.e. more solar energy at january…

The third panel relates July average of that anomaly (pink triangles) with negative of distance at Aphelium (black). The black serie is at higher values, when we are more near to Sun, i.e. more solar energy at july…

It shows, that some changes in global temperature anomaly may be attributed to changes in ellipticity of the orbit, by changing the distance to Sun and input solar energy in January (perihelium) and in July (aphelium)…

19. oldbrew says:

This is from a NASA article on Paleoclimatology
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Paleoclimatology_Evidence

Caption: The Earth’s orbit varies over tens and hundreds of thousands of years. Combined changes in eccentricity, obliquity, and precession alter the strength and location of sunlight falling on the Earth’s surface. (Graphs by Robert Simmon based on data from Berger 1992.)
– – –
In an earlier Talkshop post I speculated this…

Summary – the model proposes that:
Ratio of Obliquity cycle to Inclination cycle is 1:√3
Ratio of Obliquity cycle to Eccentricity cycle is 1:√6
therefore
Ratio of Inclination cycle to Eccentricity cycle is 1:√2.

Obliquity, inclination and eccentricity of Earth – a model: Part 2
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2019/02/04/obliquity-inclination-and-eccentricity-of-earth-a-model-part-2/

20. oldbrew says:

New research: Orbital pacing and secular evolution of the Early Jurassic carbon cycle
PNAS first published February 10, 2020

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/02/04/1912094117

From the abstract:
Overall the chemostratigraphy illustrates particular sensitivity of the marine carbon cycle to long-eccentricity orbital forcing.

Significance

Cyclic variations in Earth’s orbit drive periodic changes in the ocean–atmosphere system at a time scale of tens to hundreds of thousands of years. The Mochras δ13CTOC record illustrates the continued impact of long-eccentricity (405-ky) orbital forcing on the carbon cycle over at least ∼18 My of Early Jurassic time and emphasizes orbital forcing as a driving mechanism behind medium-amplitude δ13C fluctuations superimposed on larger-scale trends that are driven by other variables such as tectonically determined paleogeography and eruption of large igneous provinces. The dataset provides a framework for distinguishing between internal Earth processes and solar-system dynamics as the driving mechanism for Early Jurassic δ13C fluctuations and provides an astronomical time scale for the Sinemurian Stage.
– – –
The 405 ky period idea was put forward in this 2018 research:

Empirical evidence for stability of the 405-kiloyear Jupiter–Venus eccentricity cycle over hundreds of millions of years
https://www.pnas.org/content/115/24/6153

21. P.A.Semi says:

In that PNAS text https://www.pnas.org/content/115/24/6153 is an interesting value:

It shows, that during Triassic time some 200M years before present, the atmospheric CO2 levels were arround 4000 ppm, which is 10x present value. Then looking into Wikipedia, in Triassic times they state 1750 ppm CO2 on average, and 3°C warmer than today, and for Jurassic, which is a time when dinosaurs thrived, it states 1950 ppm CO2 on average. (I knew CO2 levels were higher in the past, but I didn’t know they were that much higher…) I’m not sure, from which geological era comes coal and oil, but they are testimony, that nature and forests thrived at those times, and dinosaurs didn’t become extinct because of warming, but because of meteoric impact and cooling…

During whole industrial era from 1850 until today, we raised from 300 ppm to 400 ppm of CO2. So continuing this trend of raising CO2 emissions for next 2000 years, we could get to most optimal conditions of warm and moist climate for the nature to thrive. The nature was starving of CO2 before industrial era started to feed it slowly with more of that precious CO2 food for plants…

In some industrial greenhouses, they are pumping some 800 ppm of CO2, so that plants have better yields, so to get to this level in normal atmoshere, we can continue CO2 emission rising trend for 700 years to get to agricultural optimum…

So all those alarmists, who got from “you must not smoke from chimneys” until recently Bill Gates concluded “it is necessary to reduce population of those, who consume most energy, by abuse of healthcare and vaccines” (and speaking about “real zero” means reducing our population to zero), they are all liars, that became really dangerous recently… ( https://youtu.be/iMl0ty6evhU – 3 minute video cut from Ted talk, where Bill Gates explains “dangers” of CO2 should be reduced to zero by either reducing population (by healthcare, vaccines and reproduction health), or inventing some “perpetuum mobile”, which is not in that short talk-cut but it is implied…)

Nature Loves CO2, and Nature Loves Moist Warm Greenhouses…

And the more atmospheric CO2, the better crop yields…

But problem is not warmth, problem is draught. And that depends on aerosols and dust in air, because water evaporates from oceans probably better in higher temperature, but in dirty air with condensation nuclei of aerosols it rains down sooner and does not reach midland areas… So while growing CO2 is always prosperous, growing dust and aerosols in air is harmful for agriculture and nature…

So it is worth reducing air polution by dusty particles and aerosols, but CO2 is not air polution at all, CO2 is beneficial and the more the better… (So a conclusion – burn more carbon, but more cleanly…)

22. oldbrew says:

Historical records show carbon dioxide levels following temperature changes. A clear sign of a response, not a ‘forcing’.

Ocean outgassing of CO2 due to warming is the usual explanation. Also, less sea ice = more sea surface = more CO2 outgassing. And all in reverse when temps are cooling of course.

23. P.A.Semi says:

Also a significant amount of carbon became stored underground by fossils, and nature became starving of CO2…

—–

Then about that temperature rise, which occured AFTER the climate alarmism started. Either it is unreal, or it may be induced. CO2 raises almost linearly during last hundred years, but the temperature record just changed mode abruptly… It may be related to aviation, by the contrails inducing Cirrus clouds, which have by far more profound effect on temperature than CO2, and possibly also by inducing pressure lows at certain places, possibly by chemtrails (alluminium in contrails?), for example pressure low west of Spain pumps hot African air into Europe, for example alleged artificial blocking of Pacific air from entering California for few consecutive years probably raised temperature in America… I do not have any proof of that, just a theoretical explanation, that it is possible, that these are not completely natural phenomena…

I strived to investigate, how and where has changed amount of cirrus clouds and how it may be related to regional temperature differences, but the dataset is damaged by sudden change in cloud classification:

(mean cloud temperature, middle level clouds, showing anomaly from DoY average, all series from various regions mixed together… I’ve got more such charts, as I’ve investigated that dataset in more detail, before realizing, that the results are not publishable…)

There are monthly values, and there is an unreal 2°C step just at september 2001…

The same dataset was used in this work:
Despite different approach to the data, you may also notice the dip on september 2001… So it is not just my error in data processing…

Could they in NOAA write more clearly, that they were compelled to tamper with climate series and by who? (And no, it was not arab terrorists, who did 911…)

24. P.A.Semi says:

Also a significant amount of carbon became stored underground by fossils, and nature became starving of CO2…

—–

Then about that temperature rise, which occured AFTER the climate alarmism started. Either it is unreal, or it may be induced. CO2 raises almost linearly during last hundred years, but the temperature record just changed mode abruptly… It may be related to aviation, by the contrails inducing Cirrus clouds, which have by far more profound effect on temperature than CO2, and possibly also by inducing pressure lows at certain places, possibly by chem.trails (alluminium in contrails?), for example pressure low west of Spain pumps hot African air into Europe, for example alleged artificial blocking of Pacific air from entering California for few consecutive years probably raised temperatures in America… I do not have any proof of that, just a theoretical explanation, that it is possible, that these may be not completely natural phenomena…

I strived to investigate, how and where has changed amount of cirrus clouds and how it may be related to regional temperature differences, but the dataset is damaged by sudden change in cloud classification:

(mean cloud temperature, middle level clouds, showing anomaly from DoY average, all series from various regions mixed together… I’ve got more such charts, as I’ve investigated that dataset in more detail, before realizing, that the results are not publishable…)

There are monthly values, and there is an unreal 2°C step just at september two thousand one…

The same dataset was used in this work:
(See “Veretenenko et al., 2018” titled “New Paper: The GCR-Cloud Link To Solar-Driven Climate Change Persists Despite The Post-2000 ‘Violation’” on “no tricks zone”, the direct link probably caused filtering?)
Despite different approach to the data, you may also notice the dip on september two thousand one… So it is not just my error in data processing… (But I’m somehow sceptical about their thesis of cosmic rays linked to climate…)

Could they in NOAA write more clearly, that they were compelled to tamper with climate series and by who?

(the text was censored by some automated filter and needed to rewrite to avoid certain keywords… or did word press block me for writing the previous post?)

[mod] yes, wordpress sent it to its trash bin for some reason (e.g. too long, too many links, repetition etc.)

25. oldbrew says:

Re. this 400+ ky eccentricity cycle, what other cycles are there…

J-V 405 ky
Earth (long) 413 ky
10 obliquity ~411 ky
6 inclination ~420 ky
4 Earth (short) eccentricity ~400 ky

10:6:4 = 5:3:2 ratio
Might be something there.

26. P.A.Semi says:

It would be even nicer, if the numbers were aligned better… or possibly they are? how precise are those long cycles?

2,3,5 is start of Fibonacci sequence… Those 5 and 8 are also essential with Earth-Venus resonance…
It’s always nice to find the planetary system we live in is made beautiful and logical…

27. oldmanK says:

P.A.Semi above says “It’s always nice to find the planetary system we live in is made beautiful and logical…” I wonder; I have my doubts.

Over several years now, from multiple sources, I have narrowed down dates to events as evident in man-made relics. In the past year it was brought home via another contributor on the site ‘ Climate Etc’ that the dates correlated to the Eddy cycle, and as was then found, to possible Kepler Trigon times or near. I have begun to notice those dates come up everywhere (to the point of suspecting recent research is picking those dates as ‘safe bets’).

Now I ask the question: statistically and in the context of the related science, what is the probability of such sequence of five dates/events occurring by chance. Ie a different and alternate face to the ‘beautiful and logical’?

28. P.A.Semi says:

re: oldmanK, February 12, 2020 at 7:20 am

I don’t seem to understand that, what is Eddy Cycle…

There is upper part of their chart about abrupt changing of “Obliquity”, i.e. rotational axis of Earth, if I understand that from their chart…

That just cannot change abruptly. You probably know gyroscope. There is a law of conservation of angular momentum, which is a vector. It does not change by itself either by slowing down or speeding up, and it does not change by changing it’s axis. An energy can be added or removed and then the axis vector may slowly change. There is enormous energy stored in our gyroscope, and an enormous energy is required to change it. (I calculated, that changing axis of rotation to opposite is about as energetic as heating all the ocean water to boiling temperature or by 20° or I do not remember it exactly now and I’m lazy to search for that, it’s all joules and how do they convert…)

A conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn happens about every 20 years, and as the Earth turns near them, it does not matter much, if they depart a little from each other and decrease that effect to 90% from 100%. While I could believe they can pull some more Solar wind or cause more Sunspots and some Aurora at such moment, it would not change our rotational axis…

By gravitational forces, if the Earth was a sphere without anything protruding, then any gravitational effect does not turn it, because it affects all sides same. But as the Earth is elliptical with an equatorial bulge, and since it has three protruding places, where the natural coordinate system is on 21° East, with axis on Africa, Himallaya and Andes, and missing fourth ballance in Pacific, then the gravity of Sun, Moon and by less than 1% also other planets slowly turn it, which causes the precession of equinoxes… Once I investigated Chandler Wobble http://semi.gurroa.cz/Chandler/Chandler.html where rotational axis shifts relative to body of Earth, which is something different than rotational axis shifting relative to stars…

Any planet alignment does not make a percent difference and does not turn Obliquity, because Sun and Moon are much more gravitationally prevalent here… Consider tides – you don’t consider Jupiter or Saturn ocean tides, it’s by more than 99% just Moon and Sun…

Consider numerical estimate for comparision, gravity as M/R^2, tidal as M/R^3, Jupiter and Saturn near their perihelium and Earth most near to them, Venus when most near to Earth:
Sun – 9.19E7 – 6.25E-4
Moo – 5.33E5 – 1.44E-3
Jup – 5.42E3 – 9.15E-9
Ven – 2.61E3 – 6.05E-8
Sat – 3.94E2 – 3.28E-10

However you superimpose Jupiter and Saturn, gravity force from Moon is about 90x bigger, and from Sun it is about 15800x bigger, and tidal force from Moon is 150000x bigger and from Sun is 66000x bigger. Tidal force by Venus may be about 10x bigger, than from Jupiter, it’s maximal gravity effect is about half of Jupiter… By conjunction the planets ADD best, they do not multiply… Out from conjunction it is a vector sum and it is smaller, in opposition they may cancel out each other to zero… Therefore any good alignment of planets has negligible gravitational effects on Earth rotation axis… And it does make some tiny changes to our orbital parameters, by tugs from Jupiter and Venus foremost and somewhere around 10% of them by Saturn, but our double orbital resonance with Venus stabilizes Earth to it’s normal orbital trajectory, so the large planets do not pull us out from the orbit. Mars orbit has more chaotic changes than Earth’s…
The Moon and Sun and by 1% planets have effect of Chandler wobble, but it shifts rotational axis by mere hundreds of meters relative to surface, and by continuously pulling the equatorial bulge toward ecliptic they (Sun and Moon foremost) induce precession of equinoxes with a period somewhere around 26000 years… (it’s a gyroscope with force applied onto it, so it precesses) Planets may have other effects, but claiming something about a catastrophic rotational axis shift by planet alignment is just absurd…

The Orbital Resonance between Earth and Venus is interesting. It is 13:8 on orbit (13 Venus years over 8 Earth years, it is a music interval called “minor sixth” like E to C or C to G#), and it is 12:8 on spin (12 Venus days over 8 Earth years, near “perfect fifth” music interval like E to B or C to G, but the musical tune is not exactly perfect), so that whenever we meet Venus, it has same face turned to Earth, and whenever we are at heliocentric opposition, that same face is toward Sun and Earth… When one planet is too fast into the meeting point, the other one slows it down, when it is too late, the other one speeds it up to the meeting point. Therefore, it stabilizes orbital period, and by that it stabilizes our distance from Sun, orbit trajectory pulsation is about that optimum with Earth-Venus resonance. I’ve shown, that charting 8-year frequency of Earth-Venus meeting times, it shows some noise or chaos, but it soon stabilizes back to a common pattern. Therefore, our trajectory is stabilized by Venus either artificially, or by a too good chance, I consider it one of signs of “Intelligent Design” of planetary system…
The other part of “Intelligent Design” is our Moon being tuned to Solar spin. Scientists have wondered, why our magnetosphere did not fade out already, as did Venus’s and Mars’s. By my opinion, it’s because our pulsing in and out by Moon counterballance in rythm of Solar spin recharges our inner core magnet (eddies in molten iron core)… Magnetosphere protects our Atmosphere from Solar wind, otherwise Solar wind would have already blown away our atmosphere, as it happened on Mars…
The other part of “Intelligent Design” is orbital resonance of outer planets, they are stabilizing each other to not travel toward Sun or away. In early development of Solar system, probably Jupiter was more near and was ejected outward by some effect, as I’ve read somewhere on Wiki, but now they are stabilized…

That I was meaning, when writing, that it is “logical”… And the various occurences of “phi” and music intervals encoded in it are beautiful, probably they have some meaning too…

29. oldbrew says:

Magnetosphere protects our Atmosphere from Solar wind, otherwise Solar wind would have already blown away our atmosphere, as it happened on Mars…

But Venus with little or no magnetosphere has far more atmosphere than Earth. It’s also closer to the source of the solar wind.

30. oldmanK says:

P.A.Semi, thanks for the reply. (ps, the linked site is my own, under a different name).

From one perspective I agree with what you have written; the basic mechanics of the case. Or rather what we know (or think we do know).

From an altogether different perspective, there is evidence that there are factors that are still not known and that interfere with the secular beauty that is apparent. To explain some:

Eddy cycle: after John A Eddy 975 +/- 53yr see ( pg6) in link : https://www.spaceclimate.fi/SC6/presentations/session2a/Ken_McCracken_SC6.pdf

At one thread at ‘Climate Etc’ it was noted that the DACP (~700ce) and LIA (~1680ce) corresponded to the roots of the Eddy cycle.
From altogether different research I found ancient calendar structures where, in their design, they record horizon movement of the sunrise, solstice to solstice, indirectly recording the earth’s obliquity. The last unit built records it as it is today, but also records a change from a lower value. Now there are several earlier; all record obliquity as it was then – a different value. To cut it short, I found how the design developed and changed over some three millennia, from the several such structures that still exist; and the likely dates when the changes happened (from various proxies). Surprisingly, five major dates aligned to successive roots of the Eddy cycle.

All dates in the Holocene (as in the link in earlier post) I determined before learning of the Eddy-climate connection. Those same dates are now showing up in quite a number of studies. The critical point in all the above is an evident abrupt change in obliquity. For once the design was unraveled its simplicity leaves no room for doubt. However, what I had thought as a possible inherent earth characteristic, the link to the Eddy points to a planetary trigger. Hence my comment regarding a perceived beauty.

Re ‘gyroscope’, from some delving, there are two issues. a) one is the conservation of momentum vector tending to stability. b) the other a possibility -and result- of an imposed torque from some particular planetary alignment which would then cause the earth -as a gyro- to react.

Incidentally, working backward from evidence, the last change was from ~14.5deg to ~24 at about 2345bce (a date from several unconnected proxies; which also confirms Dodwell’s 1936 theory). Then again, from a historical perspective, all dates correlate to times of great change. FWIW this aspect of the earth tilt has been referred to in several ancient texts, but has never been identified as such. Rather it was interpreted as the author going overboard with his imagination.

31. Paul Vaughan says:

Reverse Crew 10 Eye 4 Mayan Stock Car

If you play cards you’re probably familiar with the concept of pregnant threes.
For example, the dealer calls, “Pregnant threes are wild.”

You may also recall something about sagely Uncle Jesse and moonshine on the legendary TV series “The Dukes of Hazzard”.

Now imagine a Waylon Jennings narrative about Boss Hogg. See where this is going?
It’s not only the moonshine. It’s also a BRIght full moon, as you should well-imagine.

DCoy Tar Gets ×IT -6

First off, review mainstream conventions before weave rightly left to realize wider scrutiny.

20934.9357937308 = (1.00002638193018)*(0.999978614647502) / (1.00002638193018 – 0.999978614647502)

25760.4349434063 = (1.00001743371442)*(0.999978614647502) / (1.00001743371442 – 0.999978614647502)

41003.0836119625 = (68753)*(25685) / (68753 – 25685)

MI’s’Tory, please O4 Laskar \$1296000 tip = 25685 in4MIT√(Φ-φ)(V-E)a11y far from 25760.4349434063.

Next, my yen backed UN secure IT counts_4 stability:

41002.0533880903 = 8*(13*144000)/365.25

Next We take a monstrous leap into the Hazzard County moonshine of prime universal IT be 4 dialing IT back down to great ski or “Great’s Key!” if EU don’t sea hawk eye. Far from the last word, this is just the blister ring intro.

My UN Secure IT Count’s’11’or’s’ View No. 7

25760.7908545004 = 5*11*13*(36.0290781181824)
20930.9527748627 = 2^9*5^3*(5256.63940169013)/( 44.2784629967671)/11^2/3
41001.6165713382 = 2^9*5^3*13*(5256.63940169013)/( 44.2784629967671)/(73.0002008969005)/11/3

IT’s’ AIways a F(\$UN) of my UN chief slot ma Chine: Gamble Can. ID yen win big (E-V)orrery time.

My Yen Sun Wei 22a R Dr. Eye C UN Dread O (V-E) R (9*11 = 99 = 100 – 01)

Like be 4, left eyes glaze right past Mayan daycount’s’.
Shepherd’s here to remind lost sheep that 1, 4, & 36 are the only square highly composite numbers.

AI’s’O We C my yen R wiled 4 pregnant 3s.

99=63+36
396=4*99=36*44/4=18*22=4*9*11=4*(100-01)
396*365.25 = 144639 = 144000 + 639 = 20*7200 + 639

Reca11 sweet child do V-E mayan:

⌊ 351.268846907657 / 44.2784629967671 ⌉ = ⌊7.93317615684411⌉ = 8
351.268846907657 / 8 = 43.9086058634571
i.e. harmonic of 351.268846907657 nearest 44.2784629967671 is 351.268846907657 / 8 = 43.9086058634571
5256.63940172076 = (44.2784629967671)*(43.9086058634571) / (44.2784629967671 – 43.9086058634571)

E-V ‘n’ holy fathers at the vat√(Φ-φ)can seem high on 396:

363.636363636363…. = 144000 / 396 = (1-63/(63+36))*10^3 = 4/11*10^3
= (1+1/99)*360 = 36000/9/11 = 36000/(100-01)

4 Stable IT, Write AngeI’s’ See Mayan:

363.636363636363…. = ((60*60*360)/9)/4/9/11
363.636363636363…. = ((1296000)/9)/4/9/11
363.636363636363…. = (20*7200)/4/9/11
363.636363636363…. = (144000)/4/9/11

Seam Eyin’ Fraction’s’ D-S01V-E

19.7125256673511 = 19.8*(1+1/(9*11))*360/365.25 = 7200/365.25
394.250513347023 = 396*(1+1/(9*11))*360/365.25 = 20*7200/365.25
5125.25667351129 = 5256*13*11*(1+1/(9*11))*360/365.25/146 = 13*144000/365.25

“Don’t EU C?
This is what EU need.
There rea11y is a rhythym.
Eye’11 give EU what EU need.
Eye’11 take EU where EU need to be.” — INXS

19.8 = 19.7125256673511*365.25*(100-01)/100/360 = 7200*(100-01)/100/360
396 = 394.250513347023*365.25*(100-01)/100/360 = 20*7200*(100-01)/100/360
5256 = 5125.25667351129*146*365.25*(100-01)/100/360/13/11 = 13*144000*146*(100-01)/100/360/13/11

How does Cousin Cooter get the Genera11y fly yen?

25740 = 5*5256*(11*13)/(11*13+3)
25740 = 5*11*13*5256/146
25740 = 5*11*13*36 = 65*396 = 260*99

533265 = (365.25) * (365) / (365.25 – 365)
1460 = 533265/365.25
1461 = 533265/365 = 3*487 = 3*11*44.27272727…. ~= 3*11*DH
487 = 1461/3 = 11*44.27272727…. ~= 11*DH
44.27272727…. = 1461/3/11 = 487/11 ~= Double-Hale = DH = Designated Hitter in the Major League

64000 = 2^9*5^3

20931.118163151 = 2^9*5^3*5256/1461/11
20931.118163151~=2^9*5^3*5256/(3*11*DH)/11
20931.118163151~=2^9*5^3*5256/DH/11^2/3

41002.0533880904 = 2^9*5^3*13*5256/1461/73
41002.0533880904~=2^9*5^3*13*5256/(3*11*DH)/73
41002.0533880904~=2^9*5^3*13*5256/DH/73/11/3

36 = ⌊36.0290781181824⌋
73 = ⌊73.0002008969005⌋
5256 = ⌊5256.63940169013⌋
44.2784629967671 = DH
1461 = ⌊1461.18927889331⌋ = ⌊3*11*44.2784629967671⌋

These are familiar SEV & JEV slip cycles and remember that Seidelmann’s (1992) model tunes to 5256 (and therefore everything below it in the slip-hierarchy) even though this is extremely sensitive to clumsy tuning. Wildly different, totally unrecognizable, categorically dissimilar values result if the tuning isn’t Mayan or if the wheel of Mayan wisdom isn’t simply rediscovered from measurements.

Quite delectably, public revelation of official government belief in Mayan wisdom came right after the Iron Curtain folded. As some of you may recall I combed through US Navy Almanacs systematically while investigating why Bollinger’s (1944) numbers were so far from Mayan precision.

We might expect some creative mainstream model destruction moving forward as elites usually prioritize social and political dominance over fidelity.

Perfect models don’t make human behavior predictable. On the contrary if everyone knows when the next El Nino will be, that adds reactive and counter-reactive levels of human psychology and the ivory tower will opportunistically calculate the next shell-and-pea-game sales-pitch to sell yet another UNneeded social revolution to taxpayers.

By nature change brings opportunity for some and cost for others.

Quite simply I would gladly pay the ivory tower to engineer winter temperatures reliably above 5°C outdoors where I live, but the product is not available.

25760.7908545004 = 5*11*13*(36.0290781181824)
20930.9527748627 = 2^9*5^3*(5256.63940169013)/( 44.2784629967671)/11^2/3
41001.6165713382 = 2^9*5^3*13*(5256.63940169013)/( 44.2784629967671)/(73.0002008969005)/11/3

“Eye'(V-E) scene angles fa11 from blinding Heights” — Chris Cornell “UNo. Mayan Aim”

By R methOD of lo C √(Φ-φ) IT’s’ mmmm eyin’ miss tory:
No Boars Nest Count’S’ol’ seat awarded just in can.A.D.yen time.

See ’em Eye UN “The Great One”

correct’s’ yen fact’or’ = UN pu11US won over 99
1.01010101010101…. = 100/9/11 = 100/99 = (99+1)/99 = 1 + 1/99 = 1 + 1/(9*11) = (10*10)/(9*11)
= 1 +1/(100-01) = 100/(100-01)
= UN.OUNOUNOUN….
= l.ololololol….

Announce of Prayin’

UN dread – OUN = 100 – 01 = 99 = 9*11

Bo.L.D.

The boys are rea11y R-O11UN.
The car is proba.ble’s’s’TO11UN.”
TruePurr “The boys in the BRIght white sports car

“Bo and Luke had previously been sentenced to probation for illegal transportation of moonshine; their Uncle Jesse made a plea bargain with the U.S. Government to refrain from distilling moonshine in exchange for Bo and Luke’s freedom.” — Wikipedia “Dukes of Hazzard” Sage

32. Paul Vaughan says:

Car Action: Bollinger (1952)