Planetary orbital distances.

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby xionIII » Sun Aug 07, 2016 1:53 am

Saturncoil1.jpg

There's nothing special about the proportional relationship and the spiral is twisted more to the ring than to the center. Direction of rotation is clockwise. So there is clockwise current in the hexagonal Birkeland current around the North pole of Saturn. And anti-clockwise of course - it's the reverse direction nature of the current that gives the ring rigidity.

Saturncoil2.jpg

I'm thinking that apart from isolated instances like the white sub-system, the general area immediately inside the hexagonal ring is a neutral balance zone. The storms will be geo-synchrous, perhaps.
xionIII
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby xionIII » Sun Aug 07, 2016 2:16 am

Ten-square1.jpg

I thought this was a straight 100 square grid. There were two outer rings though and they are at .9 to each other. Well I decided I'd check to see if the grid was cleverly built on ratio and it is. The first square drop in is .81, then .729, then .6561 then .531441.

Ten-square2.jpg

I compared them to a 100 square grid with this result. This is about how you'd get a square crystal within a six split field - where it should be hexagonal. It's about squares occurring within circles. Drawing the grid with the ratio was awesome but that's just a treat because the real business of this one lies elsewhere.
xionIII
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby xionIII » Sat Aug 20, 2016 1:04 am

snowflake.6561.1.jpg

Equal sized circles are arranged out from the center. As they join together they express the underlying electromagnetic field. The bubbles are angle parking on a hexagonal energy grid. Anyway, I dropped in from the outer circle at .6561 increments because I've been seeing a lot of it in the snowflakes. I finished at the center with one .9 reduction.

snowflake.65612.jpg

I ran in .6561 ratio on this snowflake and it wound up accurate at the center as well.

snowflake.6561.3.jpg

The center spiral, which also means you're looking at the pole, is off center here. It got my attention. That is a .9 ratio spiral superimposed.
xionIII
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby JHL » Sat Aug 20, 2016 4:51 am

xionIII, to me this is the most beautiful think online. Thank you for the work and insight. I don't know how to take it into conscious meaning, but I'm sure it's there. I encourage you do keep making these contributions. They're a gift to the community.
JHL
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:11 pm

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby xionIII » Sat Aug 20, 2016 1:47 pm

Thankyou JHL. For that, you get another snowflake.

Redsquare1.jpg

There would appear to be a lot of .9 and .9487 ratio at the outer edges of the snowflakes. I'd like to draw more into the crystals but I'm behind with a big subject topic. This one has been around for a few years by now so there are quite a few depictions.

Redsquare2.jpg
xionIII
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby xionIII » Mon Aug 22, 2016 12:24 am

Redsquare7.jpg

There is a .531441 ratio read in the Red Square nebula. It leads me to imagine that we are viewing a solar system from over a pole.

redsquare4.jpg

This design depicts energy bubble clusters that are perhaps there to redirect current flow. All energy exists in loops and there is a track for it to follow forever.

Redsquare5.jpg

Should another event change that system, the energy will develop a new way to form a loop.

redsquare6.jpg

Funny story: These central circles drop at .5904 except for the group lower left which dips in at .622. It's a trap for those who are not paying attention maybe.

Redsquare8.jpg

There is a theory that the Red Square nebula is comprised of two opposite cones. I don't see that but I do see equal and opposite cones in the snowflakes. This is where the water droplet has collapsed not to the plane of the ecliptic but to the pole. What we see are north and south polar cones. The droplet has been caught in the act of extending along the polar axis when the interior water molecules froze. The universe is fractal because energy is scalar and if the energy bubble that is an atom were to collapse in the same way, becoming smaller in width but longer in length, it might be how light photons are generated. A complete collapse of the atomic energy field that causes equal and opposite emanations along the polar axis.

Redsquare9.jpg

HD 10180 is a fairly well known planetary system. These are the inner planets. I've been testing the idea to look for .622, .6561, .531441 reductions first than fill in the spaces rather than try to drop in from the outer circle at .9 and it does seem to work. These orbits fit .9 ratio with 100% accuracy. Orbit d is a .729 apoastron to periastron with a .8537 orbit between the two with just the right amount of eccentricity. Orbit c is a .81 A/P with a .9 orbit. They are both perfectly relative to the e planet periastron. This is also what I mean by a view over the pole.
xionIII
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby kell1990 » Mon Aug 22, 2016 8:36 am

JHL wrote:xionIII, to me this is the most beautiful think online. Thank you for the work and insight. I don't know how to take it into conscious meaning, but I'm sure it's there. I encourage you do keep making these contributions. They're a gift to the community.


I'd like to echo JHL's comments. These are a brilliant series of posts. Well done, sir (or ma'am). I feel a breakthrough coming.
kell1990
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:54 am

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby xionIII » Sat Sep 03, 2016 6:21 pm

HD-204313-1.jpg

I've been looking at single and multi-planetary system orbit ratios. HD 204313 is one of six multi-planet systems analysed so far. It's a .8538 system. The orbits originally formed around the star and then moved.

HD-204313-2.jpg

The data accuracy is .98 or 98% on average so the ratio is within the error margin everywhere.

HD-204313-3.jpg

The original .8538 brake-out.

cropcircle.8538-1.jpg

Also .8538. The circles on the outer orbit are individual electro-magnetic bubbles. When magnetic rope breaks, the energy assumes the form of spherical bubbles. The reverse also applies IMHO, If the bubbles are so frequent that they join together, they'll form a ring.
xionIII
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby xionIII » Sat Sep 03, 2016 7:24 pm

HD-7924.jpg

HD 7924 fits .81 ratio. The orbits are at the square roots of the distances between the ratio circles which in this case reduce at .81 except for the center .9.
xionIII
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:16 am

Re: Planetary orbital distances.

Unread postby xionIII » Sat Dec 24, 2016 2:46 pm

I have uploaded two movies to youtube at these urls:

Crop circle Ratios Issues1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ5zfdul9y0
Crop circle Ratios Issue 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djNHiwBcxxw

In the meantime I recall from some years ago a Thunderbolts type experiment where electricity was passed through soil. It was an explanation for Martian Blueberries at the time. Does anyone else remember that?
xionIII
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:16 am

Previous

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron