FAQ & Change Log

Answers to common questions, plus a full record of how the score has been corrected along the way

This page exists because a tool that claims to measure something as significant as sacred convergence should show its work — including the parts where the work needed fixing. Two scoring corrections are documented below in full: what was wrong, how it was found, and what changed. Nothing here is being smoothed over.

The short version: the convergence score sums six independent calendars, each contributing 0 (Normal), 1 (Minor), or 2 (Major) points, for a maximum of 12. Rather than presenting that raw number, results are now shown as a rarity tier — see the key below — which is more intuitive to read at a glance and is calibrated against the actual measured frequency of each score, not an arbitrary scale.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does the score, or rarity tier, actually measure?

Each of the six calendars independently rates a given day as Normal, Minor, or Major according to its own criteria, worth 0, 1, or 2 points. The six scores are summed to a maximum of 12, then translated into the rarity tier shown above — calibrated against the measured frequency of each score across an exhaustive historical scan, not an arbitrary scale.

Why does the calculator default to Jerusalem, and can I change it?

Sunrise, sunset, and the resulting day boundaries all depend on location, and Jerusalem is the anchor point most of this project's underlying research is built around. Yes — the date picker accepts a custom location, and any calculated date can be shared as a permalink that preserves it.

Why does a day start at sunset instead of midnight?

All six calendars follow the reckoning used throughout the Hebrew Bible and 1 Enoch, where a day begins at evening rather than at midnight. Calendar View's Sunset–Midnight slice reflects this directly by sourcing that period from the previous Gregorian day's own evening.

Where do these six calendars come from — is this all Dr. Pratt's work?

Most of it traces back to Dr. John P. Pratt's research, especially the Enoch Calendar and Priestly Courses reconstructions — see Dr. Pratt for that full story. The Aztec Sacred Round's Egyptian hieroglyph correlation and the Lunar Mansions calendar, however, are original contributions from this project rather than Pratt reconstructions. The Six Sacred Calendars credits each system individually.

Is this presented as historical fact, or a devotional framework?

Both, in different registers. The astronomical calculations (solar position, moon phase, calendar arithmetic) are precise and verifiable. The symbolic and typological readings layered on top of them are a devotional and interpretive lens, offered as a mirror for reflection rather than a settled verdict.

Can this predict anything about my life, or my death?

No. Reading anything predictive into a date would require the gift of prophecy, which doesn't come bundled with a calculator. In practice, the significance of a sacred date in someone's own life tends to become visible only in hindsight, not in advance.

Do I need to be Latter-day Saint, or religious at all, to use this?

No. All six calendars are ancient systems, independent of any modern religious movement, and nothing here requires prior belief or scripture knowledge to use. That said, familiarity with Joseph Smith's teachings on the stars and the priesthood may add a layer of meaning for readers who share that framework — see Why Enoch? for more on where this project's convictions come from.

Rarity Tier Key

Each tier boundary comes from an exhaustive scan of consecutive days, not a guess — these are genuine order-of-magnitude breaks in the real distribution of scores across history.

Common★☆☆☆☆☆about 1 in 2 days
Uncommon★★☆☆☆☆about 1 in 3 days
Notable★★★☆☆☆about 1 in 10 days
Rare★★★★☆☆about 1 in 75 days
Radiant★★★★★☆about 1 in 1,200 days
Exceptional★★★★★★about 1 in 17,000 days
The Witnessoccurs once, ever

"The Witness" is deliberately not framed as "extremely rare" — after the correction below, score 12 is currently unique across the entire searchable historical record: 2 April 33 AD, the evening of the Resurrection, and nothing else. That is a difference in kind, not just in degree, from every tier below it.

Scoring FixData-driven

The Venus Criterion Was Too Broad

A full historical sweep (BC 4000–AD 3000) turned up five dates scoring a perfect 12, not one. Four of the five landed on the Venus cycle's opening day of one of seven different phases — Falcon, Light, Lotus, Serpent, Temple, and Wind were all being credited as Major, with no distinction between them.

Only one of Venus's nine phases carries the Resurrection typology this whole project is built around: Reed, the morning the Morning Star reappears after being hidden behind the sun — the phase this project's own reference material already describes as the Resurrection phase. The other six openings were receiving the same credit despite carrying no equivalent significance.

DateVenus phase (before)Score (before)Score (after)
25 Jun 2243 BC0 Falcon — Major1211
23 May 1181 BC0 Lotus — Major1211
21 May 593 BC0 Falcon — Major1211
2 Apr 33 AD0 Reed — Major1212
11 Apr 320 AD1 Temple — Major1211

The fix: only Reed's opening days remain Major. The other six phases were demoted to Minor rather than dropped to Normal entirely — they're still genuinely notable Venus configurations, just not equal to the one phase this calendar treats as Christologically central. The four affected dates now read as Exceptional (score 11) rather than The Witness (score 12); none of them were disqualified by accident or overcorrection — each still carries real, substantial convergence.

Venus's overall Major frequency dropped from 2.2% of days to 0.27% — an eightfold tightening, matching the arithmetic of restricting from seven eligible phases to one.

Scoring FixData-driven

The Priestly Course Criterion Was Too Broad

Before the Venus fix above, an audit of all six tracks' independent Major-frequency rates found one clear outlier:

TrackMajor rate (before)
Venus2.2%
Moon2.2%
Enoch7.5%
Sacred Round9.3%
Star14.9%
Priestly29.0%

Priestly Courses was carrying roughly double the next-highest track's rate. The cause: six of the 24 priestly courses were classified Major on any day of their seven-day week, rather than only on the week's actual sabbath — the specific day (noon Saturday to noon Sunday) this project's own reference material already identifies as each week's holiest.

The fix restricted Major (and Minor, for the other 18 courses) to week-day 1 exclusively. Priestly's Major rate fell to 8.2%, bringing it in line with the other five tracks rather than standing apart from them. All five of the perfect-12 dates then known were re-checked against the corrected rule and every one of them already happened to land on week-day 1 — the tightening didn't retroactively disqualify anything, it simply closed a gap that other, unrelated dates had been exploiting.

Interface Fix

Calendar View: Sunset–Midnight Slice Navigating to the Wrong Day

In Enochian calendar view, each day cell's first slice (Sunset–Midnight) is deliberately sourced from the previous Gregorian day's own evening — because an Enoch day begins at the prior evening's sunset. The underlying data was always correct, but clicking that slice navigated to the cell's own date instead of the source date it was actually displaying, landing one day later than intended. Fixed by having the click target follow the same source-date tag the tooltip already used.

Accuracy Fix

Search Functions Retired the Legacy Night/Day Binary

Every search-family tool — Search, Range Analysis, Fingerprint, Anniversary, and the Next/Previous event finder — originally scored each candidate day using a coarse legacy toggle: a blanket "Night" or "Day" state that wasn't tied to any real clock time or location. It was an artifact of an earlier computation model, superseded once Calendar View introduced genuine four-period (Midnight/Morning/Afternoon/Evening) slice-level accuracy.

All search functions now sample the same four real, Jerusalem-anchored periods Calendar View uses, computed fresh for each specific date using a direct port of the same solar-position formula the frontend already relied on — verified numerically identical to full floating-point precision. Every search result now also carries the literal boundary values that produced its score, so clicking through reproduces the exact number shown rather than a different one computed under a different time assumption.

Scoring FixData-driven

Solar Eclipse Detection Was Far Too Liberal

A user reported today's calculator reading as a solar eclipse when it plainly wasn't. A real eclipse requires two things at once: the moon near conjunction with the sun, and the moon near one of its two orbital nodes (a small ecliptic latitude). The calculation only checked the first condition — but at conjunction, those two numbers are nearly identical, so that check alone flags the majority of all new moons, eclipse or not. The equivalent check for lunar eclipses had always correctly included both conditions; the solar-eclipse case appears to have simply lost its second condition somewhere along the way.

Measured against a real astronomical ephemeris and the exact geometric definition of a partial eclipse, across every new moon from 1900–2050: the old calculation produced 868 false positives — 57% of every non-eclipse new moon in that 150-year span, roughly six phantom eclipses a year.

BeforeAfter
Real eclipses correctly caught337 / 337337 / 337
False positives (non-eclipse new moons)868134

The fix restores the missing condition, calibrated so every real eclipse in the 150-year test range still clears it with room to spare, while removing 85% of the false positives. The 134 that remain are genuine borderline cases — near-misses this simplified model of the moon's motion can't fully resolve without a substantially more complex lunar calculation.

One existing devotional date-selection turned out to have been influenced by this: a candidate date for Isaac's binding at Moriah had scored a point higher than it should have, on the strength of a solar eclipse that, per the correction and independent verification, never actually happened. Re-examined under the fix, the date's other genuine convergences still held up — but a different candidate age now wins the comparison. The site's search index and every catalogued event's stored score have been rebuilt against the correction.

Interface Fix

The Zodiac Disc Was Computing Precession From the Wrong Year

The interactive disc rotates its outer, star-based ring relative to the seasons to represent roughly 26,000 years of axial precession — but that rotation was quietly being calculated from the Enoch calendar's own internal year-count rather than the real calendar year. It was a silent, universal mix-up: every single date, on every load, was affected — it simply went unnoticed until a specific historical date's star sign visibly landed in the wrong place on the ring.

Fixed by making sure the real year and era are available wherever the disc's rotation is calculated, so it now anchors to the same date the rest of the calculator already shows.

Interface Fix

Rarity Search Results Loaded the Wrong Time of Day

Clicking a Rarity Search result populated the date but not the specific time slice (Midnight/Morning/Afternoon/Evening) that had actually produced the shown score, so a result reading "Exceptional, Evening" could load at an unrelated time and compute a different, lower score entirely. Fixed so results now load at the exact time that produced them.

New

New This Week

New

Recent Additions