Earth Was a Moon of Saturn

[saul]

Occam's razor says no chance.

How could a large moon of Saturn relax to a near circular orbit at 1/9 the distance in less than 1 million years?

How could a large object (Saturn) on a hyperbolic orbit (capture scenario) relax to low-eccentricity near circular orbit in less than a million years?

Zeus was the son of Kronos, does that mean Jupiter was also a moon of Saturn?

Exact literal scientific interpretation of ancient and poorly translated mythologies will not always be accurate.

[Lloyd]

* Saul, the Thunderbolts team members are a lot more professional than you're imagining. They've studied these matters for about 40 years. The ancient myths from around the world have many common themes, which include descriptions of Saturn, Venus and Mars, but not the Sun, which latter was only "enthroned" later. The myths about Zeus etc are not as ancient as others and I don't know if the team members have made any determination if Jupiter was originally described in the most ancient myths. Ev Cochrane's site is http://maverickscience.com/ and there's not much there about Jupiter. The Saturn System appears to have broken up about 4,500 years ago and Jupiter doesn't seem to have been mentioned much in myths describing events before that.
* Since you're relying on conventional science's uniformitarian assumptions, you naturally have trouble imagining that orbits can change much more quickly than supposed by them. Conventional science ignores the possibility that electrical effects could be involved in cosmic phenomena. Yet, there's vast evidence to the contrary, as shown in this sites TPODs. Comets routinely change orbits very quickly and there's no reason planets can't do so as well, especially if they enter the Solar System from the outside and are captured, which is the hypothesis regarding the ancient Saturn System. It's also considered that that system behaved much like a cometary system, similar to the way the SL9 fragments behaved and the way Herbig-Haro objects behave.

[Lloyd]

* This video shows some of the evidence of the first sun-god being Saturn: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH-AJ2wDL_w&feature=autoplay&list=PLB9E8945CC21AF0E6&lf=results_main&playnext=2.

[nick c]

How could a large moon of Saturn relax to a near circular orbit at 1/9 the distance in less than 1 million years?

How could a large object (Saturn) on a hyperbolic orbit (capture scenario) relax to low-eccentricity near circular orbit in less than a million years?

Why not? What is the basis for your assertion that great amounts of time are needed to circularize or radically transform orbits? When the fact is that long periods of time make Newtonian orbits unpredictable as per the n-body problem.

Comets have been observed to have their orbits radically altered in a matter of days. Jupiter captured a comet and held it for 12 years as a satellite after which the comet escaped and went back into an orbit of the Sun, and this case is not unique.

As more and more exo solar systems are discovered we are finding out that our thoughts on what is 'typical' are in need of revision. There seem to be some unexpected arrangements between stars and their planets. I think that you are being much too hasty in invoking Occam's Razor. Perhaps some of the elements of the Saturn hypothesis will be supported as new information comes in.

[StalkingGoogle]

Jupiter captured a comet and held it for 12 years as a satellite after which the comet escaped and went back into an orbit of the Sun, and this case is not unique.

I really don't think this is a good example of anything except the delusions of astronogers, who didn't observe what you cite, but calculated it (predicting the past) based on models that anyone reading this forum should know are wrong.

As more and more exo solar systems are discovered we are finding out that our thoughts on what is 'typical' are in need of revision.

Again, these "exo solar systems" are likely just the delusions of astronogers, who use things like variations in light intensity from a star that changes over hours and days to conclude that there are jupiter-sized planets orbiting stars are absurdly close distances and at preposterous and untenable speeds. Try again here.

[StalkingGoogle]

Zeus was the son of Kronos, does that mean Jupiter was also a moon of Saturn?

Or perhaps both split from the same body, maybe Jupiter didn't even exist if and when Saturn was its own star with planets orbiting it.

[nick c]

Jupiter captured a comet and held it for 12 years as a satellite after which the comet escaped and went back into an orbit of the Sun, and this case is not unique.

I really don't think this is a good example of anything except the delusions of astronogers, who didn't observe what you cite, but calculated it (predicting the past) based on models that anyone reading this forum should know are wrong.

The point is that comets have been observed to be captured and/or change orbits. There are many examples including one that was observed to actually collide with Jupiter. If enough force is applied to any body in orbit around the Sun it can change it's orbit. Millions of years are not required.

Again, these "exo solar systems" are likely just the delusions of astronogers, who use things like variations in light intensity from a star that changes over hours and days to conclude that there are jupiter-sized planets orbiting stars are absurdly close distances and at preposterous and untenable speeds. Try again here.

I think that the technique for detecting exo planets may not be perfect, but I have not read any criticisms that totally discount the method. Certainly statements as to the mass or size of the planets may be imprecise and have an element of conjecture, but until shown otherwise, I will tentatively accept that exo planets (in close proximity to their primarys) have been discovered.

[saul]

Thanks for your replies Nick and Lloyd.

The point is that comets have been observed to be captured and/or change orbits. There are many examples including one that was observed to actually collide with Jupiter. If enough force is applied to any body in orbit around the Sun it can change it's orbit. Millions of years are not required.

The examples you give show objects whose paths are altered due to a gravitational close encounter, and the resulting orbits are more eccentric than the original orbits. While gravitational capture occurs, circularization requires frictional / electromagnetic / tidal forces and AFAIK these can only circularize an orbit over enormous time scales. There is plenty of evidence that large elliptical orbits are stable, including ancient encounters with the comet Halley and cometary families which are still relatively compact.

A Newtonian n-body simulation applicable to the hypothesis is not difficult to run cheaply. Try to find a set of initial conditions in a stellar system for which a incoming object (hyperbolic orbit) is changed to a near circular one; you will find it very difficult.. you will need some large planets in exactly the right place. Now add a moon to that incoming object and arrange the initial conditions so that this moon becomes a close orbiting satellite of the star. The probability of this scenario seems so low as to be effectively zero.

Or am I missing something about the hypothesis?

I think that the technique for detecting exo planets may not be perfect, but I have not read any criticisms that totally discount the method. Certainly statements as to the mass or size of the planets may be imprecise and have an element of conjecture, but until shown otherwise, I will tentatively accept that exo planets (in close proximity to their primarys) have been discovered.

I agree that there is good evidence for spectroscopic as well as eclipsing exoplanets, with some planets observed with both methods, by different teams at different time. The thing to keep in mind is the strong observational bias towards large planets close to their stars. These are the ones that will be seen first because they are the easiest to see with these techniques. It doesn't mean that these are the most common types of planets or that smaller planets are rare.

[Lloyd]

Orbit Circularization

Saul said: While gravitational capture occurs, circularization requires frictional / electromagnetic / tidal forces and AFAIK these can only circularize an orbit over enormous time scales.

* The Millennium Group had this paper on the subject, http://tmgnow.com/repository/cometary/ori5.html, which calculates that a body with an elliptical orbit near Jupiter would circularize near Venus in 700 years. Their assumptions are likely somewhat different from the TB team's assumptions.
* Here's Wal's ideas.
Assembling the Solar System, by Wal Thornhill
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=7y7d3dn5&pf=YES
Proto-Saturn Flares
... Brown dwarfs are noted for their occasional inexplicable polar jets and “flaring.” As explained in my electric stars article, stars that do not have bright, tufted photospheres do not have the power feedback control that maintains the steady radiant output of the Sun while the power input varies—as measured by x-rays and sunspot latitudinal migration. So any power surge on a brown dwarf will be met with polar jets and flaring behavior. We know from coronal mass ejections (CME’s) on the Sun that this involves hurling matter into space.
- Flaring would cause havoc on the satellites of a brown dwarf. In the extreme it would give birth to a new satellite. But existing satellites would suffer deposition of solids, liquids and gases and electric discharge machining of their surfaces. This is a scenario never considered by geologists but which explains all of the enigmas of planetary geology.
Earth as Moon of Proto-Saturn
- OK, let us assume that brown dwarfs and their satellites are the most hospitable places in the universe to establish life. That implies that the Earth was originally a satellite of a brown dwarf. That would explain many things, for example: where we got our water and oxygen atmosphere; why the high latitudes were so warm in the past that we find coal in Antarctica; how the Earth’s gravity and atmosphere in the past could have been so different that it supported megafauna and megaflora; what caused the global mass extinctions with instant burial and fossilization; and so on.
How the Sun Captured Proto-Saturn
- ... What about the fact that gravitational capture is highly unlikely? ... But this is an Electric Universe. Each star, being an electrical body in a galactic discharge, will have a plasma sheath that limits the weak electric field between the star and the sheath. It is the Sun’s heliosphere. The plasma sheath is a “double layer” where almost the entire voltage drop between the star and the galaxy will be found. The heliosphere is about 200 AU across. That’s a big target! You could fit about 1,300 such targets between the nearest star and us. The size of this electrical target is important because it is the minimum distance at which the electrical “insulation” between two stars breaks down. I say “minimum” because the polar circuit of each star extends much, much further—as we see where the circuit has been “lit up” in a planetary nebula.
- So what I’m suggesting is ... that all of the planets and moons in the solar system did not originate with the Sun; they were captured. Capture of a brown dwarf star begins when the plasma sheaths touch and they “see” each other electrically for the first time. The brown dwarf changes from being an anode in a galactic discharge to a cathode in the Sun’s environment. The adjustment is drastic. The brown dwarf is no longer a star. It becomes the mother of all comets and subject to a steady electrical acceleration toward the Sun. That acceleration will tend to cause the satellites of the brown dwarf to be dislodged from their orbits and, in a dynamic equilibrium, strung out behind in their primary’s cometary wake. [Cardona thinks the Saturn System had that arrangement long before it encountered the Solar System.] Since a comet’s ion tail is a discharge current, the satellites will experience “mega auroras” and devastating interplanetary discharges to varying degrees.
- As a cathode in the Sun’s discharge, the brown dwarf will jet matter into space like a comet and lose electrons. This has the effect of reducing the gravity and apparent mass of the late star, which, in turn, modifies its orbit. Conservation of orbital energy requires that the cometary body moves in toward the Sun—in other words, it is captured. We see so-called “non-gravitational” acceleration to a small extent in modern comets. This lowering of the gravitational field of comets has given rise to the mistaken view that they are fluff balls. However they look like solid rock and they are solid rock. The effect on a captured brown dwarf is to turn it into a “low density” gas giant.
Solar Wind Induced Saturn Flares
- As the captured brown dwarf traverses the plane of the ecliptic, it encounters the current sheet of the solar wind. That may cause severe flaring and mass loss in the form of new cometary material. Even today, crossing the ecliptic plane is where comets are most likely to fragment. The enhanced electromagnetic forces encountered in the plane of the ecliptic may cause damped oscillations in and out of the plane until capture is complete. The presence of the newcomer is felt electrically by those planets that encounter its coma or cometary tail. Charge transfer occurs via the filamentary currents in the tail, which serves to space the orbits of both bodies until charge transfer is minimized. Circularization of orbits also occurs due to charge exchange with the solar wind until the voltage excursions in the Sun’s weak radial electric field are minimized.
No Collisions
... Planets do not collide. Electrical forces and modification of orbits by charge exchange dominate in a close encounter. Mars bears the fresh electrical scars of its entry into the solar system with the mighty gash of Valles Marineris and the giant raised lightning blisters on the Tharsis bulge. An interplanetary discharge is the only way for Martian meteorites to have been launched into space....

[saul]

Orbit Circularization

Saul said: While gravitational capture occurs, circularization requires frictional / electromagnetic / tidal forces and AFAIK these can only circularize an orbit over enormous time scales.

* The Millennium Group had this paper on the subject, http://tmgnow.com/repository/cometary/ori5.html, which calculates that a body with an elliptical orbit near Jupiter would circularize near Venus in 700 years. Their assumptions are likely somewhat different from the TB team's assumptions.

Nice ideas there, however that figure is based on some poor calculations:

These results assume a resistive force of the form

R = cV/r^2

The "tail drag" described is completely unquantified and does not agree with any observed solar system objects from spacecraft sized to large planetary bodies.

* Here's Wal's ideas.
Assembling the Solar System, by Wal Thornhill
How the Sun Captured Proto-Saturn
- ... What about the fact that gravitational capture is highly unlikely? ... [...]
- So what I’m suggesting is ... that all of the planets and moons in the solar system did not originate with the Sun; they were captured. Capture of a brown dwarf star begins when the plasma sheaths touch and they “see” each other electrically for the first time. The brown dwarf changes from being an anode in a galactic discharge to a cathode in the Sun’s environment. The adjustment is drastic. The brown dwarf is no longer a star. It becomes the mother of all comets and subject to a steady electrical acceleration toward the Sun. That acceleration will tend to cause the satellites of the brown dwarf to be dislodged from their orbits and, in a dynamic equilibrium, strung out behind in their primary’s cometary wake. [Cardona thinks the Saturn System had that arrangement long before it encountered the Solar System.] Since a comet’s ion tail is a discharge current, the satellites will experience “mega auroras” and devastating interplanetary discharges to varying degrees..

Is the proposal an electrostatic interaction between the sun and the captured object? Consider an example of just such an object, the Leonids. The obects "strung out" behind the tail of the comet maintain their trajectory and are not rapidly accelerated at just the right moments to obtain a circular orbit.

[Lloyd]

Saul said: Is the proposal an electrostatic interaction between the sun and the captured object? Consider an example of just such an object, the Leonids. The ob[j]ects "strung out" behind the tail of the comet maintain their trajectory and are not rapidly accelerated at just the right moments to obtain a circular orbit.

* I don't understand your point about the Leonid meteor stream. I don't know of a comet involved with the Leonids. What objects are not accelerated into a circular orbit around what?
* Also, I don't know much about the math involved in these calculations, but I can ask someone, if it would matter much to someone.

[mharratsc]

@ Saul - Why would you specify 'electrostatic in an electrodynamic solar system?

[saul]

@ Saul - Why would you specify 'electrostatic in an electrodynamic solar system?

I'm not sure what to specify, I don't think any force model has been suggested that could allow for the theory. If the objects are charged, the electric force between them is referred to as electrostatic. Anyway looks like I've been trolled once again

[mharratsc]

I asked for clarification because I fully believe that the Sun and everything else in orbit around it are in an electrodynamic relationship- all of it acts as a load on an intragalactic circuit.

This gives one quite a large power source to work with for further speculation regarding the causal factors of various observations made within the solar system!

I don't know if you were referring to being trolled by me specifically or not, but I can assure you that wasn't my intention. I think you're one of the more educated folks running around here (with regards to to these matters) and I value your input, hence why I asked for clarification on your views regarding our solar system's electrical environment.

[nick c]

@ Saul - Why would you specify 'electrostatic in an electrodynamic solar system?

Anyway looks like I've been trolled once again

saul,
I am not sure what you are saying here? Mike has asked a valid question. Viewing phenomena involving the electrodynamics of plasmas in space from a simple electrostatic perspective will ultimately lead to a dead end. Scott explains this important distinction (in the context of the Electric Universe model of the solar wind) in his rebuttal to Thompson.
See:
Tim Thompson – A Rebuttal

Wal Thornhill has already referred Thompson to low-pressure gas discharge physics as being the appropriate model to use, not simple electrostatics. As a pseudoskeptic, Thompson refuses to address his remarks to this model because it refutes his beliefs and he can‘t find any authority to quote that has ever considered the possibility. In the gas discharge model, interplanetary space is an extensive plasma region termed the 'positive column,‘ which is characterized by almost equal numbers of positive charges (ions) and electrons. The plasma is electrically 'quasi-neutral,‘ like a current-carrying copper wire. And like a copper wire, it is a region with a weak electric field that causes a steady drift of electrons toward the more positive 'sink.‘ (The drift speed of electrons in a current-carrying copper wire is typically measured in cm/hr!) The drift current focused down from the vastness of space powers the Sun.