New mathematical proof of Almagest belonging to S. IX

[cjbaiget]

Dear fellow NC researchers,

At the end of 2023 I was very active in NC related research, and I was lucky enough to find a simple, definitive and straightforward proof corroborating a late dating (S. IX) for the Almagest catalog, in perfect accordance with New Chronology conclusions.

This proof doesn't require any previous statistical characterization of the catalogue, nor a selection of stars depending on potential resolution due to proper motion. Its input is the raw catalogue, no systemic error compensation of any kind being required.

It is based on the following premise, for which the results are a confirmation: for obvious reasons, the magnitude of the proper motions of the stars cannot be a source of the error to which they appear in the catalogue. When this correlation appears, it's due to an erroneous dating. Therefore, correct dating is when this correlation is minimal. Considering speeds and errors as signals, a signal cross-correlation can be computed to find this dating.

Please look further details in the paper included, and in my blog. After a brief code cleanup, I will release the data and the code of this method for anyone willing to verify the result.

Taking into account that some skeptics have critized Fomenko, Kalashnikov, and Nosovsky's dating because it relies on an informative kernel of 8 stars, this methods confirms the exactly the same dating with a subset of up to *350 stars*, with no other consideration than of requiring a minimal brightness for the star to be included.

This method doesn't include any consideration about the catalog included and has been tested with other catalogues of well known date, so the results cannot be selectively disputed.

I hope you find this research interesting and worth your time.
Carlos Baiget.

pd: I apologize for writing in a foreign language. I know online translators can be used, but I cannot risk posting something I don't understand and can lead to confusion. Thanks for your understanding.

[Алистейн]

И все опять упирается в тот самый Великий Индиктион в 877 году, который и должен быть признан началом эры, которая имеет логическую и математическую связь со всей последующей хронологией. Именно с Кругов Солнцу и Луне равных единицам начался отсчет времени. И что никакого Индиктового числа еще не могло быть по сути. Могли, правда, быть и косвенные датировки в виде: столько-то лет до или после Первого Никейского Собора.

[Орлов]

I read about dating star catalogs in this article
https://cliolapso.blogspot.com/2023/12/ ... ellar.html

Ulugh Beg's catalog dates to 1180, which exactly corresponds to the era of Andronicus-Christ!
What is the accuracy of your dating method, what is the margin of error?

[cjbaiget]

Hello again, thanks for your interest in the scc-md dating method.

It is -very- accurate, it has been proven to be accurate to the decade in several experimental tests with artificial catalogs, adultered and not, with systemic and random errors. Absolutely ludicrous systemic and random errors displaced the result around a century. The method computes its results using hundreds of stars from the catalog. The systemic error is transparent for the correlation, and random errors end cancelling themselves.

Precise quantity of the margin of error cannot be obtained from mathematical analysis of the algorithm, as the main metric (signal cross correlation) is non dimensional. The '-md' part is a substitute for this margin, and takes into account the minimal resolution of the values of the catalog (minimal fraction).

At this point, I'm very sorry to not having updated the article you'll find in my blog "The Stars of Ilkhan". There, a shift of exactly 250 years between Al-Nasir and his own catalogue 'Zil Ilkhnani' is proved. The same occurs with Ulugh-Beg catalogue, astronomically is *exactly* 1180 but Ulugh Beg itself is 1180+250 = 1430.

According to wikipedia: "He built the great Ulugh Beg Observatory in Samarkand between 1424 and 1429."

So first observations of Ulugh Beg are from 1430 (official), that is 1430-250 = 1180 real.
It seems that a systemic displacement of 250 years affects Persian history, which is what I'm researching right now.

Thanks,
Carlos

[cjbaiget]

At this point, I'm very sorry to not having updated the article you'll find in my blog "The Stars of Ilkhan".

Sorry if this sentence leads to confusion, the blog is cliolapso.blogspot.com. I was talking about "The Stars of Ilkhan" post: https://cliolapso.blogspot.com/2024/03/ ... lkhan.html

[cjbaiget]

Notice: I categorically retract this result. It is VERY INCORRECT.

I didn't double-check because I trusted NC and it gave the same date as them. Therefore, I thought it was correct. IT IS NOT.

The dating of the Almagest done by NC is based on a single star: Arcturus.
But the Almagest cannot be dated by latitudes including Arcturus in the working group.

The reason is:

When FNK established the criteria for selecting an informative core, they were already convinced that it was a later date.
Otherwise, they would have considered the following obvious possibility: If the star was perfectly identifiable and quick, astronomers from later centuries would continuously track it and soon notice a change in position, correcting it.
This is precisely what happened with astonishingly fast Arcturus, whose position was corrected by Al-Battani, replacing the original value recorded by Hipparchus. This star made its way on all the copies of the Almagest afterwards, as it was more correct.
Furthermore, Arcturus's great speed dominates over the rest of the stars in the informative core.
A new and improved version of the method presented here allows dating the catalog without Arcturus, and the response is decisive: 2nd century BCE.
Furthermore, this method can date by longitudes, confirming that Hipparchus recorded them.
The fact that the Almagest is a mixture of the latitudes from Hipparchus (2nd century BCE) and the longitudes from Ptolemy (2nd century CE) is a truth that can be scientifically demonstrated.
Arcturus can take part in the dating by longitudes, because Battani didn't correct this parameter.

The informative kernel of FKN consists of stars of different Astronomers.
From faster to slower, the stars in this kernel belong to:

-Procyon, Capella: Regiomontanus (15th century)
-Arcturus: Al-Battani (9th century)
-Regulus, Spica, Vega, Antares, Asellus: Hipparchus (-2nd century)

The source code is public, so anyone can verify what is stated here for themselves.