I’ve long been perplexed by what the ancient might have used as valid approximations of Mercury’s cycles. There’s really no shortage of good candidates – in fact, quite the opposite, which may be the source of the difficulty.
It’s curious that in all my searches for material relating to Mayan calendars the past few years, I really haven’t come across anything yet that lays out the simple internal relationships that made the Mayan Calendar and the Calendar Round work, although of course some of it is commonplace to see. Such a reference might prove helpful.
We know that Mercury was important to ancient calendars, and I am grateful to Bogna Krys (rodz) for sharing some materials that help make that clear.
The Planets in Aztec Culture by Susan Milbraith (Academia.edu)
“The Borgia narrative also helps identify Xolotl as the planet Mercury and provides hints about other planets that may be linked with different aspects of Tezcatlipoca, an Aztec god who ruled the night sky”
According to Wikipedia, Mayan Astronomy
“Pages 30c-33c of the Dresden codex are a Venus-Mercury almanac. The 2340-day length of the Venus-Mercury almanac is a close approximation of the synodic periods of Venus (4 x 585) and Mercury (20 x 117).”
Which also points to the significance of Mercury, albeit with figures that may be potentially misleading.
The textbook figures for Mercury’s cycles are
Mercury Orbital Period 87.9691 days
Mercury Synodic Period 115.88 days
Of course, 80 Indus Feet = 88.069977028 (or as numerous researchers use, simply 88) has already been nominated as a possible value for the Mercury Orbital Period, one of three experimental sets so far representing possible values for the Mercury Orbital Period.
If only recently, I’ve noticed that (1 / 18980) / 6 = 87.81173165 / 10^n, reminiscent of 87.9691, so a fourth possible formula has been logged, an elegantly simple one that cures off the Calendar Round.
To use the established experimental Calendar Round (Half Venus Cycle) figures, (1 / 18983.99126) / 6 = 87.79332690.
This is one half of the perimeter length of the Great Pyramid’s missing apex section, according to my model, from whose proposed measures the Venus Orbital Period and other planetary cycles values may be readily accessible.
Some time ago it was noted that the ratio between the standard values for Mercury Orbital Period and Mercury Synodic Period, 115.88 / 87.9691 = 1.317370579, resembles the important constant 1.315947254 (important enough to be Munck’s “Grid Point” for the massive Cholula Pyramid).
If this ratio belongs to ancient figures for Mercury’s cycles and the Mercury Orbital Period A value is 87.79332690, the A value for the Mercury Synodic Period would be 87.79332690 x 1.315947254 = 115.5313123 – and that is something that I find very interesting about this newly logged possibility for the Mercury Orbital Period.
I’ve posted before about 115.5313123. It’s a number with some interesting properties, and we can readily find it at Stonehenge as 1/2 outer sarcen circle radius / Petrie Stonehenge Unit (in inches) = 259.7575758 / 224.8373808 = 1.155313130.
Thus we can see it as a refinement of the ratio of the “Mayan” Tzolkin of 260 days and the Venus Orbital Period 225 days = 260 / 225 = 1.15555555.
Other reasons this may be a very interesting possibility include that at Stonehenge, we can very easily construct this figure from two of the most obvious resident power numbers, the Megalithic Yard and putative Megalithic Foot values that I work with
2.720174976 / 1.177245771 = 2.310626240; 2.310626240 / 2 = 1.155313120
In the previous post it was mentioned how the diameter of the Bluestone Circle may be 46.21252491 ft (Thom 17 x 2.72 = 46.24 feet — 46.21252491 / 4 = 1.155313120.
“16.98880598 (20 / 1.177245771) MY x 2.720174976 = 46.21252491 ft diameter” – that’s a Stonehenge suggestion I’ve been entertaining for a very long time now (“What else would it be?” has often been part of the discussion), but it’s only in recent years after working with calendar concepts that I’ve started to realize just how meaningful values like that could turn out to be.
We also saw in the previous post how this pair of major metrological units of Stonehenge can generate the Eclipse Year as a simple fraction as well
“(Megalithic Yard 2.720174976 / Megalithic Foot 1.177245771) x 15 = 346.5939368.”
There’s a lot left to consider – the ancient multi-planetary calendar system is an intricate network of ratios and products whose components had to have been chosen and organized very carefully for maximum harmony and functionality.
I have yet to be careful or thorough here and it remains to be seen if these possible values can be slotted sensibly into the planetary values template – but it’s remarkable how these suggestions for Mercury cycle values have come up “out of the blue” making a very good first impression indeed.
The possible Mercury Orbital Period value 87.79332690 also resonates with the primary Venus Orbital Period. Referring back to the 887.2663994 “SRVS” (Square Root of the Volume of Sphere) that appears as part of a possible interpretation of the Aubrey Circle’s measures in a preceeding post
(887.6223994 / 2) / (224.8373808^1) = 2 x (Pi^2) / 10^n
(887.6223994 / 2) / (224.8373808^2) = 87.79326948 / 10^n
So Stonehenge may be pointing at this figure, and in fact, to once again refer to the most important Stonehenge numbers,
Remen 1.216733603 / Megalithic Foot 1.177245771 = 1.033542552 (found in the mean of the sarsen circle) and
Remen 1.216733603 / (Megalithic Foot Squared 1.177245771^2) = 87.79326948
We can also conjugate this figure from the much less used shorter Remen and the Hashimi Cubit
1.067438159 / 1.215854205 = 87.79326948 / 100
It can be noted that regarding the equation above, (887.6223994 / 2) / (224.8373808^1) = 2 x (Pi^2) / 10^n, 2 x (Pi^2) is the reciprocal of the 4th Root of 6586.899478, a strong candidate figure for one of the valid approximations of the Saros Cycle of 6585.3211 days. Thus such a gesture would have further astronomical significance.
87.79326948 reacts with the proposed 100.6036766 ft sarsen circle mean diameter to give the Double Radian (and possible form of the Egyptian Royal Foot) — 100.6036766 / 87.79326948 = 1.145915595 = 57.29577951 x 2 / 10^n.
We also find that 25920 / 87.79326948 = 29.52390332, which thus far seems to be the most useful close approximation of the Lunar Month.
Even though there remains much to be considered, already 87.79326948 has passed a number of important tests.
–Luke Piwalker
Luke Piwalker 