A cubit equals one day

[zerinus]

Maybe it was Consig's new moniker image that made you...........hiss.

I posted before the new moniker, sorry.

[zerinus]

Zerinus, there are mysteries and there are obscure points. This thread is about the latter.

I am not too sure about that actually.

[wenglund]

I am not too sure about that actually.

Is your lack of surety, itself, because the verity of Volgadon's assertion is yet for you a "mystery", or because it is an "obscure point"?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mfbukowski]

Seems like jibberish to me but it makes me want to ask the following: It is said that for God, a day is a thousand years for us. What "year" are we talking about?

"Tropical Year"? "Calendar Year"? "Sidereal Year"?

In any case, the length of a year has been changing. There seems to be nothing cosmically special or stable about an earth year so why should a god-day turn out to be exactly 1000 earth years? Why precisely 1000? This number 1000 is only special sounding because we use base ten arithmetic. Considering all this makes the 1000 year thing sound made up and ill-considered.

Except for the view that God also has ten fingers.....

It sounds like a very human choice to base arithmetic on.

[zerinus]

Is your lack of surety, itself, because the verity of Volgadon's assertion is yet for you a "mystery", or because it is an "obscure point"?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The whole of the facsimile is a mystery if you ask me. Take this for an example:

Fig. 5. Is called in Egyptian Enish-go-on-dosh; this is one of the governing planets also, and is said by the Egyptians to be the Sun, and to

borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash,

[mfbukowski]

I thought we were to "study it out in our minds" first, then go to the Lord for confirmation.

This represents the first phase.

I don't know about you, but I have never received a mathematical revelation in my life. Probably Tarski gets them all the time.

[consiglieri]

How does that make sense in terms of modern astronomy or astrophysics?... or indeed the remainder of the sentence:

Why would anyone in their right mind expect a document purportedly 2,000 years old to have anything to do with modern astronomy?

Now THAT is a mystery.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Zakuska]

The whole of the facsimile is a mystery if you ask me. Take this for an example:

Fig. 5. Is called in Egyptian Enish-go-on-dosh; this is one of the governing planets also, and is said by the Egyptians to be the Sun, and to

borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash,

[mfbukowski]

This nut thinks he's a vampire. He has killed four, probably five women. He has drained every drop of blood from every one of them. Now that is NEWS, Vincenzo, NEWS. We are a NEWSpaper. We are supposed to print the NEWS. Not suppress it!

Before, your slip was showing.

Now your show is slipping.

[zerinus]

I thought we were to "study it out in our minds" first, then go to the Lord for confirmation.

This represents the first phase.

I don't know about you, but I have never received a mathematical revelation in my life. Probably Tarski gets them all the time.

I believe that the great scientists, mathematicians, philosophers, and artisans who have made great discoveries, like Newton and Einstein; and even great artists who have produced great works of art; have obtained them by revelation. In the Old Testament, when the Lord commanded Moses to build the Tabernacle, although it was essentially a tent, but was sill quite a sophisticated architecture; and all the other instruments required a lot of skill and expertise to make them. The Lord specified whom He had chosen to do that work, and why:

Exodus 31

:

1 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

2 See, I have called by name Bezaleel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah:

3 And I have

filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship,

4 To devise cunning works, to work in gold, and in silver, and in brass,

5 And in cutting of stones, to set them, and in carving of timber, to work in all manner of workmanship.

6 And I, behold, I have given with him Aholiab, the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan: and

in the hearts of all that are wise hearted I have put wisdom,

that they may make all that I have commanded thee;

[Woody]

After reading it three times, I think it is saying that the number of cubits (how measured?) along the length of one side of the base of the pyramid (which pyramid?) equal the number of days in our year.

I don't know if this means 360-days, or 365-days or 365 1/4 days.

It seems that there is a lot of fudge room in making such determinations if we are doing it on a post hoc basis.

If there is something that says the Egyptians viewed it this way, that is one thing, but this has the smell of something that 19th century white guys came up with and are trying to impose back on the Egyptians, which is not as helpful to the analysis as if we have something written by the ancient Egyptians saying that they viewed one cubit as being equal to one day.

If you get a cord 58.1 cubits long (that's 87.2 feet) and use it to trace out a circle (174 feet across) this circle will have a circumference of 365.25 cubits. Then you can place a marker somewhere on the circumference, and have your man Saphoil move the marker one cubit each day. Then the marker will circle around the entire circle in one year exactly and you can then see what it means to say 1 cubit = 1 day.

If you want to do this same exercise with a square, the square should be 91.3 cubits on each side. That's 136.95 feet.

This is only 13% of the size of the Great Pyramid. There were over 100 pyramids and they were many different sizes.

Such a pyramid, if it were 37 cubits high, (ie., it had the same proportions as the Great Pyramid) would require 13,600 tonnes of stone to build. At $250 a ton for the stone, this would be 3.4 million of today's dollars, not counting labor.

But you could stand on the top point and watch the marker go round.

So you can see why I'd say that any theory that tries to explain ancient Egypt and doesn't explain how these Pharaohs managed to convince their workers to pile up these quantities of stone just so he could have a nice tomb (weighing 5.9 million tonnes in the case of the Great Pyramid), with nice geometrical shapes and celestial alignments thus created, when it wasn't him but them what had to haul and stack the stone up there, and doesn't specify them all as crazier 'n hell, isn't a very complete theory.

Wood

[mfbukowski]

If you get a cord 58.1 cubits long (that's 87.2 feet) and use it to trace out a circle (174 feet across) this circle will have a circumference of 365.25 cubits. Then you can place a marker somewhere on the circumference, and have your man Saphoil move the marker one cubit each day. Then the marker will circle around the entire circle in one year exactly and you can then see what it means to say 1 cubit = 1 day.

If you want to do this same exercise with a square, the square should be 91.3 cubits on each side. That's 136.95 feet.

Where did you get your measure for the number of feet/inches to a cubit?

[zerinus]

Why would anyone in their right mind expect a document purportedly 2,000 years old to have anything to do with modern astronomy?

Now THAT is a mystery.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

The Book of Abraham is in part about astronomy. Chapter 3 is all about astronomy. Here are the opening lines:

Abraham 3

:

1 And I, Abraham, had the Urim and Thummim, which the Lord my God had given unto me, in Ur of the Chaldees;

2 And I saw the stars, that they were very great, and that one of them was nearest unto the throne of God; and there were many great ones which were near unto it;

* * *

And the laws of astronomy doesn

[zerinus]

I can think of a few ways.

1) Light does not necessarily have to mean "visible eminations" for example, there is light that falls out of range for our eyes to see. Infared and Ultrviolet for example.

2) Once the eminations fall in those ranges, for all intents and purposes the cease to be light.

3) elecromagnatism would also fall some where in those ranges.

4) then you also have gravity

5) Reflected light

All of these could fall under the heading of "barrowed light".

Well, I am not sure a professional astronomer would take that seriously.

[wenglund]

How does that make sense in terms of modern astronomy or astrophysics?

Since astronomy or astrophyisic don't tend to speaks to the notion of "intelligence" (i.e. truth and light) or the realm of spirits, and this since it falls outside the current scope of their field of study, one ought not expect it to make sense to those two sciences.

Now, whether for these two sciences it is a matter of "mystery" or simply an "obscure point", is question open for vigorous debate for those interested.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mfbukowski]

OK Wikipedia, that notable and always accurate reference on Egyptology says that:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza

It is thought that, at construction, the Great Pyramid was originally 280 Egyptian cubits tall, 146.478 metres (480.57 ft) but with erosion and absence of its pyramidion, its current height is 138.75 metres (455.22 ft). Each base side was 440 royal cubits, 230.37 metres (755.81 ft) in length. A royal cubit measures 0.524 meters.[4]

So according to my math, doing the conversions, there is a difference between the Millenial Star's guess of a cubit as being a bit over 25 inches and this measurement quoted in Wikipedia. Obviously, 440 is not equal to 365, so someone is getting some shorter cubits going here.

But IF we use the measurements given in Millenial Star, there would be very close to 365 cubits in the actual length of a side of the Great Pyramid, which gives us one cubit per day

The question becomes, 1- What does this have to do with Abraham, 2- Did the writer of the Millenial Star fudge his measurements to make it look like these measurements were correct, and/ or 3- Who really cares?

But on these assumptions, for what it's worth, the Millenial Star guy is correct that each side of the Great Pyramid is 365 cubits.

[zerinus]

Since astronomy or astrophyisic don't tend to speaks to the notion of "intelligence" (i.e. truth and light) or the realm of spirits, and this since it falls outside the current scope of their field of study, one ought not expect it to make sense to those two sciences.

I am not sure where you got that from. The passage I had quoted is clearly referring to astronomical objects.

Now, whether for these two sciences it is a matter of "mystery" or simply an "obscure point", is question open for vigorous debate for those interested.

Mystery definitely!

[wenglund]

I am not sure where you got that from. The passage I had quoted is clearly referring to astronomical objects.

See, for starters, Abraham 3. Note the instrument being used to descern things. Note that it is not an instrument typically employed by astronomers.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Woody]

Where did you get your measure for the number of feet/inches to a cubit?

I took a cubit to be 1.5 feet. I got this information from my 3rd grade teacher, IIRC. If that number isn't accurate enough for you, feel free to modify my figures. I'll be interested to see what useful conclusion could be deduced from them after these refinements.

Wood

[mfbukowski]

I took a cubit to be 1.5 feet. I got this information from my 3rd grade teacher, IIRC. If that number isn't accurate enough for you, feel free to modify my figures. I'll be interested to see what useful conclusion could be deduced from them after these refinements.

Wood

Well this, from Wikipedia, makes it all hopelessly complicated:

Over time, various cubits and variations on the cubit have measured:

* 6 palms = 24 digits, i.e. ~45.0 cm or 18 inches (1.50 ft)

* 7 palms = 28 digits, i.e. ~52.5 cm or 21 inches (1.75 ft)[1]

* 8 palms = 32 digits, i.e. ~60.0 cm or 24 inches (2.00 ft)

* 9 palms = 36 digits, i.e. ~67.5 cm or 27 inches (2.25 ft)

At least from the pov of doing actual math. The Millenial Star argument is based on a cubit of slightly over 25 inches, to get 365 cubits out of one side of the Great Pyramid.

So who knows? I still couldn't figure out what the pyramid is supposed to have to do with the Book of Abraham anyway. I guess we are stuck at the general concept that distance=time, but anything more specific is out.

But that is a pretty important insight anyway.

[zerinus]

See, for starters, Abraham 3. Note the instrument being used to descern things. Note that it is not an instrument typically employed by astronomers.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The Urim and Thummim was an instrument of revelation. It was an instrument of "seership". It enabled the person using it to literally "see" things that were not visible to the natural eye. That includes anything from star formations to the translation of the Book of Mormon. When Joseph Smith obtained them, he reported to his mother that he could see "everything" through them. In fact, it is such a powerful instrument of revelation that the Book of Mormon states, "and no man can look in them except he be commanded, lest he should look for that he ought not and he should perish. And whosoever is commanded to look in them, the same is called seer" (Mosiah 8:13). It gives you unfettered access to anything you want to look at, in heaven or on earth---including things you shouldn't be looking at, and cause your own destruction.

[zerinus]

I guess we are stuck at the general concept that distance=time, but anything more specific is out.

But that is a pretty important insight anyway.

Thank you, I agree. I think that the only thing we can conclude from that is that there is some kind of relationship between distance and time; and that a "cubit" (however it was defined by the person writing that text), is a unit of measure that is somehow related to a unit of time. Units of measurement of different kinds have always been based on some naturally occurring phenomena with a fixed measurement. The history of the determination of the "Meter" is an interesting example. Here is an account of how the length of the Meter was determined (emphasis added):

The origins of the meter go back to the 18th century. At that time, there were two competing proposals for how to define a standard unit of measure, or meter. The astronomer Christian Huygens suggested that the meter be defined by the

length of a pendulum having a period of one second;

others favored a meter defined as one ten-millionth the

length of the earth's meridian along a quadrant (one fourth the circumference of the earth)

. In 1791, soon after the French Revolution, the French Academy of Sciences endorsed the meridian definition because the force of gravity varies slightly over the surface of the earth, affecting the period of a pendulum.

Researchers measured the arc from Dunkirk, France to Barcelona, Spain; on June 22, 1799, the French Academy Archives adopted its standard meter, recorded on a platinum bar. (The French government made the meter the compulsory standard of measure in 1840.) The French, however, miscalculated the flattening of the earth due to its rotation. As a result, the meter in the Archives is 0.2 millimeters shorter than one ten-millionth of the quadrant of the earth.

Despite its flaws, the French definition of the meter stuck. The Treaty of the Meter was signed in 1875, and in 1889 a platinum-iridium bar was established as the International Prototype Meter. (It was selected from several candidate meters because it was the closest to the called the Meter of the Archives, the platinum bar held in the French Academy.) So in fact at that time, a meter was really defined as the length of a metal bar.

The meter bar lasted a good long time; but it became cumbersome and error-prone to refer to a specific, physical meter bar. Finally, after 71 years, a new standard emerged. In 1960 the General Conference on Weights and Measures redefined the meter in terms of the

number of waves of a very precise color (wavelength) of light emitted by krypton 86 atoms

. That revision did not last so long. In 1983 the Conference discarded the krypton standard and redefined the meter in terms of the

speed of light

---what might be called a theoretical definition. The meter is now officially 1/299,792,458 the

distance traveled by light in a vacuum in one second

.

These changing definitions offer a good example of what happens in the field of measurement: as the tools and available precision change, the standards change with them. These days, you can buy a laser from Hewlett-Packard and create a reference meter on your own; the level of accuracy is far beyond what any scientist could achieve a century ago.

Source

.

Here are some more websites giving more detailed history of the determination of the length of the Meter:

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1895/whats-the-origin-of-the-meter-and-the-metric-system

http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/origin.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre

http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/meter.html

Not especially that in almost all of those definitions, something astronomical was involved, and something relating to time was involved. The "pendulum" determination, the "wavelength" determination, and the "speed of light" determination all involved the element of time. So what the Book of Abraham tells us is that the Cubit, as it was understood by the person who wrote the Book of Abraham, was a unit of distance that was calculated on the basis of some astronomical measurement relating to both distance and time

[handys003]

Question here! I see all sorts of opinions but which measurement is correct of a cubit?

Eastman's bible dictionary says there are at least 2

measures for the term "cubit":

* Standard cubit : elbow to end of middle finger (20").

* Lower forearm cubit : elbow to base of the hand (12").

From Strong's Definitions:

cubits

Old Testament Hebrew Definition:

0520 'ammah {am-maw'}

prolonged from 0517; TWOT - 115c; n f

AV - cubit 242, measure 1, post 1, not translated 1; 245

1) cubit - a measure of distance (the forearm), roughly

18 in (.5m). There are several cubits used in the OT, the

cubit of a man or common cubit (Dt 3.11), the legal cubit

or cubit of the sanctuary (Eze 40.5) plus others.

So looking at De 3:11:

De 3:11 For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of

giants; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron;

is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine

cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the

breadth of it, after the cubit of a man.

Source: http://home.teleport.../4god/cubit.htm

Before any measurement is made should not the cubit be defined correctly? Instead of extracting a theoretical length. It's all relevant to a mans distance from the two proposals above. What if the man was really tall for his time or short? Plus the fact men back then were much shorter in size compared to todays modern man.

[mfbukowski]

So what the Book of Abraham tells us is that the Cubit, as it was understood by the person who wrote the Book of Abraham, was a unit of distance that was calculated on the basis of some astronomical measurement relating to both distance and time

[mfbukowski]

Before any measurement is made should not the cubit be defined correctly?

See post 70