~valWright~'s MySpace Blog |

MySpace.com | rss | sign in

~valWright~

Last Updated: 11/28/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Male
Status: Married
Age: 49
Sign: Aquarius

City: Mt.Vernon / Jacksonville / Germany
Country: US
Signup Date: 11/23/2008

Blog Archive

[Older Newer]

/ /

Monday, October 12, 2009

Ardipithecus: Discovering Ardi: Building Ardi's World

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/discovering-ardi-d...

Scientists returned to the Ethiopian desert year after year to search for fossilized evidence of the plants and animals that lived with Ardi.

12:39 PM

0 Comments

(Add Comment) |

0 Kudos

Translate

Monday, October 12, 2009

100 Greatest Discoveries: Toumai Skull

Modern humans are just the latest link in the evolutionary chain. See how the fossil record changes our view of what it means to be

12:33 PM

0 Comments

(Add Comment) |

0 Kudos

Translate

Saturday, October 03, 2009

2009 Nobel predictions go public
Current mood:

stoked
Category: Jobs, Work, Careers

The identities of top contenders for annual Nobel Prizes are kept under wraps during the nomination and selection process, no one quite knowing what happens behind the committees' closed doors. That secrecy doesn't stop a few brave organizations from trying to predict the winners every year, often with varying degrees of success.

Alfred Nobel
Image: Wikipedia

Publishing and information company Thomson Reuters released their list of finalists yesterday. Using data from ISI Web of Knowledge (part of Thomson Scientific started by The Scientist founder Eugene Garfield ), the company compiles a list of Citation Laureates -- top researchers that have accumulated stratospheric citation totals and written several high-impact papers during their careers. Thomson Reuters made its first formal predictions in 2002, but bibliometricians working for the company and using the same citation method published their picks in The Scientist as early as 1989. Twenty-seven of their choices have gone on to win a Nobel Prize, although sometimes years after they were originally chosen by Thomson Reuters.

The company tapped two teams and one lone researcher to win this year's Nobel Prize in physiology and medicine. Elizabeth Blackburn, a biochemist at the University of California, San Francisco, Carol Greider, a geneticist at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, and Jack Szostak, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School, were noted for their roles in the discovery of and pioneering research on telomeres and telomerases. James Rothman, a cell biologist and chemist at Yale University, and Randy Schekman, a developmental cell biologist at the University of California, Berkeley, were chosen for their work on cellular membrane trafficking. Lastly, Seiji Ogawa, a neurobiologist from the Hamano Life Science Research Foundation in Tokyo, rounds out the list for his discoveries leading to functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).

For the Nobel Prize in chemistry, the company picked Michael Gratzel at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology for his invention of dye-sensitized solar cells, now known as Gratzel cells, Benjamin List at the Max Planck Institute for Coal Research in Germany for his development of organic asymmetric catalysis using enamines, and the research team Jacqueline Barton at the California Institute of Technology, Bernd Giese at the University of Basel in Switzerland, and Gary Schuster at the Georgia Institute of Technology for their pioneering research in electron charge transfer in DNA.

The winners of the 2009 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine will be announced Monday, October 5 and the Prize in Chemistry on Wednesday, October 7.

2:55 PM

0 Comments

(Add Comment) |

0 Kudos

Translate

Thursday, October 01, 2009

Cosmic Voyage
Category: Life

2:16 AM

0 Comments

(Add Comment) |

0 Kudos

Translate

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

The Mayan Calendar (video)

9:25 PM

0 Comments

(Add Comment) |

0 Kudos

Translate

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Valid circular reasoning
Current mood:

indescribable
Category: Life

............

Valid circular reasoning....

The fallacy in begging the question or circular reasoning in its usual sense lies not in the circularity of the argument, but in the initial assumption of the truth of one of the premises, or, as Douglas Walton puts it: "Arguing in a circle becomes a fallacy of petitio principii or begging the question where an attempt is made to evade the burden of proving one of the premises of an argument by basing it on the prior acceptance of the conclusion to be proved." While acknowledging the need for proof or observation of such a premise, circular reasoning can be a useful tool in logic or mathematics. It can be used to prove the reverse of an argument, which could otherwise be very difficult. In other words, if the last statement in a line of proofs can be connected to the first, all arguments in this line work both ways.....

To illustrate this, assume that 'A ? B' means that statement A is shown to prove statement B (but not the other way around). Now if we know that A ? B ? C ? D and we find that D ? A, we can complete the circle and by simple logic we can deduce that A ? B ? C ? D. In fact, we can put the statements in any order, e.g. C ? A ? D ? B is also true. It can be said that the premises A, B, C and D are equivalent, i.e. they are found to contain exactly the same information. If we can observe or prove any of these statements, the others must also be true. This observation or proof is obviously crucial, it forms a line to the circle in order to make the entire argument valid. Of course, this works for any number of steps in a circular argument.....

....

Begging the question (or petitio principii, "assuming the initial point") is a logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in the premise. Begging the question is related to the fallacy known as circular argument, circulus in probando or circular reasoning but they are considered absolutely different by Aristotle.^[1] The first known definition in the West is by the Greek philosopher Aristotle around 350 BC, in his book Prior Analytics, where he classified it as a material fallacy.

The term was translated into English from the Latin in the 16th century. The Latin version, Petitio Principii (petitio: petition, request; principii, genitive of principium: beginning, basis, premise of an argument), literally means "a request for the beginning or premise." That is, the premise depends on the truth of the very matter in question.....

The Latin phrase comes from the Greek en archei aiteisthai in Aristole's Prior Analytics II xvi:....

"Begging or assuming the point at issue consists (to take the expression in its widest sense) in failing to demonstrate the required proposition. But there are several other ways in which this may happen; for example, if the argument has not taken syllogistic form at all, he may argue from premises which are less known or equally unknown, or he may establish the antecedent by means of its consequents; for demonstration proceeds from what is more certain and is prior. Now begging the question is none of these. [...] If, however, the relation of B to C is such that they are identical, or that they are clearly convertible, or that one applies to the other, then he is begging the point at issue.... [B]egging the question is proving what is not self-evident by means of itself...either because predicates which are identical belong to the same subject, or because the same predicate belongs to subjects which are identical."....

Fowler's Deductive Logic (1887) argues that the Latin origin is more properly Petitio Quæsiti which is literally "begging the question".....

The fallacy of petitio principii, or "begging the question", is committed "when a proposition which requires proof is assumed without proof." More specifically, petitio principii refers to arguing for a conclusion that has already been assumed in the premise. The fallacy may be committed in various ways.....

When the fallacy of begging the question is committed in a single step, it is sometimes called a hysteron proteron, as in the statement "Opium induces sleep because it has a soporific quality".Such fallacies may not be immediately obvious in English because the English language has so many synonyms; one way to beg the question is to make a statement first in concrete terms, then in abstract ones, or vice-versa.Another is to "bring forth a proposition expressed in words of Saxon origin, and give as a reason for it the very same proposition stated in words of Norman origin", as in this example: "To allow every man an unbounded freedom of speech must always be, on the whole advantageous to the State, for it is highly conducive to the interests of the community that each individual should enjoy a liberty perfectly unlimited of expressing his sentiments."....

When the fallacy of begging the question is committed in more than one step, it is sometimes referred to as circulus in probando or reasoning in a circlebut incorrectly if we look at the definition what Aristotle gave us in Prior Analytics.....

"Begging the question" can also refer to making an argument in which the premise "is different from the conclusion ... but is controversial or questionable for the same reasons that typically might lead someone to question the conclusion.

Related fallacies....

In informal situations, the term begging the question is often used in place of circular argument. In the formal context however, begging the question holds a different meaning.In its shortest form, circular reasoning is the basing of two conclusions by means of which there is demonstrated a reversed premise of the first argument. Begging the question does not require any such reversal so instances of petitio principii (begging the question) are formally logical, and in fact logically valid – that is, the conclusion does follow from the premise – they are tautological.....

Begging the question is similar to the fallacy of Fallacy of many questions: a fallacy of technique that results from presenting evidence in support of a conclusion that is less likely to be accepted than merely asserting the conclusion. A specific form of this is reducing an assertion to an instance of a more general assertion, which is no more known to be true than the more specific assertion:....

All intentional acts of killing human beings are morally wrong.....
The death penalty is an intentional act of killing a human being.....
Therefore the death penalty is wrong.....

If the first premise is accepted as an axiom within some moral system or code, this reasoning is a cogent argument against the death penalty. If not, it is in fact a weaker argument than a mere assertion that the death penalty is wrong, since the first premise is stronger than the conclusion.

Traditional usage....

"That begs the question" is an appropriate reply when a circular argument is used within a syllogism Syllogism....

A syllogism, or logical appeal, is a kind of logical argument in which one proposition is Inference from two others of a certain form. That is, when the given argument depends on what it is trying to support, and as a result, the proposition....

Proposition....

In logic and philosophy, proposition refers to either the "content" or Meaning of a meaningful declarative sentence or the pattern of symbols, marks, or sounds that make up a meaningful declarative sentence is being used to prove itself. For example:....

"Why am I the boss? It's because I call the shots around here."....
"Of course I had a reason, or I wouldn't have done it."....
"I didn't steal it. I'm no thief!"....

These statements strongly suggest logical arguments (A is true because B is true) that don't actually provide any proof, because they are circular (in each case B can only be true if A is already assumed to be true).....

Another common instance is found when computations lead to identities: someone is trying to solve an equation and in the course of the attempt reduces a mathematical expression to itself.....

Instances of petitio principii are formally logical, and in fact logically valid – that is, the conclusion does follow from the premise – they are tautological.....

Formally speaking, the fallacy of petitio principii has the following structure (P and Q are propositions):....

Q only if P.....
P.....
Therefore, Q.....
(unspoken) P only if Q.....

The syntactic presentation is rarely this transparent: if it were, it wouldn't have any convincing power. Usually, this means that the argument isn't actually an instance of simple deductive reasoning in the first place, but only superficially takes that form. For instance, the remark concerning God's existence quoted here is really just a shorthand for the following reasoning (or variants of it):....

(1) The writings in question are true on all specific points we can verify. (With arguments in each case.)....

(2, from 1) Hence, we have good reason to assume that they are completely truthful throughout.....

(3) The writings describe many events that demonstrate the existence of God.....

(4, from 2 and 3) Hence, these descriptions must be truthful, so God must exist. (It actually suffices for just one of them to be truthful.)....

(5) If the writings had been authored by man, they would not have been true on all of these points. (With arguments in each of these cases.)....

(6, from 1 and 5) Hence, they must have been authored by someone other than man.....

(7, from 2 and 5) Hence, we have good reason to assume the existence of someone who, unlike man, is completely truthful, and who authored these writings.....

(8, from 7) This someone is God.....

What we see here is not an instance of circular reasoning, but two different arguments, only partly deductive, for the existence of an all-knowing higher being who wrote the writings in question.....

Modern usage....

More recently, to beg the question has been used as a synonym for to raise the question, or to indicate that the question really ought to be addressed. A colon and the statement of the question commonly follow this usage. For example, "This year's budget deficit is half a trillion dollars. This begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?"....

Using the term in this way, although common, is considered incorrect. This usage is the result of confusion over the translation of petitio principii, which literally translates as "assuming the starting point".....

Arguments over whether such usage should be considered incorrect are an example of debate over linguistic prescription and description.

2:57 PM

0 Comments

(Add Comment) |

0 Kudos

Translate

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Maya calendar
Current mood:assuming

............

The Maya calendar is a system of distinct calendars and almanacs used by the Maya civilization of pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, and by some modern Maya communities in highland Guatemala.....

These calendars can be synchronized and interlocked, their combinations giving rise to further, more extensive cycles. The essentials of the Maya calendric system are based upon a system which had been in common use throughout the region, dating back to at least the 6th century BC. It shares many aspects with calendars employed by other earlier Mesoamerican civilizations, such as the Zapotec and Olmec, and contemporary or later ones such as the Mixtec and Aztec calendars. Although the Mesoamerican calendar did not originate with the Maya, their subsequent extensions and refinements of it were the most sophisticated. Along with those of the Aztecs, the Maya calendars are the best-documented and most completely understood.....

By the Maya mythological tradition, as documented in Colonial Yucatec accounts and reconstructed from Late Classic and Postclassic inscriptions, the deity Itzamna is frequently credited with bringing the knowledge of the calendar system to the ancestral Maya, along with writing in general and other foundational aspects of Maya culture.....

The most important of these calendars is one with a period of 260 days. This 260-day calendar was prevalent across all Mesoamerican societies, and is of great antiquity (almost certainly the oldest of the calendars). It is still used in some regions of Oaxaca, and by the Maya communities of the Guatemalan highlands. The Maya version is commonly known to scholars as the Tzolkin, or Tzolk'in in the revised orthography of the Academia de las Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala.^[2] The Tzolk'in is combined with another 365-day calendar (known as the Haab, or Haab' ), to form a synchronized cycle lasting for 52 Haabs, called the Calendar Round. Smaller cycles of 13 days (the trecena) and 20 days (the veintena) were important components of the Tzolk'in and Haab' cycles, respectively.....

A different form of calendar was used to track longer periods of time, and for the inscription of calendar dates (i.e., identifying when one event occurred in relation to others). This form, known as the Long Count, is based upon the number of elapsed days since a mythological starting-point.^[3] According to the correlation between the Long Count and Western calendars accepted by the great majority of Maya researchers (known as the GMT correlation), this starting-point is equivalent to August 11, 3114 BC in the proleptic Gregorian calendar or 6 September in the Julian calendar (−3113 astronomical). The Goodman-Martinez-Thompson correlation was chosen by Thompson in 1935 based on earlier correlations by Joseph Goodman in 1905 (August 11), Juan Martínez Hernández in 1926 (August 12), and John Eric Sydney Thompson in 1927 (August 13).^[4][5] By its linear nature, the Long Count was capable of being extended to refer to any date far into the future (or past). This calendar involved the use of a positional notation system, in which each position signified an increasing multiple of the number of days. The Maya numeral system was essentially vigesimal (i.e., base-20), and each unit of a given position represented 20 times the unit of the position which preceded it. An important exception was made for the second-order place value, which instead represented 18 × 20, or 360 days, more closely approximating the solar year than would 20 × 20 = 400 days. It should be noted however that the cycles of the Long Count are independent of the solar year.....

Many Maya Long Count inscriptions are supplemented by a Lunar Series, which provides information on the lunar phase and position of the Moon in a half-yearly cycle of lunations.....

A 584-day Venus cycle was also maintained, which tracked the heliacal risings of Venus as the morning and evening stars. Many events in this cycle were seen as being astrologically inauspicious and baleful, and occasionally warfare was astrologically timed to coincide with stages in this cycle.....

Other, less-prevalent or poorly-understood cycles, combinations and calendar progressions were also tracked. An 819-day count is attested in a few inscriptions; repeating sets of 9- and 13-day intervals associated with different groups of deities, animals and other significant concepts are also known.....

Maya concepts of time....

With the development of the place-notational Long Count calendar (believed to have been inherited from other Mesoamerican cultures), the Maya had an elegant system with which events could be recorded in a linear relationship to one another, and also with respect to the calendar ("linear time") itself. In theory, this system could readily be extended to delineate any length of time desired, by simply adding to the number of higher-order place markers used (and thereby generating an ever-increasing sequence of day-multiples, each day in the sequence uniquely identified by its Long Count number). In practice, most Maya Long Count inscriptions confine themselves to noting only the first 5 coefficients in this system (a b'ak'tun-count), since this was more than adequate to express any historical or current date (with an equivalent span of approximately 5125 solar years). Even so, example inscriptions exist which noted or implied lengthier sequences, indicating that the Maya well understood a linear (past-present-future) conception of time.....

However, and in common with other Mesoamerican societies, the repetition of the various calendric cycles, the natural cycles of observable phenomena, and the recurrence and renewal of death-rebirth imagery in their mythological traditions were important and pervasive influences upon Maya societies. This conceptual view, in which the "cyclical nature" of time is highlighted, was a pre-eminent one, and many rituals were concerned with the completion and re-occurrences of various cycles. As the particular calendaric configurations were once again repeated, so too were the "supernatural" influences with which they were associated. Thus it was held that particular calendar configurations had a specific "character" to them, which would influence events on days exhibiting that configuration. Divinations could then be made from the auguries associated with a certain configuration, since events taking place on some future date would be subject to the same influences as its corresponding previous cycle dates. Events and ceremonies would be timed to coincide with auspicious dates, and avoid inauspicious ones.....

The completion of significant calendar cycles ("period endings"), such as a k'atun-cycle, were often marked by the erection and dedication of specific monuments (mostly stela inscriptions, but sometimes twin-pyramid complexes such as those in Tikal and Yaxha), commemorating the completion, accompanied by dedicatory ceremonies.....

A cyclical interpretation is also noted in Maya creation accounts, in which the present world and the humans in it were preceded by other worlds (one to five others, depending on the tradition) which were fashioned in various forms by the gods, but subsequently destroyed. The present world also had a tenuous existence, requiring the supplication and offerings of periodic sacrifice to maintain the balance of continuing existence. Similar themes are found in the creation accounts of other Mesoamerican societies.....

The tzolk'in (in modern Maya orthography; also commonly written tzolkin) is the name commonly employed by Mayanist researchers for the Maya Sacred Round or 260-day calendar. The word tzolk'in is a neologism coined in Yucatec Maya, to mean "count of days" (Coe 1992). The various names of this calendar as used by Precolumbian Maya peoples are still debated by scholars. The Aztec calendar equivalent was called Tonalpohualli, in the Nahuatl language.....

The tzolk'in calendar combines twenty day names with the thirteen numbers of the trecena cycle to produce 260 unique days. It is used to determine the time of religious and ceremonial events and for divination. Each successive day is numbered from 1 up to 13 and then starting again at 1. Separately from this, each day is given a name in sequence from a list of 20 day names:....

Some systems started the count with 1 Imix', followed by 2 Ik', 3 Ak'b'al, etc. up to 13 B'en. The trecena day numbers then start again at 1 while the named-day sequence continues onwards, so the next days in the sequence are 1 Ix, 2 Men, 3 K'ib', 4 Kab'an, 5 Etz'nab', 6 Kawoq, and 7 Ajau. With all twenty named days used, these now began to repeat the cycle while the number sequence continues, so the next day after 7 Ajaw is 8 Imix'. The repetition of these interlocking 13- and 20-day cycles therefore takes 260 days to complete (that is, for every possible combination of number/named day to occur once).....

....

Origin of the Tzolk'in....

The exact origin of the Tzolk'in is not known, but there are several theories. One theory is that the calendar came from mathematical operations based on the numbers thirteen and twenty, which were important numbers to the Maya. The numbers multiplied together equal 260. Another theory is that the 260-day period came from the length of human pregnancy. This is close to the average number of days between the first missed menstrual period and birth, unlike Naegele's rule which is 40 weeks (280 days) between the last menstrual period and birth. It is postulated that midwives originally developed the calendar to predict babies' expected birth dates.....

A third theory comes from understanding of astronomy, geography and paleontology. The mesoamerican calendar probably originated with the Olmecs, and a settlement existed at Izapa, in southeast Chiapas Mexico, before 1200 BC. There, at a latitude of about 15° N, the Sun passes through zenith twice a year, and there are 260 days between zenithal passages, and gnomons (used generally for observing the path of the Sun and in particular zenithal passages), were found at this and other sites. The sacred almanac may well have been set in motion on August 13, 1359 BC, in Izapa. Vincent H. Malmström, a geographer who suggested this location and date, outlines his reasons:....

(1) Astronomically, it lay at the only latitude in North America where a 260-day interval (the length of the "strange" sacred almanac used throughout the region in pre-Columbian times) can be measured between vertical sun positions -- an interval which happens to begin on the 13th of August -- the day the peoples of the Mesoamerica believed that the present world was created; (2) Historically, it was the only site at this latitude which was old enough to have been the cradle of the sacred almanac, which at that time (1973) was thought to date to the 4th or 5th centuries B.C.; and (3) Geographically, it was the only site along the required parallel of latitude that lay in a tropical lowland ecological niche where such creatures as alligators, monkeys, and iguanas were native -- all of which were used as day-names in the sacred almanac. ....

Malmström also offers strong arguments against both of the former explanations.....

A fourth theory is that the calendar is based on the crops. From planting to harvest is approximately 260 days.....

The Haab' was the Maya solar calendar made up of eighteen months of twenty days each plus a period of five days ("nameless days") at the end of the year known as Wayeb' (or Uayeb in 16th C. orthography). Bricker (1982) estimates that the Haab' was first used around 550 BC with the starting point of the winter solstice.....

The Haab' month names are known today by their corresponding names in colonial-era Yukatek Maya, as transcribed by 16th century sources (in particular, Diego de Landa and books such as the Chilam Balam of Chumayel). Phonemic analyses of Haab' glyph names in pre-Columbian Maya inscriptions have demonstrated that the names for these twenty-day periods varied considerably from region to region and from period to period, reflecting differences in the base language(s) and usage in the Classic and Postclassic eras predating their recording by Spanish sources.^[11]....

Each day in the Haab' calendar was identified by a day number in the month followed by the name of the month. Day numbers began with a glyph translated as the "seating of" a named month, which is usually regarded as day 0 of that month, although a minority treat it as day 20 of the month preceding the named month. In the latter case, the seating of Pop is day 5 of Wayeb'. For the majority, the first day of the year was 0 Pop (the seating of Pop). This was followed by 1 Pop, 2 Pop as far as 19 Pop then 0 Wo, 1 Wo and so on.....

As a calendar for keeping track of the seasons, the Haab' was a bit inaccurate, since it treated the year as having exactly 365 days, and ignored the extra quarter day (approximately) in the actual tropical year. This meant that the seasons moved with respect to the calendar year by a quarter day each year, so that the calendar months named after particular seasons no longer corresponded to these seasons after a few centuries. The Haab' is equivalent to the wandering 365-day year of the ancient Egyptians.....

Wayeb'....

The five nameless days at the end of the calendar, called Wayeb', were thought to be a dangerous time. Foster (2002) writes "During Wayeb, portals between the mortal realm and the Underworld dissolved. No boundaries prevented the ill-intending deities from causing disasters." To ward off these evil spirits, the Maya had customs and rituals they practiced during Wayeb'. For example, people avoided leaving their houses or washing or combing their hair.....

Neither the Tzolk'in nor the Haab' system numbered the years. The combination of a Tzolk'in date and a Haab' date was enough to identify a date to most people's satisfaction, as such a combination did not occur again for another 52 years, above general life expectancy.....

Because the two calendars were based on 260 days and 365 days respectively, the whole cycle would repeat itself every 52 Haab' years exactly. This period was known as a Calendar Round. The end of the Calendar Round was a period of unrest and bad luck among the Maya, as they waited in expectation to see if the gods would grant them another cycle of 52 years.....

Since Calendar Round dates can only distinguish in 18,980 days, equivalent to around 52 solar years, the cycle repeats roughly once each lifetime, and thus, a more refined method of dating was needed if history was to be recorded accurately. To measure dates, therefore, over periods longer than 52 years, Mesoamericans devised the Long Count calendar.....

The Maya name for a day was k'in. Twenty of these k'ins are known as a winal or uinal. Eighteen winals make one tun. Twenty tuns are known as a k'atun. Twenty k'atuns make a b'ak'tun.....

The Long Count calendar identifies a date by counting the number of days from the Mayan creation date 4 Ahaw, 8 Kumk'u (August 11, 3114 BC in the proleptic Gregorian calendar or September 6 in the Julian calendar). But instead of using a base-10 (decimal) scheme like Western numbering, the Long Count days were tallied in a modified base-20 scheme. Thus 0.0.0.1.5 is equal to 25, and 0.0.0.2.0 is equal to 40. As the winal unit resets after only counting to 18, the Long Count consistently uses base-20 only if the tun is considered the primary unit of measurement, not the k'in; with the k'in and winal units being the number of days in the tun. The Long Count 0.0.1.0.0 represents 360 days, rather than the 400 in a purely base-20 (vigesimal) count.....

There are also four rarely-used higher-order cycles: piktun, kalabtun, k'inchiltun, and alautun.....

Since the Long Count dates are unambiguous, the Long Count was particularly well suited to use on monuments. The monumental inscriptions would not only include the 5 digits of the Long Count, but would also include the two tzolk'in characters followed by the two haab' characters.....

The Mesoamerican Long Count calendar forms the basis for a New Age belief, first forecast by José Argüelles, that a cataclysm will take place on or about December 21, 2012, a forecast that mainstream Mayanist scholars consider a misinterpretation, yet is commonly referenced in pop-culture media as the 2012 problem.....

For example, Sandra Noble, executive director of the Mesoamerican research organization FAMSI, notes that "[f]or the ancient Maya, it was a huge celebration to make it to the end of a whole cycle". However, she considers the portrayal of December 2012 as a doomsday or cosmic-shift event to be "a complete fabrication and a chance for a lot of people to cash in."^[12]....

Venus Cycle....

Another important calendar for the Maya was the Venus cycle. The Maya were skilled astronomers, and could calculate the Venus cycle with extreme accuracy. There are six pages in the Dresden Codex (one of the Maya codices) devoted to the accurate calculation of the heliacal rising of Venus. The Maya were able to achieve such accuracy by careful observation over many years. There are various theories as to why Venus cycle was especially important for the Maya, including the belief that it was associated with war and used it to divine good times (called electional astrology) for coronations and war. Maya rulers planned for wars to begin when Venus rose. The Maya also possibly tracked other planets’ movements, including those of Mars, Mercury, and Jupiter.

..What is so special about the Mayan Calendar?..

The person with no previous exposure to the Mayan Calendar will usually initially be surprised by the fact that some people today take such an interest in an ancient calendar. After all, human history has seen a high number of different calendars. Is not then the Mayan calendar just a very specialized subject of interest only to specialists or history buffs? �Why would the world today need another calendar than the Gregorian or Muslim that are currently in use, and why should this be the Mayan calendar?� some may ask.

Well, to begin with most people probably have a much too limited view of the importance of the Mayan civilization, and Native American traditions generally. In fact, at their height in the 5th to 9th centuries AD, the Mayan cities would be among the largest in the world and developed the most advanced mathematics and astronomy of their day. And so, even if the Native American civilizations hardly survived the later contact with the Europeans they were and are the carriers of a significant and irreplaceable part of the global human consciousness.

When we talk about the Mayan Calendar something profoundly different is also meant than just a system to mark off the passage of time. The Mayan Calendar is above all a prophetic calendar that may help us understand the past and foresee the future. It is a calendar of the Ages that describes how the progression of Heavens and Underworlds condition the human consciousness and thus the frames for our thoughts and actions within a given Age. The Mayan Calendar provides an exact schedule for the Cosmic Plan and the unfolding of all things that come into existence. There is now ample empirical evidence for this, something that shines new light on the age old questions of mankind. Things do exist for a reason. The reason is that they fit into the divine cosmic plan. For those that seriously engage in a study of the Mayan Calendar this soon becomes evident and the former materialist world view loses all relevance. The Mayan Calendar is a gateway to the worlds of consciousness which the majority of humanity has been blinded to through the use of false or delusory calendars.

Since everything that exists is an aspect of consciousness, and the Mayan Calendar describes the evolution of consciousness in all of its aspects, no stone is left unturned for the serious student of the Mayan Calendar. All of science is affected, all of religion is affected, all of life is affected. We are here for a reason. Time is no longer equated with money, but with spirit. Time is inspiration!

Carl Johan Calleman

2:27 PM

0 Comments

(Add Comment) |

0 Kudos

Translate