planets orbit like their stars vibrate ?

[nebel]

<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/12/181212134352.htm>.
highly recommended reading and images in the above Science daily article.
In the OP, and our solar system, the finished product, there is a correlation between stellar seismology, resonances and planetary spacings, even at the scale of .3 AU. to 9.6 AU, seven octaves.
Will all these proto planetary disks have cleared, and andsettled into a pattern like we have here?and
ehat came first, the Eigenschwingung of the "cloud", disk or the star? or a point in time or size, where it rings the bell? ?

 

[nebel]

How to look inside a star with artificial intelligence and sound waves
A pair of astronomers has found a way to peer inside the hidden hearts of stars, revealing their age, composition, and more.
By Chelsea Gohd | Published: Tuesday, November 27,
"It’s based on the fact that stars aren’t solid objects — far from it, in fact. They’re intense, vibrating balls of plasma"
" specific frequencies, just as flutes or guitars or pianos have specific “tones” and “overtones” (or harmonics). So from the tones, we deduce how big the star is, as the sound probes the size of the “concert hall”. So for us, a star is a gigantic 3D musical instrument, and its sound waves probe the physical conditions in its interior.”
"Kepler observed the sound waves of tens of thousands of stars and TESS is expected to observe the sound waves of up to one million red giants."

Just confirming by selected quotes from this article in "Astronomy" magazine, how massive the pulsation of stars are, and can be triggered. With this, perhaps one day, another correlation between planet orbits and wavelength of resonances of the central mass might be found, as is with the 5 minute, 160 minute , ~.3 AU and~ 9.6 AU orbital differences, in our inhabited solar system.

 

[nebel]

University of Warwick. "Baby star's fiery tantrum could create the building blocks of planets." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 21 December 2018. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/12/181221123729.htm>

"Detection of a giant flare displaying quasi-periodic pulsations from a pre-main-sequence M star by the Next Generation Transit Survey. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 2019; 482 (4): 5553 DOI: 10.1093/mnras/sty3036 hereby
Just underlining the possibility that conditions, including pulsations, resonances, - early in star, disk formations can determine orbit sizes. That planets now orbit like their stars once resonated. and perhaps still do.

 

[nebel]

"--These internal oscillations cause the density at any particular place within the planet to fluctuate, which makes the gravitational field outside the planet oscillate at the same frequencies.
"Particles in the rings feel this oscillation in the gravitational field. At places where this oscillation resonates with ring orbits, energy builds up and gets carried away as a wave," explained Christopher Mankovich, a graduate student in astronomy and astrophysics at UC Santa Cruz.
excerpt from :
<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190118123019.htm>.

True, this is speaking of Saturn, but the principle of vibrations inside a body, particularly of a star, to really influence the exterior, via the gravitational field,-- is corroborated. Star pulsations are more powerful than Saturn,'s.

 

[nebel]

"--In the same way that a bell rings and creates pressure waves that jiggle our eardrums, a spinning Saturn produces gravitational oscillations that herd particles in the rings into filaments. The filaments form visible spiral patterns within the rings, revealing motions deep inside the planet that can be linked to its rotation speed--" quoted from:
"The answer was hiding in the planet’s rings." article ByNadia Drake The New York Times, Jan 25
At least on this small scale, oscillations will shape orbiting particles.

 

[nebel]

"These magnetic waves, known as Alfvénic waves, play a crucial role in transporting energy around the Sun and the solar systemThe team discovered that the sound waves leave a distinctive marker on the magnetic waves. The presence of this marker means that the Sun's entire corona is shaking in a collective manner in response to the sound waves. This is causing it to vibrate over a very clear range of frequencies"
Northumbria University. "Evidence for a new fundamental constant of the sun." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 7 February 2019. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190207111256.htm>.
reminder: stars transport their vibrations into their proto planetary disks.

 

[nebel]

"The interference of the original and reflected waves leads to a standing wave pattern, in which specific points appear to be standing still while others vibrate back and forth. A drum resonates like this when struck in exactly the same way."
quoted from Science Daily:
Queen Mary University of London. "Earth's magnetic shield booms like a drum when hit by impulses." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 12 February 2019. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190212081540.htm>
By way of comparison only,described here is action in the inter planetary space producing standing waves, although not directly related, the solar system can be viewed as a pattern of standing waves, with activity in the Sun as origin.

 

[nebel]

Waves from the Sun can perhaps do the impossible, heat the corona to 200 times higher temperature than the underlying source source, interfere with each other, create standing wave patterns, that reach millions of kms into the planetary field. Possibilities. outlined in this link. Not asserting that planets were spaced apart like that, but the very basic unrelated pattern outlined in this link:
National Institutes of Natural Sciences. "Mystery of coronal heating problem: Magnetically driven resonance helps heat sun's atmosphere." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 24 August 2015. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/08/150824064742.htm>.

 

[nebel]

Here is just one sentence from the link below, showing how pulsations at a large scale can be sorting out elements, and as in this thread: perhaps orbits?.
"We don't understand this combination of pollutants, but one of our ideas is that extreme blasts of supernovae caused the galaxy to pulsate in size during its adolescence, in a way that retains magnesium preferentially to iron," said Romanowsky. (Bold added) quoted from
ScienceDaily, 27 February 2019. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190227111123.htm>.

 

[globali]

i am really confused. What is this all about? can you briefly explain? where is the new alternative theory?

 

[nebel]

where is the new alternative theory?

globali, please read post #24, page#2. basically, using the speed of light to convert Eigenschwingungen found in the Sun, the 5 min frequency, and 160 min vibes , into distance, you will have wave lengths of
300 light seconds, which equals~ .3 AU*** (coinciding with the smallest orbital distance between Mercury, Venus and Earth respectively) and ~9,6 AU ( corresponding with the largest orbital diameter difference between Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto respectively). and a central section of
doublings of spacings , octave -like, between Earth to Mars, to the Asteroids, to Jupiter and then Saturn. (to Uranus,to Pluto too) ---so, 2 equal series at the beginning and end, centrally: 5 octaves apart.
All a pattern reminiscent of a standing wave arrangement.
*** Easy to see because the diameter of 1 AU is ~ 1000 light seconds.
Confirmation is sought in other entities, where, like by action of sound or other waves, in other media.- matter, or charges might congregate in "node" areas; -- or not. thank you.

 

[globali]

you are saying that planets can only orbit the sun at very specific and predetermined orbit radii, something like the electrons and the nucleus, but instead of spin you use AU?

 

[globali]

300 light seconds, which equals~ .3 AU*** (coinciding with the smallest orbital distance between Mercury, Venus and Earth respectively)

Are you saying that the distance between Mercury-Venus is the same as Venus-Earth?


Also what about the Kuiper zone objects?

 

[nebel]

Are you saying that the distance between Mercury-Venus is the same as Venus-Earth?

globali, Yes, within 5 % (0%,for Earth , 01% for Jupiter!), all orbit data conform to the theoretical "Bode" numbers. expressed in distances: Mercury +3, +3,+6,+12,+24 = Jupiter,+48, +96, +96, +96=Pluto. I am proposing a modified Bode/Titius scheme. and yes.
the 3 inner planets have ~ 300 light seconds between their orbit diameter, the outer planets ~160 light minutes. so. There is a geometric series of halving orbital diameter differences starting with Pluto inward and ending at Mercury, with no planets below Venus because of the .3AU minimum.

Also what about the Kuiper zone objects?

please go to post# 50 page #3: partial quote:
"Here is the correlation: The Perihelion of Sedna is 76 AU, the next Bode position after Pluto is 2x 388 = 776, within 5%, 77.6 AU of the quoted Sedna Perihelion clustering of other TNOs."
so, while the wild data of 120 AU. 140AU for planet 9, 10 or X produce no match in the continued doubling into the Kuiper zone, One would expect a standing wave effect from the source, the Major Mass , the Sun in the system to wane with distance. thank you.

 

[globali]

globali, Yes, within 5 % (0%,for Earth , 01% for Jupiter!), all orbit data conform to the theoretical "Bode" numbers. expressed in distances: Mercury +3, +3,+6,+12,+24 = Jupiter,+48, +96, +96, +96=Pluto. I am proposing a modified Bode/Titius scheme. and yes.
the 3 inner planets have ~ 300 light seconds between their orbit diameter

Wait! I may be a layman in physics, but i know that the distances must be exact in order to fit the mathematics of a model. Natural phenomena do not happen "approximately"

The theory of relativity was confirmed because it predicted a 3 degree perihelion procession of Mars. Those 3 degrees are super critical.

A quick check i did revealed that Mercury-Venus is 0.34AU and Venus-Earth is 0.28AU. This means a difference by an entire 8%, which rules out the claim that the distances are equal.

Calculations are out by 8.6 million kilometers!!!!

 

[nebel]

Wait! I may be a layman in physics, but i know that the distances must be exact in order to fit the mathematics of a model. Natural phenomena do not happen "approximately"

globali, point well taken, but au contraire, in many models vs theory, here is scattering about the predicted curve, caused by other factors. (see main sequence stars for example)

Here are the data to 3 decimals past 0 as compared to the model, Mercury 4, Venus 7, Earth 10, Mars 16 Jupiter 52


Mercury0.387 AU

vs 4 = 3.25 % deviation
Venus0.723 AU

vs 7 = 3.18% deviation.
Earth1.000 AU

vs 10 = 0% the one that counts, No. 1, us, right on.
Mars1.524 AU
vs 16 = 4.75%
Jupiter = .5.203
vs 52 = .o39 % deviation (over 90% of the planetary mass within 4/10 000!)
sorry for the mess, but
measured against the theory, the model, none of the planets vary more than 5% from the predicted position. now: for the reasons for the deviations: " love of Neat Resonances" might be of interest.

The theory of relativity was confirmed because it predicted a 3 degree perihelion procession of Mars. Those 3 degrees are super critical.

Yes, the precession of Mercury clinched it for Einstein, but we are dealing here with broader strokes, 300 year old concepts, surprisingly valid nevertheless imho.
May I add: looking at the data, and plotting them against the wave model that we did in the 80s,
none of the planets would be more than 5 % off the low point, node, the trough of the standing waves.

 

[globali]

globali, point well taken, but au contraire, in many models vs theory, here is scattering about the predicted curve, caused by other factors.

Like what other factors?

 

[nebel]

Like what other factors?

Assuming that the hypothesis of prevailing massive solar resonances are valid and predominant, other factors might be the competing resonances of orbiting bodies, like Jupiter that are responsible for asteroid gaps and/or accumulations. Case in point might be Mars, near a Jupiter yearly resonance, and it's position might be the balancing point between the Sun's tugs and the Big planet further away. Consider too, that these solar pulsation were a feature of an earlier, stronger, more youthful star, as a link above asserts.

As a point of interest, I, being stuck on a tropical island, worked on the "Bode law", and insights are always gained where a "law" fails. Analyzing the .035 % to 4.75% deviations in miles (I was working from American tables) the figure 186 000 came up as a common factor, which send my into the direction of "c" and the solar resonance match. Prefer km/sc. thank you.

 

[river]

And rotation .

 

[globali]

Assuming that the hypothesis of prevailing massive solar resonances are valid and predominant, other factors might be the competing resonances of orbiting bodies, like Jupiter

Earth is revolving only around the sun. You are talking about permissive orbits here.

And in any case, the distance Mercury-Venus is 10% more than the distance Venus-Earth. If Jupiter played a role you would expect the opposite.