Talk:Maya astronomy

Speedy and merge proposals

This article is awful. Wasn't it nominated for speedy deletion? What happened? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senor Cuete (talk • contribs) 01:26, October 10, 2014‎

The copy vio material was removed, and the content left over is not the same as the existing article section Maya Civilization#Astronomy, so both speedy nominations were removed. It has been suggested that the remainder of this article be merged to Maya Civilization#Astronomy, but there isn't much to bother with. The star pictures are not worth keeping in my opinion, since they don't actually show which stars are part of the constellations. The correlation between the Mayan and Western constellation names could be worth keeping, but would have to be sourced. There's a ref in the article, but it must be left over from the copyvio material since it does not cover the constellations. (I'll remove it.) Meters (talk) 01:44, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, the ref does discuss the constellation correlations, but it is not clear how well accepted this correlation is:

"However, some other students of the Codex doubt Schele's interpretation. Victoria Bricker believes the Codex illustrates a zodiac, but argues that the constellations represent those opposite the sun at 168 day intervals. When opposite to the sun, a constellation will be high in the sky at midnight. According to Linda Schele the names are: Aries (Kuc= Quetzal), Libra (Xoc = shark) Taurus (Kuh = owl), Scorpius (Sinan-Ek'=scorpion) Gemini (Ak-Ek'=turtle), Sagitarrius (Chan= rattlesnake), Capricorn (Balam= jaguar), Cancer (Ok= dog?), Pisces (Zotz= bat), Virgo (Chitam= peccary). "

Without the images the entire content of this article is just a table of the second sentence. Meters (talk) 01:51, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I think that, since we have articles on Chinese Astronomy, Australian Aboriginal Astronomy, Islamic Golden Age Astronomy, Indian Astronomy and of course Ancient Greek Astronomy, this page should be improved, not merged, out of fairness to a great astronomical tradition: I might add more info to this page today to help resolve this issue. Jamutaq (talk) 18:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Oppose both proposals. I think Maya astronomy is a valid subject, and I have stacks of info lying around in books on the Maya, although I doubt that I personally will get around to improving this article - at least not any time soon. It certainly deserves its own article rather than just a summary paragraph in Maya civilization. I'm surprised no-one has put together a decent article previously. The star photos can probably be dumped, and (rather mythological) Maya imagery used, including the Venus charts from the Dresden Codex. Simon Burchell (talk) 09:51, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree. What is here is dreadful but I would support the idea of a high-quality article. Also thank you for moving the article back to MAYA astronomy. Senor Cuete (talk) 17:34, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree. I'm about to teach a class and this would be a great stub article for students to improve.K8shep (talk) 17:40, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Maya vs Ptolemy bias

Does it seem like the article shows bias toward Mayan Astronomy versus Ptolemy's predictions? Looking at the source, I can see that the Maya were more accurate, but I feel like the article shows that it is a significant difference. I'm not an expert by any means so this difference could be significant, I'm just not aware. Sustainablility4life (talk) 15:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I just did some very quick calculations, and haven't checked my results, but it seems to me that over the course of a year, the Maya were just over 4 and a half minutes out, while Ptolemy was about 45 minutes out. Please do double check. Simon Burchell (talk) 15:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Heliacal rising of Venus

If any of you are in Central America, particularly in Tulum, you should ascend your nearest Mayan temple while it's still dark on the morning of March 25th and look to the east to see Venus in the glare of the rising sun. Senor Cuete (talk) 14:55, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Adding Subsections

I think the quality of this article would be tremendously improved if subsections were added to elucidate actual information about Mayan astronomy such as its role in the Madrid Codex or the Caracol structure. Both of these are pictured but not so much as mentioned in the article. Are there any good sources for the technical practices or cultural role of Maya astronomy? Cmunchycrunch (talk) 21:20, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Writing this article

I know that various editors have considered writing this article. It's finally time to do it. I haven't added any in-line citations but don't worry I'll add many of them as the article progresses. I tried not to violate WP:NPOV when I wrote about the proleptic Gregorian calendar but I really hope that authors will avoid it. In years of reading about the calendar and Maya astronomy I have found it to be a real nightmare that has caused nothing but trouble. The mainstream scientific consensus is that there is absolutely no doubt that the GMT correlation is correct. I think that the correlation question is adequately covered in main articles and should be avoided in this article. I thought that a brief description of the calendars and correlation would be important because the article needs to be clear about how these work. I must be very brave, or stupid, to do this. Eventually this will be a high-class article. Senor Cuete (talk) 16:14, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Precession of the equinoxes

I decided not to include a section about Precession of the equinoxes because the two sources you would cite, Jenkins and Grofe are unreliable. John Major Jenkins was clearly a WP:FRINGE researcher. He was an expert in the fields of Maya calendrics and astronomy but refused to draw the line between verifiable facts and spiritual beliefs and was critical of those who do. Michael John Grofe wrote an interesting paper about the Dresden Codex Serpent Series, claiming that it proved that the Maya measured the Precession of the equinoxes. However, Bricker and Bricker thought that he was wrong and specifically wrote why in Astronomy in the Maya Codices. In reading his thesis I see problems that cause me also to doubt his analysis. If some better research becomes available this could be in the article but at this time I think it should be left out. Senor Cuete (talk) 17:38, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Also I see that Jenkins' books are self-published, so they can't be cited as reliable sources in Wikipedia articles. Senor Cuete (talk) 18:16, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

I changed my mind about the precession of the equinoxes. The very long distance number is noteworthy. Senor Cuete (talk) 16:29, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Calendar inscriptions section

Are there any plans to link the content of this section to the available calendar pages? I feel that it would also help to cite these statements.SeanLoreaux (talk) 17:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I could add some references. There are links to other articles about the calendar. Senor Cuete (talk) 23:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Venus as seasonal indicator

I re-read this several times. I can't understand how "extremes of the evening star are seasonally fixed". The cycles of Venus are 583.92 days long. It seems impossible that these would be fixed relative to the 365.2422 day solar year. Also because its orbital plane is inclined at 3.94 degrees to the ecliptic its declination (angle between Venus and the equator) can be about + or - 8.3 degrees. So its declination (north or south) can vary by about 16.6 degrees.

There are other problems with this reference: The Wikipedia editor is the author of the publication possibly violating WP:OR. The reference may be self-published. Quetalcoatl is the Mexican god, not Mayan. The publication is in Spanish. This is technically allowable but it's not helpful.

Is this really a reliable source and is the statement true? Senor Cuete (talk) 15:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Reading this in my inadequate Spanish, it looks like what he says about the Maya calendars, the astronomy of Venus and the Dresden Codex Venus table is correct. Like most authors writing about this, he could make his life much easier by forgetting the Proleptic Gregorian calendar. Perhaps clarification of the sentence that I quoted would be helpful. What "extremes of the evening star" is he talking about? Are the greatest declinations of Venus roughly correlated to the seasons of the tropical year? Is there some astronomical almanac that demonstrates this or is it an interesting but irrelevant fact? I am now reading the relevant chapter. Also a page or chapter in the citation would be useful. Senor Cuete (talk) 15:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Since other authors cite Šprajc, I added his book to the bibliography. Senor Cuete (talk) 17:16, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: CMN2160B

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2022 and 1 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sugar Tian (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by BoyaJia666 (talk) 00:37, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Why is there a section on the Julian calendar that does not talk about anything to do with the Mayan Calendar?

If it has no relevance then it should be removed. Grinhelm (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Because this is an article about ASTRONOMY. Astronomers use the JULIAN calendar for dates before the invention of the Gregorian calendar in 1582. This is explained clearly and succinctly in the text of the article. Read an astronomy book and you will see that astronomers don't even recognize the existence of the entirely fictitious proleptic Gregorian calendar, often used by mayanists. 207.183.181.238 (talk) 22:05, 4 August 2023 (UTC)