We've arrived at another Christmas, and are now (this particular instant, a notion we will better define shortly) just as hopeful as we were on December 25, 2015 (when we delivered our last Christmas letter, the specific date of which has since been drawn into question [0]) that you are at all like me, at least insofar as this text will be read and, perchance appreciated between us in some form of light. So much time has passed since our initial season's greetings, with so much learned, and we have been reminded since, for better or for worse, that we must take into account factors of time dilation and spatio-temporal variability due to various astronomical constraints either tightening or relaxing themselves since our first considering the truth of the matter regarding the hypothetical time of Jesus' birth relative to some verbal expression of the phrase "Christ is born". Specifically, it is not simply enough to consider with respect to absolute time when speaking the aforementioned phrase may have constituted a fallacious utterance, but where specifically in spacetime it was made relative to some form of stable, reliable measure of both time and location whence the verbal emission and the birth in question took (or will take) place.
An astrological rewinding of history (which we will make more rigourous by reference to various forms of analysis suitable for use in astrophysics) to the specific set of timeframes constituting the alleged year of Jesus' birth will provide a partitioning of spatial and temporal criteria by which we may begin considering such a form of measure. For instance, the following set of 31536000000 possible birth event milliseconds in iso8601 format:
Seismic and geological activity locally alongside planetary activity peripherally will both have had possible effects on the specific location of Bethlehem within these supposed timeframes, considered as an expanding circular planar radius as capacity to accurately assess its location diffuses into the relative past. Linked is a collection of seismological datasets [1] which we may use to make numerical localized determinations, parameterized below as β. We will exclude for brevity elevation considerations, as well the effect of near-field objects such as Frankincense & Myrrh during the time of birth, but note them for further analysis by the reader should they have an interest in deriving a better bound [2].
We will consider the verbal emission location as a unit of reference volume, a measurable space which is specific in that it can be used as a co-ordinate axis. In this way, the verbal emission will present itself relative to the hypothetical birth as both:
Formally, we define:
Singling out τ for a moment, we will suggest that any prolonged expression of truth is a constrained (non-critical) radioactive path bounded below the so-called Dollar ratio defined by Louis Slotin, so any path through the kernel chain of spheroids between σ and 0 must not have exceeded this particular bound, otherwise a form of prompt-critical divergence would have disallowed the utterance relative to the birth in the first place (or, rather, in the distance travelled since the specific birth point in the birth-place disc to the location of the utterance nullity, here 0). Statistically, this places very specific constraints on both the reverse and forward phase Bayesian dynamics of τ.
In sum, the specific location of Jesus' birth is now represented as a disc of some radius which includes any possible trajectory into the future time of a given emission of the phrase (C.I.B), constrained physically by astronomical & local geological considerations, then expanded or contracted by a dynamic measure of probability, which is what we wanted.
Whether the consideration of such notions binds an additional factor to the bigram of birth/emission orientation across such relative time constraints is a detail we have not included here, which theoretically may have tightened the spectrum of December 25, 2015 considerations vs those described above, up to certain strange delays which maybe have been introduced either currently or retroactively due to awareness.
[0]
[1]
[2] The affine location of the time drift for for the verbal emission may be considered relative to some hypothetical observation point, which we have left out of this analysis but would be included in the above expression as a composite factor of the ζ(α) and ζ(β) ie ζ(β1, β2), ζ(α1, α2).