Earth's axis in polar configuration

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby 3circl » Wed Aug 15, 2018 5:30 am

During the polar configuration, would the Earth's axis not have been been turned 90 degrees, the north pole facing the south pole of Mars, thus setting the geographical poles at the equator and the equator along the lines of the magnetic poles? This seems highly implausible, but if I'm misunderstanding it all, I'd like an explanation.
3circl
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 4:25 pm

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby moses » Wed Aug 15, 2018 8:28 pm

Hi 3circi,
Perhaps this should be in the new ideas section.
The Hudson Bay would have been facing one hemisphere of Mars all the time and this hemisphere lost crustal material in this configuration. This is why one hemisphere of Mars has less crust than the opposite hemisphere.

Whether the Mars - Earth axis rotated is debatable. Perhaps only occasionally would this axis line up with the Sun. If Jupiter or Saturn or both lined up with this Sun - Earth - Mars axis then huge electrical currents might have flowed then. In my theory this would have been responsible for the major destructions like the dinosaur extinction and also for the production of the oceans.

Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby nick c » Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:03 am

During the polar configuration, would the Earth's axis not have been been turned 90 degrees,
90 degrees with respect to what?
the north pole facing the south pole of Mars
Yes, that is my understanding although it may not have been exact(?)
thus setting the geographical poles at the equator and the equator along the lines of the magnetic poles? This seems highly implausible, but if I'm misunderstanding it all, I'd like an explanation.
The geographic poles would be the two places where the axis of rotation meets the surface of the planet. Why would you conclude that they were at the equator? There is no reason for that and that is not what is described in the hypothesis/model.
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2362
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby 3circl » Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:25 pm

I made an image showing what I mean to try and make it easier. The geographical poles would be at the equator because the magnetic (and current geographical poles) would be lined up with that of Mars, and Mars that of Venus, and so on, if my (probably flawed) understanding of the polar configuration is correct.
https://i.imgur.com/k2YevxB.jpg
Most orbital models I've seen don't display it like this but explain it as if it is to my understanding. I'd like some corrections overall.
3circl
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 4:25 pm

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby moses » Sat Aug 18, 2018 11:16 pm

A geographical pole is where the axis of spin intersects the Earth's surface. So, yes, the Earth's axis would have been tilted 90 degrees to what it is today. So the geographical pole back then would have been where todays equator is now in terms of our relationship to Saturn, say, but that is a confusing statement.

The linear configuration of planets was supposed to be outside the Solar System, and then entered later. In your diagram you have the ice as if heat was coming from Saturn or from the Sun to the left. Then the ice would be spread out in a ring which would be the equator because the North Pole faced Mars. Most of the heating would have been electrical anyway, and thus conditions might have been pretty similar worldwide.

My theory has a similar configuration of Earth and Mars, but has them at where the asteroid belt is now, with only the occasional alignment with Saturn and Jupiter then. No ice.

Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby nick c » Sun Aug 19, 2018 7:52 am

So, yes, the Earth's axis would have been tilted 90 degrees to what it is today. So the geographical pole back then would have been where todays equator is now in terms of our relationship to Saturn, say, but that is a confusing statement.
Moses, that is wrong. Where in the literature did you read that? Talbot and Cardona are the two main proponents of the Polar Configuration and unless I missed something, I cannot recall anywhere in their writings where the Earth's geographic pole, ie the axis of rotation, was placed at the equator. If I am missing something then please give me a reference on that.
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2362
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby moses » Sun Aug 19, 2018 8:45 pm

Nick, I was just trying to get where 3circi was coming from. I think 3circi was talking about the relationship of the axis to Saturn. Now the axis is pointing away from Saturn whereas in the configuration the Earth's axis is pointing towards Saturn. I did not write that the Earth's axis was at the equator.

In actual fact we do not know where the axis was pointing in the Saturn System configuration in terms of where it is pointing now. I guess there is a theory that it was pointing in generally the same direction as now, along with Mars and Saturn, however I cannot see them keeping their orientation considering the enormous interactions they must have gone through to end up where they are now. And this is one of the main reasons I drifted away from the Saturn System theory.

Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby celeste » Sun Aug 26, 2018 8:23 pm

Perhaps the best starting point would be to realize that Saturn appeared in Canopus, and work from there?
From the mythology, ( Hamlet’s Mill is a good read, to start), we see that Earth’s North Pole was once in Canopus. Knowing that in earlier times, constellations were often named after their brightest star, it just means that Earth’s North Pole was in the constellation containing Canopus, or at what is now Earth’s south ecliptic pole. So we have (if we are to trust the mythology), the alignment of planets along what is now the solar system axis.

Just to make that clear, planets were not aligned in what is now the solar system plane ( the ecliptic plane, more or less), but strung out on the ecliptic axis. That’s nearly 90 degrees from where they appear now.

At any rate, all I’m suggesting is to pin the planetary alignment tobackground stars first, then see how our solar system fits in that.


For example, Dave Talbott was willing to consider that planets were aligned in the solar system plane. This would be explainable even in the gravity only model, by having each planet at a Lagrangian point. But that would put the planetary alignment not only 90 degrees from where we saw it, but more importantly, we would expect that alignment to sweep out 180 degrees compared to background stars. Again, the ancient records are clear, that the planets were strung out along the current solar system axis, with Earth itself being inverted almost 180 degrees. (Canopus not even visible from Earth’s north polar region today.)
celeste
 
Posts: 787
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby moses » Mon Aug 27, 2018 7:18 pm

celeste,
this all assumes that the pole was fixed and always pointing to the same spot in the sky. Whereas if it always pointed to Mars then Mars may have been in some orbit around the Earth and thus the pole would have swept out a plane at least. And when Earth - Mars was lined up with Jupiter and Saturn, at least, then tremendous currents could have flowed prompting the ancients to record such events.

Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby Lloyd » Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:23 pm

Videos

The series, Discourses on an Alien Sky, explain the Saturn polar configuration pretty well. Video #1 may answer your questions. Otherwise, keep watching the videos following that till you get it clearer maybe.

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svfWvSHh4AY&list=PLwOAYhBuU3UeFB-ygaH63Seg6r6C_dtqB

#8 on the list is titled Visualizing the Polar Configuration.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4253
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby celeste » Sun Sep 02, 2018 8:51 am

moses wrote:celeste,
this all assumes that the pole was fixed and always pointing to the same spot in the sky. Whereas if it always pointed to Mars then Mars may have been in some orbit around the Earth and thus the pole would have swept out a plane at least. And when Earth - Mars was lined up with Jupiter and Saturn, at least, then tremendous currents could have flowed prompting the ancients to record such events.

Cheers,
Mo

This is why it is so important to read " Hamlet's Mill". The actual position of the pole, compared to background stars, was accurately recorded for centuries. The precession of pole compared to background stars, was recorded over centuries. This point is often missed by those focusing only on solar system dynamics. At NO TIME in recorded hstory, was Earth's North pole reported as being in stars near Earth's ecliptic plane!
celeste
 
Posts: 787
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby moses » Sun Sep 02, 2018 8:14 pm

celeste,
We are missing out on the overview story here. In the Saturn System the line of planets was as you say and then this system came into the Solar System and so Earth's north pole moved from pointing to Canopus to it's present position. One must assume that the pole's position in the sky was not recorded during this transition. One needs to give an estimate of the time involved in this to judge whether the recorded pole positions were actually in this Saturn System.

My theory is that Earth - Mars was where the asteroids are now, and had Mars orbiting Earth with the north pole of Earth always facing Mars. This configuration broke up and Earth went into a very elliptical orbit producing all the ice ages. So I think that the datings are very different between the two theories. Thus the recorded pole positions likely started after the ice ages. So my theory does not have the north pole of Earth pointing at Saturn and the ecliptic plane very often at all, only rarely to Saturn but all hell broke loose when it did.

I have read much of 'Hamlet's Mill' but that is more like torture. I prefer the geological evidence and thinking.
Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Earth's axis in polar configuration

Unread postby Younger Dryas » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:07 pm

Personally I prefer Peratt's Southern Ball Plasmoid being associated with Canopus:
Canopus: origin from the Semitic root G(C)-N-B (Gimmel-Nun-Beth), from which the Arabic word for south, janūb ( جنوب ), is derived.




For Saturn after 10500B.C, I've found it helpful to stick to Ursa Minor/Ursa Major.
"I decided to believe, as you might decide to take
an aspirin: It can't hurt, and you might get better."
-- Umberto Eco Foucault's Pendulum (1988)
Younger Dryas
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:28 am
Location: Toronto ON Canada


Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests