arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1509.00135

Astronomical Interpretation of the Signs on the Vessel of the Bronze Age (Central Donbass)

Larisa N. Vodolazhskaya·Anatoliy N. Usachuk·Mikhail Yu. Nevsky
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The article presents the results of multidisciplinary study carried out with the help of archaeological and astronomical methods. The aim of the study was to analyze and interpret the signs - elements of the composition, incised on the outer side surface of the vessel of the Late Bronze Age, owned to Srubna culture and discovered near the Staropetrovsky village in the northeast of the Donetsk region. The measurements and astronomical calculations revealed that all signs have astronomical meaning. Fourray star has been interpreted as the star Sirius. The sign polyline has been interpreted as an analog of graphic of equation of time in which the testimony of a water clock correspond with average solar time, and the testimony of a sundial - the true solar time. Sign wheel has been interpreted as a complex of lines, reflecting the regularity changing the direction of the shadows from the gnomon at sunset at the equinoxes and solstices. The sign thin polyline has been interpreted as a symbol of change of height of the Sun in the meridian at the equinoxes and solstices. Interpretation of wheel and polyline is related to the definition of the duration of the day. Sign of the wheel shows a direct relationship the duration of the day on the magnitude of the azimuth of sunrise/sunset, and thin polyline - from changing the height of the Sun in the meridian. Thus Staropetrovsky vessel, thanks to the astronomical signs, is a kind of ancient astronomical visual aid, which reflects the level of astronomical knowledge of the priesthood of Srubna culture at the late Bronze Age. Archaeoastronomy, vessel, Srubna culture, marks, Sirius, equation of time, mean solar time, true solar time, azimuth, calendar, astronomical year.

Explore related subjects

physics.hist-ph

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Larisa N. Vodolazhskaya, Anatoliy N. Usachuk, Mikhail Yu. Nevsky. 2015-08-27. Astronomical Interpretation of the Signs on the Vessel of the Bronze Age (Central Donbass). https://arxiv.org/abs/1509.00135

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Niels Bohr in North America (1923) and his Meeting with Robert Frost

During the autumn of 1923, Niels Bohr stayed for about three months in Canada and the United States where he gave a series of lectures on atomic and quantum theory. This paper provides details about his many meetings and lectures. It deals in particular with his stay at Amherst College, where he had a long conversation with the celebrated poet Robert Frost. Based on new archival sources, the paper includes a more fine-grained and better documented version of the episode than the one offered by literary critics and scholars. It concludes, perhaps somewhat disappointingly, that the Bohr-Frost meeting was of no great importance to either the physicist or the poet.

physics.hist-ph↗
arXiv2026

Gauge Matters More Than Curvature

Recent orthodoxy, which we call Curvature Fundamentalism, posits that the field strength $F$ on spacetime exhausts the physically significant content of electromagnetism, at least on prosaic (contractible) spacetimes. We argue that it is gauge invariance that constrains physical significance. As a result, there are physically significant quantities that $F$ does not capture, even on contractible spacetimes. We show that this result is robust: in the presence of charged matter fields, there are interference experiments whose outcome cannot be predicted by $F$ or any other point-local gauge invariant quantities on the basis of initial Cauchy data. We prove this using the example of relative phase of a Klein-Gordon-Maxwell field, and use it to identify a context in which the widely-claimed equivalence between the Maxwell-Faraday formulation $EM_1$ and the gauge formulation $EM_2$ of electromagnetism is untenable, and that new strategies may be needed for the reductionist project.

physics.hist-ph↗
arXiv2026

Lorenz vs Lorentz. The controversy examined from the original texts

The attribution of the condition div A + (1/c^2) dPhi/dt = 0 has been under discussion since 1938 as a question of priority between Ludvig Lorenz and Hendrik Lorentz. This work argues that the problem is of a different nature, and that the discussion does not close because it has never been specified what is being attributed. Drawing on the three versions of the 1867 paper and on six further primary sources, it is documented that three separable acts have been designated under a single name: the obtaining of the relation between potentials, its imposition as a restriction on the admissible potentials, and its denomination as a gauge. It is further documented that in none of the three versions of the 1867 paper does the word potential appear, that the magnetic field does not figure in it as a quantity of the theory, and that the vocabulary in which that paper is described today enters the literature after it was written. It is concluded that the disjunction between the two denominations, posed without specifying which of the three acts is being attributed, is ill formed.

physics.hist-ph↗