Kuiper belt and exoplanets fitting into AP-Titius-Bode rule; #151;3rd ed; Atom Totality (Atom Universe) theory

So here is the old Titius Bode Rule
(0 + 4)/10 = 0.4 for Mercury (in Au)
(3 + 4)/10 = 0.7 for Venus
(6 + 4)/10 = 1.0 for Earth
..
..
..

Here is the newest AP-Titius-Bode Rule which applies
only to CellWell2 of Jupiter and beyond, whereas the
old Titius Bode Rule really only applied to the inner planets
and the moons of Jupiter.

1 + 2^2 = 5 for Jupiter (in Au)
2 + 3^2 = 11 for Saturn
3 + 4^2 = 19 for Uranus
4 + 5^2 = 29 for Neptune
5 + 6^2 = 41 for Pluto
6 + 7^2 = 55 for Kuiper Belt
7 + 8^2 = 71

Now I looked to see how well matched those numbers are
with actual distances, and they match far better than the
old Titius-Bode Rule.

And I took the curiousity of looking to see if the exoplanets of
the last decade follow either one of these Rules:

Here is what I found in Wikipedia on exoplanet distances:

---from Wikipedia---

2008, OGLE-2006-BLG-109Lb and OGLE-2006-BLG-109Lc
On February 14, the discovery of the, until now, most similar Jupiter-
Saturn planetary system constellation was announced, with the ratios
of mass, distance to their star and orbiting time similar to that of
Jupiter-Saturn.

2008; HR 8799
Their masses and separation are approximately 10 MJ @ 24 AU, 10 MJ @
38 AU and 7 MJ @ 68 AU.

List of extrasolar planets
Centaurus at 173 light years away "planet b" has 41 Au

Cancer at 40.9 light years away "planet d" has 5.77 Au
--- end of data from Wikipedia---


What I see in the data of exoplanet orbits is that most of them
are Jupiter sized planets orbiting a star closer than what
Mercury orbits the Sun. This tells me that the pattern or fate
of Stellar Systems is one of which a star eventually swallows
up all of its planets. Whether they become a binary star system
or whether a solo star grows much bigger in the process of swallowing
up.

So eventually our Sun will have Jupiter orbiting close in, and far
closer than what Mercury is orbiting now. Whether our Sun will
have a binary companion star, or whether our Sun will swallow up all
its planets and just grow bigger. It would certainly cast light on the
fact that we seem to be alone in the Cosmos, since we have never been
able to contact alien intelligence. That no
lifeform is able to escape its solar system and gets swallowed up in
the process.

Also, if that speculation is true that civilizations get swallowed
by their own star would be food for thought for humanity, as to
the question of how long does humanity want to live? Do we
want to go out at the first signs of hardship, or do we want to
last for as long as possible? If we want to last for as long as
possible then we would have to start to prepare for making
colonies out into the Kuiper Belt or beyond. So if we as a
civilization, cannot even get our act together on human
overpopulation, nuclear war, and global warming, well, when
things get tough and hot, we are going to be swallowed by
the Sun early on.

Now I need to look up the Tifft quantized galaxy positions or speeds.
I need to see if those Tifft quantizations follows a square pattern as
in the above Jupiter pattern or whether the
Tifft pattern is a pure doubling or halving and not a squaring.
I seem to remember it was a doubling pattern.

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

On Aug 17, 1:00*am, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
snipped

Now I need to look up the Tifft quantized galaxy positions or speeds.
I need to see if those Tifft quantizations follows a square pattern as
in the above Jupiter pattern or whether the
Tifft pattern is a pure doubling or halving and not a squaring.
I seem to remember it was a doubling pattern.


Looked up Tifft quantized redshifts and found this in Wikipedia:
--- quoting Wikipedia ---
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, four studies on redshift
quantization were performed:

In 1989, Martin R. Croasdale reported finding a quantization of
redshifts using a different sample of galaxies in increments of 72 km/
s (Äz=2.4x10-4).[15]
In 1990, Bruce Guthrie and William Napier reported finding a "possible
periodicity" of the same magnitude for a slightly larger data set
limited to bright spiral galaxies and excluding other types[16]
In 1992, Guthrie and Napier proposed the observation of a different
periodicity in increments of Äz=1.24x10-4 in a sample of 89 galaxies
[17]
In 1992, G. Paal, et al. [18] and A. Holba, et al. [19] reanalyzed the
redshift data from a fairly large sample of galaxies and concluded
that there was an unexplained periodicity of redshifts.
In 1994, A. Holba, et al. [20] also reanalyzed the redshift data of
quasars and concluded that there was unexplained periodicity of
redshifts in this sample, too.
--- end quoting ---

So it looks like a linear doubling or halving and not a squaring.

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

On Aug 17, 2:28*am, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:00*am, Archimedes wrote:
snipped
So it looks like a linear doubling or halving and not a squaring.


Well, hold on a moment. I found a website that said this:
--- quoting from the website called Alternate View ---
Are there theories that can explain the effect? Not really.
Gravitational attraction is known to bunch galaxies into clusters of
galaxies with similar red-shifts, but such bunches should be randomly
distributed, not regularly spaced. Tifft's Arizona colleague W. John
Cocke attempted to place the quantized red-shift effect in a
theoretical ad hoc "quantum" framework by hypothesizing a "red shift"
operator constructed to produce discrete recession velocities as
eigenvalues of a wave equation. Cocke's approach, however, did not
yield velocities spaced a even intervals. Instead, the squares of the
velocities were equally spaced in the model. In later theoretical
work, Nieto at Los Alamos devised a mathematical technique for
producing evenly spaced velocities. However there is no physical
justification for such a wave equation or red shift operator, nor is
there any explanation of underlying mechanisms behind the suggested
mathematics.

--- end quoting website---

Interesting that Cocke's math found squaring yields even spaced
intervals. So that the AP-Titius-Bode
Rule of squaring and the force of Coulomb and gravity are inverse
squares. So that squaring is
quantum mechanics.

The trouble with the above and 20th century physics was that they were
blind to anything but a Big Bang
theory. An Atom Totality is a atom, need I say so. If the Universe is
an atom, obviously, everything
inside that atom is quantized.

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

Archimedes Plutonium set the following eddies spiralling through the
space-time continuum:

What I see in the data of exoplanet orbits is that most of them
are Jupiter sized planets orbiting a star closer than what
Mercury orbits the Sun. This tells me that the pattern or fate
of Stellar Systems is one of which a star eventually swallows
up all of its planets. Whether they become a binary star system
or whether a solo star grows much bigger in the process of swallowing
up.

Suppose we were on a planet orbiting around a star 50 or so light years from
the Sun.

(a) With the solar system as it is, would the Sun's "wobble" due to
Jupiter's orbit be detectable with current technology?
(b) If Jupiter occupied Mercury's orbit, would the Sun's "wobble" due to
Jupiter's orbit be detectable with current technology?
(c) If Jupiter orbited the sun at the distance "planet a" and others of that
ilk orbit their primaries, would the Sun's "wobble" due to Jupiter's orbit
be detectable with current technology?
(d) If Earth orbited the sun at the distance "planet a" and others of that
ilk orbit their primaries, would the Sun's "wobble" due to Earth's orbit be
detectable with current technology?

I think the answers to (a), (b) and (d) will be no, and (c) yes. The very
close Jupiter-plus massed planets are the only ones we can currently
detect.
--
ξ Proud to be curly

Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply