Titius-Bode Rule becomes a law of physics from Maxwell EquationsChapt16.15 Gravity Cells #1456 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

It gives me pleasure to turn the Titius Bode Rule into a science
physics law of Nature. It gives me pleasure because it is basically
the Solid Body Rotation of the Sun's gravity-cell.

Maybe I should find a better name for gravity-cell for its importance
is to nullify the 220km/sec of the Sun's linear speed in space while
Earth has only 29km/sec. So is there a term in the Maxwell Equations
for a rotation that compensates for electricity current versus
magnetism? Is it a displacement current in the Ampere/Maxwell law? So
that a gravity-cell is actually just the displacement current in
Ampere/Maxwell law
or is it the magnetic current density in the Faraday law when magnetic
monopoles are included? At the moment, I do not know. But let me start
talking about the Titius Bode Rule and why it exists because gravity
is EM-gravity out of the Maxwell Equations.

--- quoting Wikipedia on the Titius-Bode Rule ---
Here are the distances of planets in the Solar System, calculated from
the rule and compared with the real ones:

Graphical plot using data from table to the left
Planet
k
T-B rule distance (AU)
Real distance (AU)
% error (using real distance as the accepted value)
Mercury
0
0.4
0.39
2.56%
Venus
1
0.7
0.72
2.78%
Earth
2
1.0
1.00
0.00%
Mars
4
1.6
1.52
5.26%
Ceres1
8
2.8
2.77
1.08%
Jupiter
16
5.2
5.20
0.00%
Saturn
32
10.0
9.54
4.82%
Uranus
64
19.6
19.2
2.08%
Neptune
128
38.8
30.06
29.08%
Pluto1
256
77.22
39.44
95.75%
1 Ceres was considered a planet from 1801 until the 1860s. Pluto was
considered a planet from 1930 to 2006. Both are now classified as
dwarf planets.
2 While the difference between the T-B rule distance and real distance
seems very large here, if Neptune is 'skipped,' the T-B rule's
distance of 38.8 is quite close to Pluto's real distance with an error
of only 1.62%.
[edit]
Theoretical explanations
There is no solid theoretical explanation of the Titius–Bode law, but
if there is one it is possibly a combination of orbital resonance and
shortage of degrees of freedom: any stable planetary system has a high
probability of satisfying a Titius–Bode-type relationship.

--- end quoting Wikipedia on Titius-Bode Rule ---

Now basically the Titius-Bode Rule is a doubling.

Now look at these speeds of planets in which I included Ceres and
Pluto:

Sun 
____
Speed in Space 220 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 7,000 km/hour


Mercury 
____
Orbital speed Â*47 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 10 km/hour


Venus 
____
Orbital speed 35 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 6 km/hour


Earth 
____
Orbital speed Â*29 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 1,674 km/hour

Mars 
____
Orbital speed Â*24 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 868 km/hour


Ceres ____
Orbital speed 17km/sec

Jupiter 
____
Orbital speed Â*13 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 45,300 km/hour

Saturn 
____
Orbital speed Â*9 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 35,500 km/hour


Uranus 
____
Orbital speed Â*6 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 9,320 km/hour


Neptune 

____
Orbital speed Â*5 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 9,660 km/hour

Pluto ____
Orbital speed 4 km/sec

So how is the Titius-Bode Rule become a law of physics? Well, when
gravity is EM-gravity, then the Space gravity around the Sun is a
extended sphere out to the Oort Cloud and this sphere rotates slowly
around that axis. The rotation of that axis nullifies the huge speed
of the Sun of its 220km/sec and allows for small speeds like the Earth
at 29km/sec or Jupiter at 13km/sec allows them to remain bounded-
bonded into the Solar System. If not for the gravity cell rotating in
solid body rotation, then in 10 years time the planets of the Sun
would migrate out to the Kuiper belt and the Solar System would
disintegrate day by day.

Now the reason there is a tiny mismatch for Neptune and Pluto in the
Titius Bode Rule is because in the rule we have to compensate for the
gravity cell set up by Jupiter and Saturn which has a influence on the
uniformity of the Sun's gravity cell and we see this in the fact of
Uranus having a 97degree axial tilt and that the asteroid belt is
rubble instead of a solid planet due to the Jupiter-Saturn nexus.

The Solar System, our Solar System is completely governed by
electricity and magnetism and gravity is a EM-gravity.

--

Google seems to have stopped doing author-archives as of 2012.
Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts to sci.math for the past several years as seen
he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

On Apr 3, 3:47Â*pm, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
It gives me pleasure to turn the Titius Bode Rule into a science
physics law of Nature. It gives me pleasure because it is basically
the Solid Body Rotation of the Sun's gravity-cell.

Maybe I should find a better name for gravity-cell for its importance
is to nullify the 220km/sec of the Sun's linear speed in space while
Earth has only 29km/sec. So is there a term in the Maxwell Equations
for a rotation that compensates for electricity current versus
magnetism? Is it a displacement current in the Ampere/Maxwell law? So
that a gravity-cell is actually just the displacement current in
Ampere/Maxwell law
or is it the magnetic current density in the Faraday law when magnetic
monopoles are included? At the moment, I do not know. But let me start
talking about the Titius Bode Rule and why it exists because gravity
is EM-gravity out of the Maxwell Equations.

--- quoting Wikipedia on the Titius-Bode Rule ---
Here are the distances of planets in the Solar System, calculated from
the rule and compared with the real ones:

Graphical plot using data from table to the left
Planet
k
T-B rule distance (AU)
Real distance (AU)
% error (using real distance as the accepted value)
Mercury
0
0.4
0.39
2.56%
Venus
1
0.7
0.72
2.78%
Earth
2
1.0
1.00
0.00%
Mars
4
1.6
1.52
5.26%
Ceres1
8
2.8
2.77
1.08%
Jupiter
16
5.2
5.20
0.00%
Saturn
32
10.0
9.54
4.82%
Uranus
64
19.6
19.2
2.08%
Neptune
128
38.8
30.06
29.08%
Pluto1
256
77.22
39.44
95.75%
1 Ceres was considered a planet from 1801 until the 1860s. Pluto was
considered a planet from 1930 to 2006. Both are now classified as
dwarf planets.
2 While the difference between the T-B rule distance and real distance
seems very large here, if Neptune is 'skipped,' the T-B rule's
distance of 38.8 is quite close to Pluto's real distance with an error
of only 1.62%.
[edit]
Theoretical explanations
There is no solid theoretical explanation of the Titius–Bode law, but
if there is one it is possibly a combination of orbital resonance and
shortage of degrees of freedom: any stable planetary system has a high
probability of satisfying a Titius–Bode-type relationship.

--- end quoting Wikipedia on Titius-Bode Rule ---

Now basically the Titius-Bode Rule is a doubling.

Now look at these speeds of planets in which I included Ceres and
Pluto:

Sun 
____
Speed in Space 220 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 7,000 km/hour

Mercury 
____
Orbital speed Â*47 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 10 km/hour

Venus 
____
Orbital speed 35 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 6 km/hour

Earth 
____
Orbital speed Â*29 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 1,674 km/hour

Mars 
____
Orbital speed Â*24 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 868 km/hour

Ceres ____
Orbital speed 17km/sec

Jupiter 
____
Orbital speed Â*13 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 45,300 km/hour

Saturn 
____
Orbital speed Â*9 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 35,500 km/hour

Uranus 
____
Orbital speed Â*6 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 9,320 km/hour

Neptune 

____
Orbital speed Â*5 km/sec 
Equatorial Rotation velocity 9,660 km/hour

Pluto ____
Orbital speed 4 km/sec

So how is the Titius-Bode Rule become a law of physics? Well, when
gravity is EM-gravity, then the Space gravity around the Sun is a
extended sphere out to the Oort Cloud and this sphere rotates slowly
around that axis. The rotation of that axis nullifies the huge speed
of the Sun of its 220km/sec and allows for small speeds like the Earth
at 29km/sec or Jupiter at 13km/sec allows them to remain bounded-
bonded into the Solar System. If not for the gravity cell rotating in
solid body rotation, then in 10 years time the planets of the Sun
would migrate out to the Kuiper belt and the Solar System would
disintegrate day by day.

Now the reason there is a tiny mismatch for Neptune and Pluto in the
Titius Bode Rule is because in the rule we have to compensate for the
gravity cell set up by Jupiter and Saturn which has a influence on the
uniformity of the Sun's gravity cell and we see this in the fact of
Uranus having a 97degree axial tilt and that the asteroid belt is
rubble instead of a solid planet due to the Jupiter-Saturn nexus.

The Solar System, our Solar System is completely governed by
electricity and magnetism and gravity is a EM-gravity.


Now I am having a hard time of locating a vital piece of information.
I need to know the direction of Sun's motion, its 220 km/sec relative
to the plane of the ecliptic. I would hazard to guess that the motion
is parallel to the plane of ecliptic, in other words the linear
forward motion of the Sun is the plane ecliptic itself as if the plane
had a arrow of direction.

I intuitively find it hard to think that the motion of the Sun is
anywhere off the plane of the ecliptic.

I had a look in Kaufmann's text Universe on page 461 and he talks
about the Sun relative to stars nearby and the Perseus arm, Orion
bridge and Sagittarius arm. I looked in Wikipedia for some light shed
on the question with no luck.

So the question is quite simple, as to what is the direction of motion
of the Sun of its 220km/sec relative to the Plane of the Ecliptic? Is
the direction in the plane or is it some angle off that plane?



--

Google seems to have stopped doing author-archives as of 2012.
Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts to sci.math for the past several years as seen
he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutoniumhttp://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

On Apr 3, 6:24*pm, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
On Apr 3, 3:47*pm, Archimedes Plutonium
(snipped)

Now I am having a hard time of locating a vital piece of information.
I need to know the direction of Sun's motion, its 220 km/sec relative
to the plane of the ecliptic. I would hazard to guess that the motion
is parallel to the plane of ecliptic, in other words the linear
forward motion of the Sun is the plane ecliptic itself as if the plane
had a arrow of direction.

I intuitively find it hard to think that the motion of the Sun is
anywhere off the plane of the ecliptic.

I had a look in Kaufmann's text Universe on page 461 and he talks
about the Sun relative to stars nearby and the Perseus arm, Orion
bridge and Sagittarius arm. I looked in Wikipedia for some light shed
on the question with no luck.

So the question is quite simple, as to what is the direction of motion
of the Sun of its 220km/sec relative to the Plane of the Ecliptic? Is
the direction in the plane or is it some angle off that plane?


Let me phrase my question more clearly.

Let me define the Sun's ecliptic as the plane in which the Sun's
equator radiates outward, so that the Sun's equator plane forms the
Solar System ecliptic. Now it happens from Maxwell Equations in EM
gravity that all the planets lie mostly or near that ecliptic. When
electricity and magnetism forms gravity, then the bodies would lie
near or on that ecliptic.

Now the question of direction of the Sun's 220 km/sec is a vector
direction of an angle from the center of the Sun. Is the Sun moving
its 220km/sec of a vector that is in that equator and thus ecliptic?
Or is that 220km/sec some angle off of that equator-ecliptic plane?
For instance is the 220km/sec in a direction of the poles of the Sun
and thus the motion is 90degrees from the ecliptic? If the direction
is 0degrees then the 220km/sec is in the ecliptic.

Now if the Sun is 0degrees of its 220km/sec, then the question is, at
what day of the Earth year is the Sun moving to? In other words, as
the Earth revolves around the Sun, there is one day of that revolution
in which the Sun is moving in Space in that direction.

--

Google seems to have stopped doing author-archives as of 2012.
Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts to sci.math for the past several years as seen
he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

On 04/03/2013 07:58 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
On Apr 3, 6:24 pm, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
On Apr 3, 3:47 pm, Archimedes Plutonium
(snipped)

Now I am having a hard time of locating a vital piece of information.
I need to know the direction of Sun's motion, its 220 km/sec relative
to the plane of the ecliptic. I would hazard to guess that the motion
is parallel to the plane of ecliptic, in other words the linear
forward motion of the Sun is the plane ecliptic itself as if the plane
had a arrow of direction.

I intuitively find it hard to think that the motion of the Sun is
anywhere off the plane of the ecliptic.

I suspect that the 3-D rectangular origin (0, 0, 0) in
rectangular coordinates is or is near the centre of
mass (barycentre) of the solar system.

The ecliptic is a reference plane that approximates
very well the mean orbit of the earth around the sun.





I had a look in Kaufmann's text Universe on page 461 and he talks
about the Sun relative to stars nearby and the Perseus arm, Orion
bridge and Sagittarius arm. I looked in Wikipedia for some light shed
on the question with no luck.

So the question is quite simple, as to what is the direction of motion
of the Sun of its 220km/sec relative to the Plane of the Ecliptic? Is
the direction in the plane or is it some angle off that plane?

I sincerely doubt that people in solar dynamics would use
an ecliptic reference plane where the sun would move
at 220 km/sec .

In the old days, the proper motions of extra-solar stars
relative to the earth were not known.

Wikipedia quote:

The Sun travels in a nearly circular orbit (the solar circle) about
the center of the Milky Way at a speed of about 220 km/s at a radius of
8 ± 0.65 kpc from the center,[4][5] which can be taken as the rate of
rotation of the Milky Way itself at this radius.[6][7]

cf.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_motion

dave


Let me phrase my question more clearly.

Let me define the Sun's ecliptic as the plane in which the Sun's
equator radiates outward, so that the Sun's equator plane forms the
Solar System ecliptic. Now it happens from Maxwell Equations in EM
gravity that all the planets lie mostly or near that ecliptic. When
electricity and magnetism forms gravity, then the bodies would lie
near or on that ecliptic.

Now the question of direction of the Sun's 220 km/sec is a vector
direction of an angle from the center of the Sun. Is the Sun moving
its 220km/sec of a vector that is in that equator and thus ecliptic?
Or is that 220km/sec some angle off of that equator-ecliptic plane?
For instance is the 220km/sec in a direction of the poles of the Sun
and thus the motion is 90degrees from the ecliptic? If the direction
is 0degrees then the 220km/sec is in the ecliptic.

Now if the Sun is 0degrees of its 220km/sec, then the question is, at
what day of the Earth year is the Sun moving to? In other words, as
the Earth revolves around the Sun, there is one day of that revolution
in which the Sun is moving in Space in that direction.

--

Google seems to have stopped doing author-archives as of 2012.
Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts to sci.math for the past several years as seen
he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies



--
Jesus is an Anarchist. -- J.R.

On Apr 3, 7:43*pm, David Bernier wrote:
On 04/03/2013 07:58 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

On Apr 3, 6:24 pm, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
On Apr 3, 3:47 pm, Archimedes Plutonium
(snipped)

Now I am having a hard time of locating a vital piece of information.
I need to know the direction of Sun's motion, its 220 km/sec relative
to the plane of the ecliptic. I would hazard to guess that the motion
is parallel to the plane of ecliptic, in other words the linear
forward motion of the Sun is the plane ecliptic itself as if the plane
had a arrow of direction.

I intuitively find it hard to think that the motion of the Sun is
anywhere off the plane of the ecliptic.

I suspect that the 3-D rectangular origin (0, 0, 0) in
rectangular coordinates is or is near the centre of
mass (barycentre) of the solar system.

The ecliptic is a reference plane that approximates
very well the mean orbit of the earth around the sun.



I had a look in Kaufmann's text Universe on page 461 and he talks
about the Sun relative to stars nearby and the Perseus arm, Orion
bridge and Sagittarius arm. I looked in Wikipedia for some light shed
on the question with no luck.

So the question is quite simple, as to what is the direction of motion
of the Sun of its 220km/sec relative to the Plane of the Ecliptic? Is
the direction in the plane or is it some angle off that plane?

I sincerely doubt that people in solar dynamics would use
an ecliptic reference plane where the sun would move
at 220 km/sec .

In the old days, the proper motions of extra-solar stars
relative to the earth were not known.

Wikipedia quote:

The Sun travels in a nearly circular orbit (the solar circle) about
the center of the Milky Way at a speed of about 220 km/s at a radius of
8 ± 0.65 kpc from the center,[4][5] which can be taken as the rate of
rotation of the Milky Way itself at this radius.[6][7]

cf.:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_motion

dave











Let me phrase my question more clearly.

Let me define the Sun's ecliptic as the plane in which the Sun's
equator radiates outward, so that the Sun's equator plane forms the
Solar System ecliptic. Now it happens from Maxwell Equations in EM
gravity that all the planets lie mostly or near that ecliptic. When
electricity and magnetism forms gravity, then the bodies would lie
near or on that ecliptic.

Now the question of direction of the Sun's 220 km/sec is a vector
direction of an angle from the center of the Sun. Is the Sun moving
its 220km/sec of a vector that is in that equator and thus ecliptic?
Or is that 220km/sec some angle off of that equator-ecliptic plane?
For instance is the 220km/sec in a direction of the poles of the Sun
and thus the motion is 90degrees from the ecliptic? If the direction
is 0degrees then the 220km/sec is in the ecliptic.

Now if the Sun is 0degrees of its 220km/sec, then the question is, at
what day of the Earth year is the Sun moving to? In other words, as
the Earth revolves around the Sun, there is one day of that revolution
in which the Sun is moving in Space in that direction.

--

Google seems to have stopped doing author-archives as of 2012.
Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts to sci.math for the past several years as seen
he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

--
Jesus is an Anarchist. *-- J.R.


Hi David, let me see if I can make my question more clear.

Suppose I am holding the Sun (a big ball) and you nearby at a distance
of say 10meters is holding a ball called Earth. Now you are revolving
(walking very slowly around me) and a complete revolution is 365 days.

Now the Plane of Ecliptic is defined as the poles of the Sun forming
an equator and this equator extended outwards from the Sun is the
plane of ecliptic. Now it happens to be the case that most of the
planets lie in this plane of ecliptic.

Now I am standing still while you walk around me holding the Sun. But
what if I start to move, the Sun moving, and it does not have to be
fast motion compared to Earth's 29km/sec. I do not have to move a
220km/sec which would be brisk and fast compared to 29km/sec. Let us
say I am moving slowly, about a fraction of the pace that David
holding Earth is moving around the Sun.

So, the question, is David, at what day of the year, say last year of
2012, of what day of the year did the Sun cross the point in the
Earth's revolution since the Sun is moving in Space at 220km/sec. Did
this crossing of the Earth's revolution happen on a winter day? or a
Spring or Summer or Autumn day?

You see, David, the flaw of Newtonian gravity and General Relativity
is that they are theories based on a premiss that the Sun has 0 speed
in Space. If the Sun has no speed in Space, then planets of slow
speeds like Jupiter of 13km/sec can go around the Sun and be a stable
system for billions of years. But if the Sun moves at 220km/sec in
Space, then a Jupiter going around the Sun at 13km/sec can only be
stable and going on for billions of years if a gravity-cell exists for
the Sun where a axis extends out to the Oort Cloud and this cell
rotates on that axis, and provides a Solid-Body-Rotation of all the
objects in the Solar System. So that regardless of Sun moving at 2km/
sec or 220km/sec or 500km/sec, that the planets will tag along and the
solar system remain stable because the entire solar system is rotating
around a gravity cell axis.

My question, David, was, what day of year 2012 did the Sun moving at
220km/sec cross the path of where Earth was going to revolve in its
365 days? Was it a winter or spring or summer or autumn day of 2012
where the Sun passed the spot in the revolution of Earth in its plane
of ecliptic orbit.

In other words, our entire solar system is a solid body rotation
produced by Maxwell Equations.

I realize all of this is new to physics and astronomy, because no-one
has ever asked this question before-- what day of the year 2012 did
the Sun traverse the spot of the Earth's orbit.

--

Google seems to have stopped doing author-archives as of 2012.
Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts to sci.math for the past several years as seen
he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

On 04/03/2013 10:20 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
On Apr 3, 7:43 pm, David Bernier wrote:
On 04/03/2013 07:58 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

On Apr 3, 6:24 pm, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
On Apr 3, 3:47 pm, Archimedes Plutonium
(snipped)

Now I am having a hard time of locating a vital piece of information.
I need to know the direction of Sun's motion, its 220 km/sec relative
to the plane of the ecliptic. I would hazard to guess that the motion
is parallel to the plane of ecliptic, in other words the linear
forward motion of the Sun is the plane ecliptic itself as if the plane
had a arrow of direction.

I intuitively find it hard to think that the motion of the Sun is
anywhere off the plane of the ecliptic.

I suspect that the 3-D rectangular origin (0, 0, 0) in
rectangular coordinates is or is near the centre of
mass (barycentre) of the solar system.

The ecliptic is a reference plane that approximates
very well the mean orbit of the earth around the sun.



I had a look in Kaufmann's text Universe on page 461 and he talks
about the Sun relative to stars nearby and the Perseus arm, Orion
bridge and Sagittarius arm. I looked in Wikipedia for some light shed
on the question with no luck.

So the question is quite simple, as to what is the direction of motion
of the Sun of its 220km/sec relative to the Plane of the Ecliptic? Is
the direction in the plane or is it some angle off that plane?

I sincerely doubt that people in solar dynamics would use
an ecliptic reference plane where the sun would move
at 220 km/sec .

In the old days, the proper motions of extra-solar stars
relative to the earth were not known.

Wikipedia quote:

The Sun travels in a nearly circular orbit (the solar circle) about
the center of the Milky Way at a speed of about 220 km/s at a radius of
8 ± 0.65 kpc from the center,[4][5] which can be taken as the rate of
rotation of the Milky Way itself at this radius.[6][7]

cf.:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_motion

dave











Let me phrase my question more clearly.

Let me define the Sun's ecliptic as the plane in which the Sun's
equator radiates outward, so that the Sun's equator plane forms the
Solar System ecliptic. Now it happens from Maxwell Equations in EM
gravity that all the planets lie mostly or near that ecliptic. When
electricity and magnetism forms gravity, then the bodies would lie
near or on that ecliptic.

Now the question of direction of the Sun's 220 km/sec is a vector
direction of an angle from the center of the Sun. Is the Sun moving
its 220km/sec of a vector that is in that equator and thus ecliptic?
Or is that 220km/sec some angle off of that equator-ecliptic plane?
For instance is the 220km/sec in a direction of the poles of the Sun
and thus the motion is 90degrees from the ecliptic? If the direction
is 0degrees then the 220km/sec is in the ecliptic.

Now if the Sun is 0degrees of its 220km/sec, then the question is, at
what day of the Earth year is the Sun moving to? In other words, as
the Earth revolves around the Sun, there is one day of that revolution
in which the Sun is moving in Space in that direction.

--

Google seems to have stopped doing author-archives as of 2012.
Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts to sci.math for the past several years as seen
he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

--
Jesus is an Anarchist. -- J.R.


Hi David, let me see if I can make my question more clear.

Suppose I am holding the Sun (a big ball) and you nearby at a distance
of say 10meters is holding a ball called Earth. Now you are revolving
(walking very slowly around me) and a complete revolution is 365 days.

Now the Plane of Ecliptic is defined as the poles of the Sun forming
an equator and this equator extended outwards from the Sun is the
plane of ecliptic. Now it happens to be the case that most of the
planets lie in this plane of ecliptic.

Now I am standing still while you walk around me holding the Sun. But
what if I start to move, the Sun moving, and it does not have to be
fast motion compared to Earth's 29km/sec. I do not have to move a
220km/sec which would be brisk and fast compared to 29km/sec. Let us
say I am moving slowly, about a fraction of the pace that David
holding Earth is moving around the Sun.

So, the question, is David, at what day of the year, say last year of
2012, of what day of the year did the Sun cross the point in the
Earth's revolution since the Sun is moving in Space at 220km/sec. Did
this crossing of the Earth's revolution happen on a winter day? or a
Spring or Summer or Autumn day?

You see, David, the flaw of Newtonian gravity and General Relativity
is that they are theories based on a premiss that the Sun has 0 speed
in Space. If the Sun has no speed in Space, then planets of slow
speeds like Jupiter of 13km/sec can go around the Sun and be a stable
system for billions of years. But if the Sun moves at 220km/sec in
Space, then a Jupiter going around the Sun at 13km/sec can only be
stable and going on for billions of years if a gravity-cell exists for
the Sun where a axis extends out to the Oort Cloud and this cell
rotates on that axis, and provides a Solid-Body-Rotation of all the
objects in the Solar System. So that regardless of Sun moving at 2km/
sec or 220km/sec or 500km/sec, that the planets will tag along and the
solar system remain stable because the entire solar system is rotating
around a gravity cell axis.


I suggest to get an intuition about the gravitational perturbation
of the Oort Cloud and other light-years away masses on the
main solar system bodies, to have a look at Newton's
elementary study of moon tidal forces on the earth.

Gravity is an inverse square law. So, at the point on
earth Now closest to the Moon, the Moon pulls a bit
more on a standard kilogram etalon (Paris, France)
than it would to on an "identical twin" standard
kilogram etalon (Paris, France) located at the
other end of the earth: antipodal to the point
nearest to our Moon Now ...

That, in essence, is the nature of tidal forces.

Through mathematical tricks, we can substract the
force on a standard kilogram etalon (Paris, France)
imaginationationanally located Now at the earth's very
centre (of Gravity) ...

Newton and his geometric diagrams on moon tidal forces
on the earth's surface:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_t...f_lunar_motion

That section explains the perturbation of a faraway big
massive body on nearby things that are far enough away
that the differential gravity field from one
place to the second can cause so-called tidal forces, etc.

dave




My question, David, was, what day of year 2012 did the Sun moving at
220km/sec cross the path of where Earth was going to revolve in its
365 days? Was it a winter or spring or summer or autumn day of 2012
where the Sun passed the spot in the revolution of Earth in its plane
of ecliptic orbit.

I don't understand, sorry.


In other words, our entire solar system is a solid body rotation
produced by Maxwell Equations.

I realize all of this is new to physics and astronomy, because no-one
has ever asked this question before-- what day of the year 2012 did
the Sun traverse the spot of the Earth's orbit.

[...]


--
Jesus is an Anarchist. -- J.R.

That was painful, but finally found the information. It is called
Solar Apex.

Here is what Wikipedia says about it:

The solar apex (Apex of the Sun's Way) is the direction that the Sun
travels with respect to the Local Standard of Rest. In lay terms, it's
the "target" within the Milky Way that the Sun appears to be "chasing"
as it orbits the galaxy. It should not be confused with the Sun's
"motion" through the Zodiac, which is not a real 3D motion, but a 2D
parallax effect due to change in our vantage point (the Earth's
revolving around the Sun).
The general direction of the solar apex is southwest of the star Vega
near the constellation of Hercules.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---

I do not know what day of the year of 2012 that the Sun traversed the
orbit of Earth to so to speak "go to Vega the solar-apex". Anybody
know? And whether that crossing of the path of what was Earth's
projected revolution is the same from year to next or varies every
year?

Now the reason the Solar Apex is so very important is that the Sun
creates a plane of ecliptic and then because the Sun is not 0 speed
but 220km/sec speed in Space, that the Sun crosses its plane of
ecliptic that it formed in time past and now has reformed in time
present. So that Newtonian gravity and General Relativity are false
theories, because the planets cannot keep up with a Sun moving at
220km/sec while Earth is moving at 29km/sec. What is the solution?
Gravity is from the Maxwell Equations and that the Sun has a gravity
cell that extends out to the Oort Cloud and rotates on that cell axis.
The rotation is solid-body-rotation and thus Earth at 29km/sec and Sun
at 220km/sec, the rotation makes null the 220km/sec.

There is no denying the Sun moves in Space at 220km/sec.

There is no denying the Earth moves in Space at 29km/sec.

There is no denying that Newtonian gravity and General Relativity
cannot keep the Earth bound and bonded to the Sun when one has 220 and
the other has 29 speeds. So what must be done? We throw
out Newtonian gravity and General Relativity and realize that the Sun
has magnetic monopoles of Space
that has a axis out to the Oort Cloud and this Sun gravity cell is in
rotation. This rotation keeps the planets bound and bonded to the Sun.


--

Google seems to have stopped doing author-archives as of 2012.
Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts to sci.math for the past several years as seen
he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies