- Thank you received: 0
Requiem for Relativity
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
15 years 2 months ago #23046
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
Halley's Comet: more evidence for Barbarossa
Halley's comet happened to have, most likely, its second longest known period, during the interval 1066AD-1145AD. Barbarossa's incoming latus rectum was 1144AD, according to my calculation.
One internet source says that the perihelion-to-perihelion period 1066-1145AD was 79.3yr and tied for 1st-2nd place for longest. Wikipedia's list says that the 1066-1145AD period was 79.1yr, and tied for 2nd-3rd place for longest; on this list, the other period tied for 2nd-3rd place, was two cycles later. These periods seem to have been calculated from a compromise between celestial mechanics and historical records.
Wikipedia's article also notes that in 1145AD, Halley's comet was drawn with a fan tail as in 1986AD, and does not mention this for any other return. The outgoing latus rectum is 2012AD. However, John H. Lienhard (article online, www.uh.edu , #1642) shows multiple examples of fan tails recorded in other returns, and there is even another such in the Wikipedia article, though labeled "fanciful".
According to Wikipedia, most returns since 240BC (and another likely return three cycles before that) are documented in surviving records, except for that of approx. 1378AD (aftermath of the Black Death) and, it seems to be implied, those six of approx. 218AD through 607AD and the one of 760AD (decline of Rome, and Dark Ages). This leaves 18 observationally (though often not very accurately) defined cycles.
Halley's comet happened to have, most likely, its second longest known period, during the interval 1066AD-1145AD. Barbarossa's incoming latus rectum was 1144AD, according to my calculation.
One internet source says that the perihelion-to-perihelion period 1066-1145AD was 79.3yr and tied for 1st-2nd place for longest. Wikipedia's list says that the 1066-1145AD period was 79.1yr, and tied for 2nd-3rd place for longest; on this list, the other period tied for 2nd-3rd place, was two cycles later. These periods seem to have been calculated from a compromise between celestial mechanics and historical records.
Wikipedia's article also notes that in 1145AD, Halley's comet was drawn with a fan tail as in 1986AD, and does not mention this for any other return. The outgoing latus rectum is 2012AD. However, John H. Lienhard (article online, www.uh.edu , #1642) shows multiple examples of fan tails recorded in other returns, and there is even another such in the Wikipedia article, though labeled "fanciful".
According to Wikipedia, most returns since 240BC (and another likely return three cycles before that) are documented in surviving records, except for that of approx. 1378AD (aftermath of the Black Death) and, it seems to be implied, those six of approx. 218AD through 607AD and the one of 760AD (decline of Rome, and Dark Ages). This leaves 18 observationally (though often not very accurately) defined cycles.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
15 years 2 months ago #23039
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
Dec. 21, 2012: Our Four Giant Planets Lie on a Circle
Above, I note that every 6340.0yr, Uranus achieves a recurring position relative to Neptune, according to the currently most accepted values of their periods (indeed the position recurs 37 times in 6340yr). According to the currently accepted values of their periods, Saturn and Jupiter do not achieve an exactly recurring position relative to Neptune (and Uranus) in 6340yr, but the interaction of Saturn and Jupiter is stronger, so their periods probably are known less accurately; also, their angle changes faster, so their periods need to be known more accurately.
Nevertheless, the four outer planets achieve a special geometry at approx. Dec. 21, 2012. They lie on a circle.
Let the angle in space, between, say, Uranus and Jupiter, with Saturn at the vertex, be "USJ", etc. (this is standard geometry terminology). Then, to no worse than about one arcminute accuracy, the following are true, on Dec. 21, 2012:
NJU = NSU = 29.69 deg
USJ = UNJ = 31.14 deg
JNS = JUS = 23.16 deg
SUN = SJN = 96.02 deg
These are the angles in space, not projected onto any plane. These equations all are satisfied if the planets lie on a circle (Euclid's Elements, Prop. III.20, the Central Angle Theorem).
On one hand, Jupiter and Saturn might really achieve recurring positions relative to Neptune, producing a congruent figure every 6340yr. On the other hand, they might produce a different figure each time, using only one of their two degrees of freedom, to make a circle somewhere.
I found the positions of the planets by extrapolating heliocentric coordinates and distances for the equinox and ecliptic of date, from the Astronomical Almanac, for late 2010AD. For Jupiter I used the four-point (i.e. third order) backward Newton formula, for Saturn & Uranus the second order, and for Neptune the first order. The inaccuracy expected from the extrapolation is about an arcminute. The above equations are most precise on about Dec. 20.7, but this one day discrepancy could be due to the inaccuracy of the extrapolation.
The positions of the inner planets, in the famous recent crop circle depiction, define the Dec. 2012 date most precisely, but this part of the crop circle was destroyed very soon after its formation. Fortunately the positions of the outer planets contain a valuable hint.
From the positions of Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, in the approximation that these are projected onto the ecliptic, the center of this circle is at x = 8.8AU, y = -11.5AU. Its radius is 17.94AU.
Above, I note that every 6340.0yr, Uranus achieves a recurring position relative to Neptune, according to the currently most accepted values of their periods (indeed the position recurs 37 times in 6340yr). According to the currently accepted values of their periods, Saturn and Jupiter do not achieve an exactly recurring position relative to Neptune (and Uranus) in 6340yr, but the interaction of Saturn and Jupiter is stronger, so their periods probably are known less accurately; also, their angle changes faster, so their periods need to be known more accurately.
Nevertheless, the four outer planets achieve a special geometry at approx. Dec. 21, 2012. They lie on a circle.
Let the angle in space, between, say, Uranus and Jupiter, with Saturn at the vertex, be "USJ", etc. (this is standard geometry terminology). Then, to no worse than about one arcminute accuracy, the following are true, on Dec. 21, 2012:
NJU = NSU = 29.69 deg
USJ = UNJ = 31.14 deg
JNS = JUS = 23.16 deg
SUN = SJN = 96.02 deg
These are the angles in space, not projected onto any plane. These equations all are satisfied if the planets lie on a circle (Euclid's Elements, Prop. III.20, the Central Angle Theorem).
On one hand, Jupiter and Saturn might really achieve recurring positions relative to Neptune, producing a congruent figure every 6340yr. On the other hand, they might produce a different figure each time, using only one of their two degrees of freedom, to make a circle somewhere.
I found the positions of the planets by extrapolating heliocentric coordinates and distances for the equinox and ecliptic of date, from the Astronomical Almanac, for late 2010AD. For Jupiter I used the four-point (i.e. third order) backward Newton formula, for Saturn & Uranus the second order, and for Neptune the first order. The inaccuracy expected from the extrapolation is about an arcminute. The above equations are most precise on about Dec. 20.7, but this one day discrepancy could be due to the inaccuracy of the extrapolation.
The positions of the inner planets, in the famous recent crop circle depiction, define the Dec. 2012 date most precisely, but this part of the crop circle was destroyed very soon after its formation. Fortunately the positions of the outer planets contain a valuable hint.
From the positions of Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, in the approximation that these are projected onto the ecliptic, the center of this circle is at x = 8.8AU, y = -11.5AU. Its radius is 17.94AU.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
15 years 2 months ago #23047
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
My poster to be displayed at Walter Cruttenden's (Binary Research Inst.) CPAK (Conference on Precession and Ancient Knowledge) conference (Oct. 10, 2009, U. of California - Irvine) can be seen on Mauro Lacy's server (thanks, Mauro!) at:
maurol.com.ar/barbarossa
This includes 20 sheets of text, some with diagrams, plus 5 color illustrations.
maurol.com.ar/barbarossa
This includes 20 sheets of text, some with diagrams, plus 5 color illustrations.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
15 years 2 months ago #23716
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
text of Joseph C. Keller's poster for Oct. 10, 2009 CPAK conf. (U. of California - Irvine), p.1
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
The author, Joseph C. Keller, is a 1973 graduate of Scottsbluff (Nebraska) High School (covaledictorian, National Merit Scholar), a 1977 graduate of Harvard College (A. B.,*****laude, Mathematics, i.e. "pure Mathematics"; nominated for Marshall Scholarship, awarded NSF Fellowship in Physics; awarded fellowship in Applied Physics to Cal Tech), and a 1980 graduate (M. D.) of the Univ. of Nebraska College of Medicine.
He is author of a chapter on optics in Yang & Kline's textbook on intraocular lenses. He is primary author of "Pioneer Probe Generates Space Warp, Disproves Big Bang", Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology vol. 74, no. 3, 2002.
For alleged underpayment of state income tax and child support, the author's medical licenses and passport have been revoked. His driver's license was revoked for the same reason but has been reinstated. For the same reason, the American Board of Ophthalmology said they might revoke his board certification, but never told him whether they had or not, unless he threw their letter away by mistake.
The author is descended from the original European-American settlers of Washington (Seattle, Redmond, Woodinville) and of West Virginia (Wayne County).
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
The author, Joseph C. Keller, is a 1973 graduate of Scottsbluff (Nebraska) High School (covaledictorian, National Merit Scholar), a 1977 graduate of Harvard College (A. B.,*****laude, Mathematics, i.e. "pure Mathematics"; nominated for Marshall Scholarship, awarded NSF Fellowship in Physics; awarded fellowship in Applied Physics to Cal Tech), and a 1980 graduate (M. D.) of the Univ. of Nebraska College of Medicine.
He is author of a chapter on optics in Yang & Kline's textbook on intraocular lenses. He is primary author of "Pioneer Probe Generates Space Warp, Disproves Big Bang", Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology vol. 74, no. 3, 2002.
For alleged underpayment of state income tax and child support, the author's medical licenses and passport have been revoked. His driver's license was revoked for the same reason but has been reinstated. For the same reason, the American Board of Ophthalmology said they might revoke his board certification, but never told him whether they had or not, unless he threw their letter away by mistake.
The author is descended from the original European-American settlers of Washington (Seattle, Redmond, Woodinville) and of West Virginia (Wayne County).
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
15 years 2 months ago #23048
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
text of Joseph C. Keller's poster for Oct. 10, 2009 CPAK conf. (U. of California - Irvine), p.2
IN MEMORIAM: DR. TOM VAN FLANDERN
Essentially all my work on this subject is posted to the messageboard of the website of the late Dr. Tom Van Flandern, www.metaresearch.org . I have always posted there under my real name, "Joe Keller". Because of the relevance to ether drift theory, to the so-called "Cosmic" Microwave Background, and to the "Big Bang", my work on this subject is posted to the "Requiem for Relativity" subthread. The coordinates of my objects on the sky surveys, and many other important details, will be found there.
I had found that most other astronomy messageboards in the U. S., including all the Association of Lunar and Planetary Observers (ALPO) messageboards that I tried, which was most of them, censored my posts. Though Dr. Van Flandern sometimes disagreed with my points, I never have been censored on his messageboard. I doubt that this work could have been accomplished without this moral support from Dr. Van Flandern.
CONTACT INFORMATION
I may be "private message" ("PM") emailed through Dr. Van Flandern's messageboard at www.metaresearch.org , to my membership name, Joe Keller. Or, use my email addresses: josephkeller100@hotmail.com
or *********@*******.com
Regular mail: Joseph C. Keller, M. D.
POB 9122
Ames, Iowa 50014
IN MEMORIAM: DR. TOM VAN FLANDERN
Essentially all my work on this subject is posted to the messageboard of the website of the late Dr. Tom Van Flandern, www.metaresearch.org . I have always posted there under my real name, "Joe Keller". Because of the relevance to ether drift theory, to the so-called "Cosmic" Microwave Background, and to the "Big Bang", my work on this subject is posted to the "Requiem for Relativity" subthread. The coordinates of my objects on the sky surveys, and many other important details, will be found there.
I had found that most other astronomy messageboards in the U. S., including all the Association of Lunar and Planetary Observers (ALPO) messageboards that I tried, which was most of them, censored my posts. Though Dr. Van Flandern sometimes disagreed with my points, I never have been censored on his messageboard. I doubt that this work could have been accomplished without this moral support from Dr. Van Flandern.
CONTACT INFORMATION
I may be "private message" ("PM") emailed through Dr. Van Flandern's messageboard at www.metaresearch.org , to my membership name, Joe Keller. Or, use my email addresses: josephkeller100@hotmail.com
or *********@*******.com
Regular mail: Joseph C. Keller, M. D.
POB 9122
Ames, Iowa 50014
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Joe Keller
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
15 years 2 months ago #23166
by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
text of Joseph C. Keller's poster for Oct. 10, 2009 CPAK conf. (U. of California - Irvine), p.3
MY DISCOVERY OF PERCIVAL LOWELL'S PLANET X:
BARBAROSSA
The name is from the prologue to a Berry Fleming political satire, that became a 1945 Hollywood movie. My study of Dayton Miller's ether drift experiments, and the cosmic microwave background, made me suspect that a large undiscovered planet lay near the positive CMB dipole. The Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt suddenly ends, and the Pioneer 10 probe made strange signals, at the very distance where the sun's gravity equals the maximum self-gravity of a proton. At this distance, the gravitational potential energy of an electron, equals the energy of a typical CMB photon.
A planet beyond this spherical, 52.6AU radius movie screen, at which the CMB originates, makes the defined locus oblong, and the potential energy unequal. For a planet at 200AU, 0.01 solar mass is needed to give the correct CMB dipole, though the higher multipoles are somewhat too large. In February 2007, I searched for the planet near the positive CMB dipole, and found it.
Originally, I looked for discordant "Red 1" adn "Red 2" magnitudes in the billion-star USNO-B online catalog. A moving planet, its moons, or its nebula, might cause mistaken identity in this automated catalog, or cause transient dimming.
MY DISCOVERY OF PERCIVAL LOWELL'S PLANET X:
BARBAROSSA
The name is from the prologue to a Berry Fleming political satire, that became a 1945 Hollywood movie. My study of Dayton Miller's ether drift experiments, and the cosmic microwave background, made me suspect that a large undiscovered planet lay near the positive CMB dipole. The Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt suddenly ends, and the Pioneer 10 probe made strange signals, at the very distance where the sun's gravity equals the maximum self-gravity of a proton. At this distance, the gravitational potential energy of an electron, equals the energy of a typical CMB photon.
A planet beyond this spherical, 52.6AU radius movie screen, at which the CMB originates, makes the defined locus oblong, and the potential energy unequal. For a planet at 200AU, 0.01 solar mass is needed to give the correct CMB dipole, though the higher multipoles are somewhat too large. In February 2007, I searched for the planet near the positive CMB dipole, and found it.
Originally, I looked for discordant "Red 1" adn "Red 2" magnitudes in the billion-star USNO-B online catalog. A moving planet, its moons, or its nebula, might cause mistaken identity in this automated catalog, or cause transient dimming.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.355 seconds