Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

seasmith wrote:...
Long-period standing waves, as well as rotation within a Birkeland Current [which i think is the proposition set out (following Donald Scott) in a previous post by Celeste] can both be graphed in 3D/t as spirals progressing within larger spirals. Or in 2D, as wheels within wheels and waves within waves.
At which ever arbitrary method/scale one chooses to calculate the motions and progression of the solar system through space, that progression must be integrated with the dynamics of our galaxy,
to be real.

I know, far easier said than done, but at least we have a catalog of galaxy forms to work with.
.

From my web page:
The following table shows commonly reported cycles periods that are linked by exact prime number ratios and includes many accurately measured cycle periods. The table has ratios of 2 horizontally and 3 vertically, except where larger prime ratios are shown on the right side.

(millions of years)
586.24 293.12 146.56 73.28 36.64
(11)
53.294 26.647 13.324
4.4412 2.2206 1.1103
(5)
0.44412 0.22206 0.11103 0.05552

(years)
55520 27760
9253 4626 2313 1157
3084 1542 771.0
1028 514
171.3
(13)
4270 2135 1068 533.8
711.7 355.9 177.9 88.97 44.48 22.24 11.12
59.31 29.66 14.83 7.414
19.77 9.885 4.943
(5)
427.0 213.5 106.8 53.38 26.69
142.3 71.17 35.59 17.79 8.897 4.448 2.224
23.72 11.86 5.931 2.966 1.483 0.7414
7.908 3.954 1.977 .9885 .4943 .2471
.6590 .3295 .1648 .08238
(7)
3.389 1.695 .8473 .4237 .2118
.5649 .2824 .1412 .07061 .03530 .01765

Some of these related to the galaxy through to the solar system standing waves:

Distance between large spiral galaxies typically 2.22 M light years.
Longest periods in solar system dynamics 2.22 and 1.11 M years.
Earth's magnetic reversals 1.11 M years.
Typical distances of small galaxies from spirals 185,000 light years (2.22M / 12)
Outer planets alignments 2300 years, and in combination with inner planets, 4600 and 9200 years.
Climate and solar cycles 2300 years.
Concentration fluctuations in spiral arms 2300 light years.
Solar cycles 355 years .... 22.2 and 11.1 years.
Jupiter's [period around sun 11.86 years.
Nearby stars common distances near multiples of 4.44, 5.93, 8.88, 11.86 light years etc.
Ray Tomes
Web site : YouTube : Blog

RayTomes

Posts: 198
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

Ray,
Thanks for those links. Full of good information and ideas.
From your post on the Tallbloke site:
(1) The 2nd differential you are using is indeed solar acceleration, or the total force of the planets on the Sun as a vector. If you study the cycles in this you will find that it includes 11.86 years (J), 11.07 years (J-V-E) and perhaps 9.93 years (1/2 19.8g J-S), which are close to real solar cycles. But the real solar cycles have 11.07 years dominating while the forces are dominated by 11.86 years and 19.86 years.

I have been supporting the idea of planet involvement in the solar cycles on other posts.
The proximity of the orbit length of Jupiter(11.86yrs) and 1/2 the synodic period of Jupiter with Saturn(9.93yrs) is too close to the average sun cycle to discount; especially given that the sun cycles seem to occur most often at 10.4 and 12 years.

Also, not enough consideration is given to the planets changing their positions above and below the Heliospheric Current Sheet. IMO.
when we consider that the gas giants spend many years at a time above and below the solar equator (suns poles tipped about 7 degrees relative to plane of planets orbits)

draws needed attention to this factor.
The distances involved, especially for the outer planets, are great. Jupiter moves on the order of 100 million miles north/south of the solar equator in each orbit. A lot more than a small(6.09*) orbital angle to the solar equator might indicate.
You spoke of the
forces are dominated by 11.86 years and 19.86 years.

I am thinking more in the way of OPPORTUNITY FOR ELECTRIC ACTIVITY than forcing.
By FORCING I assume is meant gravity and planet positions causing sun spots.

The solar equator is important to understanding and visualizing the solar/planet geometry, but the Heliospheric Current Sheet being more like a "balerina's skirt"(wavy, not flat) affords many more opportunities for electric activity as the planets move above, below, and through the boundary of the sun's north/south magnetic field polarity.

I imagine the planets interacting with the sun electrically, effecting the magnetic field(s) on the photosphere, and eventually, in close approximation to the planet orbit cycles, causes the magnetic poles of the sun to flip. Graphic representations of the solar magnetic fields show an ~11 year change of polarity at and near the poles, but there is always a lot of chaos of polarity in the lower latitude areas where the sun spots are.

I believe the energy is coming from the Galaxy, but the planets are involved in the solar cycles locally.

Happy New Year,
Jack
jacmac

Posts: 572
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

re SS and galactic-
There is also this concordance between the well known solar ~11 and 22 solar magnetic cycles and the long-term ~88 year variations in cosmic ray spectra (galaxy scale). Four-one or eight-one, based on FFT analysis.

There is a sharp 87.6-year peak in the power spectrum, but no significant power at the Hallstatt 2300-year period. The reconciliation of the cosmogenic record with the modern sunspot record could be an important step to providing a vetted solar activity record for ...

https://hifast.wordpress.com/2018/10/28 ... -activity/

Power spectral density (PSD) of cosmic rays has been calculated from hourly averaged counts observed by underground muon telescopes located at Mawson over the low-frequency range 2.7×10−7 – 1.4×10−4 Hz. The first two harmonics of the solar daily variation are well defined for even cycles (20 and 22) whereas only the first harmonic is defined in cycle 21. The amplitude of the diurnal variation is lower for even cycles than for the odd cycle. The spectral power of the odd cycle exceeds those of the even cycles. The spectra are flatter and have lower power when the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) is directed away from the Sun above the current sheet (A>0) than when the IMF is directed toward the Sun above the current sheet (A<0). The spectra imply that heliospheric magnetic turbulence may be more variable on time scales of several years than previously suspected.

seasmith

Posts: 2813
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

for some reason this entry wasn't able to be submitted above as quoted:

"... the 88-year cycle is unique, because it can be directly linked to the cyclic activity of sunspot formation. Variations of amplitude as well as of period of the Schwabe 11-year cycle of sunspot activity have actually been known for a long time and a ca. 80-year cycle was detected in those variations.
https://simsee.org/simsee/biblioteca/CI ... gin14C.pdf
seasmith

Posts: 2813
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

seasmith wrote:Long-period standing waves, as well as rotation within a Birkeland Current [which i think is the proposition set out (following Donald Scott) in a previous post by Celeste] can both be graphed in 3D/t as spirals progressing within larger spirals. Or in 2D, as wheels within wheels and waves within waves.
At which ever arbitrary method/scale one chooses to calculate the motions and progression of the solar system through space, that progression must be integrated with the dynamics of our galaxy,
to be real.

I know, far easier said than done, but at least we have a catalog of galaxy forms to work with.
.

Yes. In my view there are countless (harmonically related) standing waves interpenetrating each other at all scales. The harmonics theory says that smaller harmonically related standing waves are produced from larger waves due to the laws of nature being non-linear. These non-linearities are greatest near the centre of the spherical standing waves. Therefore stars form preferentially in galaxies, particularly near the centre. Planets form near stars and so on. Nucleons form near the centre of atoms. It is all the same process.

This means that there are standing waves linking stars to the galaxy centre in a way described by EU. Likewise for the planets and the Sun. In the vicinity of the solar system, there are noticeable standing waves of period (in years) and length (in light years) of 4.44, 5.93, 8.88, 11.86 and others. Most of the nearby stars lie near a 4.44 light year almost cubic lattice. Actually there are two lattices intersecting. One is for the galaxy and the other I am not sure, perhaps larger scale.

In the solar system the standing waves have periods in minutes and wavelengths in light minutes of near 160, 80, 6 and 3. The gas giants are on the nodes of the larger waves and the inner planets near the smaller wave nodes. These periods affect many things, from waves in the sea to cycles of sleep and blood thickness in humans.
Ray Tomes
Web site : YouTube : Blog

RayTomes

Posts: 198
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

https://www.earthmagazine.org/article/g ... itch-cycle

"The researchers found that the dates of the climate cycles recorded in the Newark Basin rock record match the 405,000-year cycle predicted by astronomical models, providing the first empirical evidence for the cycle’s existence and stability over the last 215 million years."

It also mentions that the cycle is due to the effects of Jupiter and Venus. I note that these are the two dominant tidal effect planets. To me this shows the stability of the solar system over very long periods of time. No big changes for Venus.
Ray Tomes
Web site : YouTube : Blog

RayTomes

Posts: 198
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

Hate to be that guy and rain on your parade Mr. Thomas; but precession does not apply to the era previous to 747bc
"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: 101
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:28 am

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

From Ray:
https://www.earthmagazine.org/article/g ... itch-cycle
However, because astronomers know the configuration of Earth, Venus and Jupiter when the 405,000-year cycle is at its minimum and maximum, and because those events are evident in the rock record and have now been well-dated, astronomers have more solid data on which to base estimates of planetary configurations going back more than 200 million years.

From here:
https://www.sciencefocus.com/planet-ear ... ths-tides/
But the other planets, since they have a gravitational pull of their own, also have a small effect on the tides. Venus is the strongest because it happens to come closest to Earth. However, even at its maximum, its influence is 10,000 times less than that of the Sun and Moon together. Even the giant planet Jupiter exerts a force less than one-tenth that of Venus. So, for all intents and purposes, the effect of the planets on Earth’s tides is imperceptible.

Ray, Is this the same planet tidal effect of Jupiter and Venus ?
Perhaps not strong enough evidence to falsify Velikovsky?
Unless I am not following the discussion properly.
jacmac

Posts: 572
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

jacmac wrote:...
Ray, Is this the same planet tidal effect of Jupiter and Venus ?
Perhaps not strong enough evidence to falsify Velikovsky?
Unless I am not following the discussion properly.

Jacmac, the tidal effects of the planets are indeed small. However they have significant effects on the Sun.
The 405,000 year cycle is not tidal effects, but gravitational disturbances of each others orbits.
Ray Tomes
Web site : YouTube : Blog

RayTomes

Posts: 198
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

Younger Dryas wrote:Hate to be that guy and rain on your parade Mr. Thomas; but precession does not apply to the era previous to 747bc

My name is Tomes.
How do you know that precession doesn't apply before 747BC? Is that because no-one was watching it?
Ray Tomes
Web site : YouTube : Blog

RayTomes

Posts: 198
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

jacmac wrote:Ray, Is this the same planet tidal effect of Jupiter and Venus ?
Perhaps not strong enough evidence to falsify Velikovsky?
Unless I am not following the discussion properly.

Have we measured the tides on other planets? Honest question.

OTH, if 'tides' are only a result of gravity. Then how/why should that be related to planet, solar and galactic plasma waves.

Apologies if I seem to be rudely crashing in. I do love this quote; "there are standing waves linking stars to the galaxy center in a way described by EU. Likewise for the planets and the Sun."
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes
Cargo

Posts: 261
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: Water isotope ratios, Velikovsky and electric universe

RayTomes wrote:
Younger Dryas wrote:Hate to be that guy and rain on your parade Mr. Thomas; but precession does not apply to the era previous to 747bc

My name is Tomes.
How do you know that precession doesn't apply before 747BC? Is that because no-one was watching it?

This is certainly to be recognized from the multitude of data which points to the fact that the same constellations were held to be the centerpoints of the spring and fall equinox -- Taurus and Scorpio -- for the time before 685 BC, which I've extended to include be 747 BC.

Precession was only noted after 400 BC in Asia Minor and after AD 300 in China when it became obvious. These noted observations required the accumulation of data for more than a hundred years, since the rate is about one degree in a hundred years.

Apologies, Mr Tomes (my last name is Thomas!)
"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: 101
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:28 am