Sun,moon, earth and mathematics . (page 8)

kepler

Bode's law used to have a lot of currency among "planetologists" - until some extra solar planetary systems were detected via doppler and transits of other stars. Haven't heard much about Bode's law lately, save in used and very old astronomy books.

You could look at these as Pythagorean integers of import, or you could look at them as outcomes of efforts to define precise units of measure - until something better comes along.

Regarding planets and their rotation rates. Some planets have roughly ten hour rotation rates. Others don't. But usually planets are not formed in isolation. Their are mechanisms that dissipate their angular momentum so that they often rotate, after a time, synchronously with other bodies. What applies to moons such as ours and the principal satellites of Jupiter, can apply to planets as well with respect to suns.

kepler

I just noticed that half of the paragraphs I submit get edited out.

1. Something about the units of measure for the meter and the second in terms of integers and how they could be interpreted.

2. Remarked that Carl Sagan's science fiction novel "Contact" leaned remarkably on numerology.

They're both gone.

Viviane

The 2 important ones, Earth, because life is here, and Jupiter, for it has most of planetary mass, the gravitational influence, are within.5% of these idealized values. so:?

This has been shown to be baseless numerology many times. What does idealized even mean?

"Look at perfectly all these numbers align, except everywhere they don't, which is everywhere, but kinda close, therefore magic!"

prologos

najw: "Without knowing the values of those distances I have to object to that assertion. The only way you can maintain those ratios to be true all the time you would need concentric circular orbits and identical duration of their rotation around the sun. But none of this is true. Please explain.

I already gave the [cl]ever doubling distances between planets in 1/10 AU in the last post above, and mentioned Kepler's laws, which will give you the revolution time and speed, and my numbers refer to the mean orbit values. , Pluto's at 388, is very eccentric, but still fits the pattern;-- 92% of the planetary mass rotates at 10 hours per their day, but Mercury, Venus are already gravitationally slowed by solar tidal effects. Both the Earth and Jupiter have quite circular orbits, apparently the mass, or rotation are not factors in the regular spacing, so what could be?.---sorry, I could not align the above tabulation, but someone could have noticed that Mercury and Neptune are not included in this geometric series, which makes it different from strictly "Bode", a series that would end inwardly with ever smaller divisions by half at "4", or ~(.4 AU) does anybody care? It is an amazing set-up, that had set up itself. having a system with at least 9 freely orbiting bodies align in doubling distances.

Viviane

It is an amazing set-up, that had set up itself. having a system with at least 9 freely orbiting bodies align in doubling distances.
Except that's not actually true.

prologos

V: "--- only numerology---"

agreed !, -- if the series 0*....,3,6,12,24,48, 96,192,*...... were only a paper exercise, but these ratios are traced out in billion year old, now stable orbital path.-- then we should give up how it was done, a[u]tomatically. or? sorry bold did not turn off. *position of Mercury.

prologos

V: ".Except that's not actually true.

well, why would you say that??-- count them in the series: 1) Mercury =0; - Venus=7, - Earth=10, - Mars, - Asteroids, - Jupiter, - Saturn, - Uranus, and - -9) Pluto=388. this is not Bode, but Bode+, --

PS: thank you for asking and let me explain: If you half the spacing between Venus and Mercury, one should have a planet at 1/2 the venus-earth gap., at .55 AU , another at 4.75 AU, but have not found any, nor Vulcan. So the question is then, what limits the spacing to a minimum of 3, (.3 AU) - or, incidentally 300 light seconds? and how do you dare not counting Neptune,a biggy? well, let me explain--

Viviane

well, why would you say that??-- count them in the series: 1) Mercury =0; - Venus=7, - Earth=10, - Mars, - Asteroids, - Jupiter, - Saturn, - Uranus, and - -9) Pluto=388. this is not Bode, but Bode+, --

Mecury is zero what?

Are you even trying to make sense?

prologos

V: "Mecury is zero what?

sorry I can not post graphics or tabulations, so: Mercury is the 0 endpoint of a geometric series that works in ward from 388 (the pluto position) of ever halving orbit difference values. perhaps my time-overlapping post above, deals with your question? There would be an indefinite number of orbit possibilities between Venus and Mercury, if that theoretical sequence would have it's embodiment in the real, created world.

PS what I am driving at, is, that there is more to the solar system then just an expressed numerology, and the answer will come, hidden in the deviations.-- like in Humour and music that is where the pleasant feeling lie. truthfully.

Viviane

But that's not true, the orbital distances. You're not making sense.

OBJECT	Distance from Sun (average)	Distance traveled in one complete orbit of the Sun (one "year.")	Amount of time for one complete orbit of the Sun (one "year.")
Sun	0 miles
Mercury	36,800,000 miles	223,700,000 miles	3 Earth months
Venus	67,200,000 miles	422,500,000 miles	7 Earth months
Earth	93,000,000 miles	584,000,000 miles	1 Earth year (365.25 days)
Mars	141,600,000 miles	888,000,000 miles	23 Earth months. Almost 2 Earth years.
Jupiter	483,600,000 miles	3,037,000,000 miles	142 Earth months. Almost 12 Earth years.
Saturn	886,500,000 miles	5,565,900,000 miles	354 Earth months. (29.5 Earth years)
Uranus	1,783,700,000 miles	11,201,300,000 miles	1009 Earth months. (84 Earth years)
Neptune	2,795,200,000 miles	17,562,300,000 miles	1979 Earth months (almost 165 Earth years)
Pluto	3,670,100,000 miles	22,698,700,000 miles	2977 Earth months (248 Earth years)

Sun,moon, earth and mathematics .

Share this