Solar System Replay:
This is another look at the mechanics of the Solar System that I started with my book, Surfing the Solar System, and that I have continued to write about on the Internet
This time I wanted to rethink the formation of the system a little looking for something more in the way of uniformity than we see present today. If you have read some of my articles you may know that I arrived at my own constant of sorts for the measure of the Solar System. Sir Isaac Newton’s constant was originally recited, I think as, .0000000667 and that over the years is now reconsidered to be more like .0000000000667. Years ago when I tried to find the basis for Newton’s constant no progress of note were made but there were some curious numerical relationships of numbers. Working the constant as a full number like 1/ .0000000667 = 149925003.748 the end result is somewhat unique. Note that 149925003.748 / 2000 = 7496.251 and if we now multiply the 7496.251 * 2001 we get 14999999.9999 that can be rounded to 15,000,000. When comparing conversions of kilometers to miles there were things of interest relating to his constant but since I was not able to develop anything note-worthy I will not waste any words on it here.
My own constant, for the exposure of the mechanics of the Solar System is based upon a minimum Solar System circumference of 200,000,000,000 miles providing a minimum radius in miles of (200000000000 / 6.2832) = 31,830,914,183.8 miles. This number has been shown to be a very important ingredient because you can divide the mean orbital radius of any planet in the Solar System into it and get the actual velocity of the planet revolving around the Sun in miles per second squared. Earth = 342.43 ^(1/2) = 18.505.
If I wished to use a fraction, as Newton did, I can show you a little surprise.
1/31830914183.8 = .0000000003141599 and also represents my constant. This number can be shown as 3.1416D-11. Newton’s now is 6.67D-11 or similar. When I did the conversion the first time it was like being struck with a Pi in the face to see the result. There is another unique number relationship that is worth a little comment because some of it will be a part of the body of my speculations about the system. My so-called constant was discovered when comparing the Earth to the Sun. The Sun with 864000 miles diameter provides for a circumference of 2714342.4 miles. By trial and error I found that dividing the Sun’s circumference by the Earth’s diameter of 7926.6 miles I got 342.434. 342.434 ^(1/2) = 18.505 and that turned out to be the Earth’s mean velocity in miles per second in it’s orbit around the Sun. By building on that I was able to apply the approach to all of the planets with great accuracy. Some other curious numbers was the Sun’s circumference of 2714342.2 miles times 25 Earth days ((24*60*60)*25) represents one Sun day of 2160000 seconds. 2714342.2 miles circumference divided by one days seconds of 2160000, gives us a mean surface velocity at the Sun’s equator of 1.25664 miles per second. 3.1416 / 1.25664 = 2.5. Also 2160000 divided by the Sun’s radius of 432000 miles is .5. 3.1416 / .5 = 6.2832, which is another variant of Pi. I went through this small review thinking it would entertain you, if nothing else.
What we see of our Solar System appears to be quite random if we try to find a method of construction based upon the positions of the planets. This seems strange to me because the balance of the mathematics is so precise. Suppose that there have been major catastrophes in the past that have seriously altered the layout of our Solar System. So severe, that the positions of the planets were altered so that the current layout has nothing remaining that would conform or relate to the original system created by the working combination of the Sun and gravitation. As of today computer efforts to re-create Solar Systems, I believe, are based on random configurations. Why couldn’t there be an ideal Solar System that relies on the Sun for its formation? Our present solar layout is as follows. All numbers are in miles.
Planet Orbit radius Planet radius Velocity Density
Mercury=== 35,997,324======1515.5 miles=====29.74 mps==5.43
Venus =====67,232,236===== 3759.5 miles=====21.76 mps==5.2
Earth======92,961,440=====7926.6 miles=====18.505 mps=5.52
Moon======239,239 to Earth=1080.0 miles=====.63682 mps=3.34
Mars======141,610,227=====2111.5 miles=====14.99 mps==3.91
Jupiter=====483,612,285====44678.7 miles=====8.11 mps==1.33
Saturn======886,695,015====37284. miles=====5.99 mps===.69
Uranus=====1,783,953,320==16246.5 miles=====4.22 mps===1.32
Neptune====2,794,363,106==15379.6 miles======3.37 mps===1.64
Pluto=======3,666,222,305==1430.0 miles======2.94 mps===2.0
The planet radii and densities make reorganization look hopeless.
In the opening paragraphs I discussed the unique relationship that the Earth appears to have with the Sun. I did experiment to see if the other planets might have a similar connection with out much success. Recall that the Sun’s circumference divided by Earth’s diameter gave us Earth’s mean orbital velocity squared. I wanted to see if that unique relationship would be true for the other planets and I found that it was not present, except for two more planets. That meant it could be a finding that is not just a coincidence.
It works like this:
Sun at 2714342.2 / 7926.6 for Earth = 342.43, un-squared = 18.505 mps.
==The actual mps for Earth is 18.505 mps.
Sun at 2714342.2 / 3031 for Mercury = 895.52 un-squared = 29.92 mps.
==The actual mps for Mercury is 29.74 mps.
Sun at 2714342.2 / 74568 for Saturn = 36.4 un-squared = 6.0 mps.
==The actual mps for Saturn is 5.99 mps.
Getting three hits from eight planets isn’t bad. Why not speculate that when the Solar System was originally formed that all of the planets were in orbits that would fit the above formula. That means that we can equate the orbital velocity to the equivalent mean orbital radius and relocate the planet in the new hypothetical orbit to compare with what we have in real time. I cannot change the planet’s radius without being grossly speculative. Based on what the preliminary test showed we can predict that the smaller planets will be closest to the sun. I do not think that the density of a planet will contribute to the game and if it does I am unable to make use of it anyway.
If there was a mutual attraction between massive objects and if that mutual attraction was present at the origin of creation (at least for all objects that were in motion) then it seems reasonable that the forming rings of matter in the process of creation would be in successively larger rings of stuff as you get farther from the Sun. The formative stages collected matter before becoming solid individual objects. I cannot claim that this idea is accurate but when dealing with the improvable all possibilities should receive a fair and reasonable evaluation. As you may know from some of my previous articles I do not think that the orbiting object contributes anything to the relationship between the orbited and the orbiter. In plain language that means that the mass of the Earth plays no part in the orbit relationship it has with the Sun. That seems to be in conflict with Newton’s formula and I know seems illogical. The proof is my formula to determine orbit velocities.
What I am going to do now is reverse engineer the Solar System based upon an assumed planet Sun control mechanism that has the formation of the matter in the rings that are destined to become planets controlled by a gravity wave placing planets eventual orbits based upon the potential mass of the planet being formed. This would be a wave following a straight line from the Sun’s equator with the wave being above and below the line getting larger and larger as it gets farther and farther from the Sun. The sides of the wave being the control barriers constraining the amount of building material that will eventually become a planet at each step of the wave wherein there is matter being condensed. The waves close to the Sun being the narrowest provide for greater compression giving us objects of greater density. I only have limited data to make my projections so we all know up front that there can be no claim that this method is correct. If there are young people reading this I want to stress that this is more like a game than a science proposal and you should not give it any more credence than you would any other game.
Before we begin the reconstruction some thing must be done about Venus and the missing planet between Mars current location and Jupiter. I will call the missing planet Atlan as I did in my book on page 115. I did not suggest a radius for the missing Atlan but I recall thinking it about 20,000 miles in diameter. Any remake must provide for that and for the most likely location for Venus before it was flipped over and moved sunward. Venus now measures slightly smaller than the Earth and I am convinced that originally it was larger than the earth. I guess a third larger. ((7928.8/2)*3), providing a diameter of 11.890.miles. You may find this dialogue distasteful because I am suggesting objects and sizes and positions that are otherwise non-existent. Look at it this way- that’s what I do. Possibly some day a very prehistory document or tablet will be found that replicates what the original Solar system looked like. Until then I offer my humble whispers.
The formula is much like the three object effort I already listed. Some small difference is required because we will now use the known diameter of the objects (except for Venus and Atlan) working the current orbit velocity backwards to create a new orbit position. This will place each object in a new relative position compared to all the other objects. Recall our Constant, SS#= 31,830,914,183.8. First we will use the objects known diameter to find its ratio to the Sun’s circumference. SC# = 2714342.2. We then divide the planets diameter into the sun’s circumference as if that really meant a useful something, in order to get a projected velocity the we can use to divide into the SS# and get a new mean orbit radius for the object in question. We can then use the new orbits to reconstruct a Solar System that will be of interest.
I do not claim that this chart is anything more than wishful thinking. On the other hand it does open the door to speculation as to what the original Solar System may have looked like. I have given the Moon and Pluto new orbits just based on their size. I always felt that the burned over look of the moon suggested it was at one time close to the Sun, I can almost see the bubbling surface leaving blister residue just like the ones my back had when my family poked my sun blisters with a needle, in my youth, at the beach. Pluto has not revealed much to astronomers. I doubt it came from outside the system so I place Pluto by size like everything else.
Planet =====SC# / PD=======OV^2=====SS# / OV^2=====OV
Moon ====SC# / 2160======1256.6=====25,330,983.75===35.44 mps
Pluto=====SC# / 2860======949.07=====33,539,058,43===30.80
Mercury===SC# / 3031======895.53====35,544,218.71====29.92
Mars======SC# / 4223=====642.75=====49,523,009,23====25.35
Earth=====SC# / 7926.6=====342.43=====92,961,440=====18.505
Venus====SC# / 11890======228.28===139,438,033.04====15.1
Atlan=====SC# / 20000======135.71====234,550,985.1====11.65
Neptune===SC# / 30759.2=====88.24====360,731,121.75====9.39
Uranus====SC# / 32493 ======83.53====381,071,641.13====9.13
Saturn=====SC# / 74568======36.4=====874,475,664.39====6.03
Jupiter=====SC# / 89357.4====30.37====1,048,103,858.5====5.51
==============================New mean orbit radius=====
This exercise provides for a much smaller Solar System than we have now but considering that I have speculated that severe catastrophic changes have occurred in our past there is potential for a more conservative beginning that was re-made into what we see now. When people speak of “Gods” traveling between planets in pre-history it certainly would have been easier if the Solar System was more condensed as I have conjectured. The next question is what would it take for events to change the above configuration to what we see of our Solar System today?
First we must take an inventory of what the differences are. Both the Moon and Pluto appear to have received substantial relocation, but, being as small as they are would have required much less interference than some of the other objects. My speculation projects that Earth, Mars and Saturn remained in relatively their original orbits. Venus is in an area of major changes along with Atlan’s destruction and the relocation of Neptune, Uranus and Jupiter.
Jupiter ends up about twice as far from the Sun and being the largest known planet moving it would require some unusual force. However if we suppose that Saturn was traveling in its orbit in a position in front of the direction the Solar System was revolving around the Galaxy and that Uranus, Neptune and Jupiter were in reasonably close proximity traveling behind the Sun it might be possible for those planets to be pulled to the outer areas fending on their own temporarily while the balance of the intruding force disrupted the inner areas of the system. It does not seem so far fetched to me that the remake continued for some time because it had to cover the entire Solar System. My problem. even with unlimited and unlikely speculation is what objects would be massive enough to cause this disruption. Assuming it was another Solar System there could be sufficient mass to bring it off but where does a second migrant Solar System come from. If it formed in our Galaxy it should have had an orbit of its own and neither our system nor the other system would be in position to collide. It is also extremely improbable that there could be a collection of massive objects in our orbital path just sitting there waiting for us to run into them- they should be moving at our speed.
Obviously I do not have the answers. Logic tells me that whatever caused the corruption of our peaceful generations was with us from the start as a part of our Solar System. They would be large objects in extreme orbits by comparison to the planets up to Jupiter. Being large and being in extreme orbits they were subjected to the gravitation of the Galaxy to a greater extent than the planets being controlled more by the Sun’s gravitation and much less by the Galaxy. Therefore by adding conjecture to speculation with some guess work thrown in, I believe that we literally tore ourselves apart and that in the fringes on our Solar System there remain large massive objects that could be capable of giving us a makeover all over again. The good news is that the Earth ended up with a great deal more water taken from Venus and in a favorable orbit with a smaller companion to entertain us. I am well aware that some will see this as unwarranted pure speculation off the wall. I pretty much see it that way too. It is fun for me to try and apply logic to things that cannot otherwise be proven by facts. Do not overlook the three planets that did fit first efforts relating them to the Sun and orbital velocity.
Please check out my web sites:
www.surfingthesolarsystem.com
www.thesolarsimplicity.com
www.egpok.com that concerns my book on the Great Pyramid.
| Views: 16
Email This to a Friend 