The obliquity of the ecliptic, Karnak and the Great Pyramid

This is from F.S. Richards, "Note on the Age of the Great Temple of Ammon at Karnak" (1921):

[p. 2] “If then the sun at sunset at the summer solstice shone down the axis of the Karnak temple at the time the temple was built, it does not do so now because of the slow change in the obliquity of the ecliptic.” [p.3] “When considering the effect of the altitude of the hills across the Nile Valley behind which the sun set, Mr. Howard Payn said his observation would make the date of the foundation a little earlier, possibly 4000 BC. In order to clear this matter up the Surveyor General of Egypt agreed to have the necessary measurements made as soon as the axis of the temple had been cleared…the results of this survey showed widely discrepant values from those used by Sir Norman Lockyer and gave an impossible date for the foundation of the temple. So to make quite sure of the facts it was consequently decided to make a complete survey of the axis of the temple from end to end. This was undertaken early in 1914 by Mr. P. G. Windsor.” [p.4] The observed azimuth was 297°4’31” clockwise from South. [p.7] “Substituting in the formula [Based on Newcomb] we get the obliquity of the ecliptic for the year 4,000 BC to be 24°6´39” – this differs by more than 1 degree from the required obliquity to make the sun shine down the axis…We also see that since 4000 BC up to the present day the obliquity of the ecliptic has only decreased by some 40´. [p.8] If the sun shone down the axis of the temple at the date of its foundation it has since decreased by more than 100´ which would give a ridiculous date for the foundation of the temple…This entirely confirms the fact that never since the great temple of Karnak was built has the sun ever shone straight down its axis.”

Because the obliquity is currently decreasing at a rate of 0.013 degrees (47”) per hundred years, the "impossible" and "ridiculous" age signaled by the orientation of the axis of the temple of Karnak would be 13,100 years B.P., that is about 11,100 B.C. – corresponding to an obliquity of 25° 40´. This is what is reported also, among others, by Hancock and Bauval.

Interestingly, according to current astronomical models, the obliquity oscillates between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees over a 41,000 years cycle. An obliquity of 25°40´ is therefore outside the possible range predicted by the current models.

Here is however something very interesting. If the obliquity at the time of the construction of the temple of Karnak (or whatever structure might have existed on the same spot thousands of years before, whose alignment was preserved in that of the pharaonic temple) was indeed the "impossible" value of 25°40´required for the sun to shine through its axis at sunset on the day of the summer solstice, then a very interesting coincidence would take place: The latitude of Karnak is 25°44´, very close to the obliquity of 25°40´signalled by its axis, meaning that the temple of Karnak would have laid almost exactly on the Tropic of Cancer.

Here some questions come to mind:

If the obliquity of the ecliptic changes over time, then would also the entire system of latitude and longitude of ancient sites be shifted accordingly? For instance, the present value for the obliquity is 23°26' . At the time supposed by Egytpologist for the construction of the Great Pyramid, this value would have been somewhere close to 24°, and if we go further back to 10,500 BC, this value would have been at least 24°30´. (as for Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...)

- Does this mean that the latitude of the ancient Equator and North and South Pole (relative to the present day ones) would have also been different?
- If that's the case, then the fact that the Great Pyramid lies almost exactly on the 30° parallel would no longer be true in a world in which the obliquity of the ecliptic is not 23°26´, because the entire system of reference would have shifted (by as much as half a degree)

I admit my astronomic knowledge is quite limited, but I hope somebody on this forum would be able to clarify the issue.

See what you've done here, is taken on faith something, that someone got wrong almost 100 years ago and instead of admitting he got it wrong, you are moving the Earth to make it right

a reply to: NeoIkonEpifanes

...about 11,100 B.C. – corresponding to an obliquity of 25° 40´

I don't understand how you came up with an impossible angle from a date. Oscillation goes forwards, then back again so( arbitrary descripive words here)...I am lost. I am not an astronomer either, so could you explain?

a reply to: NeoIkonEpifanes

Why does there always have to be a mystery about pyramids?
Egyptology is a crock.
They feed mysterious tidbits to keep themselves in a redundant job.
They know the truth.
Nothing special here.
The Egyptians became slaves to grandeur.
We haven't changed. We still can't build a building big or high enough. There's always the next project.
The most impressive thing about pyramids is the workmanship in building them.

Here's some interesting information from a source that's more modern...

The main directional orientation of the vast temple of Amun, known as Ipet-Isut, which stands on the east bank of the Nile, faces west towards the Theban hills on the opposite side of the river. Its calculated azimuth of 296º - 53’ (SB study suggested 296.75°) corresponds with a mid-summer sunset on a level horizon. This is what Sir Norman Lockyer suggested, in his book The Dawn of Astronomy first published in 1894. However the height of the cliffs on the far bank of the Nile precludes the observation of such a phenomenon. For this reason the solstice alignment was dismissed by Egyptologists.

You can't align with something you can't see.

However the height of the cliffs on the far bank of the Nile precludes the observation of such a phenomenon. For this reason the solstice alignment was dismissed by Egyptologists. It is possible that this solar alignment is simply chance, because the temple axis is broadly at right-angles to the Nile at this point so that it could have been the river rather than any astronomical events that determined the temple’s axis. It is an accepted fact that the Nile does play a significant part in the alignment of the temples close to the river. However the SB study shows a number of other temples in Ancient Thebes and elsewhere in Egypt are all aligned, to within ±1° on the same axial azimuth or its converse opposite of 116 º - 53’. This degree of precision supports the argument for an astronomical basis for the orientation, for a meandering river could never have provided such an exact correspondence for so many sites, as is clearly evident from a map of the area

In the case of Ipet-Isut, a more plausible explanation is that the temple orientation was set to the opposite solar event of the mid-winter sunrise,...

This makes more sense - midwinter is the time of a series of important feats for the birth of the five major gods of the pantheon.

(sorry. Quite tired. But you can read the article AND see photos at this link

originally posted by: NeoIkonEpifanes
Here some questions come to mind:

If the obliquity of the ecliptic changes over time, then would also the entire system of latitude and longitude of ancient sites be shifted accordingly? For instance, the present value for the obliquity is 23°26' . At the time supposed by Egytpologist for the construction of the Great Pyramid, this value would have been somewhere close to 24°, and if we go further back to 10,500 BC, this value would have been at least 24°30´. (as for Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...)

- Does this mean that the latitude of the ancient Equator and North and South Pole (relative to the present day ones) would have also been different?

No. Our system of latitude and longitude is not based on any astronomical angles or measurements.
What would change our system would be if the Earth's axis of rotation were to change.
Of course, if that happened, there likely wouldn't be anyone left to make the change anyway. And if there was, they wouldn't be in any immediate need to redraw latitude and longitude lines, being more concerned with somehow preventing our extinction.

Harte

originally posted by: Marduk
See what you've done here, is taken on faith something, that someone got wrong almost 100 years ago and instead of admitting he got it wrong, you are moving the Earth to make it right

You have already amply proven on this forum to be completely ignorant of the temple of Karnak when you claimed it being constructed of Talatats...

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: NeoIkonEpifanes
Here some questions come to mind:

If the obliquity of the ecliptic changes over time, then would also the entire system of latitude and longitude of ancient sites be shifted accordingly? For instance, the present value for the obliquity is 23°26' . At the time supposed by Egytpologist for the construction of the Great Pyramid, this value would have been somewhere close to 24°, and if we go further back to 10,500 BC, this value would have been at least 24°30´. (as for Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...)

- Does this mean that the latitude of the ancient Equator and North and South Pole (relative to the present day ones) would have also been different?

No. Our system of latitude and longitude is not based on any astronomical angles or measurements.
What would change our system would be if the Earth's axis of rotation were to change.
Of course, if that happened, there likely wouldn't be anyone left to make the change anyway. And if there was, they wouldn't be in any immediate need to redraw latitude and longitude lines, being more concerned with somehow preventing our extinction.

Harte

Yes, OUR system of latitude and longitude, but what about an ancient system of latitude and longitude? Wouldn't this mean that, given a different obliquity of the ecliptic, such a (admittedly hypothetical) civilization would have picked a different equator, and therefore a different system of latitude and longitude?

What I am trying to say is that if truly the Giza pyramids were intended to lay on the 30th parallel, the position of the 30th parallel would be shifted by at least 0.5° from its present location - and therefore not be the same as today. As a consequence, the often repeated statement that the Great Pyramid lay exactly on the 30th parallel is only true in our frame of reference, but would not have been true for an ancient Egyptian living in 2,500 BC.

Or am I getting it wrong? As I said, I am no expert in astronomy, just asking questions.

originally posted by: NeoIkonEpifanes

originally posted by: Marduk
See what you've done here, is taken on faith something, that someone got wrong almost 100 years ago and instead of admitting he got it wrong, you are moving the Earth to make it right

You have already amply proven on this forum to be completely ignorant of the temple of Karnak when you claimed it being constructed of Talatats...

From the wiki article of Talatats...

The blocks used in the Temple of Amenhotep IV in Karnak and the other abandoned Aten temples were reused by Horemheb and Ramesses II as filler material for pylons and as foundations for large buildings. The Great Hypostyle Hall at Karnak is built on thousands of these blocks, as is the Second Pylon.

source

Wow I thought you were being ignorant before, but when you claim there are no Talatat blocks at Karnak at the same time using Hancock and Bauval as a source then its made quite clear that any claim that anyone other than you is ignorant is simply psychological projection



As you have been told already, the Temple is not aligned to the sun, because the sunrise is not visible from the site, but please feel free to carry on pretending otherwise, we could all do with a good laugh.

originally posted by: NeoIkonEpifanes
Yes, OUR system of latitude and longitude, but what about an ancient system of latitude and longitude? Wouldn't this mean that, given a different obliquity of the ecliptic, such a (admittedly hypothetical) civilization would have picked a different equator, and therefore a different system of latitude and longitude?

and how likely is that, from ancient cultures who weren't aware that we live on a globe...

originally posted by: NeoIkonEpifanes
Yes, OUR system of latitude and longitude, but what about an ancient system of latitude and longitude? Wouldn't this mean that, given a different obliquity of the ecliptic, such a (admittedly hypothetical) civilization would have picked a different equator, and therefore a different system of latitude and longitude?

You can, if you like, look up the oldest Egyptian map in existence the Turin papyrus map. If you compare it to modern maps, you will find (as others have) that although the shape is generally correct, the distances are not.

In order to have latitude and longitude, you need a very standard measuring system. They could measure accurately (surveying) on a small scale but no way of measuring things like roads.

For example, imagine that you are measuring a neighborhood creek bed with a yardstick. You're fine as long as the creek runs straight, but at some point it twists slightly to the left, then swings left and back to the right. If you can't see your origin points, how do you know how far to the left you've gone?

This is the same problem all ancients had - until we came up with a good system for latitude and longitude, maps were accurate in one direction but not in the other.

a reply to: Byrd

Why would you need longitude and latitude to measure a road? Even one you can't see the start of or end of.
You could use a string line.
Stride it out at a set stride. eg 3 foot stride x =.
Measuring stick.
I don't think they needed longitude or latitude.
Unless they were sailing long distance.
As for the map itself.
Did it really need to be accurate?
Or. Is it as accurate as it needed to be?
Did it need to be accurate for someone using the map?