आपणास माझे लेखन आवडते आहे असे ब्लॉगला भेट देणारांच्या वाढत्या संख्येवरून वाटते. विषेशकरून कर्णकथेला वाचक पुष्कळ मिळाले. आपल्या प्रतिक्रिया जरूर मिळावयास हव्यात! त्याशिवाय लिहीत राहण्याचा उत्साह कसा टिकून रहाणार?
I changed over from Marathi to English for my comments on Shri. Oak's book recently. I continue to get readers but there are no comments! Wonder whether I am boring!

Last Seven Days

माझी थोडी ओळख

My photo
San Ramon and Mumbai, California and Maharashtra, United States
ज्येष्ठ नागरिक. साहित्य व संगीत प्रेमी. Senior Citizen

Thursday, February 9, 2017

Planet Positios for 16th Oct 5561BCE - Gregorian.

Shri. Oak has assumed 16th Oct., the date proposed by Dr. Vartak to be Julian but obviously, it is not so. It is Gregorian. Based on 16th Oct to be Julian date Shri. Oak has noted down various planet positions for that date. He has claimed in his book and on his blog and on facebook repeatedly, that they match the astronomical references in Mahabharat. I do not accept the claim in many cases and have written extensively on this blog, giving my reasons.
There is a gap of almost 40 days between 16th Oct. Julian and 16th Oct Gregorian. Within those 40 days there may be no major change in the positions of the planets. I believe, if positions on the Julian date can be considered corroborated, so can be those, for the Gregorian 16th Oct. I wonder whether Shri. Oak agrees or finds any major problems.
16th Oct Julian, accrding to Shri. Oak, was an Amavasya. If so 16th Oct., Gregorian, will not be an Amavasya. Dr. Vartak in his book has claimed that it could have been an amavasya. He does this based on a 39 years cycle for repetition of a particular combination of date and tithi. Is the tithi of a particular date, 7500 years back, given by Software really reliable? If not what margin of error is likely? What was the tithi of 16th Oct. Greg.?
What does Shri. Oak say?


Nilesh Oak said...

I have written about this 'apparent chaos' either directly to Shri Phadnis vis private communication in the past or via some blog notes on my blog.


Vartak calculated positions of planets via their orbital periods. which can show reasonable accuracy for slower planets -e..g Saturn ( and may be Jupiter). As one goes to other planets, orbital period calculations are not sufficient.

As to 16 October of Vartak.. whether he (Vartak) meant per Julian or Gregorian, I would encourage Shri Phadnis to try multiple different ways until he is convinced of his own position or of Dr. Vartak or mine..

(1) Test sun and moon position on 16 October (Julian) and 16 October (Gregorian).. in year 5561 BCE

(2) Test day of winter solstice for that year per Julian (30/31 January 5560 BCE) or about 18 December (Gregorian).

These are simply calculations however Shir Phadnis is unnecessarily confusing himself. If mine is wrong, it is responsibility of others to show how it is so. No point, asking me to recheck my calculations, repeatedly.

Nilesh Oak said...

Julian calendar

16 October 5561 BCE - Day of Amawasya

30/31 January 5560 BCE - Day of winter solstice

Gregorian Calendar

16 October 5561 BCE - Day of Full moon (Pornima)

17 December 5561 BCE - Day of Winter solstice

Hope this helps.

Nilesh Oak said...

What this means is if Gregorian calendar is assumed (as assumed by Shri Phadnis)...

There would be only 53/54 Days for Bhishma on the bed of arrows (25 October through 16/17 December)

Nilesh Oak said...

The whole problem of Vartak's estimate for day of Bhishma Nirvana, I have written in meticulous detail in my book (chapter 9 and also chapter 10) - When did the Mahabharata War happen? The Mystery of Arundhati.

Nilesh Oak said...

In brief...

Vartak assumed 16 October (Julian) for the first day of War (correctly)

But jumped to assumed but incorrect 22 December (per Gregorian in his mind) day of winter solstice for the day of Bhishma Nirvana.. without making the required correction of ~40 days for Julian to Gregorian jump.

In reality.. things are even bit more complex than he (Vartak) assumed or Shri Phadnis assumes... but their elaboration is beyond the scope of this note, here.

प्रभाकर फडणीस P.K. Phadnis said...

I have not claimed any date for start of war. You have claimed 16th Oct. Julian as Dr. Vartak's date and checked it. Dr. Vartak has obviously claimed it as Gregorian as he arrives at this date working backwards from 22nd December as winter solstice, again, as per his assumption. So, if you want to claim 16th Oct Julian, as the first day, claim it as your own, not as Dr. Vartak's claim. That is all I am saying. About your claim of validating planet positions of 16th Oct. Julian as mathing Mahabharat, we have exchanged our views and I stick to mine.

Nilesh Oak said...

I would love to claim it as my own claim - 16 October (Julian) as the first day of war.. and claimed by me and me alone and the first one to do it.

More feathers in my caps, eh!

I won't do it only because Dr. Vartak has done it and while it is my duty (as a child on his shoulders) to point out his error for the day of Bhishma Nirvana, Dr. Vartak is to be credited with the correct claim of 16 October (Julian) for stating as the first day of Mahabharata war.. even when his descriptions of planetary positions are off (which was due to back of the envelope orbital calculations)

Nilesh Oak said...

Shri Phadnis,

If you refuse to comprehend, not much can be done.

(1) Dr. Vartak did not arrive at 16 October (Julian) by beginning with 22 December as day of Bhishma Nirvnana!

And assuming he did (for a min, let's assume your claim is correct), then he should have begun from 17 December (day of winter solstice in year 5561 BCE) and gone backwards to count 58 days ...and thus arrived at 11 October (Gregorian). He did not.

(2) Once he tried to explain/validate/justify 16 October (Julian) as first day of war, he tried to justify 22 December (Gregorian) as the day of winter solstice.

This resulted in ROYAL MESS.

(3) Indirectly, he was made aware of it when some critique brought up the issue of 'Leap year calculations " (very much due to Julian/Gregorian computation difference). Dr. Vartak acknowledged it and tried to explain that planets would not move much (which is true for Saturn/Jupiter ). However, he did not comprehend the implication of this gap of 40-50-55 days between Julian and Gregorian computations. I have shown and explained it in great detail in my book.

More coming in my next book 'Bhishma Nirvana'.

प्रभाकर फडणीस P.K. Phadnis said...

I can quote from Swayambhu to show that he has never claimed 16th Oct. as a Julian date. His book, 3rd edition, does not refer to Julian calendar anywhere. Whether his calculations or findings are right or wrong is not my subject. I am by no means confuse. I have always understood that You are examining 16th Oct. Julian as first day of war. I have repeatedly said that 'I' have no date of my own to propose. I maintain that I have every right to criticise or reject your claims as an interested reader without having my own alternative claim of year or date.
I always had my doubts whether Dr. Vartak meant Julian date. After reading his book once again, I am convinced that he meant Gregorian, rightly or wrongly being besides the point.
Your claim of validating 16th Oct., Julian, as first day raises serious questions of mismatch or inadequate match and I have written in detail about them. We should agree to differ and close the subject.

Lean Jedi said...

I thought the subject was closed long time ago. These are very simple and logical things that can be concluded rather easily.

Even then, when you bring it up, repeatedly, I choose to respond because I see this as another opportunity to educate the masses. If you are confused (real or apparent), imagine the position of masses.

There are multiple forums where so called researchers discuss these things. They are in such a gagaland, I rarely bother responding to their.queries. The rationale behind my decision is beyond the scope of this short comment.

Lean Jedi said...

Sameer Barve has posted comment on this very subject on my blog.

Lean Jedi said...

You have every right to accept or reject or critique my claims without presenting date of your own.

I have every right to respond (or Not) to your comments, show how the criticism is misplaced, accept it when it is correct and discuss the consequences of such changes for my date, and also to explain why you are unable to comprehend certain challenges and why that is because you have not bothered to come up with your own date. Precisely for this very reason I consider it my mission to educate people on drastic difference between 'raising an argument' vs. 'Developing a theory/proposal'...as nicely summarized by Prof B N Balagangadhar in his blog note- arguments vs. Theory.