The relationship between Maya and our calendar is expressed by a coefficient
known as ?correlation? which is a number of days that we have to add to the
Mayan Long Count date to get Julian Date used in astronomy. There is
surprisingly large uncertainty in the value of the correlation, yielding a
shift between both calendars (and thus between the history of Maya and of our
world) to typically several hundred years. There are more than 50 diverse
values of the correlation, some of them derived from historical, other by
astronomical data. We test here (among others) the well established
Goodman-Mart?nez-Thompson correlation (GMT), based on historical data, and
the B?hms? one (B&B), based on astronomical data decoded from the Dresden
Codex (DC); this correlation differs by about +104 years from the GMT. In our
previous works we used several astronomical phenomena as recorded in the DC
for a check. We clearly demonstrated that (i) the GMT was not capable to
predict these phenomena that really happened in nature and (ii) that the GMT
predicts them on the days when they did not occur. The phenomena used till
now in the test are, however, short-periodic and the test then may suffer
from ambiguity. Therefore, we add long-periodic astronomical phenomena,
decoded successfully from the DC, to the testing. These are (i) a synchrony
of Venusian heliacal risings with the solar eclipses, (ii) a synchrony of
Venus and Mars conjunctions with the eclipses, (iii) conjunctions of Jupiter
and Saturn repeated in a rare way, and (iv) a synchrony of synodic and
sideric periods of Mercury with the tropical year. Based on our analysis, we
find that the B&B correlation yields the best agreement with the astronomical
phenomena observed by the Maya. Therefore we recommend to reject the GMT and
support the B&B correlation.
Astronomical phenomena in Dresden codex
