Miles Mathis' Theory: Macrocosm EARTH'S ECCENTRICITY © Lloyd http://milesmathis.com/eccen.html (HOW TO CALCULATE THE ECCENTRICITY OF THE EARTH Using the Charge Field) *I have already shown (in my paper on Axial Tilt) that the Earth's tilt is caused mainly by charge forces from the four big outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune). *It turns out that the same thing causes the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit. The tilt and eccentricity do match, as I will now show. I will once again limit my math to the four big planets, simply estimating an answer. Since the planets are an average of 23 times further away from the Earth than the Sun, we divide.374 by 23 to obtain.0163. That would be the eccentricity just from the four planets and the Sun. Since the actual eccentricity of the Earth is.0167, I am very close already. To understand how my simple math worked, we have to go back to the ellipse, as proposed by Kepler. The second focus in the Earth's ellipse should be outside the ellipse, as we recognize when we start doing the actual perturbations. As I just showed, the second "focus" is the average distance of the four big planets. Geometric ellipses are created with two interior foci, but celestial ellipses clearly are not. Celestial ellipses are caused by forces outside the circle. This means that the ellipse of the Earth is not caused by a second pull from within, it is caused by a second push from without. The big planets are pushing on the Earth with their charge fields, with their photons. Remember that we are explaining the ellipse now by a perturbation from outside the circle, not a second focus inside the ellipse. If the force from outside (by the big planets upon the Earth) were constant in strength and direction, this would only change the radius of the orbit; it would not create an ellipse. To create an ellipse requires a varying force from outside. So the tilt is a measurement of the difference, and the eccentricity is a measurement of the variation in the difference. This is why they aren't the same number. One number is the change in the other number. The number is the same only because the math is very similar for average distance and variation. But I have never said that all distant objects have their charge increased by this method. It only applies to objects in orbit around the Sun. It is a unified field effect, so the object in question has to be IN the Sun's unified field. Its charge must be captured by the vortex of the Sun, and this vortex has a limit. I haven't been able to calculate yet where this limit is, but it is probably somewhere just beyond Pluto. Farther than that, the charge is not channeled toward the Sun in an efficient manner. It is doubtful, for instance, that much charge from the Oort cloud makes it back to the Sun. But, yes, the charge that does make it back will be compressed and its density will be increased, increasing its effect. As I have said in other papers, you have to think of the charge field as wind, not as mysterious potentials. Basically you have two winds: you have the incoming wind of charge from the galactic core to the Sun. The Sun takes in this wind at the poles, due to spin, and emits it at the equator. The emitted wind moves opposite to the incoming wind, but the two are interpenetrable. The photon wind is so fine, as a matter of particles, that it doesn't interfere with itself much. Photons do collide, but the collisions only affect[] the spins, not the linear velocity. Which means that only the magnetism is affected by these collisions; the linear charge (which causes electricity) isn't. Although photon fields are mostly interpenetrable with eachother, they are not interpenetrable with normal matter in planets. Since baryons are quite large compared to photons, we have many orders (more than 10; see the number G) more collisions, and these collisions create measurable forces or motions. The sum of all these collisions is what causes perturbations. Now that we see how the ellipse is really created, we see that the big planets are not only the cause of the inner ellipses, they are the reason these ellipses are so small. The fairly large charge forces from the outside keep the Earth's orbit constrained. Even if it were bumped into a greater eccentricity by an impact, the charge field would resist this eccentricity, and would tend to push it back to a lower eccentricity over time. This is why even large impacts are rarely fatal to an orbit. Planets and moons will break up before they will crash into a primary or eject from the system altogether, as we see from the debris around Jupiter and Saturn, as well as from the asteroid belt.