[meteorite-list] Boguslavka fall (was...Happy Crab Nebula Day!)

Tue Jul 5 13:29:34 EDT 2011

"I got a beautifully prepared specimen from Anda, Martin and Stefan, my 
star example of a hexahedrite ..."

Oops - that's Andi, of Meteoriten Haus!

Kindest wishes
Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: MexicoDoug <mexicodoug at aim.com>
To: sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net; paw at wirelessbeehive.com; 
meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Sent: Tue, Jul 5, 2011 1:26 pm
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Boguslavka fall (was...Happy Crab Nebula 
Day!)

Sterling wrote: 

"By 1917, when revolutionary Russians changed their calendars, it was 
13 days." 

Hi Sterling, 

Very informative post ... Now I have one doubt I'm going to have to 
check on. 

Boguslavka hexahedrite, (fall, 1916 Oct. 18). I got a beautifully 
prepared specimen from Anda, Martin and Stefan, my star example of a 
hexahedrite ... 

I'd like to clarify on the label the fall date: Julian or 'Gregorian'? 
If the date is Old System, the modern fall date in its time zone would 
then be 31 October 1916 - a Halloween in some cultures - though still 
October 30 (or October 17) in the USA... I'm thinking the it was 
probably recalculated to the modern calendar system since it was close 
enough to the change of the official calendars on Feb. 1, 1918 or so? 
But their is the reference quoted of 1916 ... 

"BOGUSLAVKA 
Iron IIA-H 
Fall, October 18, 1916 
Russia, Primorsk region 
Two stones weighing 256.8 kg 
Photo shows a 1765 g piece 
The fall was at 11:45 AM, the sky was clear and weather was warm. The 
fall was seen from Vladivostrok to the Han Dao He Tse rail station (475 
versts) and accompanied by light and sound phenomena. 

The fall occurred 200 cubits south of a Korean village (fan-za), and 
location of the fall was shown by a resident of this fan-za, Ma Tomu 
Ni. The first fragment fell near a Cossack who happened to be riding 
nearby, Ivan Ovchinnikov. 

…The meteorite Boguslavka was the first observed fall of an iron 
meteorite in the Russian Empire. Based on its main mass it was a huge 
fall in comparison with others, and has a beautiful external structure 
and fantastic shape. ... 

O.O. Baklund, 1916" 

ref: 
http://www.geokhi.ru/~meteorit/opis/boguslavka-e.html 

Maybe the Handbook of Iron Meteorites has more on this? 

Kindest wishes 
Doug 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net> 
To: paw at wirelessbeehive.com; meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com; 
MexicoDoug <mexicodoug at aim.com> 
Sent: Tue, Jul 5, 2011 2:49 am 
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OT - Happy Crab Nebula Day! 

The Calendar-Go-Round!  

  Simple answers first: if a source specifies "Julian calendar"  
for the date of an event, it almost certainly means the event's date  
in the Julian calendar system, proposed and enforced by Augustus,  
Julius Caesar's adopted son and first Emperor of Rome.  

  By the time Pope Gregory XIII decided the calendarical slide had  
gone far enough, the Julian calendar of 1700 and the astronomical  
calendar were 11 days apart, by the 1800's when Protestant Europe  
adopted the "Gregorian" calendar, it was 12 days off. By 1917, when  
revolutionary Russians changed their calendars, it was 13 days. The  
Julian lags by one day every 143 years (since Year 1 AD).  

  But it's messier than that. For example, when does a year begin?  
Jan. 1? No, not for most of the past two millennia. Were calendars,  
at a given time, the same in all countries? No.  

  The Roman calendar began the year on 1 January, and this remained  
the start of the year after the Julian reform. However, even after 
local  
calendars were aligned to the Julian calendar, they started the new 
year  
on different dates. The Alexandrian calendar in Egypt started on 29  
August (30 August after an Alexandrian leap year). Several local  
provincial calendars were aligned to start on the birthday of 
Augustus,  
23 September.  

  The indiction caused the Byzantine year, which used the Julian  
calendar, to begin on 1 September; this date is still used in the  
Eastern Orthodox Church for the beginning of the liturgical year.  
When the Julian calendar was adopted in Russia in AD 988 by  
Vladimir I of Kiev, the year was numbered Anno Mundi 6496,  
beginning on 1 March, six months after the start of the Byzantine  
Anno Mundi year with the same number. In 1492 (AM 7000),  
Ivan III, according to church tradition, realigned the start of the  
year to 1 September, so that AM 7000 only lasted for six months  
in Russia, from 1 March to 31 August 1492.  

  During the Middle Ages 1 January retained the name New Year's  
Day (or an equivalent name) in all Western European countries  
(affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church), since the medieval  
calendar continued to display the months from January to December  
(in twelve columns containing 28 to 31 days each), just as the  
Romans had. However, most of those countries began their  
numbered year on 25 December (the Nativity of Jesus), 25 March  
(the Incarnation of Jesus), or even Easter, as in France.  

  In England before 1752, 1 January was celebrated as the  
New Year festival, but the "year starting 25th March was  
called the Civil or Legal Year, although the phrase Old Style  
was more commonly used." To reduce misunderstandings  
on the date, it was not uncommon in parish registers for a  
new year heading after 24 March for example 1661 had  
another heading at the end of the following December  
indicating "1661/62". This was to explain to the reader  
that the year was 1661 Old Style and 1662 New Style.  

  Most Western European countries shifted the first day of  
their numbered year to 1 January while they were still using  
the Julian calendar, before they adopted the Gregorian calendar,  
many during the sixteenth century. The following table shows  
the years in which various countries adopted 1 January as the  
start of the year. Eastern European countries, with populations  
showing allegiance to the Orthodox Church, began the year on  
1 September from about 988.  

  Note that as a consequence of change of New Year,  
1 January 1751 to 24 March 1751 are non-existent dates  
in England.  

  The Julian calendar was in general use in Europe and Northern  
Africa from the times of the Roman Empire until 1582, when  
Pope Gregory XIII promulgated the Gregorian Calendar.  
Reform was required because too many leap days are added  
with respect to the astronomical seasons on the Julian scheme.  
On average, the astronomical solstices and the equinoxes  
advance by about 11 minutes per year against the Julian year.  
As a result, the calculated date of Easter gradually moved out  
of phase with the moon. While Hipparchus and presumably  
Sosigenes were aware of the discrepancy, although not of its  
correct value, it was evidently felt to be of little importance at  
the time of the Julian reform. However, it accumulated significantly  
over time: the Julian calendar gained a day about every 134 years.  
By 1582, it was ten days out of alignment.  

  The Gregorian Calendar was soon adopted by most Catholic  
countries (e.g. Spain, Portugal, Poland, most of Italy). Protestant  
countries followed later, and the countries of Eastern Europe  
even later. In the British Empire (including the American colonies),  
Wednesday 2 September 1752 was followed by Thursday  
14 September 1752. For 12 years from 1700 Sweden used a  
modified Julian Calendar, and adopted the Gregorian calendar  
in 1753, but Russia remained on the Julian calendar until 1917,  
after the Russian Revolution (which is thus called the 'October  
Revolution' though it occurred in Gregorian November), while  
Greece continued to use it until 1923. During this time the Julian  
calendar continued to diverge from the Gregorian. In 1700 the  
difference became 11 days; in 1800, 12; and in 1900, 13, where  
it will stay till 2100.  

  Although all Eastern Orthodox countries (most of them in Eastern  
or Southeastern Europe) had adopted the Gregorian calendar by  
1927, their national churches had not. A revised Julian calendar  
was proposed during a synod in Constantinople in May 1923,  
consisting of a solar part which was and will be identical to the  
Gregorian calendar until the year 2800, and a lunar part which  
calculated Easter astronomically at Jerusalem. All Orthodox  
churches refused to accept the lunar part, so almost all Orthodox  
churches continue to celebrate Easter according to the Julian  
calendar (the Finnish Orthodox Church uses the Gregorian Easter).  

  The solar part of the revised Julian calendar was accepted by  
only some Orthodox churches. Those that did accept it, with  
hope for improved dialogue and negotiations with the Western  
denominations, were the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople,  
the Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, the Orthodox Churches  
of Greece, Cyprus, Romania, Poland, Bulgaria (the last in 1963),  
and the Orthodox Church in America (although some OCA parishes  
are permitted to use the Julian calendar). Thus these churches  
celebrate the Nativity on the same day that Western Christians do,  
25 December Gregorian until 2800. The Orthodox Churches of  
Jerusalem, Russia, Macedonia, Serbia, Georgia, Ukraine, and the  
Greek Old Calendarists continue to use the Julian calendar for their  
fixed dates, thus they celebrate the Nativity on 25 December Julian  
(which is 7 January Gregorian until 2100).  

  And... Here's a further deeper sample of calendrical complexity.  

  Some examples: Should one use local solar time, local mean  
solar time, or standard time? (Prior to the International Meridian  
Conference in 1884, the records of that meeting indicate that only  
four nations followed standard time systems: the UK, the USA  
and Canada - but only just for those two, from the year before.  
The Netherlands did not become part of the international standard  
time system until 1954, for example.  

  With the leap year scheme used in the Western calendar the  
time of the vernal equinox ranges over 53 hours within 19-21 March,  
producing a corresponding variation in the solar longitudes at which  
January, or any other month, occurs.  

  It has been assumed for a long time that the seasonal year follows  
the spacing between the equinoxes and solstices, the *average* such  
time being the familiar *tropical year* of 365.2422 days when again  
averaged over some dozens of orbits. This assumption seems to be  
wrong. The cycle time of the seasons over the past several centuries  
(since temperature records began) is actually the anomalistic year,  
the time between perihelion passages, which is near 365.2596 days  
again when suitably averaged.  

  Because perihelion passage shifts later by about one day every  
58 years on the Western calendar, this would imply that not only  
does 'January' oscillate by 53 hours in the leap year cycle, but also  
the current January is shifted, seasonally-speaking, by more than  
two days compared to 'January' back in 1867.  

  Apart from anything else, if one kept a calendar held steady  
against the perihelion position (and hence the seasonal cycle *at  
present* - I would anticipate that this cyclicity is only temporary 
for  
some centuries until perihelion moves far enough away from the  
winter solstice to lose the resonance) then the 24-hour period  
labelled 'January 31st (Eastern Standard Time)' would in the  
past have been in February.  

  This all comes back to the calendar one uses. I have employed the  
term 'Western calendar', It is a fallacy that the calendar used as the  
world-wide standard (with local or religious calendars also employed)  
is the 'Gregorian calendar.' That is an ecclesiastical calendar 
adopted  
by-and-large only in various Catholic states around 1582-1610,  
persisting since in Italy and Spain. Elsewhere solar calendars have  
been legally adopted (by other countries) in which the same  
(inaccurate) leap year rule as the Gregorian happens to be used.  
The Western calendar derives basically through the major powers:  
Britain's calendar reform of 1751, which was inherited by the  
American colonies and thence by the initial founding states of the  
USA (note that the USA does not have any legal calendar code of its 
own,  
the familiar system is just used by common assent there and hence  
elsewhere). It is this which may be termed the 'Western calendar'.  

  But that does not make the Western calendar the same as the  
Gregorian.  

  There are several very significant differences. The Gregorian is a  
luni-solar calendar in that it provides for a lunar cycle as well as  
a solar sycle. Everyone knows about the leap-year corrections (three  
in 400 are dropped: 1700, 1800, 1900, 2100...) but few know also of  
the lunar jumps: the lunar phase (the phase of the ecclesiastical 
moon,  
not the real moon) is assumed to follow the Metonic cycle of 19 years  
which is close to 235 lunations, except that over a period of 2500 
years  
there are eight single-day jumps interposed. This is done to 
'regularize'  
the date of Easter, the main aim of the Gregorian reform. The 
Gregorian  
is a luni-solar religious calendar, whereas the Western is a solar 
civil  
calendar. They are not the same thing.  

  That is not to say that Lord Chesterfield's Act of 1751 did not 
address  
religious matters. It had to, because Great Britain (as it was then)  
is a religion-based nation. The monarch is the 'Defender of the 
Faith.'  
In this connection the Act contains several mistakes. For 
anti-Catholic  
and anti-Semitic reasons the phraseology employed (oft-quoted by people 
in  
some form : "Easter is the first Sunday after the first full moon after 
the  
equinox") is nonsensical in itself, and does not lead to the Easter 
dates  
actually printed in the Book of Common Prayer, the tables there 
following  
the Catholic rules. The statement cited there would imply that Easter  
cannot coincide with either an astronomical full moon or the Passover,  
whereas such coincidences do occur. I might note that the first person  
to have spelled out this nonsense, in about 1850, seems to have been  
Augustus De Morgan, one-time Secretary of the Royal Astronomical 
Society.  

  On top of that - and this is significant - the Act mentions the 
desire to  
keep the solstices and equinox at the same seasonal dates. Leaving 
aside  
the recently-recognized fact that the seasons follow the anomalistic 
year,  
the implied necessary year-length for the calendar (the Western) as 
defined  
by that Act is the *tropical year* of 365.2422 days (on average, 
etc.).  
The 'Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac' (an official  
publication of the US & UK governments) actually mis-defines the 
tropical  
year as the time between vernal equinoxes, and it is NOT. Because of 
the  
eccentricity of our orbit four different-length years result from the  
times between vernal and autumnal equinoxes, and winter and summer  
solstices. The Gregorian reform was based upon regularizing Easter and  
thus keeping the date of the vernal equinox near-constant (which it 
fails to  
do; note the 53-hour range mentioned earlier), meaning that the year  
counted between those equinoxes is what is needed. This is 365.2424 
days  
at present.  

  This provides another reason why the Gregorian and Western calendars  
are not the same thing: their target year lengths are different. That  
difference in the fourth decimal place is significant. The mean  
Gregorian year of 365.2425 days is much closer to the Vernal Equinox  
year of 365.2424 days than the tropical year of 365.2422 days, as used  
in the Western calendar. Arguments over whether we need a 'correction'  
every 3200 or 4000 years, begun by astronomer John Herschel in 1828,  
are thus specious (and apart from anything else, tidal drag is  
lengthening the day as defined astronomically as opposed to  
atomically).  

  The Catholic Church in the later sixteenth century would  
have produced a 'better' calendar if it had instead used a 33-year  
cycle containing eight leap years, as does the Persian calendar. This  
(i) Makes a year 365.242424... days long on average; (ii) Makes a 
cycle  
short enough to keep the equinox within a 24-hour range; (iii) Leads 
to  
a better solution of the lunar phase problem connected with Easter.  

  There is more. The Eastern Orthodox Churches have suffered splits  
since in 1923 it was suggested that they alter from the Julian 
calendar  
to what has been called the 'Revised Julian'. This would have seven  
leap year days dropped from nine centuries, such that the year would  
average to 365.242222... days. This was to provide one-upmanship over  
the Gregorian scheme, but it is based on the mistaken belief that the  
*tropical year* rather than the *vernal equinox year* is the target.  
There are still arguments within those Churches on this topic, mostly  
based on a totally incorrect understanding of the astronomy.  

  But this brings me full circle. So far as I am aware the only one of  
the Orthodox Churches to have adopted the Gregorian calendar is that 
of  
Finland. Thus it is true that the Gregorian calendar is used in  
Finland: within the Orthodox Church, and the Catholic Church. As for  
the rest of the country, that is a different matter. One would need to  
look at the Swedish legislation to see whether they adopted the  
Gregorian calendar, in a legal act dated (I would imagine) 1752, the  
year before the actual reform took place, although I am not sure  
whether Sweden was using the March 25th New Year as was Britain until  
31st December 1751. I would imagine that the Lutherans of Sweden, like  
the Anglicans of Britain, would have written an Act which did not  
mention the Catholic Church/Pope etc., but rather defined a parallel  
solar calendar with some definition for when Easter is to be  
celebrated. Perhaps they made the same silly (and  
religiously-motivated) mistakes as did the British.  

  It is very easy to make glib statements like "We use the Gregorian  
calendar" without realizing what is actually involved. For example,  
making January 1st the New Year's Day is often ascribed to the 
Gregorian  
reform, but that is a false belief. It was already in use before that.  
Off and on it has been used since at least 153 BC. Similarly we use  
calendar months which have been unaltered since 45 BC, notwithstanding  
claims that Augustus Caesar fiddled with them. Thus the months, as 
such,  
are not defined as part of the Gregorian calendar.  

  Our year numbers are ordinals, not cardinals. Notwithstanding the  
fact that we count a 'zeroth law of thermodynamics', and a 'zeroth'  
Pharaonic dynasty in Egypt, it makes little sense to have a 'zeroth  
year'. AD 1 is 'the first year of the Lord'. (1 BC is the 'first year  
Before Christ', a seventeenth-century invention by an astronomer, by  
the way.) One may wonder how AD 1 can be 'the first year of the Lord'  
if he was born on December 25th (I am talking here about *traditional*  
dates rather than historically-veracious dates). When Dionysius  
Exiguus was setting up his framework for Easter dates in 525-253 (he  
was not trying to define an era) he correctly recognized that a Jewish  
boy's life is reckoned from his circumcision, not from birth.  

  Thus Dionysius equated 1st January (in the year which two centuries  
later became labelled AD 1) as the date of the circumcision, it being 
the  
start of the year. (Look into a Church Missal and you will find 
January  
1st named as the Feast of the Circumcision, and our method of counting  
years from that date is technically referred to as the *Stylo  
Circumcisionis*.) Circumcision occurs on the eighth day counting  
exclusively (see your Bible), putting the traditional Nativity on 25th  
December 1 BC, which was the traditional (but not actual, even then)  
date of the winter solstice festivities. (The early Church had 
actually  
used January 6th, Epiphany, to avoid the pagan solstice celebrations.)  
Dionysius then counted back the nine month gestation period to the  
traditional (but not actual) vernal equinox of March 25th in 1 BC, and  
he counted years from there as the *Anni ab Incarnatione*. This is the  
year which astronomers call 0 (using cardinals) but is more generally  
termed 1 BC (using ordinals). The fact that March 25th was the  
Incarnation/Annunciation/Lady Day was what led to the British and  
eventually American colonies using that date for New Year, although  
counted FROM THE WRONG YEAR! (AD 1 instead of 1 BC).  

  Although the USA now uses the Western calendar, and previous  
to 1752 the Julian was used in the Atlantic colonies, do not imagine  
that no use has ever been made of other systems. When the first  
Catholic missionaries arrived, they imposed the Gregorian calendar.  

  Thus when (say) Texas and California joined the USA, although  
their dating systems may have been continuous they did move from the  
Gregorian to the Western calendar. Those parts in the Louisiana  
Purchase were on the Gregorian until they were administered for three  
weeks under the French Revolutionary Calendar in late 1803, before  
Napoleon sold the region to the USA. That's something to note next  
time you eat Lobster Thermidor in New Orleans.  

  Until Alaska was sold in 1868 to the USA it was part of the Russian  
Empire, and thus on the Julian calendar. But it is more confusing than  
that. The day of the week there was different to that throughout the  
rest of North America. Although a change from Julian to Western (or  
Gregorian) calendar did not involve a change in the day of week 
sequence  
elsewhere, in Alaska it did because that region, in the absence of any  
International Date Line, used both the date and the day of the week  
appropriate for Moscow.  

[Deep breath]  

  But the date of the supernova is recorded in the Chinese calendar,  
not the Western calendar, as "Zhihe era of the reign, first year, 
fifth  
lunar month, ji-chou day," says the Wenxian Tongkao of 1280 CE  
and the Xu Zizhi Tongjian Changbian of 1320 CE. But the Song  
Huiyao, a Sung source, gives the date as "Zhihe era, first year, 
seventh  
lunar month, 22nd day" when it was observed as a faint yellow  
star that then brightened. The account contains considerable  
observational detail: "...has been seen in daylight, like Venus.  
It had rays stemming in all directions, and its colour was reddish  
white. Altogether visible [in the day] for 23 days." This date would  
shift the supernova date from the Fourth of July into September,  
however.  

  Japaenese sources (three) all agree with each other but put it  
one linar month earlier than the Chinese account and are all  
inconsitent with rising times.  

  An Islamic oberservation was discovered in 1978 that places  
the supernova in the year 446 of the Islamic calendar, which year  
ran from 12th of April 1054 to the 1st of April 1055 (it's a lunar  
calendar] at the summer low level of the Nile, which fits the July  
date. Claims that certain vague European accounts are of the  
Crab are rejected by most astronomers.  

Interpretations of the dates are not straightforward. the 24th of  
April and the 11th of May have also be argued for as the correct  
date by various scholare. The July 4 date was calculated by  
Jan Julius Lodewijk Duyvendak for Jan Oort in 1942.  

Sterling K. Webb  
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------  
----- Original Message ----- From: "MexicoDoug" <mexicodoug at aim.com>  
To: <paw at wirelessbeehive.com>; <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>  
Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 10:15 PM  
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OT - Happy Crab Nebula Day!  

>  
> It ought to be Julian since that was in effect ... or else all the > 
references would have to say something about the re-adjustment of the > 
date, but that's just an opinion! In astronomy, generally the 1582 > 
conversion is respected by astronomers if I recall - I.e., before that 
 > time events are on the Julian Calendar, and afterwards Gregorian, 
even > if they nation of the observation was still on the Julian date; 
 > usually that doesn't matter and by convention the expression I time I 
 > believe changes in 1582. Jean Meeus's incredibly useful books, if I > 
had them would have an excellent discussion of the subject, but I > 
don't have my references with me. Some other list member could look it 
> up as Meeus'd be the expert.  
>  
> Best wishes  
> Doug  
>------------------------------------------------------------------------

---  
> -----Original Message-----  
> From: Patrick Wiggins <paw at wirelessbeehive.com>  
> To: MeteorList <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>  
> Sent: Mon, Jul 4, 2011 10:12 pm  
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OT - Happy Crab Nebula Day!  
>  
>  
> I've often wondered and maybe someone here can answer.  
>  
> Since 1054 was long before the 1582 conversion from the Julian to > 
Gregorian  
> calendar, is the July 4 date that gets mentioned for the first > 
sighting of  
> supernova a Julian date or has it been converted to Gregorian?  
>  
> ???  
>  
> patrick  
>  
>  
> On 04 Jul 2011, at 10:25, Gary Fujihara wrote:  
>  
>> Cosmic Fireworks: On July 4, 1054, Chinese astronomers observed a  
> "guest star"  
> in the constellation Taurus, the result of a star exploding or going 
> Supernova.  
> At mag -6, SN1054 (Supernova of 1054) became about 4 times brighter > 
than Venus,  
> was visible in daylight for 23 days, and lasted a period of two 
years. > Today we  
> can still see remnants of SN1054 as the Messier Object 1 (M1) Crab > 
Nebula.  
>>  
>> http://bigkahuna-meteorites.com/_M1.jpg  
>>  
>> Oh, and for those terrestrially bound in the USA, Happy Fourth of  
> July!  
>>  
>> Gary Fujihara  
>> Big Kahuna Meteorites (IMCA#1693)  
>> 105 Puhili Place, Hilo, Hawai'i 96720  
>> http://bigkahuna-meteorites.com/  
>> http://shop.ebay.com/fujmon/m.html  
>> (808) 640-9161  

______________________________________________  
Visit the Archives at 
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html  
Meteorite-list mailing list  
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com  
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list  