StefanTallqvist

De anno natali Christi

  • Kuva 1.
    Kuva 1.
  • Kuva 2.
    Kuva 2.
  • Kuva 3.
    Kuva 3.

"meidän Herramme ja Vapahtajamme armorikas syntymäjuhla", vietetään piakkoin. Mutta useammat meistä tietää että oikea päivämäärä on epäselvä; Raamattu ei sitä mainitse!

Tiedemiehet ja tutkijat ovat, siitä lähtien kun kristinusko vakiintui Rooman valtakunnassa, yrittäneet erilaisten tietojen perusteella määrätä todellista " Annus Domini", tai

Anno Domini, joka tarkoittaa 'Herran vuonna', sekä muita kristinuskoon ja kalenteriin liittyviä tosiasioita.

Olen aikaisemmin maininnut että tämän vuoden elokuussa osallistuin Saksassa Berliinissä 21.8.2014 alkavaan kansainväliseen seminaariin:

http://stefantallqvist.puheenvuoro.uusisuomi.fi/175606-kansainvalinen-konferenssi-berliinissa

Vuoden 7 e.Kr. tapahtunutta kolmoiskonjunktiota ja konjunktioitten päivämääriä ovat laskeneet koko joukko tiedemiehiä, aina Johannes Keplerin (1603) ajoilta tähtien. Tarkat päivämäärät vuonna 7 BC tapahtuneelle kolmoiskonjunktiolle epäiltiin siellä Berliinissä, joten tein uuden laskun viime kuussa (Marraskuu 2014), ja lähetin tiedot kaikille mainitun konferenssin osanottajille.

Vain uudet ohjelmat, joitten tarkkuus planeettojen asentoon suhteen ovat parempia kuin 0.001 astetta pysyvät laskemaan oikein päivämäärät, jolloin planeettojen Jupiter ja Saturnus välinen kulma Maasta nähtynä asteina oli pienin! Uudet laskutulokset löytyvät täältä:

http://personal.inet.fi/koti/elektron/triplemergeda.pdf

Kuva 1. on ensimmäinen kuva yllä olevasta dokumentista "triplemergeda.pdf". Siihen sisältyy minimikohtien tarkat laskut ja ajankohdat.

Kuva 2. on vanha lasku käyttäen "Tuckerman's tables" (1962), mutta minimien kohdat sattuvat virheellisille päivämäärille: May 27, October 6 and December 1.

Kuva 3. on konjunktio joka rekisteröitiin Englannissa, "Annals of the Abbey of Worcester, December (year) 1285. Tämä Jupiterin ja Saturnuksen konjunktiokäyrä on aivan erilainen kun kolmoiskonjunktio vuonna 7 e.Kr.

Alkuperäinen "De anno natali Christi" by  Johannes Kepler; löytyy netistä.

 

Viesti Berliiniin oli seuraava: (jatkuu)

 

Piditkö tästä kirjoituksesta? Näytä se!

0Suosittele

Kukaan ei vielä ole suositellut tätä kirjoitusta.

NäytäPiilota kommentit (6 kommenttia)

Käyttäjän StefanTallqvist kuva
Stefan H. Tallqvist

Dear friends from the meeting in Berlin in August 2014,

my attempt to tell about the 7 BC triple conjunction and Jesus birth date, become very short and unclear. I'm therefore sending to you a more complete report on some of my collected knowledge of the subject:

Four new calculated figures, of the triple conjunction in 7 BC, are included in this document:
1. All three minima in 7 BC, seen to be close to one degree
2. Enlarged detail of the first minimum distance in May 29
3. Enlarged detail of the second minimum distance in September 30
4. Enlarged detail of the third minimum distance in December 5
(see my e-mail attachment: triplemergeda.pdf)
=

My intention is to write about the following scientific papers witch are main references to the Star of Bethlehem and the birth date of Jesus:

1. Annals of the Abbey of Worcester, December (year) 1285.

2. "On the Conjunctions of the planets Jupiter and Saturn in the Year B.C. 7, B.C. 66 and A.D. 54" by C. Pritchard
(and Astronomer Royal), Mon. Not. Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. XVI, July 11, 1856.

3. "The Star of Bethlehem", review article by David W. Hughes, Nature, Vol. 264, December 9, 1976.

4. Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Ephemeris, apr. year 1960.

5. "The Science Content of the Urantia Book"; page 6; Bain R., Glasziou K. Neibaur M. and Wright F., The Brotherhood of Man Library; 1991.

6. "Can we Find the Star of Bethlehem in Far Eastern Records ?", Christopher Cullen, Q.Jl. Royal astr. Society 20, 1979.

7. "Bethlehem's star attraction", Nigel Henbest, New Scientist, 19/26 December 1992.

8. "Myter och teorier on artalen kring var tideraknings borjan", (Foddes Jesus pa hosten? Lag Eden pa Cypern?) by Tallqvist S., HUFVUDSTADSBLADET 19 Dec. 1987, (the leading Finnish newspaper in the Swedish language).

9. “Urantia (The Great Cult Mystery)” by Martin Gardner, Prometheus Books, 1995.

10. "The Urantia Book", by Urantia Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, 1955, (Second Printing 1967).

11. "The Bethlehem Report" by Robert Teeter, 1998.

12. Jean Meeus, letter 1989 January 27, and the SkyMap program.

13. Simo Parpola, "The Magi and the Star," Bible Review, December 2001, p.16-23, and p. 52 & 54.

14. “The Long Ephemeris Tape.”, JPL and NASA, 1976

15. "De anno natali Christi" by Johannes Kepler, n. 1603
= = =

Related to the Urantia Book text:
(1352.3) 122:8.7 These wise men saw no star to guide them to Bethlehem. The beautiful legend of the star of Bethlehem originated in this way: Jesus was born August 21 at noon, 7 B.C. On May 29, 7 B.C., there occurred an extraordinary conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the constellation of Pisces. And it is a remarkable astronomic fact that similar conjunctions occurred on September 29 and December 5 of the same year. Upon the basis of these extraordinary but wholly natural events the well-meaning zealots of the succeeding generation constructed the appealing legend of the star of Bethlehem and the adoring Magi led thereby to the manger, where they beheld and worshiped the newborn babe. Oriental and near-Oriental minds delight in fairy stories, and they are continually spinning such beautiful myths about the lives of their religious leaders and political heroes. In the absence of printing, when most human knowledge was passed by word of mouth from one generation to another, it was very easy for myths to become traditions and for traditions eventually to become accepted as facts.
=

About: 1. Annals of the Abbey of Worcester, December (year) 1285.

London: 31 dec 1285 16:00:00 (= Julian day number 2190769.16667 conjunction). The Abbey of Worcester wrote:
"In the same year (1285), Saturn and Jupiter were in conjunction in Aquarius, which has not happened since the Incarnation, nor, as calculated by the astronomers will it happen again for a long time."

Original text in latin (Annales Monastici vol. IV, 1285):
"Saturnus et Jupiter eodem anno erant in conjunctione in Aquario, quod non contigit post Incarnationem, nec multo tempore secundum astronomicos iterum eveniet ut aestimatur."

Source with pictures:
http://stefantallqvist.puheenvuoro.uusisuomi.fi/15...

=

About: 2. "On the Conjunctions of the planets Jupiter and Saturn in the Year B.C. 7, B.C. 66 and A.D. 54" by C. Pritchard (and Astronomer Royal), Mon. Not. Royal Astronomical Society,
Vol. XVI, July 11, 1856. (The following text was copied by me at the old astronomy library (The University of Helsinki):

ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vol. XVI July 11 , 1856 No.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the Conjunctions of the Planes Jupiter and Saturn in the
Years B.C. 7, B.C. 66 and A.D. 54.

By the Rev. C. Pritchard, M.A., F.R.S.

In this paper author has corrected an astronomical error, into
which Dr. Ideler and several others have fallen, in attempting to
establish the date of the true Annus Domini. The German
chronologist, in his Handbuch der mathematichen und techniscen
Chronologie, has remarked, that certain conjunctions of the planets
Jupiter and Saturn wholly fulfil the conditions and phenomena
recorded of the star of the Magi. It asserts that of three conjunctions
which occurred in the year B.C. 7. the first was of a nature sufficient
to arouse the attention of the Magi, and send them on their errand to
Jerusalem, and that the last of the three conjunctions was so close that,
to weak eyes, the discs of the two planets might appear diffused into
one, and would satisfy, moreover, the condition of being in a proper
position at sunset to conduct the Magi from Jerusalem to Bethlehem.
In order to ascertain the accuracy of this statement, the author
undertook the computation of the geocentric places of the two planets
for the year B.C. 7, so far as any possible conjunctions were
concurrent. The result is, that as regards the fact of there having been
tree conjunctions during the year, Dr. Ideler's statement is confirmed;
but the author finds that the dates assigned by Ideler to these
conjunctions are not correct; still less is it true that any such
proximity occurred as to make it possible that the planets could,
to any observer, have presented the appearance of a single star.
The following are the places of the planets for each of the three
conjunctions, as computed by the author.

December 4, B.C. 7, at 6 p.m., Paris mean solar time
Sun's longitude, 250d 57' 57.9".
Geoc. Long. , Geocentric Latitude. True Equinox.
Jupiter .... 345d 30’ 5.1” , 1d 28’, 27.9” S.
Saturn .... 345d 33’ 44” , 2d 31’ 8.0” S.

September 29, B.C. 7, at Paris mean midnight.
Sun's longitude 184d 17' 7.6"
Geoc. Long. , Geoc. Lat.
Jupiter .... 347d 35’ 5” , 1d 46’ 13” S.
Saturn .... 347d 32’ 5” , 2d 44’ 18” S.

May 29, B.C. 7, at Paris mean midnight.
Sun's longitude, 64d 59' 15.4"
Geoc. Long. , Geoc. Lat.
Jupiter .... 351d 1’ 17.3” , 1d 20’ 57.3”
Saturn .... 350d 59’ 42.7” , 2d 19’ 57.1”

From these results it would appear that in a latitude not
differing much from that of Jerusalem, on Dec. 4, B.C. 7, the planets
would be about 1 1/2 hour east of the meridian at sunset, and would,
on May 29, rise about 3 1/2 hours before sunrise.
The author has computed other two ancient conjunctions, one of
which occurred in the year B.C. 66, and the other in the year A.D. 54.
The distance between the two planets on the occasion of the
conjunction in the year 66 was found to be only 55'. With respect to
conjunction of 54 A.D., the planets were too near the sun to be visible.
The results of the author's researches were confirmed by
calculations executed independently at the Royal Observatory by the
instructions of the Astronomer Royal.
=

My comment: The date "December 4, B.C. 7, at 6 p.m" is in error according to modern calculations, and so are Sun´s longitude values. Therefore it has to be considered a coincidence, that Pritchard's conjunction dates are so close to the U-book dates.

The UB mentions the dates:
1. May 29
2. September 29
3. December 5

The skeptic Martin Gardner also discuses the "famous conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter", beginning on pages 206 to 209 of his book Urantia, The great Cult Mystery, Prometheus Books, 1995. However, Gardner says on page 206:
"The UB (1352) says that these conjunctions gave the appearance of a single star which in turn gave rise to the legend of the Star of Bethlehem, as recounted only in the gospel of Matthew." And on p. 208 Gardner states: " Only an abysmally weak pair of eyes could have ever merged them", was how Marshall put it. This has always counted strongly against the guess that the Saturn-Jupiter triple conjunction was the basis for the Star of Bethlehem legend. This also counts against the credibility of the UB".

I would like to say that this counts against the credibility of Garner's research, because the UB never mentions that "these conjunctions gave the appearance of a single star"!
Further Gardner isn't aware of Hughes paper in Nature, nor about Jupiter and Saturn mentioned in Annales Monastici vol. IV, year 1285:

=
About: 3. "The Star of Bethlehem", review article by David W. Hughes, Nature, Vol. 264, December 9, 1976.

This paper in Nature is highly interesting and carries a lot of facts similar to the UB text!
The astronomer Hughes also mentions the conjunction dates given by Pritchard, whish are slightly in error. But it was really difficult to fin an astronomical algorithm in the 1970:ies that calculated the correct conjunction dates. I know, because I tied to calculate the three dates already in the 1970:ies. (I learned the mathematics involved, when I wrote the pointing programs for our Finnish microwave telescope in Metsahovi in the year 1974.)

In the scientific paper Nature (ref. 3) David Hughes also ends his review article with the words:

" Bearing in mind Herod's surprise on being told of the star by the Magi, the triple conjunction in 7 BC seems to be the most probable candidate. If this is so Christ would have been born in about October of that year." Hughes also mentions several other details and dates that agrees very closely with the information in the U-book:

-The date of Herod's death in 4 BC (UB p.1334); Christ must have been born before this.

-"They (the Magi) were probably Median priests of Zoroastrianism who, apart from performing the duties of national priesthood, used to occupy themselves with the interpretation of dreams." (UB p.1352)

-Hughes thinks that the delay of the census in Israel (to the year 7 B.C.) by one year was caused by slow communication. The Ubook states that it was due to a conscious delay by Herod.(UB p.1350)

This paper in Nature, a leading scientific magazine, gives strong support for the facts in the Urantia Book. This is the abstract of the paper by Hughes:

"The Star of Bethlehem was probably a triple conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter in the constellation of Pisces, the significance of which was only obvious to the Magi of Babylonia. This occurred in 7 BC and events indicate that Jesus Christ was probably born in the Autumn that year, around October, 7 BC."

Hughes diagram or chronology in Nature is very similar to dates mentioned in the UB:
http://www.kotiportaali.fi/adslfor/hughestable.jpg

Hughes also motions that the census in Augustus, 8 BC is mentioned on an inscription in Ankara, Turkey (Çankaya):
http://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g2986...

One of my sources:
http://stefantallqvist.puheenvuoro.uusisuomi.fi/85...

=

About: 12. Jean Meeus, letter 1989 January 27, and the SkyMap program.

Dr. Matt Neibaur in Florida sent to me the following letter, after some discussions with him:

= = =
Jean Meeus
Heuvestraat 31
B-3071 Erps-Kwerps
Belgium, 1989 January 27

Dear Mr. Neibaur,

I have both the Tuckerman tables (1962)
and Bretagnon-Simon book (1986), but I
had never heard of Urantia. The
Bretagnon-Simon book certainly is far
superior with respect to Tuckerman,
because it is based on the modern VSOP
planetary theories constructed a few
years ago at the Bureau des Longitudes
in Paris. Not only did Tuckerman use
older theories, but moreover he used an
arbitrary method for calculating the
planetary positions. The aim of the
Bretagnon-Simon book is to provide an
accuracy of at least o.o1 degree during
the time period considered.

I calculated the second Jupiter-Saturn
conjunction with the book, and
surprisingly I obtained October 1
instead of September 30. Then I made
the calculation again using a
completely different program I wrote
for another computer, and which has an
accuracy of at least 0.001 degree. Both
this program and the Bretagnon-Simon
book are based on the VSOP theory, but
in my program I consider a larger
amount or periodic terms. My results
are given on the enclosed sheet. What
you should consider is the column
"LONG.", which gives the apparent
geocentric longitude of the planet at
0h Dynamical Time at the date
indicated. (Note that "7 B.C."
corresponds to the astronomical year
-6; astronomers use a year "zero"). As
you see, the conjunction in longitude
took place on October 1, and by
interpolation one finds the time,
namely 10h TD (dynamical Time). Because
the difference between TD and UT was 3
hours at that epoch, the conjunction in
longitude took place around 7h UT.

However in his article, Sinnott says
that the separation was least on
September 30; he doesn´t speak about a
conjunction in longitude. Using my
program, I find that the separation
between Jupiter and Saturn was as
follows (in degrees), at 0h TD or the
date:
-6 Sep 28 0.986
-6 Sep 29 0.980
-6 Sep 30 0.976
-6 Oct 1 0.974
-6 Oct 2 0.975

As you see, the least separation to
occur on October 1. Maybe Sinnott used
similar data, but rounded to 0.01
degrees, which might explain the
"error" of one day.

The error made by using Tuckerman´s
data is easily explained by the fact
that Jupiter and Saturn are slowly
moving planets, and the difference of
their longitude is varying still more
slowly. About -6 September 30, the
daily variation or the geocentric
longitude was -0.122 degrees for
Jupiter, and -0.074 degree for Saturn.
So the difference between their
longitudes decrease by only 0.048
degree would give rise to an error or 4
days in time or the conjunction.

I did not check the other two
conjunctions or the year -6. May I
further say that I don´t agree with the
statement "On May 29, 7 B.C., there
occurred an extraordinary conjunction
of Jupiter and Saturn…" No. that
conjunction was not extraordinary (it
was not a close one) What was
remarkable was the fact that in the
year -6 a triple conjunction between
the planets took place. Each of the
tree conjunctions, considered
separately, was not extraordinary at
all!

Yours very sincerely,
Jean Meeus

(some tables were also added included in the letter by Jean Meeus).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Meeus

Jean Meeus wrote the mathematics of the SkyMap (by Chris Marriott) computer program, which for the first time gave the same results (same dates as the UB text), in the 1990:ies, after a large amount of additional calculations by me.
=

Planetary conjunctions might be defined both as the closet approach of two planet, or as the time when the planetary longitudes are the same. This is another source of confusion, because the closet approach and the conjunction in longitude, happen on different dates in case of the Jupiter-Saturn triple conjunction in September 7 BC! I figure that this is highly unusual.

But all the three conjunctions were "similar" (the word used by the UB) in the sense that the minimum distance between Jupiter and Saturn was very close to one degree for all three conjunctions.
=

Here comes the original text by Augustus at the Monumentum Ancyranum of Ankara, Turkey. This is essential as a verification of the census mentioned in the UB text in the year 8 BC:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_Gestae_Divi_Augusti

"Many copies of the text were made and carved in stone on monuments or temples throughout the Roman Empire, some of which have survived; most notably, almost a full copy, written in the original Latin and and Greek translation was preserved on a temple to Augustus in Ancyra (the Monumentum Ancyranum of Ankara, Turkey);"

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/...

MONUMENTUM ANCYRANUM (RES GESTAE DIVI AUGUSTI)
Part IIa (2: chapters 8‑13)
(year 8 BC: "In this lustrum 4,233,000 Roman citizens were entered on the census roll."

“8 As consul for the fifth time,32 by order of the people and the senate I increased the number of the patricians. Three times I revised the roll of the senate.33 In my sixth consulship, with Marcus Agrippa as my colleague, I made a census of the people.34 I performed the lustrum35 after an interval of forty-one years. In this •lustration 4,063,000 Roman citizens were entered on the census roll. A second time,36 in the consulship of Gaius Censorinus and Gaius Asinius, I again performed the lustrum alone, with the consular imperium. In this lustrum 4,233,000 Roman citizens were entered on the census roll. A third time, with the consular imperium, p359and with my son Tiberius Caesar as my colleague, I performed the lustrum in the consulship of Sextus Pompeius and Sextus Apuleius.37 In this lustrum 4,937,000 Roman citizens were entered on the census roll. By the passage of new laws I restored many traditions of our ancestors which were then falling into disuse, and I myself set precedents in many things for posterity to imitate.38”
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/...

see note "36 _ 8 B.C." ("Click here to go back to the reference in the text")

Gaius Asinius Gallus Saloninus was an ambitious Roman Senator with family connections to the Julio-Claudian house. Asinius Gallus was consul in 8 BC.

=

About 14. “The Long Ephemeris Tape.”, JPL and NASA, 1976
Jet Propulsion Laboratory Development Ephemeris
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_Propulsion_Labora...

"E102 was the first numerically integrated so-called Long Ephemeris, covering much of history for which useful astronomical observations were available: 1141 BC to AD 3001." For instance, DE102, which was created in 1977, took six million steps and ran for nine days on a Univac 1100/81.[3]...
(But the DE102 calculation found conjunctions in longitude, which in our case are slightly different from the conjunctions based on minimum separation between the planets.)
=

Comments or possible corrections are welcome!

Best Regards,
Stefan Tallqvist

Käyttäjän jarmolauros kuva
Jarmo Lauros

Paljon tutkimusta uskonnosta, jossa kaikkivaltias isä sivusta katsoo kun poikaansa ristillä tapetaan.
Minulle kästtämätön uskonto.

Käyttäjän jallerajala kuva
Jari Rajala

Horuksen poika, joka kopioitiin egyptiläisten kuolleiden kirjasta, tämä käsittämätön palvontamme kohde http://www.argumentti.fi/argumentti/2011/10/jeesuk... Tän asian vois jo päivittää, ettei tule jatkuvia väärinkäsityksiä

Käyttäjän jallerajala kuva
Jari Rajala

Ok, Mitä tarkoittaa konjuktio?
Tiedätkö Risto vastauksen tähän kysymykseen?

Käyttäjän jgagarin56 kuva
Juha Kuikka

Kun katsoo vaikkapa Jerusalemin keskilämpötiloja,:

http://www.weather-and-climate.com/average-monthly...

niin huomaa, että joulu- tammikuun vaihteessa yön minimilämpötilat putoavat viiden asteen tienoille.

"Sillä seudulla oli paimenia kedolla vartioimassa yöllä laumaansa"

Voiko tuo pitää paikkaansa sellaisena vuodenaikana?

Jarno Liedes

On suomessakin ollut Juhannuksena järvet jäässä aikaan jolloin yleensä on voinut olla ulkona, joten noista säistä tuolloin on paha sanoa nyt mitään.

http://www.kolumbus.fi/seppo.oikkonen/poytakirja.htm

Toimituksen poiminnat