I Ching and 2012?

So, I have been hearing a lot about the I Ching's connection to 2012, and I have tried to do a bit of research into it. I am not finding anything that seems to me the least bit convincing. Consider this, from a website about Time Wave Zero (which is a clear BS theory, but from what I can tell this association with the precession of the equinoxes is the source of the relation)

survive2012.com...

Their studies began with the I Ching, which is composed of 64 hexagrams, or six-line figures. It struck them that 6 x 64 = 384, which is exceptionally close to the number of days in 13 lunar months (29.5306 x 13 = 383.8978), and that maybe the I Ching was originally an ancient Chinese calendar. Further multiples had astronomical significance:

1 day x 64 x 6 = 384 days = 13 lunar months

384 days x 64 = 67 [solar] years, 104.25 days = 6 minor sunspot cycles (11.2 years each)

67 years, 104.25 days x 64 = 4306+ years = 2 Zodiacal ages

4306+ years x 6 = 25836 years = 1 precession of the equinoxes

Alright, so, let us ignore the fact that 383.8978 =/= 384, because that is pretty astonishingly close, I guess. I'll let that part slide.

0) This is the main question that got me started here: Why does this similarity indicate that the I Ching could have been used as a calendar? Is there any OTHER evidence that it was?

1) Why are they multiplying 64 * 6? I know, it is because there are 64 hexagrams, and each hexagram has 6 lines -- why should each individual line in the I Ching represent a day? What is the basis for thinking this? Thereare two kinds of line -- broken and unbroken. The 64 hexagrams are generated by all of the possible variations of this over the 6 lines. (2^6 = 64)

2) Why do they then multiply 384 by 64 again? I just outright see no reason for this. (Also, if they were being consistent, they would multiply the actual length of a solar year -- they're off from this by 6.5408 days.)

3) The actual length of a minor sunspot cycle is "131 plus-or-minus 14 months" -- this comes out to 9.75 - 12.083 years, not 11.2. The mean length of one of these cycles is 10.9 years, which is significantly different from 11.2.

4) Repetition of previous question: Why multiply this result by 64 AGAIN?!

5) If the Zodiacal ages are to have regular lengths, they will be approximately 2160 years long. 2160*2 = 4320. This is 14 years more than the claimed 4306+ (which by my calculations, following their numbers, is actually about 4306.267) years. So this is a bit less than 2 zodiacal ages. Does this somehow not make the number wholly irrelavent to the zodiacal ages? (If we factor in the 6.5408 days they left off from a genuine lunar year * 64, we find that they should actually be off by 15 years.)

6) And why do they multiply by 6 here?!

7) The prcession of the equinoxes -- A Great/Platonic Year -- is actually 25765 years (give or take a small amount of time). Their figure which they claim is this length is 25836. Their calculations end 71 years late. (Factoring in that extra time that they forgot about, they should actually be a bit lower -- 7 years closer, approximately, which isn't much. They're only off by 64 years if they go by the actual lunar year, which, man, I don't even know.)

8) For consistency, shouldn't they have to multiply it by 6 again at some point? They have used 64 three times and 6 twice. What makes this non-arbitrary? The fact that it got them to a number that was basically what they wanted?

So, the final set of questions, my 2012 fearing friends: Is the I Ching actually related to the end of the world prophecies? Have I made glaring errors in all this analysis? If so, what are they? Has my minimal research led me completely astray on the meaning of the I Ching in relation to 2012 prophecies? What is the real association?

Help me out here!

reply to post by Solasis

Consider this, from a website about Time Wave Zero (which is a clear BS theory, but from what I can tell this association with the precession of the equinoxes is the source of the relation)

WoahH there-Don't let Evasius hear you say that!!
Have you read any of his research in the timewave zero theory?
Give it a try-I was sceptical at first,but having read his posts,I am now not so sure.Complicated stuff but
worth a read anyhow IMO:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

318 flags and counting...the guy must be onto something.

Check out some of his other posts on the subject too.

reply to post by Silcone Synapse


haha, maybe I spoke too quickly about timewave zero then...! I was just assuming it was the consensus around here based on a few comments I had seen.... You know what they say about assuming!

reply to post by Solasis


Sounds like you have a good knowledge base of the I ching in your first post,more than me but thats not hard

You really should check out Evasius,the ATS resident timewave technician-He knows al good deal on the theory,which I believe is in simple terms,a computer model of the I ching,which suggests prophecy according to echos/waves in our time fabric.

But thats not all,the theory states there is something wrong/a tear in the fabric,which creates ripples,and the end of Dec. 2012,is the Zero point of the echo/wave.

Its an interesting topic no doubt,tell me what you think after reading some of Evasius threads-If you have the hours to spare (or days!)