© Lloyd
  1. http://milesmathis.com/tilt.html (The Cause of Axial Tilt - Part 1) [The cause is the photonic charge field.]
  2. Abstract: By doing simple calculations on Mercury, Uranus, and the Earth, I will show that the tilts are easily calculable from perturbations, and that these perturbations can be calculated from only three numbers: mass, density, and distance.
  3. [I]t is thought that all the planets gained their various tilts by accidental collisions in the distant past.
  4. [T]he mainstream knows that [] the axis seems to have something to do with the E/M field of the body, but they don't know that distant bodies can [a]ffect eachother via that same E/M field.
  5. I have shown that Newton's and Kepler's own equations contain the E/M field, in very simple form, and always have.
  6. (To see mainstream data in conspicuous agreement with my analysis here, you may go to Wikipedia and type in "Heliospheric Current Sheet".)
  7. This E/M field is the card I had in my hand that allowed me to see through the tilt question immediately.
  8. You only have to look at a few lists of numbers to get a feel for the solution.
  9. Let us list the actual tilts of the eight planets, then list masses relative to the Earth, then list the relative distances between planets, with Mercury's distance as 1.
  10. 0.01           0.05           1
  11. 2.6            0.82           0.86
  12. 23.4           1              0.71
  13. 25             0.11           1.33
  14. 3              318            9.5
  15. 26             95             11.3
  16. 97             14.5            24.9
  17. 28             17.1            28.1
  18. The first thing we see is that we have four planets within a few percentage points of one another.
  19. The Earth, Mars, Saturn, and Neptune all have similar tilts.
  20. That is unlikely to be a coincidence.
  21. If we measure those four tilts relative to the Sun's equator, instead of relative to their individual orbits, the numbers are even closer, being 30.55, 30.65, 31.51, and 34.4.
  22. Another big clue is Mercury, with no tilt.
  23. And the final big clue is Uranus, with a near 90o degree tilt.
  24. Let's start with Mercury.
  25. Like all other planets, Mercury has bodies on both sides of it.
  26. On one side, we have the Sun; on the other side, Venus.
  27. Because the Sun is so huge, it overwhelms all other influences.
  28. So we may treat Mercury as perturbed only by the Sun, in the first instance.
  29. Mercury orbits very near the Sun's equator, at an inclination of only 3 degrees, 4 degrees closer than the Earth.
  30. Mercury is also furthest from the invariable plane [What's that?], and this proves again that it is influenced more by the Sun and less by Jupiter and the other planets, as would be expected.
  31. But it must be influenced by the charge or E/M field, in this case.
  32. Mercury is matching its tilt and inclination to the Sun, and in doing so it is matching itself to the ambient E/M field, not the gravity field.
  33. The gravity field has no mechanism for influencing Mercury's tilt or inclination, since it is all the same to gravity whether Mercury orbits east-west or north-south.
  34. The field equations of Kepler, Newton, Laplace, and Einstein all fail to provide a mechanism for tilt or inclination, which is precisely why current astrophysicists still give tilt and inclination to accident or collision.
  35. In a moment I will show exactly how the charge field (which I have shown underlies E/M) causes this phenomenon, but for now let us just look at the effect.
  36. I propose that a body that is perturbed by a charge field from only one direction will have no tilt, and that a body that is perturbed equally from two opposing directions will have a tilt of 90o.
  37. Tilts in between are caused by uneven forces, and may be calculated from the sizes of the forces.
  38. Just to be clear, I am proposing new perturbation theory.
  39. Below, I will solve multiple-body problems by calculating real mechanical forces upon those bodies.
  40. My charge field cause[s] forces by bombardment. That is, particles must touch.
  41. There are no attractions and no forces at a distance, not in the gravity part of the unified field and not in the charge part of the unified field.
  42. The entire unified field is mechanical, and resolves to motion and contact.
  43. All equations are explained and underpinned, and all the math is simple and transparent.
  44. So, back to Mercury. In this case, Mercury has almost no tilt because the Sun overwhelms the field coming from the other direction.
  45. We can even do a bit of rough math here.
  46. Mercury's tilt+inclination relative to the Sun's equator is about 3.39o, which is 3.76% of 90o.
  47. The mass of the rest of the Solar System is about .134% of the Sun's mass, and the average distance of the mass is about 23 times the distance of Mercury.
  48. 23 x .134% = 3.1%  That is why Mercury is tilted.
  49. The Sun is 97% of the effect, so Mercury can tilt only 3%.
  50. The charge field of the Solar System has to be taken as one spherical field.
  51. Imagine that the Solar System is one big ball.
  52. When charge is emitted out from the center of that ball, it diminishes.
  53. When it is emitted toward the center, it increases.
  54. The entire field is defined by the Sun, and shaped by the Sun, so the radial lines of the main field come out from the Sun.
  55. If that is true, then the field lines get closer together as you get nearer the Sun.
  56. When field lines get closer together, the field gains density.
  57. Therefore, the effects of outer planets on inner planets are relatively greater than the effects of inner planets on outer ones.
  58. One way to look at this is to recognize that inner planets are emitting out into larger shells.
  59. The surface area and volume of these shells increases with increasing distance from the Sun, so the charge field loses density for that reason.
  60. But in the reverse case, the charge field density must increase, because the outer planets, when perturbing inner planets, are emitting into a smaller orbits and smaller shells.
  61. [W]hen the emission is traveling toward the Sun, the Sun's field lines channel all charge toward the Sun.
  62. The charge field out from the Sun is constant and relatively heavy, so it is a pre-existing stream that any new emission must be affected by.
  63. Some emission from outer planets to inner ones will be lost to space, but the bulk of it joins the stream, and is channeled into ever denser fields, until it perturbs an inner body or is recycled through the Sun's poles.
  64. To read more on this, consult my recent equations on the magnetosphere.
  65. If the density increases as we go in, shouldn't it follow a square law, at least?
  66. [Y]ou can't just follow equations, you have to follow mechanics.
  67. Yes, the charge field will square because we are going to smaller surface areas, but we are still in the gravity field, too.
  68. We are in both simultaneously: the unified field.
  69. You can't go toward or away from a gravity field, in this case.
  70. You are either in one or you are not.
  71. Gravity is still the inverse square (relative to the charge field), and the charge field is now squared, since we are moving in.
  72. So the two together cancel, giving us a field that simply increases with distance.
  73. If we follow the charge field out from the Sun, we use 1/R4.
  74. If we follow the charge field in, we use 1/R.
  75. I will solve another pair of perturbations, to show this in more detail.
  76. Let us study the opposite effect from Mercury, on the planet Uranus.
  77. Mercury is perturbed from one side, and has very little tilt.
  78. Uranus is perturbed equally on both sides, and has a lot.
  79. First of all, Uranus is the only planet, save Mars [& Mercury!], that has planets larger than itself on both sides.
  80. This is important.
  81. Even more important is how the size and distance of these planets create a balanced field.
  82. Uranus has a tilt of about 97.77o, or about eight degrees from flat, so we would expect fairly balanced fields on both sides of Uranus.
  83. Saturn has a charge field that is 2.328 times as dense as Neptune's (charge density differential = mass differential x density differential—see below for clarification) and is .887 as far away.
  84. This gives Saturn a relative charge density of 2.3281/4 = 1.235.
  85. Neptune's is 1/.887 = 1.128.
  86. The difference between them is 4.53%.
  87. 4.53% x 90o = 4.1o.
  88. If not for further perturbations, Uranus would be tilted to 94.1o.
  89. (We add 4.1 to 90 because 90 is the baseline.
  90. 90 is balance, and we are 4.53% from balance.
  91. Zero in this case is not balance, it is complete imbalance.)
  92. http://milesmathis.com/tilt2.html (The Cause of Axial Tilt - Part 2)
  93. I will start by answering the biggest question raised by part 1.
  94. "How can your equations explain tilt by straight-line influence of the charge field, when the bodies are rarely lined up?
  95. If we take the perturbations of the Sun and Jupiter upon the Earth as an example, the perturbing bodies need to be on opposite sides of the Earth for the mechanics to work.
  96. But for large parts of their orbits, this is not the case.
  97. Jupiter is often on the other side of the Sun from the Earth."
  98. The main part of the answer lies in the fact that the charge field is much less dense than the bodies it is perturbing.
  99. This creates a lag time in the effect.
  100. In this way, this problem is much like the gravitational well problem in my ellipse paper.
  101. A body can go into a "gravitational well", which is a well below the line of field balance, only because there is a time lag on the field effects.
  102. A field cannot move a large body immediately, because of what we call inertia.
  103. The large body has motions that the new forces must overcome, and the new forces cannot do this all at once, since the forces are mechanical forces of contact by discrete particles.
  104. [T]he Sun's "perturbation" only works to keep a planet's tilt at 0, as with Mercury.
  105. Remind yourself that if all the charge is from one side, the tilt is 0.
  106. The planet stands straight up.
  107. So in our Earth problem, the Sun is not trying to push the tilt in the opposite direction of the Jovians.
  108. The Sun is not really perturbing, it is simply supplying the ambient field.
  109. Zero tilt is not balance, zero tilt is complete imbalance.
  110. If the force's are balanced, the tilt is 90o.
  111. What that means is that any perturbation, even one over a limited time, must create a tilt.
  112. I agree that the Earth feels a perturbation from Jupiter only about once a year, but it feels it every year, year in year out.
  113. It also feels it over an extended period, even if that period is only a few weeks.
  114. It isn't hit by a few photons in a passing wave, it is hit by an extended force.
  115. The Earth cannot just shrug off this force.
  116. If we add to that the perturbations from the other Jovians, we find that the Earth is almost always in the rebound stage from a perturbation from one of the four.
  117. Remember, Uranus' perturbation is larger than Jupiter's, and Neptune's is more than twice as big.
  118. Because the response to these perturbations is slow, and the rebound from each perturbation is slow, there is time for them to add.
  119. Also remind yourself that I have shown that these four perturbations are made of charge densities that are very near the charge density of the Sun at the Earth.
  120. So while they can have only a delayed action on the Earth, due to the Earth's large density, they can have a profound effect on the ambient charge field.
expand post'14-03-03, 02:16Axial Tilts

← PREV Powered by Quick Disclosure Lite
© 2010~2021 SCS-INC.US