Tech used to prove Angkor’s link to sun

[geovalin]

Erin Handley

An Italian professor has set about the task of verifying with angles and axes what has long been theorised about Cambodia’s iconic Angkor Wat – that the temples took their cues from the sky.

Giulio Magli, professor of archaeoastronomy at Politecnico di Milano, used modern technology to test age-old thought in a bid to prove the clear orientation of buildings to the west was “connected with the temple’s symbolism and the management of power by the Khmer kings”. “I only believe in what I can measure,” Magli told the Post, explaining his motivation to map precisely the orientation of the temples.

Using previously unavailable Google Earth satellite data, geographic information system (GIS) data from the Greater Angkor Project and by reconstructing the ancient sky with software called Stellarium, he traced the phenomenon of the sun disappearing vertically behind the temple at equinoxes.

read more http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/tech-used-prove-angkors-link-sun

[boomerangutang]

"he traced the phenomenon of the sun disappearing vertically behind the temple at equinoxes."

That's cool and commendable, about equinoxes. However, sometimes endeavors like that, like to stretch the connections. It's happened at Giza re; the pyramids, and has happened innumerable times with interpretations of the Bible. Because certain people are so intent on finding connections, such connections are stretched beyond reason.

The best way to ascertain, is to get a panel of experts, show them the data, and have them decide on the veracity of the connections. Leaving it up to just one person is relying too much on that person's subjectivity and his/her wanting to make connections.

Speaking of equinoxes: a few times I've mentioned the phenomena to Thai friends, and each time, I draw a blank. they seem to have no knowledge of them, and can scarcely understand the concept. Perhaps I'm just asking the wrong people.

[mike2011]

Reminds me a bit about the same phenomenon on Phanom Rung in Buriram province. Of course the temple has been rebuilt by French archaeologists who did a very nice job as opposed the Fine Arts Department's concrete stile attempts.

What makes me a bit wondering is that the Italian scholar did not publish his findings in a peer-reviewed journal. Moreover, the data he used sounds a bit like couch-surfing. He apparently did not conduct field research on his own with sophisticated equipment.

[PETERTHEEATER]

Probably did it on a weekday instead of waiting until Sunday........

[arjunadawn]

I also have Stellarium and use it for much the same purposes. In fact, the feature to roll back the clock of the heavens (the retrograde appearance of the constellations as the background for the house of the rising sun in each epoch/2,000 years- Aquarius, Pisces, Aries, Taraus, etc, Leo) was specifically added for those keen on archaeoastronomy and peeking back in time. What better way to get someone to consider a point in time then to project it clearly in monolithic ruins? (Orion, Draco). So, when you reflect in Stellarium what is reflected in megaliths, you reveal the night time sky they are communicating. You reveal the time they refer to. Its 100% mathematical.

A message is being conveyed in stone, in math, in astronomy, and in mythos. One would think the mythological would be the most subjective, requiring the most gymnastics to excise, but this is not the case. For ages peoples have long noted the repeating themes and mathematics in all the world's cosmology mythos. As it turns out, so did some brilliant authors associated with MIT. In 1969 they produced this ponderous tome called Hamlet's Mill. Brilliant, but exhausting read. As these tease apart the central narratives of all the worlds' mythos it is abundantly clear that a message was not only preserved in stone but in archetype as well. 72 virgins, 72 disciples, 72, 54, 108, 36, 2,000, 26,000... these are the repeating numbers or their constituents that make up the world's mythology. They are also duplicated throughout the megalithic world in precession and stone.

Angkor was built 1,000 years ago but it most certainly was placed over prime Vishnu/Indian layout, thus decidedly embracing existing Vedic cosmology (even a casual walk in Angkor one is overwhelmed by the dizzying marriage of vedic and buddhist iconography. It was the Indians/Egyptians (then every other ancient culture that ever lived) that were preoccupied most with the heavens. (In fact, beyond the knowledge of the precession of the equinoxes, the Indians also detailed in exhaustive cosmology the orbit of our solar system through the galactic plane in its x million year orbit- and they are correct)! In particular, a point in time approximately 12,000 years ago seems to be the common address for most myths and megaliths! Certainly, with the constant references to 72, and other vital numerology, Angkor architects of 1,000 years ago did not reinvent, they elaborated.

I initially thought the researcher was a lazy. It does appear he did a remote analysis. However, metadata analysis is also removed and its legitimate? The sources he used are calibrated, verified software, etc. I suspect if a court case required Google Earth to supply testimony that its map/Mercator projections meet acceptable standards Google could do so. But more, I asked myself "What is this guy's motivation?" After all, we are still not to the day where mainstream scientists can easily explore such topics without being run out of academia. Why would he do this? (Mainstream academia has an investment in the Darwinian linear evolution of Mankind- primitive to enlightened, with nary a chance the former was smarter/as smart as the latter. This is why all theories that challenge the status quo that "civilization began 5-7,000 years ago, in Sumer, sprang up from no where as an integral whole- knowing agricultural, arts, sciences, architecture, laws, etc..." anything that challenges this framework has consistently been attacked by the community and funding stopped. Why would someone do this study of Angkor? Because he believes the modern story of humanity is a lie.

Here is the actual paper of Angkor: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1604/1604.05674.pdf

But what is more interesting is his "Sirius and the project of the megalithic enclosures of Gobekli Tepe." Now he gives it all away (Yea!). This man does not remotely buy into the narrative taught in school. Good for him. He believes civilization is much... much older and likely believes in lost civilizations (good for him too). By revealing his interest in Gobeki Tepe he sets himself apart as brilliant. This site absolutely irritates the status quo. This site cannot be explained. Unlike the Sphinx, this site is known to be dated to the end of the last ice age, many thousands of years older than the pyramids- many. His approach and interest in this site seems similar to Angkor- the precession of the equinoxes. In other words, he finds a plausible connection between the message contained in both. Both reflect civilizations begging posterity to roll back the clock and look in time to 12,000 years ago. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.8397.pdf

Love the OP. Thanks. Highly recommend anything... anything Graham Hancock has written on the subject/youtube. If anyone has further interest on this, check out this British guy's brilliant deductions:

EDIT: In the Hancock video (also addressing Angkor Wat) there is a moment where the head of Egyptian archeology is asked a question (within first 20 min). When he realizes the questioner is asking about Gobekli Tepe the man losses his mind. Why? Because there is a very established order for the development of humanity and entrenched interests have not yet discovered what to do now the known civilization has been doubled to high civilization/last ice age. It also means Egypt is either much older, or much younger; both painful to accept for some. Thx for letting me post this.

[sanukjim]

This guy is full of xrap.

[arjunadawn]

But of course he is/I'm not. The ignorant always scream loudest.

http://www.ece.lsu.edu/kak/Time2.pdf