Author of the Month :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums

Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world.

OK Gang, I am still waiting for further information on this but here is a preliminary report.

The Starry Night version I have (6.4) quotes the following proper motion for Vega (0.2008, 0.2872) (RA,Dec) arcsec/year. The current SIMBAD website quoted values are (0.20094, 0.28623) [same units]. In Black Genesis I used (0.20103, 0.28747) which was at the time the SIMBAD quoted value.

SIMBAD: [simbad.u-strasbg.fr]

So anyhow that is clearly not the issue because those differences in proper motion yield less than 0.002 degrees differences over 14,000 years. (Compared to the 1.36 degrees movement of the whole proper motion itself.)

My version of Starry Night Pro shows Vega culminating at a declination of 86.2407 degrees, 12008 BC, which is 0.299 degrees less than the culmination declination I gave in Black Genesis. The difference between my value and Starry Night's value (for the declination) is not due to our very slightly different proper motions. It is because I used a different method to calculate Earth's pole movement. I calculated it from scratch, using the published equations I referenced in BG and in Origin Map. I have a query out to Starry Night, asking them details on how they calculate Earth's pole for such ancient dates, so I can identify our differences. But I haven't heard back from Starry Night yet. FYI, the reason I calculated such extremely ancient dates myself is because when I started doing such calculations circa 2001, the available software either used a much worse approximation for such extremely ancient dates, or simply didn't do dates before Julian date 0 (circa 4700 BC). I am willing to consider that maybe, today, Starry Night Pro's values might be better than mine. But I can't tell until I find out exactly how Starry Night does their calculations. And, importantly, note that these Vega shaft calculations are the only ones where such a small difference (0.3 degrees over 14,000 years) makes any difference to the interpretations. It will be interesting to track this down.

And, given that, it is interesting to look at the shaft situation if we end up taking the Starry Night value as (possibly, don't know yet) better. The center of the shaft is declination 86.544, and the edges of the shaft if we consider the outer edges at the outside of today's Pyramid are 86.2825 and 86.8052 degrees. So if Vega culminated at 86.2407 degrees it just missed shining down the shaft by 0.04 degrees, IF the whole pyramid was there 12,000 BC (and if the shaft angle did not shift geophysically at all over 14KY, and that is another separate issue). BUT we are pretty sure the whole pyramid as it is today was not there 12,000 BC. As we indicate in Black Genesis, we think, possibly if anything was there it might have been the part of the shaft that goes through the bedrock. That part is shorter, and so has a wider angle to the sky. Its edges are at declinations 86.187 and 86.900 degrees. So if Starry Night's values are correct (again, not certain about this) Vega started shining to the bottom of the bedrock shaft circa 12,120 BC, and continued shining down the shaft through its culmination 12008 BC until 11,896 BC when Vega's declination descended too low to shine down for another 26,000 years.

The Starry Night version I have (6.4) quotes the following proper motion for Vega (0.2008, 0.2872) (RA,Dec) arcsec/year. The current SIMBAD website quoted values are (0.20094, 0.28623) [same units]. In Black Genesis I used (0.20103, 0.28747) which was at the time the SIMBAD quoted value.

SIMBAD: [simbad.u-strasbg.fr]

So anyhow that is clearly not the issue because those differences in proper motion yield less than 0.002 degrees differences over 14,000 years. (Compared to the 1.36 degrees movement of the whole proper motion itself.)

My version of Starry Night Pro shows Vega culminating at a declination of 86.2407 degrees, 12008 BC, which is 0.299 degrees less than the culmination declination I gave in Black Genesis. The difference between my value and Starry Night's value (for the declination) is not due to our very slightly different proper motions. It is because I used a different method to calculate Earth's pole movement. I calculated it from scratch, using the published equations I referenced in BG and in Origin Map. I have a query out to Starry Night, asking them details on how they calculate Earth's pole for such ancient dates, so I can identify our differences. But I haven't heard back from Starry Night yet. FYI, the reason I calculated such extremely ancient dates myself is because when I started doing such calculations circa 2001, the available software either used a much worse approximation for such extremely ancient dates, or simply didn't do dates before Julian date 0 (circa 4700 BC). I am willing to consider that maybe, today, Starry Night Pro's values might be better than mine. But I can't tell until I find out exactly how Starry Night does their calculations. And, importantly, note that these Vega shaft calculations are the only ones where such a small difference (0.3 degrees over 14,000 years) makes any difference to the interpretations. It will be interesting to track this down.

And, given that, it is interesting to look at the shaft situation if we end up taking the Starry Night value as (possibly, don't know yet) better. The center of the shaft is declination 86.544, and the edges of the shaft if we consider the outer edges at the outside of today's Pyramid are 86.2825 and 86.8052 degrees. So if Vega culminated at 86.2407 degrees it just missed shining down the shaft by 0.04 degrees, IF the whole pyramid was there 12,000 BC (and if the shaft angle did not shift geophysically at all over 14KY, and that is another separate issue). BUT we are pretty sure the whole pyramid as it is today was not there 12,000 BC. As we indicate in Black Genesis, we think, possibly if anything was there it might have been the part of the shaft that goes through the bedrock. That part is shorter, and so has a wider angle to the sky. Its edges are at declinations 86.187 and 86.900 degrees. So if Starry Night's values are correct (again, not certain about this) Vega started shining to the bottom of the bedrock shaft circa 12,120 BC, and continued shining down the shaft through its culmination 12008 BC until 11,896 BC when Vega's declination descended too low to shine down for another 26,000 years.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.