Thread by @mmpandit

Fresh thread to intersect other three threads on scientific nature of research: Read on
How reproducible is a research work of the Mahabharata?
Can it be reproduced as people say or is that not true?
Let us see.

First we have to ask:
How does someone reach a year like 5561BCE for their year of the Mahabharata?
Is it because of the triangulation of Jupiter or Saturn or indeed Mars?

For example in 3067BCE we have a biangulation of Saturn at Rohini (137 points )and Mars retrograde before reaching Jyestha/Anuradha (brings it down to 19 points) and then lunar eclipse precedes solar eclipse to bring it down to two points.
Can 5561BCE reproduce this sort of path?

To get into this, we have to look at the way the original proposer of 5561BCE brought out his theory of Mahabharata.
PV Vartak was his name.
His proposal for 5561BCE was based on what?
A: Halley’s Comet in 98th cycle with (wrong) period of 77 years.

So 5561BCE was actually thought of by Vartak because of Halley’s Comet periodicity (calculated wrong at 77 years) and verse 3:12 of chapter 3 of Bhisma Parva.
Let’s check of what I say is true:
5661 + 1986 (last seen Halley’s) = 7547 years
Divide by 77: answer is 98.01
Check it.

Unfortunately, Vartak went wrong because the date of 5561BCE wasnt the 98th return of Halley’s Comet.
The period of Halley’s Comet is actually 75.32 years.
So in actual fact, Halley’s Comet return was 5546BCE.
Let’s check if what I say is true:
5546 + 1986 = 7532 divide by 75.32

So, here lies the problem.
The original situation of 5561BCE was wrong.
That date should have been 5546BCE.
Now we can see how reproducible or scientific this research is.

Now, let’s go further:
Suppose hypothetically we accept Saturn and Jupiter near Vishakha.
Then Saturn and Jupiter should be near Vishakha.
But they are not. They are 5 and 3 Nakshatras away. Is this reproducible research?
I can show you how this looks.
👇🏻

That tells you why 5561BCE does not contain any of the data which it is supposed to contain.
For example, the 14th night Moonrise is late and in fact in the Eastern sky.
So the war cannot start on an Amavasya. Can we reproduce this in 5561BCE?
A: No.
👇🏻

Balarama’s pilgrimage must start on Pushya Nakshatra and end on Shravana nakshatra to coincide with last day of war on Amavasya.
Can we reproduce this in 5561BCE?
A: definitely not
Or can we reproduce this in 3067BCE?
Yes!!!
#reproducible

In an effort to corroborate every single reference, if someone says that the ambiguous names of Chapter 3 of Bhisma (Lohitango, Pavaka, Pavakaprabha, Shweta graha, Parusha graha etc) are x or y planet then this is only subjective.
Will this not lead to non reproducible research?

In an effort to corroborate non existent Amavasya start to the war, if faces of warriors and canopies of chariots are produced as Moonphase references, then can this be called scientific or reproducible?
A: Subjective maybe but not reproducible or scientific (ie. 5561BCE)

And if someone asks for a generic “theory” on the Mahabharata war and says that “all observed grahas are planets” regardless of what the text shows, then of course, this cannot be scientific nor can it be reproducible.
Because then one lands up in a royal mess!