Orbits in our solar system proof of divine scientific interference?

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: TerryDon79
they have stabilised themselves the way they have is a bloody miracle though science explains it quite elegantly

Yes... Science does explain it quite elegantly. In fact, we can test these explanations and confirm them ourselves.

That evidence only verifies that the instances in which you're referring to are naturally formed.

You even admitted that the comments that explained how physics and gravity account for this phenomena is valid. So why are you continuing to suggest it's anything else?

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Though I shortened and rounded a few numbers in the OP text, I used the most accurate numbers I could find for the calculations. Mostly the same numbers as given in the NASA stats for the given planets. Period.

Conclusions can be either where you run out of curiosity or when you're satisfied.

The rounding up of numbers isn't honest scientifically, and the difference between observation and modelisation of patterns should not be unaddressed, it's a hint that's there's something else making a mark, and that something else is the next logical step towards satisfying conclusion.

Anything less feeds a dichotomy of dumb #s' manufacturing according to which science is removed from awe, magic, emotion or religion. It is not.

a reply to: wisvol

Well stated, however I don't feel that anything in the OP remotely hint's that there's 'something else making a mark'.

We understand that physics and gravity produce the same results naturally, without any intervention being necessary. The only 'something' that's making a mark is the mark of physics and gravity.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: TerryDon79

All these planets interfere with each others, that they have stabilised themselves the way they have is a bloody miracle though science explains it quite elegantly, but seeing how all these planets express these ratios and geometric shapes, primes and well awesomeness, is pretty awesome.

Awesome yes, the universe itself is awesome, but miraculous no. What could be miraculous would be if it happened some other way, if it defied our understanding of physics and the universe and seemed genuinely random, or in some other way unexplainable. That would be more miraculous, wouldn't it?

==> Why would the synodic alignment of our nearest neighbours in space express the first four regular primes (well actually 5 since Sol would be 1) in perfect order?

Apart from other arguments about acurateness, surley a much better question would be...

why shouldn't it?

originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: TerryDon79

All these planets interfere with each others, that they have stabilised themselves the way they have is a bloody miracle though science explains it quite elegantly, but seeing how all these planets express these ratios and geometric shapes, primes and well awesomeness, is pretty awesome.

Awesome yes, the universe itself is awesome, but miraculous no. What could be miraculous would be if it happened some other way, if it defied our understanding of physics and the universe and seemed genuinely random, or in some other way unexplainable. That would be more miraculous, wouldn't it?

I'd say the approximations of PI and Phi are miracles, I can't see any rational reason why this would happen by chance. Neither do I see why Earth would have a near 360 day calendar, 360 is a special number and is the most rational way to divide a circle to work with fractions and geometry, that's why the ancients chose it. That is a bloody miracle. Like a user mentioned it's also a bloody miracle— although the trolls keep arguing about the split hair difference in apparent sizes— that the relative sizes of our moon and sun are near identical . It's a bloody miracle that the first five primes are listed from center out (and jokingly, Saturn's synodic cycle is 13 days longer than Earth's orbital period so there you have the sixth prime in the sequence). There are soooo many coincidences (or whatever one choose to call it) that one by one can be easily explained using science, but the bloody massive amounts of coincidences makes this whole Solar System a humongous practical joke

==> Why would the synodic alignment of our nearest neighbours in space express the first four regular primes (well actually 5 since Sol would be 1) in perfect order?

Apart from other arguments about acurateness, surley a much better question would be...

why shouldn't it?

Hehe, yeah, why? Why don't the Martian moons cover the sun perfectly? Or any of the other moons of the other planets? Why are these patterns mentioned in the OP ONLY apparent relevant to planet Earth? Oh, that's right Earth has a near perfect 360 day calendar, which is rational and the Universe is all rational. The Sol system is a relatively young solar system even. Earth is one REALLY special planet! We have friends up there...

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

So because the numbers aren't perfect, that means it's perfect?

What the serious he'll have you been smoking?!

Some explain the inaccuracies by an unknown giant orbiting Sol with a very large orbit. Others speculate whether Sol and Sirius are a twin system and that the planet's orbits are interfered by that. Also, our Sol is moving quite fast through space with the various planets swirling after, and we are at an angle with the centre of the galaxy, so maybe that might explain the inaccuracies? I don't know. I am not saying anyone made these planets or Sol, like shaping them and placing them here, but I believe someone out there found this system and selected it for its lovely distribution of planets and that these ETs levelled the system further and seeded life here. There have been many suggestions as to these deviations in the orbits of the planets here, but none conclusive. My guess is the reason why is the Sol system isn't fully stable yet, like atoms and isotopes, I guess solar systems will seek to distribute its planets as rationally as possible in order to stabilise the system. I guess we're just not there quite yet, but things are starting to look real nice.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

pi is not accurate as there is no perfect circle, even if it appears so? a smaller and smaller line segment down to a single pixel... even then? its simply a vibration of light vibrating against the optic nerve dectecting vibration.

in my 3D engineering classes i placed as high a numbered polygon as allowed by the program, then used the circumferance to circumscribe and inscribe the polygon using a circle from the same center point... 3.14159.... was no longer 3.14159 etc. its a varible not a constant. anyone else wanting to do the same? look up how to calculate pi using a hexigon and a circle and try it yourself. it does require a CAD program with a very high polygon wall count for a more accurate calculation.

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

CAD programs like AutoCAD works mostly polygons, not circles as such. If however you'd use a PostScript vector based application like Illustrator which follows certain algorithms which calculates the arcs you'd be able to calculate Pi exactly as a fraction made from the circumference and the diameter, you could never precisely display, draw or print or build the perfect circle with a 100% accuracy in other words displaying the perfect PI, but just about as good as it gets. And Sol, Mercury and the Earth has a great go at it if you ask me.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

imperfection in perfection is good enough for representation of concept is it not? hearken for the echo. different words? same meaning despite the difference of appearances.

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Indeed, sir.

originally posted by: Ghost147

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: TerryDon79
they have stabilised themselves the way they have is a bloody miracle though science explains it quite elegantly

Yes... Science does explain it quite elegantly. In fact, we can test these explanations and confirm them ourselves.

Yes, but could we do this with any other star system out there? Could we expect that the seemingly near perfect symmetry of the Sol system would be the rule for other solar systems? Would the planets around Alpha Centauri behave according to Pi and Phi and have synodic cycles relative to one of its planets showing primes in sequence? NO. Or we just don't know that, and we certainly can't expect that. We don't have inter-stellar capabilities and our optics are hardly good enough. But CCDs are getting smaller and smaller allowing higher and higher resolution, so one day we might map the entire Universe using your mobile phone.

That evidence only verifies that the instances in which you're referring to are naturally formed.

Yes, because the size of the planets and relative orbit due to mass and inertia etc. it's a bloody miracle that the three inner planets move according to Pi and Phi, the mass and inertia of Mercury, Venus is given by their mass and their distance to the sun etc., and Mercury and Venus and the others behave the way they do because of some extreme coincidences that makes the Sol system a universal wonder. Had Venus been just a tad heavier, let's say we added the mass of our moon, we wouldn't have these elegant ratios and all the planets would behave differently since one of the planets changed mass. Had anything been any different relating to the mass of the planets these primes and math constants just wouldn't be there.

You even admitted that the comments that explained how physics and gravity account for this phenomena is valid. So why are you continuing to suggest it's anything else?

Thing is, the Sol System is a bloody joke! Probably to make all the scientists blush when they figure out how elegant and SPECIAL the Sol System is.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: wdkirk

That would depend on what you call God or gods. Jesus says God is love. Are you saying we don't need love? Genesis 1 explains God as the Forces of Nature, and goes on to describe how this God (the Forces of the Universe) made everything in seven stages, and supposedly this process ended with the creation of two humans called Adam and Eve (there were plenty people around when Adam was made). Genesis is a riddle and it even reveals the age of Planet Earth. Supposedly God created everything in 6 stages of 1000 years each, and supposedly one day for God is like 1000 years for us. He is supposed to have rested while Adam and Eve lived and died, about 1000 years where God is resting and Adam sweating. This cycle of creation supposedly started with the creation of the Earth and ended about 6000 years ago with the creation of Adam when God would rest until Noah's kingdom was flooded. Supposedly Adam was a human clone of some demiurge calling himself Jahveh.

6000 x 365.25 x 1000 = 2 191 500 000
5777 x 365.25 x 1000 = 2 110 049 250
SUM = 4 301 549 250 years

According to Google Earth is 4 543 000 000 years old, according to Genesis and the Hebrew calendar Google's almost right. Or maybe God counts the Sabbaths too?

Where do you get 5777 from?

Genesis is a Hebrew book, and it comes with its own calendar, and according to this calendar Adam was conceived almost 5777 years ago. I did this exercise before.

4 301 549 250 Is almost 4 543 000 000
Another almost number. You're only 241.5 MILLION years out on that number. Not a big deal, right?

No, geologically and astronomically speaking there would be controversy or debate around when this ball of dirt could be called a planet. In a little less than thousand years the equation would produce the exact same age as Google. There is talk about a certain «millennium kingdom»? -- That will last 1000 years to complete the 7000 (which God orderly shortened since we would have destroyed ourselves completely does he not intervene) year Creation Cycle of Adam who is Man Divine? The true cycle might be given by certain conjunctions between Saturn and Jupiter, a period of 973 years which gives a date 6811 for God's supposed return to Earth when according to Revelation the New Jerusalem is finished and lowered down and anchored with Earth to turn Earth into a spaceship.

Given this, the equation look like this:

6000 x 365.25 x 1000 = 2 191 500 000
6811 x 365.25 x 1000 = 2 487 717 750
SUM = 4 679 217 750

Which is slightly older than 4 543 000 000 as given by Google (which itself is not exact). Sometimes between now and the end of the millennium kingdom, Earth's age would be perfectly equated using the formula given in Genesis 1 + Psalms. I assume some people might pull up their flag that day.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

who said the forces giving rise to all of this left? neitzche got so tried of arguing this; he declared that force dead so people would leave him the hell alone about it. blind faith is the philosophers cross.

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

In Kabbalah there is a notion about how God left the entire universe when Adam made Eve do the Tango-thing by the Tree in the middle of his garden and involving a certain ex-girlfriend of Adam's who were most skilled in all the dances and jives, she did the serpent better than anyone and knew everything about, you know, Daath

You're getting cause and effect backwards I think.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

correlation has no causation it is only proof of concept that depends on another concept and another concept to infinity. this is the truth at the end of occams razor. why not seek better than grasping at straws unless one is a rumanate and enjoys eating it. the cow is concidered sacred because it has 4 stomachs and yet still mulls over what lands on its tongue.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: Ghost147

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: TerryDon79
they have stabilised themselves the way they have is a bloody miracle though science explains it quite elegantly

Yes... Science does explain it quite elegantly. In fact, we can test these explanations and confirm them ourselves.

Yes, but could we do this with any other star system out there?

That was my very question I made in the OP, and the very question I continued to ask throughout most of the pages of this topic. So far you have yet to answer it.

Go ahead and do it to more star systems, to the rest of the planets in this one, so on and so forth. The result is that what you've concluded is an effect of physics and gravity.

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
Could we expect that the seemingly near perfect symmetry of the Sol system would be the rule for other solar systems?

We could come up with whatever we want. You've picked and chose what information to keep and what to leave out so your preconceived conclusion was accurate. You stopped doing your calculations when the results didn't apply to your premise.

Yes, the numbers are there, but:
~ they are from a subjective perspective only
~ they assume Earths orbit means anything in the first place
~ they round to the nearest 10 in order to look less random
~ they assume magnitudes of 10 mean anything in the first place.
~ they ignore the fact that all of these orbits aren't finite, nor have they ever been

Using all this 'miracle concluding' 'logic', we can make a miracle out of anything.

It's easy when you ignore everything that goes against your theory.

originally posted by: Ghost147

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: Ghost147

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: TerryDon79
they have stabilised themselves the way they have is a bloody miracle though science explains it quite elegantly

Yes... Science does explain it quite elegantly. In fact, we can test these explanations and confirm them ourselves.

Yes, but could we do this with any other star system out there?

That was my very question I made in the OP, and the very question I continued to ask throughout most of the pages of this topic. So far you have yet to answer it.

If you had say 10 balls of a random variety of mass and you put them around a random star, excuse me, but would you expect to see these balls list primes in order from center out? Could we expect that the closest planet to its star, would reveal PI when aligning with another planet in the system and the Sun, and then the next planet showing PHI or perhaps some other mathematical constants? Relative to one of the planets which in the name of coincidence also harbours advanced life? THAT my friend would not be the likely scenario. The Sol system is one special system, and Earth is one hell of a practical joke, the gods up there are all humouring us. What we see in our system would only be seen out there (given the star systems are stable) if everything mass/inertia-wise were identical to the Sol system's planets.

Go ahead and do it to more star systems, to the rest of the planets in this one, so on and so forth. The result is that what you've concluded is an effect of physics and gravity.

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
Could we expect that the seemingly near perfect symmetry of the Sol system would be the rule for other solar systems?

We could come up with whatever we want. You've picked and chose what information to keep and what to leave out so your preconceived conclusion was accurate. You stopped doing your calculations when the results didn't apply to your premise.

No, I was talking about «the seven wandering stars» whose mysterious nature has puzzled the wise since before antiquity, and they dance and turn up there according to some pretty amazing ratios and odd coincidences, and the chances for that to happen just the way it does in the Sol system, elsewhere, is about as far as we know, impossible. And if you ask me, the curious ordering of our nearest planets show clear signs of some pretty advanced scientists riding round the universe with planet-sized spaceships shaping and adjusting planets like we would rocks and snowballs. There is just no coincidence. Even Kepler admits that. It is curious and pretty awesome.

Yes, the numbers are there, but:
~ they are from a subjective perspective only

No. If Earth had 700 days in a year, these planet alignments would appear exactly in the same way, drawing these cyclic stars both in heliocentric and geocentric perspective. Earth is one special planet as I told you about a million times now. These stars I posted in the OP are real (and btw, you have misunderstood the word OP), whether you use the Earth year or you use a 360° system. They just happen to be almost the same. You could also have used a 420° system, these ratios would appear just the same. These proportions would show up anyway, they are based on each planets' orbits counted in Earth days, since that is the universal standard measures humans use.

~ they assume Earths orbit means anything in the first place

It is relevant, since the only advanced hominids we know about in the whole universe live there, walking about telling stories of ancient encounters with extraterrestrial interference, hey, even the whole seeding life here and making «all the morning stars dance of joy» or «make the Earth behave like a drunkard». At one point science will need to address the massive amount of these epic coincidences involved with the orbits of our neighbouring planets relative to the Sun and Earth. That Earth has almost exactly 360 days orbit is also an epic coincidence. To divide a circle into 360 arc degrees is simply the most rational system and it gets even better in base-12 than in base-10. There is no secret why they call the guy up there «The Great Architect». There is no coincidence that we humans use the 360° system. It has nothing to do with Earth's orbit to others than the ones who see the massive amounts of apparent coincidences.

And that mass, gravity and inertia has all agreed to let the closest planet move relative to the Sun and Earth according to the golden proportion is ANOTHER epic coincidence. If the Sol system was a coincidence, that was probably the reason the Elohim guys turned their spaceships around and seeded life here, adjusting the planets just a little bit so there is continuation and the whole clockwork working like highly functional calendar, where the different planets move in fixed cycles that keep progressing over relatively short periods of time.

~ they round to the nearest 10 in order to look less random
~ they assume magnitudes of 10 mean anything in the first place.
~ they ignore the fact that all of these orbits aren't finite, nor have they ever been

That would be your most powerful venom. If it made any sense. There is no questioning the apparent PHI ratio between the orbits of Earth and Venus. Days doesn't matter, we align with the Sun together with Venus at a ratio which is almost exactly the golden proportion.

Using all this 'miracle concluding' 'logic', we can make a miracle out of anything.

It's easy when you ignore everything that goes against your theory.

It's not a bloody theory, I just present the evidence, make your own conclusion, I suspect divine interference and I see this solar system as a huge practical joke subtly reminding us that we are subjects to a kind of power and might that makes your jaw drop when you realise it. It's not my fault you donot see this.

a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

Had this here simmering in my head for a while and the only way I can see this turns out— is that at one point these patterns store pretty damn much energy and that this could or would interfere with or even be central in producing stuff like gravity, or even time and that this state we're in just now in space-time, may change as the result of this, like long before we'd be using Jupiter to refuel Sol when or if it ever runs out of hydrogen, and we'd be better off preparing the Earth to become our spaceship into cosmos, riding our planet like it was some sort of comet? Does or could Sol accumulate some sort of awareness of this interplanetary «resonance conundrum?» Is our system alive?

To me this Sol system looks like some sort of counting device for prime factorisation perhaps to function as some sort of calibration remedy for this entire space-time continuum. It could be used to store quite a bit of information, like a computer (Hashem comes to mind...). A kind of stellar post-it note, a remedy for star travellers to synchronise their watches to make way and time in space-time. Or some sort of clock for interstellar journeys in case you'd lost track of time and space in other words.

What if— I at one point in another time and place, returned to this time here in the Sol system 2016 intentionally and that the buzzer would be a simple algorithm having to do with synchronicity and resonance? Am I really an interstellar time traveller? You guys too? What if our minds are entities that travel through space programmed to recognise and lock-on to worlds showing these kind of patterns in order to be more likely to experience beauty the time you're here?

Just about everything here on this planet and experienced from this here point in space— is beyond awesome in some respect. We do inhabit an incredibly beautiful and well organised and balanced oasis in space. It's pretty amazing really. I bet it's the first thing we will change to make our place in space to seem less likely to inhabit any sentient beings, hence hide our asses so the ants from space forget all about us and we can live inside a giant glacier inside what? A box Quadropolis/Octapolis the size of a small moon, to discover a new planet under a new heaven, like in the stories in my favorite iron-age book talk about? †

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

Orbits in our solar system proof of divine interence?

No.

The answer is no.

someone on here once said that if a thread title ends in a question mark the answer is always no.

I bet that was one heavy thinker.