Requiem for Relativity

Hey Stoat, if Mercury is an escaped moon of another planet or an extra-solar planet that was captured, then Bode's law needn't apply.... just a thought.

Mark

Hi Mark, I suppose this depends on which theory of solar system development you accept. The current favourite is that of catastrophism. Personally I think this smacks of trying to make our solar system something very special, and therefore unlikely to reoccur.

A much bigger Earth is supposed to have been hit by another planet and almost destroyed. This creates the present Earth, Mars and the Moon. Lunacy, excuse the bad pun! Start with bigger planetsbeing formed and as they collapse they spin out smaller planets. Earth , Mars and the Moon are one result, Venus and Mercury another.

So, if we say that the speed of gravity is much, much greater than the speed of light, we can look at the lorentzian in terms of refractive index and get
1 - 1/ infinity, this being the case for Newton's idea of the speed of gravity. Expand it, it's an exponential. But hang about, if it's quantised then we have to draw the exponential curve as a series of vertical lines, each h thick.

One point to make here, if we add the speed of light to the speed of gravity then we are saying, x + dx If we then insist that nothing can go faster than light, we are expanding the lorentzian to simply give us two. Actually that's not bad as an approximation. We would be talking light years to notice the difference. However, they are different curves. I think that we should be talking along the lines of saying that gravity falls off not as an inverse square law but as in the region of 1 / g^2.002 It would be nice if that turned out to be two times the fine structure constant but early days.

Okay, lets now look at the Riemann zeta function. Here we are chopping steps into our exponential curve, which are multiples of h. Any integer is the product of primes and with Riemann we have a solution to Gauss' dice that involves "imaginary" numbers. Looking at the graph, it would strike anyone that's into quantum mechanics that it looks like the profile of an electron's orbit about a proton.

I spent saturday reading John Baez, yep, related to Joan, on 26 dimensional strings, and how they apply to the zeta function. I thought I was going insane for noticing that the zeta function looks horribly like the lorentzian. Especially when John talked about elliptical functions, the lorentzian is an ellipse.

Perhaps it's because they can't have anything going faster than light, or maybe it's because they hate the idea of an aether. But let's suppose that half of the energy of a mass body goes into creating an aether. The sun has its own "space", made up of aether/vacuum particles. Riemann's zeta function simply has to mean that this stuff is a viscolelastic, a non Newtonian liquid. Complex roots are involved, a negative refractive index viscoelastic aether could do some pretty wild stuff. The main one for our talk about Bode's "law", is that we can have quantised regions of space around the sun, which a planet will be created in, or be moved into.

I think we'd have to stress, that such zones, where G varies slightly, would not mean that identical solar systems would be created. It would mean that such zones would exist and would be aids to planetary formation but the distribution of such zones could vary. It may be the case that we are a failed binary star system, and that we should be looking for those.

One possibility here, there is a ion powered rocket in space at the moment, it's doing some grand tour job. Constant thrust means that if it moves through a zone it should have anomalous velocity.

Hi John, suppose we had a cloud of gas and another one a hundred lights years from it. An electron emits a photon, and that has a gravitational information component to it. One electron in the other gas cloud accepts this. Does it take this info and then wait a hundred years for the electromagnetic part of the information signal to arrive? I doubt it, I think that to use a banking analogy, it has a half key code that says it has money in the bank. It then trades with any nearby electron that has the electromagnetic part of the half key. Coded traffic based on a complex prime Riemann zeta function, would look like noise I suppose, to anyone that didn't have the one half key among millions of half keys.

Stoat,

Nice response,

I teach the meta model version of earth/lunar consolidation - overspin and the whole lot. There is some evidence to suggest that the earth did get hit by a large planetary body - not that I think that was the cause of the moon. But I was curious if the present orbital calculations could support that hit and if that hit could cause an unbalanced overspin - such a spin I think would be far more likely to shed a molten crustal fragment. Two methods that seem logical would either be just a gross unbalancing of the stable orbit - or a wave of heating so profound that the whole planet were to experience significant melting and then centrifugation of the heaviest elements to the core causing significant overspin and crustal shedding. In either event, evidence should exist in the earth's orbital mechanics to recreate these events in a model - I do not have the math or measurement prowess for that task unfortunately. There should also be physical evidence too. This has puzzled me since reading Dark Matter many years ago. Geologists have assumed that mantle hot spots (the phenomena that caused Hawaii, yellowstone, etc. to form were just hotter spots - no real mechanism for this spot heat is positioned. Seismic data suggests that the mantle is very dense and almost plasticlike in consistency and that there is then a liquid outer core and solid inner core. The nature of the materials in these layers is not really debatable to me since there is no convincing evidence that seems reasonable or testable to me. But if a planetary sized comet (a large fragment from previous planetary explosion perhaps) were to hit the earth, its most dense material would sink to the core level and be amalgamated with earth. The earth's orbit would not like this rapid mass addition and some counter event would have to balance the mass - the equivalent of moving towels around to balance the washing machine.

Consequently, the shock of penetrating the mantle with such large amounts of ferro-magnetic materials could cause heat passage ways and lead to the phenomena of hot spots as we find them today. It may even be possible that the movement of the plates is related to periodic bombardments and mass realignments - put that is pure conjecture.

See what you think...

Mark

Hi Mark, I think there's fashions in solar system modelling. Catastrophism is the model in vogue at the moment, because it looks as though some answers will be forthcoming. People need to keep their hand in, there's grant money up for grabs a few years down the line. I'm not being cynical about it, its simply real politic.

A cosmic billiard game looks sexy on t.v. and it doesn't really commit one to a theory that calls for some regulatory system. The next generation space telescope promises the first pictures of a "proper"solar system. It would never do to have nailed your colours to the mast in terms of some systematic view, if the real data doesn't fit it. Make noises and get noticed now, grab grants later. As I say that's fair enough.

What I think happens is a variant of Tom's views. First let's think a bit about proto planets. We want a model that gives us our six major planets. We leave out Mercury and Mars for now.

In terms of heavier elements the six are much of a muchness. If we could remove the atmosphere of a gas giant we'd end up with an Earth, more or less.

Let's gravitationally collapse a cloud of about one Jupiter mass. Say about 1% heavier element particulates, another 1% heavier elements and the rest hydrogen and helium.

At a certain radius, the collapsing proto planet sheds half of its mass as an equatorial disk. The minor regular satellites will form inside of this radius from the debris. The planet is still contracting however and and at a second critical radius it spits out one body of material, of about one tenth its mass. After that the planet has lost most of its angular momentum. This critical radius has to do with the relative compressibility of the body, for Jupiter its about 1 gramme per cubic centimetre.

However, this depends on the rate of sedimentation of our 2% of heavier elements. These particles can slow as they are moving through lighter material. This in turn depends on just what the angular momentum of the proto planet is.

The upshot of such a model is that we end up with planets of about the right orbital velocity for the proto Earth and proto Jupiter. The Earth then loses its lighter gas envelope due to it being close to the sun.

I'm fairly happy with that. It's a proto Earth that spits out Mars and a lot of little blobs with it, one of which becomes our moon. Venus could have had a moon but because of tidal breaking, its moon crashes down into it. Who knows, that might have been what flipped the planet.

It takes a while for all the excess material of the proto Earth to clear out. There's still piles of junk from the ejection event to really hammer the new Earth and its moon.

Now well shift over to Tom's notion, and where I would modify it a little. The Sun's collapsing in, at the first critical radius it ejects half its mass along the equatorial plane. At the second radius it ejects a percentage of its mass. I would argue that it will be a lot less than 10% due to the fact that, although it has the same percentage composition as Jupiter, tis angular momentum is off the scale and its volume is so much bigger. A ball park figure would be about one hundredth of the Sun's mass.

This thing would, with its little trail of droplets be really shifting but it has to motor through all that mass that was thrown off at the first critical radius. So it slows down and eventually goes into a far orbit, or its flung out completely.

The little droplets are now the starter feed for our proto planets, they can move round the sun and mop up the accretion disk at their leisure.

So back we go to the idea that we could have a quantised space round a star. I have to ask Joe his views on the barycentre of a system which has zones where G could differ slightly.

Anyway, we should know soon enough. That ion rocket is called Dawn. As yet I dont think the motor has fired up. It has to go through some gravitational sling shots to get up to speed, as it has very little thrust. The thing is though, that thrust is constant. If we have a quantised solar system the craft will go off course.

Hi Stoat, I would agree that the electro-magnetic component would accept instantaneous graviton wave functions ontop of the photon stream. Because I believe the magnetic portion of the hidden higher spectrum represents the graviton bandwidth. If everything is caused by a 'flow' of gravitons as a phase conjugated interaction between a forward graviton component and a reverse antigraviton component that causes mass fluctuations to even exist, then we have a virtual communications system. If a super nova event takes place with in the galaxy, that information will be available at an almost instantaneous speed any where else in the galaxy and will cause a ripple in the graviton pond on top of the photon stream as the magnetic component which I think is the part that we can see of the graviton energy. The other part of the graviton energy that we cannot see operates as the greater graviton flow causing mass to exist in the first place---Mass has an outside energy source causing it to exist.

I would also agree that quantization of wave functions exist because the circulations around all objects have above light speed components. Again that is because of a paired phase conjugated exchange taking place at all levels between a graviton forward and antigraviton reverse component. We have a graviton cycle, gravitons are captured, mass fluctuations are part of this process. I think that our solar system most likely is a failed binary star system, that the evidence of catastrophes in our solar system supports an ongoing problem from an entruder. That we have had pole shifts and the most recent event took place around 10,800 B.C. causing the younger dryas. Hapgood suggests that the north pole moved from Hudson Bay to its present location over a 2,000 year period, however evidence suggests from frozen hillocks in Siberia that this event was sudden and catastrophic causing major species extinctions.

Regarding EPH, again the asteroid belt analysis supports from TVF shows that several events took place. I think that we had not only a Fifth planet, but several moons that supported life and one of them was Mars. That the ruins on Mars shows that an advanced humanoid species once existed there, and most likely also had a presence here on Earth in our ancient past. The truth is often stranger than fiction, so yes bodes law does ring true to an extent, and quantization is a function of wave layering around mass---mass exists only because of a greater flow of graviton energy between a forward time component and a reverse time component wave function that is in constant extreme motion. John

Today a banker on the U. S. east coast, emailed me his suggestion that Barbarossa's orbit might be such that the solar system c.o.m. approaches planetary orbits and causes rotational and/or magnetic axis instability. He must remain anonymous (his bank isn't broke - yet). Here's my response to him:

"...For the c.o.m. to be at Earth's orbit (1 AU instead of 2 AU), Barbarossa would have to be about half as far from the sun. My best estimate is that Barbarossa's orbit has eccentricity about 0.05, maybe less. Usually, distant brown dwarf companions of other stars, are in low eccentricity orbits, e < 0.2. The minimum eccentricity needed to vary the distance by a factor of two, is the solution of the equation

2 = (1+e)/(1-e)

i.e., e = (2-1)/(2+1) = 0.33.

But, hold the phone! It's often said (e.g., in the refereed journals) that Mars' axis is unstable. Many (e.g., Sir Charles Shults) speculate that occasional Martian axis tilts cause its oceans to melt. Shults was on the George Noory show (a show often, I think, populated by atrocious liars, but which often also uncovers taboo truths like the "wide persistent contrail" mystery) saying that meteor cratering estimates indicate that Mars' latest ocean freezeup was only 5 million yr ago.

With a Barbarossa eccentricity as small as 0.115, the sun-Barbarossa c.o.m. could range from its present distance to Mars' aphelion."