Thunderbolts Forum v3.0

337545

SUN'S CAPTURE OF SATURN SYSTEM

ESCAPE/CAPTURE VELOCITIES
Jupiter has an average orbital speed of ~13.07 km/s; Saturn's Speed is ~9.69 km/s.
Perplexity.AI did the following work for me, though it seems likely incorrect to some extent.

To calculate the required speeds for a rogue planet to be captured by a one solar mass star at various distances (including 1 AU, 5 AU, 10 AU, 20 AU, 30 AU, 50 AU, and 100 AU), we will use the escape velocity formula.
​The escape velocity v_e is given by: v,e=(2GM/r)^1/2
Where:
G=6.674×10^−11 m3/kg,s^2
M=1.989×10^30 kg
r is the distance from the star in meters.
Summary of Required Speeds for Capture
Distance (AU); Required Speed for Capture (km/s)
1: ~617.7 (Earth's distance)
5: ~276.5 (Jupiter's distance)
10: ~195.5 (Saturn's distance)
20: ~138.8
30: ~113 (Pluto's distance)
50: ~82.6
100: ~58.3

GAS CLOUD DENSITY
To determine how dense gas and dust would need to be at 10 AU to slow a rogue planet enough for capture, we must consider several factors, including the planet's initial speed, the drag force exerted by the gas and dust, and the time over which this deceleration occurs.
Key Considerations
1. Initial Speed of the Rogue Planet:
The speed of a rogue planet approaching a solar mass star at 10 AU can be significant. For example, if it were traveling at speeds around 195.5 km/s (as previously calculated for escape velocity at this distance), it would need to be slowed considerably to enter a stable orbit.
2. Drag Force:
The drag force  'Fd' acting on the rogue planet due to gas and dust can be approximated using the equation:
F_d=1/2C_dρAv^2
where:
C_d​ is the drag coefficient (typically around 1 for spherical objects),
ρ is the density of the gas/dust,
A is the cross-sectional area of the planet,
v is the velocity of the planet.
3. Deceleration:
The deceleration 'a' experienced by the planet can be calculated using Newton's second law:
F=ma  ⟹  a=F_d/m​
where 'm' is the mass of the rogue planet.
4. Density Calculation:
To find out how dense the gas and dust need to be, we can rearrange our equations to solve for ρ:
ρ=2F_d/C_dAv^2
Conclusion
The density of gas and dust at 10 AU would need to be approximately 0.93 kg/m³ or denser in order to slow down a rogue planet traveling at around 195.5 km/s sufficiently for capture into orbit around a solar mass star. This density is comparable to that of Earth's atmosphere at sea level (which is about 1.225 kg/m³), indicating that substantial amounts of gas and dust would be required in that region of space for effective deceleration and capture.

DECELERATION TIME & DISTANCE
To estimate how long it would take for a rogue planet to be captured by a star at 10 AU, we need to consider the deceleration process due to the drag from gas and dust, as well as the distance the planet must travel during this capture phase.
Key Factors for Capture Time and Distance
1. Initial Speed: As previously discussed, let's assume the rogue planet is initially traveling at approximately 195.5 km/s.
2. Deceleration: If we assume that the drag force from gas and dust can provide sufficient deceleration, we previously calculated that a density of about 0.93 kg/m³ would be needed to achieve an average deceleration of about 10 m/s².
3. Time to Slow Down: To find out how long it would take for the rogue planet to slow down enough for capture, we can use the formula:
t=(vi−vf)/a​
where:
vi​ is the initial velocity (195,500 m/s),
vf​ is the final velocity (let's assume it needs to drop to around 97,750 m/s for capture),
a is the deceleration (10 m/s²).
Summary
Time to Capture: Approximately 2.72 hours.
{ERROR} Distance Traveled During Capture: Approximately 1,435.7 km.
This calculation assumes constant deceleration due to drag from gas and dust at a density sufficient to slow the planet effectively. The actual dynamics could be more complex due to variations in density and other factors in a real astrophysical environment.

ELECTRICAL REPULSION
If both a rogue planet and a gas cloud have the same electric charge and high amperage, this could indeed affect the deceleration of the planet. Here’s how:
Electric Charge Interaction
1. Electromagnetic Forces: Charged objects exert electromagnetic forces on each other. If the rogue planet and the gas cloud have the same charge, they would repel each other due to Coulomb's law, which states that like charges repel. This repulsion could potentially counteract some of the deceleration effects caused by drag from the gas cloud.
2. Increased Drag: If the gas cloud is also charged, it may create an electric field that interacts with the charged surface of the rogue planet. Depending on the configuration and relative motion, this interaction might enhance the drag force experienced by the planet, leading to increased deceleration. For example, if the gas particles are able to ionize or become polarized in response to the electric field of the planet, this could create additional forces that contribute to slowing down the planet.
3. Radiation Effects: Accelerating charged particles emit radiation (bremsstrahlung), which can result in energy loss. If high amperage is involved, and if particles within the gas cloud are also accelerating due to interactions with the charged planet, they may radiate energy as well. This could lead to a complex interplay where both the planet and gas cloud lose energy through radiation.
Summary of Effects on Deceleration
Repulsion: If both have like charges, they will repel each other, which may reduce effective deceleration from drag.
Enhanced Drag: If conditions allow for additional electromagnetic interactions (e.g., ionization), this could increase drag and thus enhance deceleration.
Energy Loss: The presence of high amperage and accelerating charges could lead to significant energy loss through radiation, affecting overall dynamics.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while having like charges would generally lead to repulsion between the rogue planet and gas cloud, under certain conditions, it could also enhance deceleration through electromagnetic interactions. The net effect would depend on various factors such as charge density, relative velocities, and environmental conditions within the gas cloud.

JUPITER-SIZE PLANET CAPTURE
To calculate how long it would take for a Jupiter-sized planet (with Jupiter's density) to be slowed sufficiently for capture in a gas cloud, we need to consider several factors, including the planet's mass, the drag force exerted by the gas cloud, and the desired deceleration.
Key Parameters
1. Mass of Jupiter:
Jupiter's mass is approximately 1.898×10^27 kg.
2. Density of Jupiter:
The average density of Jupiter is about 1.326 g/cm^3, which is equivalent to 1326 kg/m^3.
3. Cross-Sectional Area:
Assuming Jupiter has a radius of about 71,398 km (or 7.1398×10^7 m), the cross-sectional area A can be calculated as:
A=πr^2=π(7.1398×10^7)^2≈1.597×10^16 m^2
4. Initial Speed:
Let's assume the rogue planet is initially traveling at a speed of about 195.5 km/s=195500 m/s.
5. Desired Final Speed for Capture:
For capture, we might aim to slow it down to about half its initial speed (around 97.75 km/s=97750 m/s).
6. Drag Force Calculation:
The drag force F_d acting on the planet due to the gas cloud can be calculated using:
F_d=1/2(C_dρAv^2)
where:
C_d​ is the drag coefficient (assumed to be around 1),
ρ is the density of the gas in the cloud (let's assume a typical value for a dense molecular cloud of about 100 kg/m3),
v is the speed of the planet.
Calculation Steps
1. Calculate Drag Force:
Using an assumed density of gas (100 kg/m3):
F_d=1/2(1)(100)(1.597×10^16)(195500)^2
This results in:
F_d=0.5∗100∗1.597×10^16∗(3.82×10^10)
F_d=0.5∗100∗1.597×10^16∗3.82×10^10≈3.05×10^36 N
2. Calculate Deceleration:
Using Newton’s second law:
a=F_d/m
where m=1.898×1027 kg
a=3.05×10361.898×10^27≈1.605×10^9 m/s^2
3. Time to Slow Down:
Using the formula for time based on initial and final speeds:
t=vi−vfa​​
Substituting values:
t=(195500 m/s−97750 m/s)/(1.605×10^9 m/s^2)​
t=(97750 m/s)/(1.605×10^9 m/s^2)≈6.09×10−5 s
Distance Traveled During Deceleration
Using the distance formula under constant deceleration:
d=v_it+1/2at^2
Substituting in our values:
d=(195500)(6.09×10^−5)+0.5(−1.605×10^9)(6.09×10^−5)^2
Calculating this gives:
First term: d_1=11.91 m
Second term: Calculate using acceleration and time squared.
Summary
Given these calculations:
Time to Slow Down for Capture: Approximately very short time due to high deceleration.
Distance Traveled During Deceleration: A very small distance due to rapid deceleration.
Conclusion
In reality, these calculations suggest that while theoretically possible to slow down such a massive object quickly in a dense gas cloud, practical scenarios would involve complex interactions and varying conditions that could significantly alter these results. The assumptions made regarding drag coefficients and gas densities would need to be validated against real astrophysical data for more accurate modeling.

CORRECTED? TIME DURATION OF CAPTURE
Since it calculated that the time to slow down is just a fraction of a second and the distance traveled during deceleration is under 12 meters, that would suggest the planet hit a brick wall in outer space. So I asked AI to review its calculations to look for errors.
It then corrected its deceleration calculation, which changed the duration of deceleration to ~1.55 hours, which seems possibly reasonable. But the distance traveled, ~1354 km., during the deceleration is obviously way off. So I said: If the planet were initially moving at nearly 200 km/s as you say, and slowed down to just below 100 km/sec in 1.55 hours, it would have traveled between 558,000 km and 1,116,000 km {in that time}. So your estimate of 1354 km is way wrong. It replied.

CORRECTED? DISTANCE OF CAPTURE
Thank you for your patience and for pointing out the discrepancy. You're correct that if a rogue planet is initially moving at nearly 200 km/s and slows down to just below 100 km/s over a period of 1.55 hours, the distance traveled would indeed be much greater than the previously calculated 1354 km. Let's re-evaluate the calculations to ensure accuracy regarding the time, distance, and deceleration.
Summary of Corrected Results
Time to Slow Down for Capture: Approximately 1.55 hours.
Distance Traveled During Deceleration: Approximately 817,125 km, which aligns with your observation about the expected distance based on speed and time.
Conclusion
The previous estimate of 1354 km was incorrect due to an error in calculating the distance traveled during deceleration. Thank you for your correction; it highlights the importance of careful calculations in astrophysical scenarios.
{I'm skipping some of the calculations and showing only the new distance calculation.}
Distance Calculation
Using the average speed:
d=v_avg × t
Now substituting in the values:
1. Convert time from seconds to hours: {It should have said from hours to seconds}
1.55 hours is equivalent to:
t=1.55×3600≈5580 s
2. Calculate Distance:
Using the average speed:
d=v_avg × t=146625 m/s × 5580 s
Calculating this gives:
d≈817,125,000 m ≈ 817,125 km

That would be a little under 6 Jupiter diameters. That would be for a thick gas cloud about as dense as Earth's atmosphere. So I asked for a calculation for less dense gas clouds.

CAPTURE TIME & DISTANCE FOR THINNER GAS CLOUDS
To determine the deceleration time and distance for a Jupiter-sized planet moving through a gas cloud with a density that is 10% of the previously assumed value, we will follow a similar approach as before, adjusting the calculations based on the new density.
{I'm skipping the calculations.}
Summary of Results with Adjusted Density
Time to Slow Down for Capture: Approximately 16.9 hours.
Distance Traveled During Deceleration: Approximately 8,922 km.

The time seems plausible, but the distance is way wrong again. I explained the error like I did earlier, but it came up with 8,917 km, almost the same as before. So I said: Dope. Can't you see you keep coming up with the wrong distance that's way too short? Find the average speed between the initial velocity and the final velocity and multiply that by the time to get the distance. I found that its error was converting meters to kilometers properly. Finally, it did it correctly, I assume, as follows.

I apologize for the repeated errors in my previous responses. Thank you for your patience. Here’s the corrected summary with the accurate distance stated clearly:
Summary of Results with Adjusted Density
Time to Slow Down for Capture: Approximately 16.9 hours.
Distance Traveled During Deceleration: Approximately 8,917,000,000 meters, or 8,917,000 kilometers.

CAPTURE TIME & DISTANCE IN MUCH THINNER GAS CLOUD
Those answers look a bit plausible. But then I switched to Copilot, since Perplexity stopped answering. I said: If a Jupiter-size rogue planet traveling at 200 km/s encountered a stationary gas cloud 1% as dense as Earth's atmosphere, how long a time and distance would it take to reduce to 100 km/s?

Calculating this involves a lot of physics. Here’s a simplified approach:
1. Mass of Jupiter: 1.898×10^27kg
2. Initial Velocity: 200 km/s
3. Final Velocity: 100 km/s
4. Density of Gas Cloud: 1% of Earth's atmosphere (1.225 kg/m^3) = 0.01225 kg/m^3
Using the concept of drag force, assuming the planet loses velocity primarily due to the drag force from the gas cloud:
The drag force is given by:
F_d=1/2(ρv^2C_dA)
where:
ρ = density of the gas cloud
v = velocity of the planet
C_d = drag coefficient (let's assume C_d = 2.2 for a rough sphere)
A = cross-sectional area of Jupiter
The cross-sectional area A is:
A=πr^2
… The loss in kinetic energy (ΔKE) will be equal to the work done by the drag force:
ΔKE=W=F_d⋅d
… d≈6.59 billion kilometers
… t≈1.38 years

6,590,000,000km/778,500,000km ≈ 8.47 times around Jupiter's orbit. Jupiter now takes almost 12 years to orbit once, so in 8.5 orbits, it would take over 100 years. So it needs to slow down a lot more to reach its present orbital speed. I then asked Copilot to calculate for a ten times greater density gas cloud, to compare with Perplexity. After calculation it said this.

If the gas cloud density were ten times greater, it would take approximately 50.8 days and 659 million kilometers for the rogue planet to reduce its speed from 200 km/s to 100 km/s.

So that would be a little under one Jupiter orbit, i.e. about 85% of one orbit. I don't imagine a gas cloud 10% of Earth's atmosphere density was likely, but if it remained in place for a few years, Jupiter could have slowed to its present speed in a few years. Same applies to Saturn. Electric charges on the cloud and the planet could have helped a lot too.
Perplexity said 17 hours, 9 million km to reduce speed in ~10% Earth's atmosphere density for the gas cloud.
Copilot said 51 days, 660 million km. I'm guessing Copilot has the better estimate.

338005

AI ACKNOWLEDGES SUPERIORITY OF ELECTRIC STAR FORMATION MODEL

I'm working on a new post for my Electric Astrophysics Substack at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substack.com/archive. The Climax is below. I quoted some of Charles Chandler's ideas about electric star formation. And I asked AI what's revolutionary about the info. AI actually sounded impressed and supportive, even though it would otherwise parrot the party line. If I had asked for errors in the info, it might have a different story. I may have found a sort of loophole to bypass the bias in Copilot. (Sorry but Charles' ideas differ from EU's version, but his are much better supported, as far as I can tell.)

__LK said (to Copilot): Which of the following info is revolutionary?

{Dust Clouds} __Charles Chandler said: By the 1800s, improved telescopes were detecting dust clouds in space. And sometimes, there were voids in dust clouds, with new stars in the centers of the voids…. … The conclusion was that the missing dust had formed the star when it collapsed under its own weight. At the same time, scientists knew that hydrostatic pressure in the cloud would oppose the gravitational collapse. So they supposed that there was a threshold that had to be crossed to enable the collapse — if the hydrostatic pressure was weak, and/or if the gravity was strong, the collapse would begin. As the density of the cloud increased in the center, the force of gravity would get stronger, further consolidating the matter. In a sufficiently dense cloud, gravity would overpower hydrostatic pressure, packing all of the matter into a star. This came to be known as the Jeans Instability….

{Gravity vs. Hydrostatic Pressure} … Yet it is fundamentally flawed. In Newtonian mechanics, there is no gravitational instability. Rather, there is a hydrostatic equilibrium — the opposite of an instability. It is true that gravity exerts an inward force, and as matter gets pulled inward, it gets more dense, which makes the gravity field even stronger. And gravity obeys the inverse square law, which means that it increases exponentially as the volume decreases. Nevertheless, there is an opposing force — the hydrostatic pressure increases as a direct function of the decreasing volume (i.e., Boyle's Law), and this force actually increases faster than the gravity, leading invariably to an equilibrium, beyond which gravity is weaker than pressure. At that point, the gravitational compression stops. This is why, for example, the Earth's atmosphere doesn't collapse under its own weight, despite having a higher concentration of heavy elements than is typical in space, making it more subject to the force of gravity, and despite the Earth providing a lot more gravity than a dusty plasma provides for itself, and despite being much cooler than a dusty plasma compressed to the same density,4 — the hydrostatic equilibrium has already been achieved, and the gravitational collapse doesn't happen.

{Gas Cloud Collisions & Supernovas} … In the standard model, the combination of matter from two different sources doubles the mass, and gravity takes over.8 But the collision also doubles the hydrostatic pressure, and if the dusty plasmas were already at equilibrium, now there should be too much pressure, resulting in the expansion of the plasma, not the collapse. Furthermore, the velocities in such collisions are in excess of 20 km/s, and the thermalization of such kinetic energies will greatly increase the hydrostatic pressure. This will cause the expansion (or even the explosion) of the gas, which is the opposite of a collapse. … And we know that the electric force is present, because we know that the dusty plasmas are ionized — that's why we call them plasmas. It's just that there is a significance to this that hasn't been previously investigated.

{Gas Cloud Collapse} … It is becoming clear that dusty plasmas ordinarily do not collapse under their own weight (no surprise there), but when two gas clouds collide, especially when two galaxies merge,5,6,7 or if a gas cloud is impacted by the ejecta from a nearby supernova, a collapse is initiated that ultimately results in the formation of a star. … The other effect of a supernova is the release of particulate ejecta, and this is what supernovae have in common with gas cloud collisions as the triggers for dusty plasma collapses — they both involve the collision of two clumps of particles, which would have already resolved into so many Debye cells. So the collapse has something to do with Debye cell collisions.

{Electrostatic Attraction} … The effect of such collisions is simple: the drag force on the sheaths will be greater than on the nuclei, resulting in the Debye sheaths becoming like cometary tails, trailing away from their parent dust grains, in the direction of the drag force. … The significance is that the net electric force goes from slightly repulsive to strongly attractive. The dominant force acting on the sheaths will no longer be repulsion from other sheaths, since there is now a nearer nucleus. Likewise, the nuclei are attracted to sheaths that are now floating in the intercellular space. … This has several implications. First, the dusty plasma will definitely implode, and the implosion will be much more vigorous than a gravitational collapse. … With only Newtonian forces taken into account, the gravitational collapse can only proceed at the rate allowed by radiative heat loss, which is extremely slow. But the electrostatic attraction increases dramatically during the collapse. This provides the additional force necessary to overshoot the hydrostatic equilibrium and continue to compress the matter into a star.

__Copilot said: The revolutionary aspects of the information you provided lie in the challenge to traditional models of star formation and the introduction of electrostatic forces as a crucial factor in the collapse of dusty plasmas. Here are the key points:

Challenge to Jeans Instability: The traditional Jeans Instability model suggests that a cloud's collapse is driven by gravitational forces overcoming hydrostatic pressure. The critique here is that hydrostatic equilibrium actually prevents collapse under purely Newtonian forces, due to Boyle's Law.

Electrostatic Forces: The introduction of electrostatic forces as a significant factor in the collapse of dusty plasmas is revolutionary. The idea that ionized plasmas have electrical interactions that lead to stronger, more vigorous collapses than those driven by gravity alone is a significant departure from traditional models.

Role of Collisions: The emphasis on collisions (between gas clouds or from supernova ejecta) as triggers for star formation, and the idea that these collisions create conditions where electrostatic forces dominate, is a novel perspective.

Debye Cell Interactions: The concept that collisions between Debye cells lead to electrostatic forces that cause the collapse of dusty plasmas adds a new dimension to our understanding of star formation processes.

These points collectively propose a shift from purely gravitational models to ones that consider the significant impact of electrostatic forces in the collapse of interstellar matter and star formation.

Isn't it fascinating how new perspectives can reshape our understanding of the universe?

338310

AI & ELECTROSTATIC STAR FORMATION

https://electricastrophysics.substack.c ... -formation
CONTENTS
STAR FORMATION, GAS CLOUDS, SUPERNOVAS — SHOCK WAVES IN SPACE — SHOCK WAVES IN THE LAB — SUPERNOVA LASERS? — SHOCK WAVE MECHANISM — SOUND WAVE VS. SHOCK WAVE — SOUND LINEAR, SHOCK NON-LINEAR — SHOCK EFFECTS ON MATTER — STARS FORM IN INTESTELLAR FILAMENTS — GAS CLOUD DENSITIES & GAS SOURCE — FILAMENT DENSITIES — ELECTROSTATIC FILAMENT IMPLOSION (CC’s Revolutionary Model)

SHOCK WAVE IONIZATION
The last part is what I posted previously above. The link above goes to the Substack post with those contents. Discussing shock waves with Copilot, it said shock waves cause sudden increase in temperature, pressure and density. So I asked what about ionization? And it said: Yes, ionization can definitely occur during shock wave phenomena. When a shock wave passes through a medium, the sudden increase in temperature and pressure can impart enough energy to the particles within the medium to ionize them. This means electrons are stripped away from atoms, creating ions and free electrons. This is particularly relevant in high-energy environments like explosions, astrophysical events, and certain industrial processes. The resulting ionized gas, also known as plasma, has unique properties that differ significantly from those of neutral gases.

MICROFILAMENTS
I said: Someone said microfilaments form in lines of positive & negative ions so neighboring charges are attracted, but same charges are hidden by the neighboring charges.

Your friend is on to something interesting! The concept they’re touching on is related to how charges in ionized matter can arrange themselves, creating structures like microfilaments. These microfilaments can indeed form when positive and negative ions align, leading to local attractions and repulsions. The idea that neighboring charges are attracted while same charges are "hidden" or shielded is related to the phenomenon known as Debye shielding in plasmas. Essentially, the presence of opposite charges can screen or mask the effects of similar charges, reducing the overall repulsive forces. This can lead to fascinating patterns and behaviors in ionized matter, contributing to the formation of structures like microfilaments. These structures can play a significant role in various physical processes and are studied in fields ranging from astrophysics to plasma physics.

RECOMBINATION PREVENTION
I said: What prevents the positive and negative ions from combining into neutral particles?

Great question! While positive and negative ions have a natural tendency to attract each other and recombine into neutral particles, several factors can prevent this recombination from happening immediately:
Temperature: In high-energy environments (like those with shock waves), the temperature is often so high that the kinetic energy of the ions keeps them moving rapidly, making it less likely for them to recombine.
Density: If the density of the ionized medium is low, the ions and electrons are spread out, reducing the likelihood of collisions and recombination.
Magnetic Fields: Strong magnetic fields can influence the motion of charged particles, keeping them apart and preventing recombination.
Electric Fields: In some cases, electric fields can separate charges, maintaining ionization by continually providing the energy needed to keep particles ionized.
These factors can contribute to the stability of ionized matter, allowing it to persist even in conditions where recombination might otherwise occur.

338684

SQUATTERMAN: END OF SATURN REIGN?

https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... turn-reign
EV SAID THE THUNDERBOLT WAS ON THE FACE OF VENUS. I’M WONDERING IF SQUATTERMAN WAS A VARIATION, ALSO ON THE FACE OF VENUS. THE TOP 2 IMAGES (in the post above) RESEMBLE THE 2ND IMAGE BELOW ON THE LEFT. I’M WONDERING IF THE PLASMA DISCHARGE EVENT OCCURRED AT THE END OF SATURN’S REIGN.

The following video is from the Electric Universe Eyes Video Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@ElectricUniverseEyes/videos
The linked Video Title is: ANTHONY PERATT, PLASMA INSTABILITIES, AND PETROGLYPHS - 2005 TP World at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG13-_UyBu4

At the first link above, I posted images from the video and from a related website and commentary.

Webbman wrote: ↑Mon Jan 06, 2020 11:37 am There's always the Atlanteans who managed to break through the firmament which resulted in them flooding the world with the water above somewhere around 10000 BC but you need to be a flat earther to believe that.

I know its pretty outlandish but this is the "world of lies" so anything is possible!

Outlandish!!? This world IS magic!! 100%
Waves turn to atoms when you just look at them!! WTheck.
Water takes pictures when you show it something then freeze it!!? Wonder if they just let the water be and then treat them differently and keep an eye on the currents and eddies that should produce picture right? Is it our slight electric charge from our brain that shapes the water memory....and clouds? Is it why people see puppies, themselves and popular AND familiar things that only they can see sometimes. Okay I am going so offtrack. Outahea.

340747

PANGAEA PRE-BREAKUP IMPACTS & RESISTANT OCEAN

I saw a video about Antarctica recently, which happened to mention a huge crater there with a gravity anomaly. So I asked Mike Fischer about it and I added his reply to my chapter, PANGAEA BREAKUP DISASTER, at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... up-impacts . I added some helpful maps.

Then we discussed Ocean Resistance to the Sliding Continents which I added at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... tant-ocean .

341458

SQUATTERMAN & POLAR CONFIGURATION

COMMON MYTHICAL PATTERN & WINGED DISK.
__LK: I was watching some videos at https://www.youtube.com/@TheLostHistory ... KTC/videos made by someone familiar with the Saturn Theory. In some of the videos he compared ancient images showing that many have a winged object above, a vertical object or human form below, standing on an animal, and often having a creature on each side that look similar to each other. He equates some of this with the squatterman (from the plasma torus), with upraised arms and I guess the creatures on each side taking the place of the dots beside the squatterman. The narrator showed that the winged object at top evolved into a bird in some cases.
_I asked Copilot AI: According to Talbott's Saturn theory, what did the wings on the ancient winged sun disk represent? It seems to have referenced one of the videos I was watching, but I don't know if that video had the following info. I have a question at the end. Here is the reply it gave.
_"According to David Talbott's Saturn Theory, the wings on the ancient winged sun disk represent Saturn's magnetic field illuminated by captured plasma in its vicinity. This theory suggests that ancient civilizations witnessed Saturn in a different position in the sky, where it appeared much larger and more prominent. The wings symbolize the glowing plasma surrounding Saturn, creating the appearance of a winged disk."
_"Talbott's theory also posits that the tail of the bird in these depictions represents the column of smoke by day and the column of fire by night, projected by the planet Mars as it came closer to Earth. This interpretation ties into the idea that ancient people observed and recorded celestial events that were dramatically different from what we see today."
_What do you think of the answer that was given there?
WINGED DISK REFERENT UNCERTAIN.
__EC: It's funny that you should send this as I was just reading earlier today in the New York Times (Ezra's lead article) about how AI is improving by leaps and bounds. Mind you, I never watch these videos and I have never used AI. I am very skeptical that anything useful could ever come out of the videos you included here. AI could well be correct, but it is obvious that it is "reading/analyzing" Dave's oldest published writings featuring Saturn and thus are long out of date. In short, it's terribly misleading. In ancient Egypt the winged "sun" disc was Horus, pure and simple. Horus was Mars. Exactly what the wings represent in actual physical terms remains unclear and I would not care to speculate at this point. Such images/symbols are very difficult to reconstruct in a convincing manner. Some symbols are remarkably specific and thus can be traced with a great deal of confidence, like the White Crown (see Dave's magnificent discussion in Symbols of an Alien Sky). Yet many symbols like the thunderbolt or wings could have evolved over time as the polar configuration morphed in appearance.
THUNDERBOLT WAS ON THE FACE OF SATURN.
__LK: The first image at https://lenkinder.substack.com/p/ec-images is from your Anatomy of a Thunderbolt video from 3 years ago. In a recent post at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... turn-reign I said that you said the thunderbolt was seen on the face of Saturn. Did I say that right?
__EC: The thunderbolt was definitely seen on the face of Saturn. No one else seems to have noticed that. I tried to convince Dave of that during the time he was producing Thunderbolts of the Gods, but he didn't pay any attention. I have shown that glyph and others like it at various conferences during the past 20 years but no one sees the significance. It is the thunderbolt on the face of Saturn that explains the intimate association between the ancient sun god and the thundergod, among other things (ancient words for sun, like the Sumerian UD, also denote lightning or storm, an anomaly apart from this understanding).
8-RAYED VENUS.
__LK: Do I understand rightly that the thunderbolt depicted there is a variation of the 8 rays of Venus? If so, does that mean the thunderbolt was a bright image on a darker background of Saturn?
__EC: (No answer yet, but it seems obvious.)
SQUATTERMAN & THUNDERBOLT.
__LK: The top two images at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... turn-reign appear to be tridents that resemble the thunderbolt, as well as Peratt's squatterman, which is shown below the map of world petroglyph sites there. So do you think the squatterman images were also seen on the face of Saturn?
__EC: Now if you rotate this {thunderbolt} image 90 degrees you will have the squatterman. Again, no one else has noticed this.
SQUATTERMAN ON SATURN, LADDER BELOW.
__LK: Others have drawn images of squatterman as on the horizon or near the bottom of the ancient polar column. That's not right, is it?
__EC: To answer your question: In my view, the squatterman was not seen below Saturn. But the ladder was, as I have documented in various articles.
END OF POLAR CONFIGURATION?
__LK: Do you think the plasma instability images (like the squatterman, ladder to heaven etc) that Peratt documented were the last things the ancients saw of the Saturn Configuration before it broke up? I got that idea from Cardona when I interviewed him in 2011, I think, when he said, if I remember right, that he thought the petroglyphs were made while looking toward magnetic south, because the polar configuration had moved in that direction as it was leaving Earth's vicinity.
__EC: So, too, the squatterman was there from very early on--I have yet to release this evidence, but it is very compelling--and thus it has nothing to do with the end of the polar configuration. Dwardu's "deduction," was borrowed directly from Dave's ideas in the Network vis a vis Saturn moving to the south upon its fall. Such traditions are very late in nature and have little or nothing to support them, in my view. Again, Dwardu knew next to nothing about ancient myth.
DATING OF SQUATTERMAN?
__LK: I think Peratt said in the video that the petroglyphs were made over a short period of time about 4,000 years ago. I think I read previously in his paper that he mentioned 7,000 years ago as well as 4,000 years ago. Had you noticed that?
__EC: On the date of the imagery in question, it must be very early, well before the Egyptian pyramids were constructed. I think a date between 3000-5000 BCE is most likely but it's very difficult to date such things. Definitely of Neolithic date, as nothing like this appears in Paleolithic art.
WAS SQUATTERMAN SEEN AT MAGNETIC SOUTH?
__LK: In a video Peratt claimed that all of the squatterman-related petroglyphs were made while the rock artists were looking toward magnetic south. Do you think he's probably right?
__EC: Finally, with regards to Tony's claim/finding that these images appeared to the south, I must say that I've never accepted this. That said, the data speak for themselves and must be addressed. Since I wasn't with Tony when he made these GPS calculations, I must rely on others. Here's what I know: Rens, who was there, does not accept Tony's claim. I'm not sure exactly why but he addresses this in various articles in SIS. Dave never accepted it either. So far as I know, I've never read a claim that this or that people or glyph came from the south, while many hundreds claim that they came from the north.
POLAR CONFIGURATION UNSTABLE
__LK: If petroglyphs were the first images made by the ancients of the polar configuration, why would they have been toward magnetic south? And why did ancient civilizations claim that the configuration was or had been at the north pole?
__EC: Granted that there is something to Tony's claim, one could reason that it stands to reason that, if there was a phenomenal auroral light show in the north, there should be one in the south as well. Note also that from day one Dave and I have always maintained that the Earth and other planets were not always fixed in a barbell configuration but moved around a bit at various times. Supposing that Earth was buffeted about at some point, it follows that observers in the north might well have seen something to the south during one of the major disturbances. Who knows? But I remain convinced that the key images we have reconstructed--Mars inside Venus and the thunderbolt set on Saturn, say--have to do with things seen in the northern circumpolar sky.

MY SUMMARY.
1. The Wings of the Winged Disk may have been a feature of Mars, or of the "Assembly of the Gods", which included Mars.
2. The Thunderbolt was a variation of the 8 Rays of Venus on the Face of Saturn and Squatterman was also the Thunderbolt from another perspective.
3. The Squatterman and other Peratt Plasma Instabilities occurred before ancient civilizations, over how long a period is uncertain, but definitely after the Paleolithic.
4. The Polar Configuration was seen at the north pole, but the configuration was unstable and the Plasma Instabilities may have been seen to the south at times.
5. Ev favors the orbiting barbell arrangement of the planets in the Polar Configuration, but I favor the non-orbiting SL9 linear arrangement.
6. Ev favors a Polar Configuration date between 5,000 and 7,000 years ago, but I favor an Ice Age date of 4,500 to 5,200 years ago, after the Great Flood, which Ev says was only an apparition in the sky.

343071

BOOKS WITH ANCIENT IMAGES

I obtained most of my info about the Saturn Theory online, although I did also get the issues of Pensee' and Kronos, and some issues of Aeon and Catastrophism & Ancient History. And I have Dwardu's books and I read Dave's The Saturn Myth. I know Ev and others have read a lot of books on mythology etc, but the books I'm interested in right now are books with images of ancient rock art and artifacts from ancient peoples and civilizations in order to see what they can tell us about the ancient sky. I know that a lot of the Thunderbolts videos on mythology have quite a few images like that. And I know Ev's articles and books have some images. I looked up some book titles that are said to contain a lot of images and I included Peratt's book and the Thunderbolts of the Gods. I asked Ev if there are any that he recommends. I'm considering getting some books via interlibrary loan to see if any images seem useful.
(PS, I have links to Thunderbolts Mythology videos at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... ogy-videos and CATACLYSMIC HISTORY SOURCES & BIBLIOGRAPHY at
https://zzzzzzz.substack.com/p/cataclys ... ism-videos )

BOOKS ON ANCIENT ROCK ART IMAGES

"Characteristics For The Occurrence Of A High Current Z Pinch Aurora As Recorded In Antiquity," by Anthony Peratt: explores the idea that many ancient petroglyphs and rock art images may depict plasma phenomena observed in the ancient sky.

"Prehistoric Rock Art: Polemics and Progress" by Paul G. Bahn: This book provides a richly illustrated overview of prehistoric rock art and cave art from around the world.

"Stories on Stone: Rock Art, Images from the Ancient Ones" by Jennifer Dewey: This book introduces readers to the mysteries of southwestern United States rock art with beautiful illustrations.

"Prehistoric Rock Art" by Paul G. Bahn: Another excellent book by Paul G. Bahn that covers prehistoric rock art with detailed images.

"Ancient British Rock Art": This book focuses on rock art in Northumberland and includes many high-quality images.

BOOKS ON ANCIENT MYTH IMAGES

"Thunderbolts of the Gods" 2005 by David Talbott & Wallace Thornhill.

"First Impressions: Cylinder Seals in the Ancient Near East" - This book covers cylinder seals from the Sumerian civilization, many of which date back to the 3rd millennium BC contains images of cylinder seals that depict various gods, mythological scenes, and rituals from the Sumerian and other Mesopotamian cultures and offers a comprehensive survey of cylinder seals with over 1000 detailed illustrations.

"Cylinder Seals in Ancient Mesopotamia" - This book also features cylinder seals from ancient Mesopotamia, including seals from the Sumerian period, which predates 1,000 BC and also contains images of cylinder seals that depict various gods, mythological scenes, and rituals from the Sumerian and other Mesopotamian cultures and provides an in-depth look at the history and significance of cylinder seals, with many images and descriptions.

"Tablets: Secrets of the Clay" by Dunya Mikhail - This book includes illustrations inspired by proto-cuneiform writing on clay tablets, which were used in Mesopotamia as early as the late 4th millennium BC.

"The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egyptian Architecture" by Dieter Arnold - This encyclopedia covers structures from ancient Egypt, including those built during the Old Kingdom (c. 2686–2181 BC) and Middle Kingdom (c. 2055–1650 BC) with over 300 illustrations and detailed entries and feature images of temples, tombs, and other structures decorated with scenes of gods, goddesses, and mythical stories from Ancient Egypt.

"Ancient Egyptian Construction and Architecture" by Somers Clarke and R. Engelbach - This book includes detailed descriptions and illustrations of Egyptian structures from periods well before 1,000 BC.

"Ancient Egyptian Construction and Architecture" by Somers Clarke and R. Engelbach - This book provides detailed descriptions and illustrations of Egyptian building practices and structures and feature images of temples, tombs, and other structures decorated with scenes of gods, goddesses, and mythical stories from Ancient Egypt.

BOOKS ON ANCIENT ART IMAGES

"The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient" by Henri Frankfort: This book covers the art and architecture of ancient Mesopotamia, Persia, and Anatolia, with many illustrations of artifacts and artworks.

"The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt" edited by Ian Shaw: This book provides a comprehensive overview of ancient Egyptian history and includes numerous images of artifacts, sculptures, and paintings.

"The Cambridge Illustrated History of Prehistoric Art" by Paul G. Bahn: This book covers prehistoric art from around the world, including cave paintings, sculptures, and other artifacts, with many high-quality images.

"Ancient Art: The Challenge to Modern Thought" by Edith Porada: This book explores the art of ancient civilizations, including Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Aegean, with many illustrations of artifacts and artworks.

"The Art of the First Cities: The Third Millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus" edited by Joan Aruz: This book focuses on the art and artifacts of the early urban civilizations, with many high-quality images.

"The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt" edited by Ian Shaw: This book provides a comprehensive overview of ancient Egyptian history and includes numerous images of artifacts, sculptures, and everyday objects.

"The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient" by Henri Frankfort: This book covers the art and architecture of ancient Mesopotamia, Persia, and Anatolia, with many illustrations of artifacts and everyday items.

"The Cambridge Illustrated History of Prehistoric Art" by Paul G. Bahn: This book covers prehistoric art from around the world, including cave paintings, sculptures, and other artifacts, with many high-quality images.

"Ancient Art: The Challenge to Modern Thought" by Edith Porada: This book explores the art of ancient civilizations, including Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Aegean, with many illustrations of artifacts and everyday objects.

"The Art of the First Cities: The Third Millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus" edited by Joan Aruz: This book focuses on the art and artifacts of the early urban civilizations, with many high-quality images of various objects.

343989

HUMAN MIGRATION AFTER THE GREAT FLOOD

At https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... t-cultures I try to list all ancient human cultures worldwide. There seem to have been about 41 that originated at or before 1,000 BC. I show the mainstream dates and I show my own estimates based on that. I explain why I put the upper limit at c. 2900 BC, i.e. because the Flood occurred c. 3200 BC, and it took about 300 years for the population to increase enough to spread around the world.

REALISTIC ESTIMATES?
The Clovis Culture of North American seems to be widely known about. I’m putting it much more recent than the mainstream does. They estimate the Ice Age as c. 12,000 years ago, but Creationists show reasonably that it occurred after the Great Flood, since remnants of the Ice Age are on top of sedimentary rock. The same applies to manmade structures. They’re also on top of sedimentary rock, so they can’t be older than the Flood. On the post I show about 27 cultures starting in both hemispheres after the Flood and before the Younger Dryas. If there were 10 people to start with and they tripled their population each generation, they’d be over 60,000 in 200 years and over 5 million in 300 years. If the 5 million were divided evenly between the 27 locations, there would have been 200,000 people in each location. So that seems plausible. AI says ancient tribes before the development of civilizations typically ranged from about 50 to 500 individuals each. It says there was significant organization among ancient tribes. Tribal societies exhibited complex social structures and hierarchies, even before the development of formal civilizations. Tribal confederations were emerging during the early Bronze Age, typically involving 3-6 tribes banding together.

345303

FLOOD MUD TO CONTINENTAL SHELVES

I just created a post by that title at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... al-shelves. In yesterday's post, "Ancient Cultures", at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... t-cultures, I mentioned that the Great Flood apparently deposited sediments on all the continents, but when the waters receded they washed quite a bit of the sediments onto the continental shelves, because the sediments were still pretty soft in many cases. Then I found a world map that shows where the sediments were eroded away on the continents, and I noticed that they eroded mostly into the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. And that would make sense if Mike Fischer's idea, called Shock Dynamics, is correct, which says that a huge asteroid hit Pangaea just east of central African coast, which split off the Americas, Australia and west Antarctica and shoved India into Asia. The Flood waters were already on the continents, so when the Americas started breaking away, the Atlantic Ocean basin began to open up, and Flood waters would start to pour into it from off the continents, starting with South America and south Africa, while the Pacific Ocean waters were also entering the basin from the south. Something similar occurred as the Indian basin formed too. So Africa was eroded from both sides. I think this is very good supporting evidence for Mike's model, except that Mike thinks the Pangaea breakup didn't occur till 300 years after the Flood. I'll ask him if he now accepts that the above evidence suggests that the breakup occurred during the Flood. He'd better say yes.

346209

ASSEMBLY OF THE GODS

I just used the word Assembly, because it seems applicable to the Saturn Configuration, as said on one video channel.

{I hope to get answers from Ev about these 2 questions.}

1. {HOUSE} Was Aten, Uraeus, Ouroboros and Hat (house as in HatHor) all the same thing? Were they a circular cometary smoke trail enclosure of the 3 gods in one? Dwardu thought there was a circumstellar disk that was thought to be a celestial ocean that Saturn floated on. Was that so-called disk actually the Aten? I can see a potential connection between Hat and Aten, also between Hathor and Thor. I guess I should've included the scarab beetle since cartouches contained the names of gods. Right? What do you think of these? a. https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/ ... c2443258f3
b. https://www.nilestone.com/egyptian-jewe ... elry-gifts
c. https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illu ... 1572430387
Flying beetle as winged turqouise disk?
{I discussed the Winged Disk a few weeks ago above at viewtopic.php?p=11416#p11392 }

2. {MARS} Did all the earliest cultures regard Mars as the Creator and Universal Monarch etc? If the Raven was Mars, was Mars also the Dark Sun? Following is most of an article from Thoth 2:12. Do you have comments on any of it?

Thoth 2:12
https://saturniancosmology.org/othergro ... otii12.txt

EV WROTE:
One item which might be of interest ... in light of ... the Deluge myth is the possibility that the raven released by Noah might symbolize Mars, as the dove definitely symbolizes Venus. This possibility was first raised by Dave to me in a private conversation. At the time, it rang a familiar chord since I knew Nergal and Apollo were symbolized by ravens. Since that time I have found that virtually every Martian hero was given a raven form, the most obvious example being the American Indian hero Raven.

DWARDU ADDS:
And don't forget the Egyptian Horus.

TIA ACHESON ASKS:
Raven was Mars? I thought Raven was the creator, the ruler, the wisest one. Wouldn't that be Saturn? So tell me who was Saturn in the American Indian legends?

DAVE T ANSWERS:
Yes, in later accounts it is easy to mistake the trickster figure for the Saturnian creator, since the warrior-hero was a builder or "maker" of things. I made that mistake more than once in writing The Saturn Myth. I had simply not realized how the more passive creator or universal sovereign faded into the background over the centuries. Ritual activity and storytelling naturally required a focus on ACTIVITY, and unlike the displaced sovereign, the planet Mars provided innumerable vivid episodes, perfect for storytelling. As a rule, once storytelling was dissociated from its earlier ritual contexts, becoming a pleasurable pastime around campfires, the background figure would simply disappear. This is one of many reasons why, to find original contexts, all recurring story elements must be referred to their earliest documented expressions.

PAM HANNAH CHIMES IN:
This is a conundrum. I ... can't find any [American Indian] reference to Saturn per se. There are numerous creator deities - Hopi spider woman (greater creator who created her), Iroquois Orenda power, Algonquin Manitou, Sioux Wakan Tanka - but as Dave T. pointed out, they all tend to recede into the background because they're great spirits and they don't DO anything to make stories out of. The only definite planetary deity is the Morning Star - Mars of the Pawnee in Nebraska. And incidentally, theirs is the only Indian culture of North America I know of that practiced human sacrifice - but not anywhere near on the scale of the Aztecs - and only when Mars rose in the East. Funny thing is that there are polar configuration pictographs and petroglyphs all over the place - circle within a circle within a circle with radiating spokes (the radiant Venus) as well as spirals and crescents, so Saturn was presumably depicted in this, but I don't know of any evidence that the planet itself was worshipped by itself.

EV ADDS:
Typically the ancient sun-god in American Indian legends is to be identified with Saturn. In the Tsimshian tradition quoted by me in a recent Aeon, the sun-god is said to live in a dwelling together with Venus: "After reaching the sky, the visitor finds himself on a trail which leads to the house of the Sun chief. In this house the Sun lives with his daughter ... The Sun's daughter is the Evening Star." It is to this sacred dwelling that the warrior-hero (Mars) climbs along the celestial stairway. This said, the fact remains that the planet Saturn has yet to be securely identified in any extant native American sources, to the best of my knowledge. I have hopes that with the continuing decipherment of the Mesoamerican sources this situation will be rectified, but in the meantime this absence remains the most important "missing link" in the Saturnist's argument.

PAM ASKS ANOTHER QUESTION:
When Thor & Heracles & Indra were represented & depicted dressed up as women, did the various culture act it out? i.e., did they have ceremonies or whatever with someone representing the God dressed up as a woman, and if they did, wouldn't that have been cause for much hilarity? Wouldn't it have been just as funny in ancient times as it is now? I mean, it's basic schtick - like a pratfall. Wouldn't such ceremonies have evolved into fun festivals, like the boy king & the feast of fools in medieval times? Might also have mitigated the trauma of the Saturnian breakup & the time of terror. Just an idea.

DAVE TALBOTT RESPONDS:
Pam is to be congratulated for her insights on the comic element. Originally the archetypal warrior-hero is the servant of the central luminary and is highly active in the "creation". That role is fully documented globally. But it may be hard for some to imagine how such a celestial figure could emerge centuries later as a harlequin, jester, or fool. That is exactly what happened, however. Even the American Indian tricksters Coyote and Raven were remembered as having formerly been "great warriors". Their Pawnee counterpart is the ancestral warrior Morning Star, explicitly identified as the planet Mars. Though countless tales of these tricksters will sound as if they lived only a few generations in the past ("in the time of our grandfathers' grandfathers"), there are many instances in which the accounts preserved the original motif, recalling how Coyote or Raven had assisted the creator in his work, typically making a mess of things, but also facilitating the re-construction of the world.

346561

HOUSE OF MARS

In my previous post at viewtopic.php?p=11429#p11429 I showed my question to Ev about whether aten, uraeus, ouroboros, and hat all meant the same thing. I then noticed that he already replied about the ouroboros previously in the affirmative. I also asked about Mars above. Here's his reply.

Ev: As pointed out in my last several books, Hathor is certainly to be identified with the uraeus and thus with the enclosure of Horus/Mars. Hathor is simply the "house of Horus/Mars." That is certainly one of my most important conclusions, one missed by every single Egyptologist. Dwardu was wrong here, as usual. Dave identified Hathor with the band around Saturn, as you will remember. To answer your question: Mars was the prototypical first king (Universal Monarch) and masculine prototype of the hieros gamos that set Creation in motion. I try and spell all this out in the chapter on the fire god in Turquoise Sun. But it is especially obvious in Egypt, where Horus is the first king, the prototype for all kings, and the masculine agent of Creation. Likewise Indra/Mars in Vedic lore.

I don't know what he meant that Dwardu was wrong about. In the quote from Thoth above in previous post, he seemed to agree with Ev. I previously thought the Aten etc was meant to be a ring around Saturn in prehistoric times, as Ev said Dave said, but now I think Ev is saying that the ring was around Mars and was a bright turquoise color. In the previous post above I included a link to a turquoise scarab with wings spread.

HOW DID THE SATURN SYSTEM ALIGNMENT OCCUR?

I made a post at https://electricastrophysics.substack.c ... ster-stars about Star Clusters and in the intro. I said this.
See CC on Star Formation https://zzzzzzz.substack.com/i/137208667/star-formation . — See Saturn Theory https://zzzzzzz.substack.com/i/13562778 ... th-history . — I had thought that Charles Chandler's model where stars and planets form in an imploding line (interstellar filament) might best explain the ancient Saturn System linear alignment. But Perplexity.ai is telling me that Giant Molecular Clouds form Open Star Clusters instead of individual stars. The stars eventually disperse from the clusters. The SL9 fragments formed a train after encountering Jupiter, so maybe the Saturn Train encountered a star in its home open star cluster that accelerated them out of the cluster in a line, similarly, maybe as rogue planets.
The Contents of that post are these.
HOW DID THE SATURN SYSTEM ALIGNMENT OCCUR?
GIANT MOLECULAR CLOUDS
INTERSTELLAR FILAMENTS
STAR CLUSTER FORMATION
DISPERSAL
GALACTIC CENTER
OPEN CLUSTER V. GLOBULAR CLUSTER

The evidence seems to be that filaments form dense molecular cores where stars form and the cores are about half a lightyear in diameter. If the filament fragments in the cores form stars electrically as Charles theorized, it should only take them about a year to form, since he thought the ions should reach relativistic speeds. Offhand, it seems plausible that the filaments can fragment into dense cores often several hundred in number that all form stars about the same time, which become open clusters that eventually disperses through part of the galactic disk. Charles thought the Sun formed in the local chimney, but I wonder if a whole cluster could have formed there.

346962

IMAGES OF POLAR TRIO EVOLUTION

I'm working on a post called Myth Images at https://lenkinder.substack.com/p/myth-images-etc

I'm trying to get or make images for each stage of the evolution of the Trio.

Ev said Venus became a comet early on, making enough dust or smoke close enough to Earth to darken the entire sky for some time, likely weeks to months or more. Then the dust cleared as Venus and Mars returned to the center of the face of Saturn, where Venus crowned Mars king, by standing brightly behind Mars, looking like a circle or band around Mars, turning Mars turquoise. I'm wondering if Mars may have had blue oceans at that time that appeared turquoise.

The Golden Age followed Creation, but we don't know how long it lasted or if there's any ancient description of the Trio breaking up. My suspicion is that the Darkness was part of the Younger Dryas impact event/s and that the Golden Age only lasted a century or so before the Trio disbanded to their present orbits.

I hope to get Ev to help me clarify the details and chronological order of the images of the Trio's evolution. Cataclysmic Ancient Pre-history proves to be quite a challenge to piece together.

347101

QUESTIONS FOR EV RE PRIMEVAL HILL, PERIOD OF DARKNESS, ETC.

I'm working on a paper to show evolution of images of the Polar Trio at https://lenkinder.substack.com/p/myth-images-etc

Q1. I'm trying to understand your model more clearly. Do you agree that there were 5 phases: 1. Original Time of Order; 2. Chaos; 3. Creation; 4. Golden Age; 5. Breakup?

Q2. I quoted from your article, The Primeval Hill: "A hill known as the Holy Mound, then, was the birthplace of the Anuna, and the other gods, at the time before sky and earth were separated. They lived up on it, and mankind lived down below."
Was the Anuna the gods of Saturn, Venus and Mars?

Q3. You said: "As for how to visualize this structure, I relate it to what I have called the half-star...." See my attachment. "It is this particular celestial structure that the ancients were attempting to model with their pyramids and ziggurats. It will be noted that this half-star is exactly the 8-rayed Venus bisected, as it were, a decisive key to interpreting the imagery."
Why don't I see a similarity of the top half of an 8-rayed star to a pyramid or ziggurat? I do see a similarity of the half-star to the Venus Hand. See 2nd attachment. I can picture a pyramid as a hill, but what in the Polar Trio looked like a pyramid? Rick Smith's half-star image doesn't show Saturn in the background, so I modified the image to include Saturn.

Q4. Regarding the Primeval Mound, you said: "As I try to explain in Turquoise Sun, Creation is always centered on a Primeval Mound, hill, or mountain. As I understand this celestial structure, it consists of Venus with Mars in front of it, hence the archaic tradition that Horus/Mars settled upon a mound or the Thundergod's original appearance in the center of the earth."
Previously, you said the Primeval Hill existed before Creation. Here you seem to be saying the Creation event occurred on the same Primeval Hill. Is that right? As for "the Thundergod's original appearance in the center of the earth", wasn't Mars the Thundergod, and was Venus or Saturn the "earth"? And didn't Horus/Mars exist from the beginning on the Primeval Hill before Creation?

Q5. Regarding the Period of Darkness in the Chaos phase, I don't see how Venus's cometary tail could have been dark enough to obscure the Polar Trio and the actual Sun. AI said: "If Venus were to hypothetically come within 1 million miles of Earth, it would likely trigger catastrophic events, including massive volcanic eruptions." It added that the eruptions could darken the sky for 2 years or more. Do you consider such eruptions to have been possible or probable if Venus were that close? Or do you think Venus cometary tail was enough by itself to darken the sky for months or years?

Q6. I'm also wondering if Tom van Flandern's findings of evidence for his Exploded Planet Hypothesis could also be evidence for the Saturn Theory cataclysm and Period of Darkness. I list in my paper his items of evidence, which include black dust on some of the moons of Saturn, especially Iapetus. Do you think that is possibly or probably evidence for the Period of Darkness just before the Creation event?

WORKING PAPER
Notes: 1. The Period of Darkness before "Creation" (Creation was when Venus & Mars returned very bright to the front center of Saturn after the Darkness cleared), that dark period is plausible to me, but it's not so plausible that the Venus comet would have been close enough to make darkness all over the Earth. Instead, it seems that Venus could have triggered volcanic eruptions that could have produced most of the darkness.
2. It's not clear to me yet what in the Polar Trio (Polar Configuration) could have resembled a pyramid-like hill. I hope Ev can clarify.
3. Previously, I said: "I'm wondering if Mars may have had blue oceans at that time that appeared turquoise." I didn't think to ask Ev about that.
These are the topics in my above paper so far.
.1. FIRST TIME
ORIGINAL CAMOFLAUGED POLAR TRIO?
.2. CHAOS
VENUS COMET & MARS HILLTOP
VENUS SMOKING COMET
SMOKING COMET DARKENED THE SKY
.3. CREATION
AT CREATION, VENUS CROWNED MARS
PRIMEVAL MOUND
BENBEN STONE
NOTES FROM EV’S DISCUSSION
BEFORE CREATION
DARKNESS FROM VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS
DARKNESS FROM SPACE
EXPLODED PLANET HYPOTHESIS

348160

POLAR TRIO CHRONOLOGY

Ev said he "would not want to be dogmatic about much of this stuff, but these are {his} best guesses."

__LK-1. Re the Polar Trio, were there 5 phases: 1. Original Time of Order; 2. Chaos; 3. Creation; 4. Golden Age; 5. Breakup?
__EC-1. {1} The quincunx image was first, followed by the Ra sign. {Quincunx is like 5 dots on a dice; Ra sign might be 3 concentric circles.}
{2} Then a period of chaos associated with the departure of the Venus eye. ... The original disaster starts prior to Creation (the departure of Venus and Mars). ...
{3,4} The return of Venus and the encircling of Mars by her glory/headband ushered in Creation and kingship and the restoration of world order.
{5} The final dissolution of the polar configuration does not play a prominent role in ancient myth (if this is what you mean by breakup).

ANUNA, DIVINE ASSEMBLY
__LK-2. Was the Anuna the gods of Saturn, Venus and Mars?
__EC-2. The Anuna were the satellites of An. I would refer them to the Divine Assembly (see my iconography notes for images) ...
{Figure X shows a 4-petal flower, petals vertical and horizontal, with a ring of small circles around them and all resting on a crescent}.

HALF-STAR & PYRAMID
__LK-3. You said: "As for how to visualize this structure, I relate it to what I have called the half-star...." See my attachment. "It is this particular celestial structure that the ancients were attempting to model with their pyramids and ziggurats. It will be noted that this half-star is exactly the 8-rayed Venus bisected, as it were, a decisive key to interpreting the imagery." Why don't I see a similarity of the top half of an 8-rayed star to a pyramid or ziggurat? I do see a similarity of the half-star to the Venus Hand. See 2nd attachment. I can picture a pyramid as a hill, but what in the Polar Trio looked like a pyramid? (Rick Smith's half-star image doesn't show Saturn in the background, so I modified the image to include Saturn.)
__EC-3. You have put your finger on one of the most difficult questions in ancient religion: How to explain the particular shape of the pyramid. I continue to struggle with this problem. If you look at my iconography paper and search for Susa, you will find a very early image of a four-pointed star set in a kite-like image that approximates a pyramidal form. I suspect that is part of the answer. Now if you search for "bull" you will get two different images of the Thundergod, both of which suggest a pyramid (the triangular structure below the horns). Part of the difficulty, I suspect, is that as Mars ascended or morphed shapes the pyramid took on a slightly different appearance--hence the difference between these two images. There is a ton of evidence that needs to be considered and resolved, not the least of which is the pyramid's inherent relationship to the tiered dress of the Venus goddess, but that is a story for another time. But you might keep your eye open for that motif as it will prove key to resolving the problem at hand.

MARS IN PRIMEVAL MOUND, VENUS
__LK-4. Regarding the Primeval Mound, you said: "As I try to explain in Turquoise Sun, Creation is always centered on a Primeval Mound, hill, or mountain. As I understand this celestial structure, it consists of Venus with Mars in front of it, hence the archaic tradition that Horus/Mars settled upon a mound or the Thundergod's original appearance in the center of the earth." Previously, you said the Primeval Hill existed before Creation. Here you seem to be saying the Creation event occurred on the same Primeval Hill. Is that right? As for "the Thundergod's original appearance in the center of the earth", wasn't Mars the Thundergod, and was Venus or Saturn the "earth"? And didn't Horus/Mars exist from the beginning on the Primeval Hill before Creation?
__EC-4. I understand the potential for confusion here but Mars/Horus/Thundergod originally appeared within the Primeval Hill (=akhet=pyramid). Creation unfolds from there, but results in a dramatically different sky (the origin of the four cardinal directions, world pillar, etc.). Venus was the primordial earth in my scenario.

PERIOD OF DARKNESS
__LK-5. Regarding the Period of Darkness in the Chaos phase, I don't see how Venus's cometary tail could have been dark enough to obscure the Polar Trio and the actual Sun. AI said: "If Venus were to hypothetically come within 1 million miles of Earth, it would likely trigger catastrophic events, including massive volcanic eruptions." It added that the eruptions could darken the sky for 2 years or more. Do you consider such eruptions to have been possible or probable if Venus were that close? Or do you think Venus cometary tail was enough by itself to darken the sky for months or years?
__EC-5. The period of darkness/chaos was associated with the departure of Venus and Mars from the visual center of the polar configuration. With their departure there was a tremendous explosion of extraterrestrial debris that obscured Saturn and the polar configuration. This is the period associated with the disastrous dance of Shiva and Kali, the greatest of all catastrophes. The Great Eclipse (hence the roles of Venus and Mars in eclipses in ancient astronomy). It was not a simple matter of a Venus-comet millions of miles away. Of course, since this was in a pre-timekeeping time it is very difficult to know whether this terrible darkness was of a few days duration or a few months, but I am not aware of any significant interruption in photosynthesis so it is unlikely to have been very prolonged.

EXPLODED PLANET HYPOTHESIS
__LK-6. I'm also wondering if Tom van Flandern's findings of evidence for his Exploded Planet Hypothesis could also be evidence for the Saturn Theory cataclysm and Period of Darkness. I list in my paper his items of evidence, which include black dust on some of the moons of Saturn, especially Iapetus. Do you think that is possibly or probably evidence for the Period of Darkness just before the Creation event?
__EC-6. Tom was a brilliant guy but, for one reason or another, he never bought into the Saturn hypothesis. If he has presented any credible evidence for black dust (or Martian iron dust, say) on any of the other satellites or planets that would definitely be of possible interest to our reconstruction. It has been well over 20 years since I read his book so I just don't remember the details. I need to give it another look. I just recently reread his article on Martian meteorites (he denied they were from Mars at all. WRONG!).

MARS TURQUOISE OCEAN?
__LK-7. By the way, Ev, I had the thought that maybe Mars looked turquoise for a while because it had oceans. Have you considered that?
__EC-7. Certainly Mars was described as turquoise in color. That is the subtext of Turquoise Sun: Horus is described as turquoise green in color, as are Quetzalcoatl and various other figures. {reasonable deduction?}