h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A668531

This is an entry about the Star of Bethlehem. I hope that it is informative and amusing. I also hope that it is not in any way offensive to Christians. After all, Christmas is their holiday.

I would very much like that this entry, if it is considered suitable, should be ready in time for Christmas.

Hi Gnomon, a seasonal entry, and why not? Interesting subject. I found the following on the web, which you may like to include.

"A triple conjunction (three close passes in a row) of Saturn and Jupiter in the constellation of Pisces in 7 B.C. is one astronomically sound explanation for the Star of Bethlehem."

So says a site I can't give you the url of. If you come over to my space and e-mail, I'll send you the url.

Also, I seem to remember (about 15 yrs back) *seeing* what was purported to be the star of Bethlehem from Brighton, on the South coast. At least, it was touted as being so by the media. I'll get in touch with some friends who were there and see if anyone remembers the accompanying explanation (and date).
Frogbit.

Hi Gnomon, this is good.

One point, and one suggestion.

The point first. You say: "Christmas means Santa Claus, food, drink and presents." I was just parking my image of Santa Claus and all the other winter stolstice stuff which has accreted around Christmas, when you add: "But behind this is another image, the image of a stable in the snow with a star shining above it." Can I suggest you just mention the stable and the star but not the snow.

Be all of that as it may, I have heard another explanation of the star in the east. Namely that it was not a particular star or planets, but an astrological interpretation of the heavens. Aquarius with Mercury Rising, sort of thing. Bearing in mind that we have an English translation of a Greek document written by people whose first langauge was Aramaic.

Nice entry though. And good luck with it.

Ben

Hi, Gnomon!

I really like this entry. I think it would miss out a lot if it got left till January, so I suggest that:
- any scout who likes it should be prepared to pick it after tomorrow, and not insist on waiting the normal week;
-the Towers should send it to some obliging minimalist sub-editor who will send it back by return (after all, most of your entries need very little editing at this stage!)

Hey Presto! a suitable entry for the Front Page for Christmas Eve...

But first of all, fix the typo - you say 'anybody wise person' where you seem to have been hesitating between 'anybody' and 'any wise person'.


Azara

The typo is fixed. I've removed the snow. I knew, Ben, that it didn't really belong, but it is the image in many people's mind. I could make a convincing case for dropping the stable too, but that might be too radical.

The triple conjunction? I thought it was only a double conjunction. My planetarium program is not really accurate enough: I discovered only two in 7BC. I think that is probably enough. Glad you like the entry and obviously nobody has been offended yet.

while this entry seems reasonable enough, It ignores several points made in the sky at night this month.

1,there are only about 4 lines in the bible that deal with it at all.

2,kings only appear in the sixth century, otherwise it is wise men.

3,for the wise men to have come a long way, it must have been unusual, both in brightness, and duration.

4,the stuff sitting over the stable and the stuff being followed have very different properties. pretty much every explanation I have seen so far fails to match either one or the other set of properties.

5,It can't really be an astronomical event, as we have very good records from the chinese as to what was going on in the sky (except during the rainy season).

I think this shouldn't be accepted until someone watches the program, makes notes, and comes back and picks away at some of the holes that this entry has.

The sky at night us usually repeated late saturday morning, so that shouldn't delay it too much.

Thanks Xyroth.

>>There are only about 4 lines in the bible that deal with it at all.
That's OK. I was going to quote the lines, but they are actually rather long so I just gave a summary.

>>Kings only appear in the sixth century, otherwise it is wise men.
I never said anything about kings. I called them wise men throughout.

>>For the wise men to have come a long way, it must have been unusual, both in brightness, and duration.
We don't know that they came a long way. We just know that they were well off and that they came from the East. Nevertheless, I think that many of the proposed solutions are unusual.

>>The stuff sitting over the stable and the stuff being followed have very different properties. pretty much every explanation I have seen so far fails to match either one or the other set of properties.
I point out in the entry that some of these solutions certainly don't fit the bill. Some of them, such as the double conjunction, do.

>>It can't really be an astronomical event, as we have very good records from the chinese as to what was going on in the sky (except during the rainy season).
You are probably right about it not being a supernova. That would probably have been recorded by the Chinese. But it could have been a double conjunction because such an event is known to have happened.

>>I think this shouldn't be accepted until someone watches the program, makes notes, and comes back and picks away at some of the holes that this entry has.
Pick away. But don't wait to watch someone else's version first. Do it now.

Hi Gnomon, Hi Xyroth,

In my original comment I took a swipe at the stable too, but decided not to. It is not that sort of entry.

Personally I think the whole thing is a myth, otherwise one would expect some additional record of the infanticide of 2 years' worth of baby boys.

But on the assumption that it is NOT a myth, I think anyone who tries to chase a single star is chasing a wild goose. The most likely explanation to me is a system of astrology which predicted the birth of a king in Israel. Remember the wise men went first to Herod and then to Bethlehem.

Oh no. It can't be that, that presupposes not only that Jesus was the Messiah and son of God, but also that the system of astrology was accurate too. Hard to imagine which is the most unlikely.

Oh, what the hell. Hey Gnomon, sling my theory in as a wee Chrissy Pressy for me, eh?

Ben

Slung!

I like it. Are you still looking for theories. I haven't got one to hand but I can't help feeling there is more to come on this. Any thoughts?

Just a couple of typos for ya:

>>Bethehem

>>be interpreted as sign concerning

You'll have to be quick if you want to get in before Xmas!

Spiff *who's just had a great idea for a seasonal entry*

I think I have enough theories, thanks! The typos have been fixed.

What about a meteor procession, which would actually point the wise men in the right direction. Or a bright nova (as opposed to a supernova) which was apparently spotted by the Chinese in March 5BC in the eastern dawn sky. For info, check out the bbc website's space section - you can watch that 'sky at night' programme there, which i'd highly recommend.

Thanks Gnomon!

Calling all Scouts! Get yer luvverly Christmas Entries Here!

Ben

Nice one.

This Bible tale has always been a sticking point with some astronomers - there's no real reason to suppose that the event even took place in December as some have suggested that Christmas is simply a convenient holiday to absorb winter solstice celebrations in pagan Europe.

However, I think this yarn can stand on its own legs quite well...



- X

All we need now is for a passing scout to pick it ...

I'd just like to point out that your planet conjuction theory says there were 2 in 7BC, when Jesus was born in 4BC. Also, I'd like to point out that the star moved, showing the wise men the way, and then stopped over Bethlehem. None of your theories can explain this, and this point has not even been mentioned.

I think it is a good entry, but needs more work and explanations.

spook

We don't know that Jesus was born in 4BC. All we know is that he was not born later than 4BC, because King Herod died in that year. He could have been born in 7BC.

The biblical account says the star went before them and came down over the place where the child lay. This could mean that the star went down behind the horizon (that is, set) behind the stable. If it had been the sun, for example, that went down over the place, we would realise the author meant that it set in that direction.

I don't think this entry needs any more work. I am happy with it as it is.

Sorry to make you change something else , but the Entry says:

'And if you don't believe in the omnipotent God, you still might like to find some explanation for it.'

I would rewrite this without 2nd person pronouns. I think it would make it feel more official and ready to be recommended. I would also not begin sentences with contractions (for, and, nor, but, or, yet). It's not incorrect, just a stylistic note. You do it again here:

'For Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ,...'

We really need that two cents smiley. Anyway, there's mine!

-Spike A.

Thanks, Spike, for those comments. I've changed the sentences about the omnipotent God and I think that they sound better now. I'm going to leave the sentence starting with "For". I can see nothing wrong at all with it: "For unto us a child is born". While this is not recommended in modern formal English, it is perfectly acceptable in informal speech and the Guide is supposed to have an informal feel to it.

I'm afraid it is too late now for this entry to be picked for Christmas . The messages have already been e-mailed out with the schedule of which entries are going to appear on which day over Christmas. I know because I got one for my Wells Cathedral Clock entry. So unless the Editors have already secretly chosen this one, it is too late. Perhaps I should pack it away in cotton wool in the attic until November next year.

I like the entry, but I'm not sure about the ending. It sort of feels like a nosedive. Or a nose thumb? Not sure what to suggest to strengthen it, though.