ZetaTalk: Science

ZetaTalk: Planet Revolutions

Mail this Pageto a Friend.

ZetaTalk: Planet Revolutions

Note: written on Jan 15, 1997.

The slow motion of planets around the Sun has long puzzled mankind, who are acutely aware that without continuing

impetus to motion, motion stops. Only in dead space, where no gravitational attraction or repulsion forces exist, does

motion continue without impetus. Motion without a continuing impetus is eroded by gravitational influences nearby, as

in the case of an object thrown upward which slows gradually until turning to plummet to Earth. Children learn with a

ball on the end of a string that standing still results in the ball dropping to the ground, as only the continued impetus of

their arm throwing the ball away and up from them keeps the ball in motion in an orbit. This same pattern is apparent in satellites sent aloft to circle the Earth, as they are in a slow plummet and eventually plunge to Earth.

What keeps the planets, perpetually, the same distance from the Sun and their motion around the Sun at the same

pace?

Understanding only part of the phenomena, and unable to admit they do not understand, humans have engaged in

elaborate mathematical descriptions of the motion they observe, but descriptions do not suffice as an explanation. The

explanation eludes modern astronomers and physicists because they are considering only some of the factors, and are

no further along on the matter of motion than their counterparts in the middle ages. To best understand motion,

mankind should throw out all prior arguments and look upon the matter with the clear eyes of a child.

If a planet is slowly orbiting a massive Sun, but does not drift into it, then obviously there is a repulsion force as

well as the gravitational attraction humans are so painfully familiar with. We have described this force as the

Repulsion Force, and though mankind is not specifically aware of it from their long history on the face of the

planet Earth, this does not mean that this force does not exist.

If a planet is continuing in a steady orbit, without any impetus such as the propulsion humans find necessary to

keep their probes and satellites from drifting off the path they are set upon, then something is either steadily

pulling or pushing the planet to maintain its orbit in the face of all other influences. The influence of the orbiting

planets upon each other would otherwise, over time, alter the orbits dramatically. Why would they not? Each

time a given planet lined up with the massive Jupiter, and was perturbed to speed up or slow down due to this

influence, unless there were another influence this perturbed planet would remain in motion a bit slower or

faster, perpetually.

If the planets resume their motion around the Sun after being perturbed by each other, then the impetus setting

them in motion is not inherent in the planets as an influence upon each other. A planet slowed by the influence

of Jupiter behind its path would not speed up again to resume its steady pace unless this other impetus existed.

This other impetus, which does exist, has the same basis as the magnetic alignment of the Earth and her Sun. This

influence reaches beyond the Solar System, and dictates motion within the Sun not visible to mankind but nevertheless

present. Just as the core of the Earth revolves at a speed dictated by the thickness of the Earth's liquid core, to chase

away from or toward magnetic influences that exist in the Solar System, just so the Sun's core rotates, dragging her

children around her like baubles on the ends of her apron strings.

All rights reserved: [email protected]

http://www.zetatalk2.com/science/s81.htm[2/5/2012 11:55:17 AM]

ZetaTalk: Perturbations

Mail this Pageto a Friend.

ZetaTalk: Perturbations

Note: written on Jan 15, 1997.

What does perturb mean? This is recorded in a change in the motion, else it would be a meaningless term. I could say

the planets harumpf, but give no evidence of this, and none would agree. Therefore, perturb gives evidence, and this evidence is a slowing or speeding up, or a wider orbit or closer orbit, but it most certainly does not mean no change.

Given that the planets change when they are perturbed, they should stay changed, according to man's theory. If an orbit swings wide to move toward a giant it is passing, should not the orbit stay wide then? If a planet slows slightly

due to a giant's gravity attraction behind it, should it not stay slower? Human astrophysics has two discomfiting

notions they use as guides in this situation. They can't put these notions together, so like two passengers in the back

seat of a car who can't talk to each other, they stare out opposite windows and pretend the other doesn't exist.

1. The first notion is that the orbit of planets is due to a state of equilibrium between the gravity pull of the sun and

an original straight-line forward motion of the planet. This notion assumes the planet got caught in the gravity of

the sun to the extent that it is in a perpetual tug of war between this gravity pull and its momentum on the

original path. The fact that, almost invariably, all the planets orbit in the same direction is presumed to be due to

the original path of the planets being conveniently all in the same direction. Conveniently, that is, for the notion.

2. The second notion describes another phenomenon that is also visible and measurable to humans - perturbations.