Saturn rocking back and forth?? What if CW Leonis were really Nibiru? Link inside.

reply to post by TLOCKE


Here is a video from someone in Canada showing the sun doing the impossible. His camera is taking a pic every 10 minutes, then shows the sun set, move across the horizon then rise again. Turn down your sound, he added terrible music to it.



That's earth wobble??

reply to post by TLOCKE


If the world had shifted or tilted as much as you suggest, then all of the astronomical tables would have to be rewritten. People would not be able to point their telescopes with such a change. A very slight shift of the sitting person would cause a similar change as would a slight lean of 3 dead trees.

reply to post by twitchy


It seems you have no idea what the electric universe theory is all about. Try looking it up.

The claim is that EM forces shape the universe. Not so. Are there charged particles? Of course? Do they keep the planets in orbit and shape the galaxies? No.

reply to post by KSprepared


If the person was a little farther north or closer to the solstice then the Sun would not set.

Have you been that far north, above the Arctic circle? If you have then you know that the Sun never sets. The Sun goes around in a circle. The video was very clippy, yet it shows a normal passage of the Sun at high latitudes. Image how long the sunsets last there. Very beautiful.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by twitchy

 

It seems you have no idea what the electric universe theory is all about. Try looking it up.

The claim is that EM forces shape the universe. Not so. Are there charged particles? Of course? Do they keep the planets in orbit and shape the galaxies? No.

Actually I'm familiar with the Electric Universe theory, just really put off by your statement that there are no "interactions between plus and minus charges" in the universe, that's pretty ignorant. I'm not a physicist, but the Electric Universe theory is gaining momentum and while, IMO, it probably isn't the Holy Grail of Cosmology that some of it's proponents think it is, it certainly fills in some gaps that thermonuclear leaves us guessing at.
Sorry, but I don't think denying interractions between positive and negative charges is much of a debunking of the EU theory, and well, it just doesn't speak well for you.
Charged particles keeping planets in orbit? I guess I missed that one when I read about the EU theory.

reply to post by twitchy

"interactions between plus and minus charges" in the universe, that's pretty ignorant.

Tell me where the solar system or universe is being shaped by charges. Are you actually pretending that some minuscule amount of mass is important here?

I'm not a physicist, but the Electric Universe theory is gaining momentum...

Actually it was dead a long time ago. The only support for it comes from charlatans and those that pay the charlatans to write another hoax book on the subject.

Sorry, but I don't think denying interractions between positive and negative charges is much of a debunking of the EU theory, and well, it just doesn't speak well for you.

As I mentioned before you might want to read a little about it. You certainly have little idea what it is about.

Charged particles keeping planets in orbit? I guess I missed that one when I read about the EU theory.

Not only do you make a claim I did not make, but you again show how little you know about the EU hoax theory.

For those with a limited understanding of the EU theory (actually a large collection)

Here is one place
www.electricuniverse.info...

Galaxy formation and dynamics (circumventing the need for black holes and dark matter)

And another
Planets

In the Electric Universe model, gravity itself is simply an electrostatic dipolar force. So planetary orbits are stabilized against gravitational chaos by exchange of electric charge through their plasma tails

Planets will quickly assume orbits that ensure the least electrical interaction. Impacts between large bodies are avoided and capture rendered more probable by exchange of electric charge between them.

Originally posted by stereologist
Not only do you make a claim I did not make, but you again show how little you know about the EU hoax theory.

Originally posted by stereologist
The problem with the electric universe is that it involves interactions between plus and minus charges. Nothing of that sort is detected or observed in the universe.

You should try to sit back and relax, it's ok for other people to talk about things you don't believe in. It really is. I've not shown anything other than your error, and EU isn't a hoax, it's a theory. Why does that anger you?

The last picture of Saturn in the OP piece - the one that is kind of golden brown and perpendicular (ring-wise) to the bottom of the photograph - I found on the GLP site. Then I noticed that in the OP piece it is attributed to GLP Observatory. What is that?

The photo both here and on the GLP site is too blurry to distinguish southern or northern hemispheres. Without a storm in one hemisphere that could be seen and verified as to hemisphere, I think it would be a tough road as an amateur astronomer with an amateur telescope to distinguish the hemispheres even in a very sharp picture.

We know that the storm is in the northern hemisphere and that it is out of season because it's spring there now. There is a record of data back to Galileo in the 1600's to show which hemisphere should tilt towards us on Earth and when.

Rounding off the numbers, Saturn orbits the sun in about 29 years and every 14.5 or so years, Saturn's rings almost disappear because of their angle towards us on earth. Every 14 or so years we also see maximum ring width. So we see minimum ring width, then about 7 years later we see maximum ring width and one of the hemispheres, then 7 or so years later we again see minimum ring width and lastly, 7 or so years later we again see maximum ring width and the other hemisphere.

In March of 2003, Saturn's rings were at maximum tilt towards earth with the best view of the southern hemisphere.

In 2009 by late summer the rings should have been at their almost disappeared stage. I haven't really been able to find anything but sort of 'it's coming' articles on this so I'm just assuming that it took place.

Right now the rings from our earth view should be widening again and here would seem to be the best way for an amateur astronomer with telescope to track whether something is off or not. Track it by ring width from earth view. Forget upside down or right side up because the hemispheres for an amateur with amateur equipment will be hard to distinguish. With ring width it's not going to matter if the image is inverse (left to right) or not.

Just my thoughts on the OP and the tilt of Saturn and here follow the search criteria:

NASA JPL 'Saturn Observation Campaign' 'Viewing Saturn 2011'

curtrenz. com 'Saturn 05' 'Thirty Oppositions of Saturn'

NASA JPL 'Saturn Observation Campaign' Viewing Saturn in 2008'

brahms.phy.vanderbilt.edu 'Astronomy 103, Spring 2007' 'Saturn'

msnbc.msn.com 'Space' 'Saturn's rings tilted for optimum viewing'

nyskies 'Saturn Ring Crossings' John Pazmino 2006 Jan 26

NASA 'Saturn Stars in Three Hubble Movies'

...there are easier ways to verify that things are off that don't include telescopes, amateurs or Saturn but since this is the OP and we're doing it the hard way, this is my suggestion.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
The photo both here and on the GLP site is too blurry to distinguish southern or northern hemispheres. Without a storm in one hemisphere that could be seen and verified as to hemisphere, I think it would be a tough road as an amateur astronomer with an amateur telescope to distinguish the hemispheres even in a very sharp picture.

First of all, the saturn test pictures were being taken by people who were just starting out in astrophotography and made no attempt to stack images to improve the signal to noise ratio. Second of all, it's really simple, all you have to do as an amateur is take a picture of saturn, take a long exposure picture revealing the stars and moons around saturn, astrometrically solve the latter pic, put the two together and you have a fool-proof way of verifying that Saturn's tilt is normal.

Forget upside down or right side up because the hemispheres for an amateur with amateur equipment will be hard to distinguish.

It's not hard at all once you know what you're doing.

reply to post by twitchy

I've not shown anything other than your error, and EU isn't a hoax, it's a theory. Why does that anger you?

You did not show me making an error. What I did was show your ignorance of the EU theories.

Do I mind a challenge? Not at all. Please be sure to get your ducks in a row next time.

It isn't a theory in the scientific sense of the word. It's a guess and a rather bad one considering what is known today.

reply to post by ngchunter


My way all that is needed is an amateur (assuming eyes in the amateur) and a telescope and Saturn available in the night sky. I like it - it's neat, tidy and self-reliant.

And it's always nice to have an idea of the current norm which I'll take from NASA JPL 'Saturn Observation Campaign' 'Viewing Saturn in 2011'

"And this year Saturn's rings are more inclined than last year - tilted close to 10 degrees in January, dipping down to 7 degrees tilt in June, tipped up to 11 degrees wide in October, and to nearly 15 degrees by January 2010!" [exclamation point in original text]

"March 2011:...The ring tilt narrows to 9 degrees open this month."

"April 2011:...From now through July, the ring inclination tilts narrower."

"May 2011: You'll get a great view of almost edge-on rings this month, as the ring tilt narrows to a scant 1.9 degrees..."

"August 2011:...and the rings are open over 8 degrees..."

"September 2011: Saturn disappears from the evening sky this month, as it nears its conjunction with the sun. That's too bad, because the rings are opening wider this month."

"October 2011:...It is worth getting up early to see the rings, which have widened to an opening tilt of 11.1 degrees." [this would be getting up early on the last few days of October and continuing that in November]

"November 2011:...The ring tilt is now 12.6 degrees..."

"December 2011: Saturn's magnificent ring tilt show continues to increase from 8.1 to 9.1 this month."

There are records dating back 400+ years describing the rings and how they should look in any season and year. There are also records giving oppositions and conjunctions going back in time and also going forward in time from times in the past.

reply to post by luxordelphi


Be careful about the earliest records. Galileo would be the first observer through a telescope and due to his limited optics he described the rings as horns.

spacetheology.blogspot.com...

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by luxordelphi

 

Be careful about the earliest records. Galileo would be the first observer through a telescope and due to his limited optics he described the rings as horns.

spacetheology.blogspot.com...

That was a truly interesting story and site as well. I had read somewhere that at some point Galileo also thought that Saturn was 3 planets all lined up in a row that grew and then, of course, 2 of them disappeared.

reply to post by luxordelphi


It is important for people to think about achievements in their context. Here is Galileo looking at objects he has no idea about other than accounts from naked eye observations. Then he has to deal with an instruments he must be well aware of as not quite right. It is the best he can get. Still he is able to persevere. He works through a number of possibilities. It's quite an achievement.

Here is a much more complete version of the OP I just found posted:

docs.google.com...

It has all the missing pages.

reply to post by KSprepared


I see that the child that wrote this thing has learned how to remove blank pages from a PDF.

Here is a really funny comment from the paper. It now includes a density calculation.

Density: 1.965 g/cm3 (solid) or up to 5.242 g/cm3 if it is composed purely of iron oxide

Isn't that hysterical. The nut doesn't understand that the density is not altered by composition. What a nut! The range of densities also does not match the mass and dimension values.

This is even funnier. It's the composition.

Composition: possibly cesium, iron oxide, iron, oxygen, ozone; other substances unknown

It lists ozone as part of the composition. The nut probably doesn't understand that ozone is highly reactive.

As for the the rest of the idiotic claims they appear to be unchanged.

Yes, we have nothing here that makes sense. The only difference is that there is more nonsense in one place.

reply to post by KSprepared

Here is a much more complete version of the OP I just found posted:

docs.google.com...

It has all the missing pages.

Why not simply admit that you're the author of this "document?" As you can see, it's an epic fail. Why try to keep it going?

He has also said that the sun should be entering it's magnetic field around August 3rd, and there have been some magnetic anomalies going on in the sun the last couple days. We'll see if they increase in size and frequency during the next few days.

reply to post by KSprepared


Sounds like you are grasping at straws here or just making up the claims of magnetic anomalies.

The PDF is just a whopping pack of mistakes. It really is hard to believe someone could make that many mistakes.