I was first exposed to the puranic astronomical descriptions in the late 1970s. It has always been commented that they are hard to fathom and that the placements and measurements that they give don’t relate very well with modern astronomical observations. For example, the Mahabharata is a historical literature (itihasa) similar to the puranas, but it lacks an astronomical section. Even so, some astronomical comments are woven into the storyline. Lo and behold! In Volume 5 of the Bibek Debroy translation of the Mahabharata, on Page 99, we come across the following information: The Moon’s diameter is 11,000 yojanas (A yojana being about 8.5 miles). This works out to be 93,500 miles in diameter. The circumference is 38,900 yojanas, or 330,650 miles. This is at odds with the generally accepted size promulgated by the orthodox scientific world. We will shortly understand how truth is stranger than fiction.

Orthodox physics doesn’t allow for such measurements as we see in the paragraph above. Joseph H. Cater (RIP) is a wonderful source of alternative particle physics. Chapter 15 of his book The Ultimate Reality presents quite a few surprising concepts related to the solar system. (An earlier version of the book was titled The Awesome Life Force, copyright 1984) One of the more interesting concepts has to do with the refractive effect upon particles of light as they pass through the solar system and indeed, thoughout all of sidereal space. Cater: “There are several factors which astrophysicists and astronomers have not taken into consideration in their calculations. Perhaps the most important of these is the fact that all electromagnetic radiations suffer an attenuation affect, well beyond that due to the inverse square law. It has already been shown that all space occupied by the material universe is permeated with particles of all kinds. This principle of attenuation is demonstrated by fluctuations in the velocity of light as it travels through space. The reasons become apparent from the following considerations.

Normal light, or light which has traveled relatively short distances from its source, immediately resumes its original velocity after passing through a dense medium, such as glass of water. This is due to the close bunching of photons and electrons in any given ray. The concentration of particles in a ray of light tends to decrease after traveling great distances. The farther it travels, the more attenuated the ray becomes. This means that its ability to increase its velocity after passing from a medium of a given density, to one of a lesser density, will be reduced. This, of course, is due to the scattering and dissipation of particles within the ray, as it encounters the conglomeration of particles, moving in random
directions throughout space.

Since conglomerations of particles permeate all known space, and
the distribution is not uniform, it follows that light will experience refractive effects, even when passing through free space. Therefore, even under the best conditions with observations beyond the atmosphere, astronomical observations cannot be made with any degree of accuracy. The difficulty, of course, is compounded when they are made [from] inside the atmosphere.” [End of Cater quote] 

The reader may know that this attenuation of particles and resultant refraction also has an effect on radar measurements of distance. Previously, it was thought that outer space was a rather empty vacuum. Currently, it is accepted that space is chock-full of particles that cause refraction. How odd, then, that no updated distance measurements have been offered, given this new understanding. By now, the reader should know why. The subsequent embarrassment that would be suffered by NASA (Never A Straight Answer), other space agencies and the academic community would be catastrophic. The accusations would border on treason. (Go easy on the astronauts, we would have to hear their side of the story) 

The sunset provides an easy-to-understand example of refractive effects caused from within the atmosphere. When we see the bottom of the setting Sun touching the horizon, we have to ask ourselves “where is The Sun?”. The answer is that The Sun is already below the horizon, although we can see it above the horizon. Amazing, but true. The Sun is seen higher than where it truly is. Light from The Sun is radiating through the atmosphere from below the horizon, it is a mirage effect. 

When backyard astronomers align their telescopes on a star which is at a point lower than the general vicinity of the zenith, they may see the star right in the middle of the telescope’s field of view (FOV), right in the middle of the crosshairs. Let us assume that the star is halfway between the zenith and the northern horizon. Very well, but the truth be known, the star is not right in the middle of the crosshairs where the back yard astronomers are seeing it. Light is following a curved path because the atmosphere acts as a lense.  The atmosphere is curved, and it is denser close to the ground, but more diffuse in the higher strata. The backyard astronomer would have to compensate by placing the star above the middle of the crosshairs. In this way, the optical train would be pointing more directly at the true position of the star, although the astronomer’s eyes would see the star as being above the optical train and above the crosshairs. 

Things are not where you see them in outer space. They are much closer, although they seem to be far, far away. 

The issue of size should be dealt with because the Vedic measurements give descriptions that differ greatly from orthodox astronomy. The planet Mars offers a very clear example in the form of Olympus Mons, which is situated on an open plain. Space probes have made radar measurements of its size, including its lateral length, from almost directly above, at an altitude of somewhere around 90 miles or more. The attenuation that would take place across interplanetary space does not ocurr due to the short distance. Also, there would not be any interference from the atmosphere if the radar measurements of the space probe were taken from more or less directly above. It is the sidelong views that  begin to cause the mirage-like effects. 

Keeping in mind that we know what the latitude of Olympus Mons is,  of course, we have a constant factor which serves as our yardstick, the East – West length of Olympus Mons. In order to find out the diameter of the planet Mars, we would have to slide that length along its latitude from one horizon to the other, let’s say the eastern horizon to the western horizon, and make a note of how many lengths of Olympus Mons are needed to reach the western edge of the planet, taking curvature into consideration.  

After we arrive at the end of the process, we would arrive at a final summation, a final width for the planet Mars at that latitude. Then we would have to extrapolate down to the equator of the planet in order to arrive at the maximum width of the planet. 

Yes, the planets and the firmament are upon us, and not thousands of light years away. Refraction makes it seem that way, but it is not so. Nor are sizes what they seem to be. 

All things considered, we have reason to believe that the measurements mentioned above from the Mahabharata, and those in the Puranas, hold true.