Wheel of Heaven names two things that belong together but should not be\nconfused. The first is a celestial image: the slow turning of the whole sky\nproduced by the precession of the equinoxes — the roughly\n25,920-year cycle across which the spring-equinox point drifts backward through\nthe twelve constellations of the zodiac at about one constellation every 2,160\nyears. That is the wheel of heaven in the literal sense: the heavens wheeling\noverhead, dividing deep time into the twelve World Ages. The\nsecond is the name of this project, which takes that image as its central\nmetaphor and its organizing spine.
\nHolding the two apart matters. The wheel itself is ordinary astronomy — a real,\nmeasurable motion of Earth's axis, recognized since Hipparchus. The project is\nan interpretive framework, and the corpus of writing that states it: a\ncomparative reading of revelation, cosmic chronology, ancient memory, and sacred\nhistory, built around a single working hypothesis about who first set that wheel\nturning as a calendar. This entry takes the celestial wheel first, then the\nframework that borrows its name, then how both stand against mainstream\nscholarship.
\nPrecession is the third of Earth's principal motions, after the daily rotation\nthat makes the day and the yearly orbit that makes the year. Earth's axis is\ntilted about 23.4° from the plane of its orbit and is not fixed in space:\ngravitational torque from the Sun and Moon on the planet's equatorial bulge\nmakes the axis sweep a slow cone, like a spinning top that has begun to wobble,\nonce every roughly 25,772 years on the modern measurement. The framework rounds\nthis to 25,920 years, which divides cleanly into twelve ages of 2,160 years\neach.[1]\n As the axis wheels around, the point where the Sun\nstands at the spring equinox slides westward through the zodiac at about one\ndegree every seventy-two years, and the constellation rising behind that equinox\nSun — the signature of the epoch — changes roughly every 2,160 years. One\nvisible token of the turning is the pole star itself: the axis pointed near\nThuban in Draco around 2,800 BCE, points near Polaris today, and will point near\nVega around 13,700 CE before the wheel carries it back again. The full astronomy\nis set out in the Precession, Great Year,\nand Zodiac entries.
\nThe picture of the heavens as a turning wheel, or a great mill grinding, is old\nand widely scattered. Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend's Hamlet's\nMill (1969)[1]\n\nassembled a wide body of cross-cultural myth — the Norse and Finnish cosmic\nmills (the Grotti, the Finnish Sampo), the world-tree and world-pillar that\n\"break\" at cosmic turning points, the recurring sequences of declining ages —\nand argued that these preserve, in symbolic form, a memory of precession\nmeasured in deep antiquity. The thesis is contested (see below), but it gives\nthe framework its governing figure: the sky as a mill or wheel whose slow\ngrinding marks out the ages.
\nThe project's name carries a second, textual echo as well. In Ezekiel's vision\nthe prophet describes \"a wheel in the middle of a wheel\" — אוֹפַן בְּתוֹךְ\nהָאוֹפָן, ofan betokh ha-ofan (Ezekiel 1:15–16\n).[2]\n\nThat phrase has a long interpretive history in Jewish and Christian tradition,\nmost of it reading the ofanim as an order of heavenly beings rather than as\nmachinery.[2]\n The framework reads the passage more literally,\nas one of several biblical descriptions of an Elohim craft rendered in the only\nvocabulary its witness had. This echo is deliberately secondary: the primary\nwheel of heaven is the precessional cycle, not the wheels of the merkavah.
\nOn the framework's reading — and here a canon claim can be stated plainly — the\nwheel of heaven is not a mystical inheritance but an instrument. The zodiac is\nthe calendar the Elohim, the advanced human civilization the\nHebrew Bible names with that plural word, devised to keep their bearings across\na project that ran for tens of thousands of years, and the precessional ages are\nits slow hand. The Elohim arrived on Earth roughly 22,000 years ago and, across\nthe twelve ages of a single Great Year, surveyed and prepared\nthe planet, synthesized life, and at last created humanity in their own\nimage.[3]\n\nEach age carried a phase of the work: the human synthesis in the\nAge of Leo, Eden in Cancer, the\nGreat Flood in Gemini, Babel and the patriarchs in Taurus,\nthe Hebrew prophets in Aries, the Christian era in Pisces, and the present\nrecovery in the Age of Aquarius.[4]\n
\nBecause the wheel turns far too slowly to be caught within one lifetime, the\nframework holds that early cultures did not discover precession on their own but\nwere taught it. The teachers were the exiled creators who had sided with their\nown creation and stayed on Earth — the Lucifer faction, the party\nof the Eden Serpent — and not the home-world\nCouncil of the Eternals, nor\nSatan's faction, which had argued for humanity's abolition and had\nno reason to instruct it. The astronomical knowledge was then set into sacred\niconography — the bull of the Age of Taurus, the ram of Aries, the fish of\nPisces — so that each age left a signature its cultures could carry forward long\nafter its meaning was lost. The corpus formalizes this as the\nDoubled Signature: each age marked by both its own\nconstellation and its zodiacal opposite, the redundancy that lets the\nastronomical content survive transmission.[5]\n
\nThat the whole Elohim project fits inside roughly one Great Year — some 25,000\nyears from the human synthesis to the present transition — is, on this reading,\ndeliberate rather than coincidental: the wheel of heaven was chosen as the\nmaster clock of the work. The present moment sits at the Pisces–Aquarius cusp,\nwhich the corpus dates to about 1950 CE (with 1946 as the source-anchored\nopening), the turn it reads as the age of recovery, when the memory the wheel\npreserved becomes legible again. This is a framework claim, explicit in the\ncorpus and its Raëlian sources but not one that mainstream scholarship makes.
\nThe Wheel of Heaven project is the framework stated at length — an interpretive\nposition and the growing corpus that argues it — published at\nwww.wheelofheaven.world through a wiki of several hundred entries, a library\nof source texts, a narrated introduction, and a running blog. Its working\nhypothesis is the one sketched above: that terrestrial life was the deliberate\nscientific work of the Elohim, and that the world's religious and mythological\nrecord preserves a decipherable memory of that work. The hypothesis is advanced\nas exactly that — a working hypothesis, a basis for inquiry rather than a\nsettled result — and the corpus keeps four kinds of statement visibly apart:\nwhat a source directly says, comparison across traditions, the framework's own\nsynthesis, and questions left open.
\nThe reading rests on a few source families. The Raëlian canon — Claude\nVorilhon's contact accounts, beginning with The Book Which Tells the Truth\n(1974) and collected as Message from the Designers — supplies the specific\ncontent of the hypothesis. Jean Sendy's pre-Raëlian books, above all Ces dieux\nqui firent le ciel et la terre (1969)[6]\n\nand L'ère du Verseau (1970),[7]\n\ngive the earlier reading of the Elohim as a physical civilization and of the\nHebrew Bible through a precessional-zodiacal lens. Hamlet's Mill anchors the\nprecessional-mythology reading. And a wide body of primary religious,\nmythological, and archaeological material — Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Greek,\nVedic, Mesoamerican, and beyond — supplies the comparative evidence the\nframework reads as preserved cultural memory.
\nThe project also defines itself by what it is not. It draws on Raëlian material\nbut is not the Raëlian Movement and asks no Raëlian commitment of\nits readers. It extends Sendy's \"Tradition\" rather than simply restating it. It\nshares its subject with popular \"ancient aliens\" media but not its method,\nholding to a scholarly register, cited sources, and explicit epistemic labels\nwhere that tradition tends toward spectacle. And it reads mainstream\ncomparative-religion and biblical scholarship in earnest, parting from it on\ninterpretation rather than on the textual and historical facts it establishes.
\nThe framework's strongest claims stand on contested ground, and the corpus keeps\nthe disagreement in view.
\nThe astronomy itself is not in dispute. Precession is real, its rate is well\nmeasured, and Hipparchus of Nicaea identified it around 129 BCE by comparing his\nstar positions against older ones — the mainstream date the framework accepts.\nWhat the framework adds, and what mainstream scholarship does not grant, is that\nprecession was known and tracked well before Hipparchus. Its evidence for that\nis Hamlet's Mill, whose reception has been mixed: influential in the\narchaeoastronomy that grew up in the 1970s and 1980s, but treated skeptically by\nmost classicists and historians of astronomy, who object that its cross-cultural\nparallels are too loose to demand a precessional reading and that the case for a\nNeolithic discovery is unproven. The corpus adopts the thesis as interpretive\ninfrastructure — honestly, as an inferred reading rather than an established\nfact — and attributes the pre-Hipparchean knowledge to teaching by the Elohim.
\nSeveral neighboring frameworks share the direction while differing on warrant.\n\nZecharia Sitchin\n's The 12th Planet (1976)[8]\n\nreads the Mesopotamian Anunnaki as extraterrestrial engineers of humanity; the\nWheel of Heaven framework works principally from Hebrew Bible sources and\ndiffers from Sitchin on interpretation more than on the basic identification.\nPaul Anthony Wallis's Escaping from Eden (2020)[9]\n\nand Mauro Biglino's strict-literal Hebrew work reach a similar reading of the\nElohim from a translational rather than a Raëlian starting point. Against all of\nthese stands ordinary source criticism — the Documentary Hypothesis and its\nsuccessors — which the framework does not contest: whether the Pentateuch was\nassembled from several documentary sources is a separate question from what the\nsurviving text remembers, and both can be true at once.[5]\n
\nTwo proposed anchors for the name deserve a caution. The connection sometimes\ndrawn between \"wheel of heaven\" and Akhenaten's Aten cult has no direct warrant\nin the Amarna record and is not one the corpus treats as\nestablished.[4]\n And the count of roughly forty prophets sent\nacross the ages is a figure internal to the Raëlian source, not one derived from\nany single tradition's own reckoning.[3]\n
\nWheel of Heaven Project. Project Charter. Internal governance document.
\nWheel of Heaven Project. Editorial Style Guide. Internal governance document.
\nWheel of Heaven Project. Chronology Rules. Internal governance document.
\nWheel of Heaven Project. Nomenclature. Internal governance document.
\nWheel of Heaven Project. Source Methodology. Internal governance document.
\nWheel of Heaven Project. Chapter Index. Internal governance document.
\nWheel of Heaven Project. Master Timeline. Internal governance document.
\nVorilhon, Claude (Raël). The Book Which Tells the Truth (1974); collected in Message from the Designers. The principal source for the framework's specific content.
\nVorilhon, Claude (Raël). Extra-Terrestrials Took Me to Their Planet (1975); collected in Message from the Designers.
\nVorilhon, Claude (Raël). Let's Welcome the Extra-Terrestrials (1979); collected in Message from the Designers.
\nVorilhon, Claude (Raël). Message from the Designers. Tagman Press, 2005. The collected source compilation.
\nVorilhon, Claude (Raël). \nGeniocracy\n. Various editions.
\nVorilhon, Claude (Raël). Sensual Meditation. Various editions.
\nSendy, Jean. Les cahiers de cours de Moïse. Julliard, 1963.
\nSendy, Jean. La Lune, clé de la Bible. Julliard, 1968.
\nSendy, Jean. Ces dieux qui firent le ciel et la terre. Robert Laffont, 1969.
\nSendy, Jean. L'ère du Verseau. Robert Laffont, 1970.
\nSendy, Jean. Les dieux nous sont nés. Grasset, 1966.
\nde Santillana, Giorgio, and Hertha von Dechend. Hamlet's Mill: An Essay on Myth and the Frame of Time. Gambit, 1969.
\nCruttenden, Walter. Lost Star of Myth and Time. St. Lynn's Press, 2005.
\nSellers, Jane B. The Death of Gods in Ancient Egypt. Penguin, 1992.
\nAveni, Anthony F. Skywatchers of Ancient Mexico. University of Texas Press, 1980.
\nKrupp, Edwin C. Echoes of the Ancient Skies. Harper & Row, 1983.
\nWellhausen, Julius. Prolegomena to the History of Israel. Trans. J. Sutherland Black and Allan Menzies. Adam & Charles Black, 1885 [originally 1878].
\nFriedman, Richard Elliott. Who Wrote the Bible? Harper & Row, 1987.
\nFriedman, Richard Elliott. The Bible with Sources Revealed. HarperOne, 2003.
\nvon Rad, Gerhard. Genesis: A Commentary. Westminster, revised ed., 1972 [originally 1949].
\nWestermann, Claus. Genesis 1-11: A Commentary. Augsburg / Fortress, 1984.
\nBrueggemann, Walter. Theology of the Old Testament. Augsburg Fortress, 1997.
\nAlter, Robert. The Hebrew Bible: A Translation with Commentary. 3 vols. W. W. Norton, 2018.
\nDever, William G. What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It? Eerdmans, 2001.
\nFinkelstein, Israel, and Neil Asher Silberman. The Bible Unearthed. Free Press, 2001.
\nTov, Emanuel. Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. Augsburg Fortress, 3rd ed., 2012 [originally 1992].
\nScholem, Gershom. Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism. Schocken, 1941.
\nIdel, Moshe. Kabbalah: New Perspectives. Yale University Press, 1988.
\nWolfson, Elliot R. Through a Speculum That Shines. Princeton University Press, 1994.
\nMatt, Daniel C., trans. The Zohar: Pritzker Edition. 12 vols. Stanford University Press, 2003-2017.
\nSitchin, Zecharia. The 12th Planet. Stein and Day, 1976.
\nHancock, Graham. Magicians of the Gods. St. Martin's Press, 2015.
\nBauval, Robert, and Adrian Gilbert. The Orion Mystery. Crown, 1994.
\nWest, John Anthony. Serpent in the Sky. Julian Press, 1979.
\nWallis, Paul Anthony. Escaping from Eden. 6th Books, 2020.
\nWallis, Paul Anthony. The Eden Conspiracy. 6th Books, 2024.
\nBiglino, Mauro, and Giorgio Cattaneo. The Naked Bible. Uno, 2022.
\nAldred, Cyril. Akhenaten: King of Egypt. Thames & Hudson, 1988.
\nRedford, Donald B. Akhenaten: The Heretic King. Princeton University Press, 1984.
\nHornung, Erik. Akhenaten and the Religion of Light. Cornell University Press, 1999.
\nWheel of Heaven Project. https://www.wheelofheaven.world. The principal project web platform.
\nWheel of Heaven GitHub. https://github.com/wheelofheaven/. The principal technical infrastructure repository.
\n", "extra": {"alternative_names":["the Wheel of Heaven framework","the Wheel of Heaven corpus","the Wheel of Heaven project","the Wheel of Heaven thesis","the framework (corpus-internal short form)","the corpus (when referring to the written body of project content)"],"category":"Meta","claim_type":"framework","editorial_pass":"2026-07","entry_type":"concept","featured_order":4,"footnotes":[{"content":"The ~25,920-year figure for the Great Year is a framework-internal rounding: twelve precessional ages of exactly 2,160 years each. The contemporary astronomical value for the period of axial precession, computed from IAU 2006 precession-nutation models, is approximately 25,772 years — itself a slowly-varying figure rather than a strict constant, since the precession rate is affected by long-term changes in Earth's orbital geometry and in the lunisolar torque. The corpus's preference for 25,920 reflects the framework's organising convenience (twelve equal ages) rather than a claim that the cycle is literally 25,920 years; the difference is approximately 0.6%."},{"content":"The wheel-within-a-wheel imagery of Ezekiel 1:15–16 has a long Jewish and Christian interpretive history that does not require the spacecraft reading. The principal Jewish tradition reads the *ofanim* as one of the orders of heavenly beings in the *merkavah* (chariot-throne) tradition, with the *Hekhalot* literature and later Maimonidean and Kabbalistic engagement developing the imagery as a vision of the structure of divine reality. Mainstream biblical scholarship — Greenberg's Anchor Bible commentary, Block's NICOT volume — reads the passage as visionary-prophetic rhetoric rather than literal description. The corpus's reading takes the description's mechanical specificity (the wheels' interlocked motion, the rims full of eyes, the non-rotating travel) as evidence of observation rather than rhetoric, without claiming the standard interpretive traditions are wrong about the visionary genre."},{"content":"The approximate-forty prophets figure is a source-internal claim drawn from Vorilhon's transcripts and is not derived from external head-counts of the religious traditions. Different traditions count prophets differently — Islamic tradition speaks of twenty-five named prophets in the Qur'an against a broader corpus of 124,000 sent across human history; the Hebrew Bible names eighteen figures explicitly designated *navi* across the canonical books; the Bahá'í tradition counts nine Manifestations as central. The corpus treats the figure as Yahweh's own enumeration of alliance-sent intermediaries on the source's account, not as a number convertible to or derivable from any single tradition's prophetic register."},{"content":"Whether Akhenaten's Aten cult constituted genuine monotheism, henotheism, or a politically-motivated monolatry remains contested among Egyptologists. Cyril Aldred (1988) reads the Atenist reform as authentically monotheistic in its mature phase. Donald Redford (1984) emphasises the political-economic dimensions — the strike against the Amun priesthood at Karnak — over the theological. Erik Hornung (1999) treats the reform as a *henotheism* in which other gods were not denied but rendered functionally inert beneath the universal sun-disc. The corpus does not commit to the Atenist-monotheism question in either direction; the proposed wheel-of-heaven-vehicle connection is registered as one tradition reads it while the principal Egyptological literature is acknowledged as not containing direct textual attestation of the specific terminology."},{"content":"The corpus's framework operates orthogonally to the Documentary Hypothesis's specific source reconstructions (J / E / D / P, and the various subsequent refinements through Van Seters, Rendtorff, Schmid, and the broader post-Wellhausen tradition). Whether the Pentateuch was assembled from four discrete documentary sources, from supplementary layers around a Yahwist or Priestly core, or through fragment-redactional processes is a question internal to source-critical methodology; the framework's reading attends to what the surviving text preserves about its referents rather than to the compositional history that produced the surviving text. The two questions are independent: a text could be compositionally complex in any of the ways the source-critical tradition has proposed and still preserve the kind of historical-referential content the framework reads it as preserving."}],"infobox":{"distinguished_from":"The Raëlian Movement (the corpus draws on Raëlian source material but is not affiliated with the institutional Raëlian Movement and does not require Raëlian commitments of its readers); Sendy's pre-Raëlian Tradition framework (the corpus extends Sendy's work substantially while retaining its principal interpretive moves); the broader 'ancient aliens' popular-television tradition (the corpus holds to a scholarly register and source-material discipline it lacks); mainstream comparative-religion scholarship (the corpus engages mainstream scholarship in earnest but works from distinctive interpretive commitments)","governance_documents":"Project Charter; Editorial Style Guide; Chronology Rules; Nomenclature; Source Methodology; Chapter Index; Master Timeline","name_meaning_principal":"The precessional cycle as the 'wheel of heaven' that turns through the twelve zodiacal constellations across the Great Year; the principal organizing temporal-cosmological framework of the corpus","name_meaning_secondary":"The wheel-within-a-wheel imagery of Ezekiel's vision (Ezekiel 1:16, אוֹפַן בְּתוֹךְ הָאוֹפָן, *ofan betokh ha-ofan*) and broader Hebrew Bible spacecraft-imagery preserved in pre-scientific vocabulary","principal_source_families":"Raëlian canonical texts (Claude Vorilhon, 1974 onward); Jean Sendy's pre-Raëlian Tradition framework (1963 onward); the precessional-mythological reconstruction of *Hamlet's Mill* (Santillana and von Dechend, 1969); the Hebrew Bible read with framework-specific hermeneutic; cross-cultural religious-mythological-archaeological evidence","principal_temporal_framework":"The precessional cycle (~25,920-year Great Year) divided into twelve precessional ages of approximately 2,160 years each; the corpus period extends from the Capricorn-age opening at -21,810 to the present Aquarian age (1950 corpus boundary, 1946 source-anchored boundary)","project_status":"Active; ongoing development across multiple workstreams (wiki, library, blog, narrated introduction)","project_url":"https://www.wheelofheaven.world","status_in_framework":"Foundational meta-concept; the entry that articulates what the broader project IS, what it draws on, what it claims, and how it operates","type":"Curated comparative knowledge project; interpretive framework for the integrated reading of revelation, cosmic chronology, ancient memory, sacred history, and modern reinterpretation","working_hypothesis":"Terrestrial life was produced by the deliberate scientific work of a specific advanced civilization, called in the Hebrew Bible the Elohim, who arrived on Earth approximately 22,000 years ago and conducted across twelve precessional ages a project of planetary preparation, life synthesis, and the eventual creation of humanity in their own image"},"lang":"en","lang_prefix":"","references":[{"id":"the-book-which-tells-the-truth","note":"Vorilhon's 1974 foundational Raelian text — the principal source for the framework's specific content; first contact at Clermont-Ferrand on 13 December 1973."},{"id":"extraterrestrials-took-me-to-their-planet","note":"Vorilhon's 1976 second Raelian work — record of the October 1975 Perigord visit and Yahweh's exposition of the home world."},{"id":"lets-welcome-the-extraterrestrials","note":"Vorilhon's 1979 third Raelian work — the embassy project and the human role in the Aquarian transition."},{"id":"intelligent-design-message-from-the-designers","note":"The collected Raelian source compilation; cited as the principal articulation of the alliance-creator claim that organises the corpus's working hypothesis."},{"id":"those-gods-who-made-heaven-and-earth","note":"Sendy's 1969 pre-Raelian philological reading of Elohim as a physical civilization — an early articulation of the Tradition framework."},{"id":"the-coming-of-the-gods","note":"Sendy's *L'Ere du Verseau* (1970) — the Aquarian-age framing within the Tradition framework, foundational to the corpus's precessional-zodiacal reading of the Hebrew Bible."},{"id":"hamlets-mill","note":"Santillana and von Dechend's 1969 foundational scholarly anchor for the corpus's precessional-mythological reading."},{"id":"ezekiel","note":"Hebrew Bible book providing the wheel-within-a-wheel imagery (Ezekiel 1:15-16) that anchors the secondary semantic dimension of the project name."},{"id":"genesis","note":"Hebrew Bible book whose creation narrative the corpus reads as compressed cultural memory of the alliance's genetic-engineering project."},{"id":"the-12th-planet","note":"Sitchin's 1976 foundational work in the Anunnaki / Nibiru framework — engaged as an adjacent alternative-history reading with shared direction but distinct source-material warrant."},{"id":"escaping-from-eden","note":"Wallis's 2020 strict-translational comparative reading of the Hebrew Bible's Elohim — engaged as an adjacent framework registering shared direction."},{"id":"the-naked-bible","note":"Biglino and Cattaneo's 2022 strict-literal Hebrew translation work — methodological background to Wallis's broader strict-translational engagement."},{"id":"prolegomena-zur-geschichte-israels","note":"Wellhausen's 1878 foundational articulation of the Documentary Hypothesis — anchor for the corpus's engagement with mainstream Hebrew Bible source-critical scholarship."},{"id":"who-wrote-the-bible","note":"Friedman's 1987 accessible restatement of the Documentary Hypothesis — corpus reference point for contemporary critical scholarship."},{"id":"the-zohar-pritzker","note":"Matt's Pritzker Edition translation of the Zohar (2003-2017) — standard scholarly access point for the corpus's Kabbalah engagement."}],"see_also":[{"description":"The wider stream of comparative readings the project sits within.","path":"wiki/the-tradition","title":"The Tradition"},{"description":"A literalist Hebrew-reading approach the project draws on.","path":"wiki/biglino-method","title":"Biglino Method"},{"description":"The scholarly discipline the project applies to canon-internal reading.","path":"wiki/comparative-mythology","title":"Comparative Mythology"},{"description":"The unit of comparative analysis the project uses to track motifs across traditions.","path":"wiki/mytheme","title":"Mytheme"},{"description":"The interpretive constraints the project tries to satisfy when reading sacred texts.","path":"wiki/sendys-conditions-of-coherence","title":"Sendy's Conditions of Coherence"}],"timeline":["multi-age"]} }, "links": { "self": "/v1/wiki/wheel-of-heaven/", "canonical_html": "https://www.wheelofheaven.world/wiki/wheel-of-heaven/", "index": "/v1/wiki/", "schema": "/v1/schema/wiki-entry/", "related": [{"slug": "the-tradition", "title": "The Tradition", "kind": "WikiEntry", "type": "see_also", "url": "/v1/wiki/the-tradition/" },{"slug": "biglino-method", "title": "Biglino Method", "kind": "WikiEntry", "type": "see_also", "url": "/v1/wiki/biglino-method/" },{"slug": "comparative-mythology", "title": "Comparative Mythology", "kind": "WikiEntry", "type": "see_also", "url": "/v1/wiki/comparative-mythology/" },{"slug": "mytheme", "title": "Mytheme", "kind": "WikiEntry", "type": "see_also", "url": "/v1/wiki/mytheme/" },{"slug": "sendys-conditions-of-coherence", "title": "Sendy's Conditions of Coherence", "kind": "WikiEntry", "type": "see_also", "url": "/v1/wiki/sendys-conditions-of-coherence/" }] } }