The distinction of measuring the time in a scientific manner is achieved only by Bhāratīyas. Time has been measured from the smallest dimension to infiniteness. Even Time is envisioned as God and venerated. Paramēśvara was extolled as ‘Mahākāla’, the very embodiment of Time.
1 day is divided into 24 hōras. Based on this only, later a day is divided into 24 hours.
आरुणो अरोचनो मासक्रिन् - मासानां चन्द्र मासानां च कर्ता भवति !!
Fortnights, months, and years are counted based upon the movement of Sun and Moon.
Coz it is hard to count fortnights based on Sūrya Siddhānta,
Time is divided giving names to twelve months & 60 years.
Once the cycle of sixty years is complete, they repeat themselves.
Based on the transformations in nature, one-year time is divided into 6 seasons.
Vasanta - chaitra, vaisākha
Grīṣma - jyēṣṭha, āṣāḍha
Varṣa - śrāvaṇa, bhādrapada
Śarad – āśvīyuja, kārtīkamu
Hēmanta – mārgaśira, puṣya
Śiśira – māgha, phālguṇa
Indian scriptures scientifically detail how to carve out one’s lifestyle based on seasonal changes.
Based on the arrangement of stars in the celestial sphere, the twelve zodiacs starting from Aries to Pisces formed. During the rotation of earth around Sun, Saṅkramaṇa is formed whenever Sun enters into that specific zodiac.
Two among them are very prominent –
1. Makara saṅkramaṇa day when Sun enters into Capricorn
Makara Sankranti is celebrated as ‘Sankranti’ festival (Pongal).
āyana:
‘āyana’ means journey. One year is divided into two āyanas –
1. Uttarāyana and
2. Dakṣināyana.
The Indian Time measurement didn't stop with years, but went forward to calculate the Yugas.
Four yugas are mentioned taking the above yugas as parts within them. They are – Kr̥ta, trētā, Dvāpara & Kali.
2. trētā – 12,96,000 years
3. Dvāpara – 8,64,000 years
4. Kali – 4,32,000 years.
Combined, all these four yugas is called one ‘Mahā yuga’ = 43,20,000 years
Time is relative.
1 yr on earth is equal to 1 day for gods.
71 mahā yugas is 1 manvantara.
14 manvantaras are mentioned in our scriptures & each has diff Indra as head of gods.
1,000 mahā yugas is called 1 kalpa.
1 kalpa is day & another kalpa is night for Brahma.
Lifetime of Brahma, the Creator 1Mahā Kalpa – 311,040,000,000,000 years
Current Manvantara – Vaivasvata, the 7th manvantara
Kalpa – Nighttime of Brahma
Mahā Yuga – 28th Mahā Yuga
Current Yuga – Kali Yuga
Current Year – 5121 year in Kali Yuga
and the entire universe present at that time
dissolves into the Supreme. Again, creation
starts.
This is the ‘Cycle of Time’.
Details of Śakas :
Derived from the rule of great emperors, (not based on Christ),
1. Yudhiṣṭhira śakamu – Began in 3102 B.C. & continued for 3044 years
2. Vikrama śakamu – Began in 57 B.C. & continued for 135 years
Future śakas are also determined.
4. Vijayābhinandana śakamu – Duration is 10,000 years
5. Nāgārjuna śakamu – Duration is 400,000 years
6. Kalki śakamu – 821 years before the end of kali yuga.
Further scientific explorations of Bhāratīyas enabled them to establish the relationship between timelines of people living on this earth in relationship with stars & planets present in space.
Even from the times of Newton, Physics proposed many theories such as Multiverse theory, which states ..
More from Brahmasri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma
More from Science
Hard agree. And if this is useful, let me share something that often gets omitted (not by @kakape).
Variants always emerge, & are not good or bad, but expected. The challenge is figuring out which variants are bad, and that can't be done with sequence alone.
You can't just look at a sequence and say, "Aha! A mutation in spike. This must be more transmissible or can evade antibody neutralization." Sure, we can use computational models to try and predict the functional consequence of a given mutation, but models are often wrong.
The virus acquires mutations randomly every time it replicates. Many mutations don't change the virus at all. Others may change it in a way that have no consequences for human transmission or disease. But you can't tell just looking at sequence alone.
In order to determine the functional impact of a mutation, you need to actually do experiments. You can look at some effects in cell culture, but to address questions relating to transmission or disease, you have to use animal models.
The reason people were concerned initially about B.1.1.7 is because of epidemiological evidence showing that it rapidly became dominant in one area. More rapidly that could be explained unless it had some kind of advantage that allowed it to outcompete other circulating variants.
Variants always emerge, & are not good or bad, but expected. The challenge is figuring out which variants are bad, and that can't be done with sequence alone.
Feels like the next thing we're going to need is a ranking system for how concerning "variants of concern\u201d actually are.
— Kai Kupferschmidt (@kakape) January 15, 2021
A lot of constellations of mutations are concerning, but people are lumping together variants with vastly different levels of evidence that we need to worry.
You can't just look at a sequence and say, "Aha! A mutation in spike. This must be more transmissible or can evade antibody neutralization." Sure, we can use computational models to try and predict the functional consequence of a given mutation, but models are often wrong.
The virus acquires mutations randomly every time it replicates. Many mutations don't change the virus at all. Others may change it in a way that have no consequences for human transmission or disease. But you can't tell just looking at sequence alone.
In order to determine the functional impact of a mutation, you need to actually do experiments. You can look at some effects in cell culture, but to address questions relating to transmission or disease, you have to use animal models.
The reason people were concerned initially about B.1.1.7 is because of epidemiological evidence showing that it rapidly became dominant in one area. More rapidly that could be explained unless it had some kind of advantage that allowed it to outcompete other circulating variants.
