Hi Zi,

In response to your remarks about JMJ's message # 1169:

Jenkins uses astronomer Jean Meuss his calculations for the Galactic
Alignment. In the message he mentions an 2012-era ranging from 1980-
2016 and he explains that this range is caused due to the uncertainty
and accuracy of the actual alignment. The fact of the matter is that
this alignment zone actually represents the time that it takes for
the Sun to completely precess through the Galactic Equator at the
winter solstices during era 2012.

Smelyakov has corrected the calculations of Jean Meuss and has
calculated that it takes 39 years for the Sun to precess through the
Galactic Equator. This is because the Sun's width = 16' 15.42". With
a precession rate of 50 arc seconds a year, it will take the Sun
about 39 years to precess through the Galactic Equator. The
calculation is more complex because the solar system intersects the
Galactic Plane at an angle of 60 degrees. The complete calculation
made by Smelyakov is given here:

http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/download/Supplement%202.pdf

The alignment zone given for the era of the Great Celestial
Conjunction is 1978-2017 with a midpoint of the conjunction in May 7
1998.

As to the accuracy of the galactic parameters, Smelyakov uses
astronomical data of the year 2000 that gives the coordinates of the
North Pole of the Galactic Plane = NPg. The coordinates of the NPg
gives the normal to the Galactic Plane and describes exactly how the
Galactic Plane (Galactic Equator) is oriented in the equatorial
coordinate system. The accuracy of the calculation of the exact
timing of the Galactic Alignment of course depends on the accuracy of
the astronomical data used and Smelyakov's accounts for the
inaccuracy in his calculations. The estimates of the inaccuracy of
the NPg coordinates are expected to be a tenth of a degree! This
gives an uncertainty of the exact midpoint of the Galactic Alignment
of 7.2 years! Smelyakov calculates the exact midpoint of the Galactic
Alignment as the year:

1998.3 +/- 7.2 years = 1991.1 – 2005.5

In the PDF (supplement to our article) he makes a distinction between
Galactic Alignment (Jenkins) and the Great Celestial Conjunction
(Smelyakov) since the timing parameters are slightly different
(length of the `alignment'). The Galactic Alignment calculation is
corrected for the angle that the solar system makes with the Galactic
Plane, (60 degrees) something Meuss did not take into account. It
gives a slightly longer alignment zone than the zone mentioned by
Jenkins 1978-2017 in stead of 1980-2016.

But Jenkins his remarks about the alignment zone having something to
do with the inaccuracy of the exact location of the Galactic Equator
are incorrect! The alignment zone is determined by the time it takes
the Sun to precess through the Galactic Equator and none other. The
length of the alignment zone can be calculated rather precise (due to
the reliable data on the Sun's diameter and speed of precession) but
the exact midpoint of the Galactic Alignment depends on the accuracy
of the galactic parameters i.e. the coordinates of the North Pole of
the Galactic Plane.

So if you're interested in the nuts and bolts of the Galactic
Alignment you could study the supplement mentioned above.

Good luck
Jan



--- In TIMEWAVEZERO2012@yahoogroups.com, "zyzygyz" <zyzygyz@...>
wrote:
>
> Jan,
>
> I think we are working at cross-purposes here. I shouldn't have used
> the word "'align'" even though I did put it small quotes. I should
> have used a different term, something like 'lie at an angle of ~0.15
> +/- degrees' north of the Galactic Plane of Symmetry, or
the "Galactic
> Plane". Galactic Plane, Galactic Equator, Galactic Plane of
Symmetry -
> the multiplicity of terms confused me.
>
> For example, I refer you back to Message 1169 (09Feb2002) in which
JMJ
> said,
>
> "The Galactic equator is the mid-line of the bright band of the
> Milky Way that we can see stretching overhead on a mid-summer night.
> It can be pictured as an abstract dotted line that runs through the
> middle of the Milky Way. In terms of accuracy this conception
> obviously has its limits because how does an astronomer determine
its
> precise location?" And, "What kind of range of accuracy should we
> realistically expect?"