Introduction

The number 1649.457812, which appears to be encoded into the Sothic Calendar (Cfr., Earth/matriX No.73), also relates to the maya companion number 1385540. We examined this possibility when we multiplied the encoded number by the base measurement of the Great Pyramid (756):

where, we see the same/similar companion number appear as a result of this subtraction procedure.

Now, let us see whether we may confirm relations with the other maya companion number 1366560, as well as consider the 1385540 number further.

The Venus Number: 584

Once again, let us relate the encoded 1649.457812 number of the Sothic Calendar to the base measurement in feet of the Great Pyramid (756c): 756 x 1649.457812 = 1246990.106

Now, let us divide this result by the synodic day-count cited for Venus in the maya reckoning system (584c):

whereby, we see the maya companion number 1366560 fractal appear. In a single mathematical procedure, we may observe various historically significant numbers from two distinct ancient reckoning systems directly relate to one another. These related numbers are: 584 : 756 : 1366560 : 1649.457812. Now, consider the following:

One could easily comprehend how adjustments may have been made between the two reckoning systems as of these numbers. Given that 1366560 is a recognized historically significant number of the maya; and, given that 584 is also a recognized historically significant value for the Venus synodic cycle; and, given that the encoded number in the Sothic Calendar is registered as 1649.457812; then, one could find the adjustment for the debated 756c of the base of the Great Pyramid. Consider the following:

whereby one could understand the 756c adjusted to be 755.9975108 feet. Any of these numbers could be adjusted in a similar manner, depending upon which ones were allowed to remain constant.

For the Venus sidereal cycle (225c), one would also find a relationship to the maya companion number 1385540:

Now, let us consider the reverse order of the day-counts in relation to this particular number:

This particular procedure is quite significant, since the difference of the two results reveals a similarity to the 18980 calendar round of the maya. From this one could understand a difference between the kemi numbers (189, 378, 756), and the maya numbers (189.8, 379.6, 759.2), by way of the constant number series 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, etc.

Few scholars would admit any relevance or relationship between the ancient reckoning systems of the kemi and the maya, because the recognized historical record, does not suggest any particular relationship in that sense. Yet, the numbers associated with each system are interchangeable through distinct historically significant numbers. The isolated numbers that have been often cited by many different scholars may be related through simple mathematical procedures. If there were no original relationship between the two systems, then one would expect the numbers from the two distinct systems to be entirely incompatible with one another. As we have observed time and again, the opposite occurs. The most remotely conceived number from any one of the given systems portrays unsuspecting relationships that appear to be compatible.

The encoded 1649.457812 number, in our analyses, would appear to have been a conscious design within the Sothic Calendar. It would also appear that this particular number enjoys a computational significance with numbers coming out of other ancient reckoning systems, such as those of the maya companion numbers 1366560 and 1385540. There would seem to be no obvious reason why these numbers might be related; quite the opposite, we should suspect that it would be impossible to relate them in any manner. Yet, as we have seen above, these numbers are relational by way of the synodic (584c) and sidereal (225c) orbital times of Venus as cited in the historical record of the maya.

To have created two distinct ancient reckoning systems, and observe the fact that their numbers are relational, one might consider to be logical because they are both studying the same sky, the same planets, the same orbital timings. Yet, some of these historically significant numbers are purported to have been selected numbers, not having any scientific value, meaning reflecting reality. Yet, the numbers do reflect computations that are exact and representative of the events occurring in the sky. It would appear to be impossible to have it both ways; either the numbers are invented numbers with consciously assigned meanings, or the numbers are scientifically based on observations of reality. From our studies, we continue to suspect that the historically significant numbers were consciously chosen, given assigned meanings, and that, in fact, they also enjoyed computational value and meaning. The ancients achieved both of these seemingly contradictory purposes. They united myth and reality in numbers; something that is quite difficult for contemporary scholars to accept, much less admit. Our understanding of such matters, based on the few centuries of studies that we have been able to achieve, somehow does not allow for this kind of curious thinking. Possibly, in time, as we delve deeper into the manner in which the historically significant numbers are relational, we shall be able to comprehend past achievements better.

e-mail:Charles William Johnson

©1997-2012 Copyrighted by Charles William Johnson. All rights reserved.
Reproduction prohibited without written consent of the author.