Monolithic Stars

[JuanMena]

Okay, please someone explain this:

The Universe has and always be expanding, so, cosmological bodies does not occupies the same place, never.
Is that movement rate so slow, that millennium old monoliths built as astronomical spots are still aligned to the same stars that were in the same place before they were even built?

Or, are we moving at the same speed, thus, monoliths are still aligned to the same stars?

OR, they were built with totally different constellations?

 

[FAST6191]

Hubble expansion is so slow (or only becomes relevant over such large distances and thus dim stars/nebulae) that it is a non factor in this. The reason for deviations between old stargazing methods* and points is predominately going to be precession of the equinox (which was known in ancient times, indeed maybe even being the basis for the "age" as a length of time)
https://personal.math.ubc.ca/~cass/courses/m309-01a/tsang/precession.html

*assuming they were made for those purposes -- archaeoastronomy is not much better/less prone to hippy nonsense than efforts to reconstruct the religions of the same people.

 

[impeeza]

Okay, please someone explain this:

The Universe has and always be expanding, so, cosmological bodies does not occupies the same place, never.
Is that movement rate so slow, that millennium old monoliths built as astronomical spots are still aligned to the same stars that were in the same place before they were even built?

Or, are we moving at the same speed, thus, monoliths are still aligned to the same stars?

OR, they were built with totally different constellations?

The distances are so big what the expansion is very very slow in comparison.

 

[Noctosphere]

Hubble expansion is so slow (or only becomes relevant over such large distances and thus dim stars/nebulae) that it is a non factor in this. The reason for deviations between old stargazing methods* and points is predominately going to be precession of the equinox (which was known in ancient times, indeed maybe even being the basis for the "age" as a length of time)
https://personal.math.ubc.ca/~cass/courses/m309-01a/tsang/precession.html

*assuming they were made for those purposes -- archaeoastronomy is not much better/less prone to hippy nonsense than efforts to reconstruct the religions of the same people.

Equinox as a measuring unit for age? I though they were going by either season (i am 30 springs or 30 summer old) or, in some case where they needed to be a bit more specific, they were going with moons.

 

[FAST6191]

Equinox as a measuring unit for age? I though they were going by either season (i am 30 springs or 30 summer old) or, in some case where they needed to be a bit more specific, they were going with moons.

Not equinox as in summer or winter equinox but "precession of the equinox" which is thousands of years for the cycle as it were (25800 or so for a full one). Was also known about in ancient times when someone was comparing astronomical data several centuries apart.

Equally not age as in duration someone or something has been around but age as in a long period of time (stone age, bronze age, iron age, light metal* age is something I saw in some older books of mine and some have dubbed the present one the silicon age).

*aluminium had turned from something your finest chemists would spend a long time and a lot of chemicals to make you a fancy set of knives and forks (Napoleon III having a story tied to it, https://history.stackexchange.com/q...al-set-of-aluminum-cutlery-for-special-guests ) to today where it is used for one time drinks can use and otherwise another industrial metal.

If you prefer the religious side of things then where some bibles translate things as Mr Jesus would be with you for all time then some going back to the Hebrew and Aramaic instead say until the end of the age which can be a bit of a philosophical fight in some circles (even more so if your sect has interactions with Islam).