day length clues
Right or wrong, the basic implication of physics is there is an instantaneous circular force within space of space upon space around mass. And that this instantaneous force alters the nature of space in accordance with the increase of spherical area around mass. The added centre column to the rotation rates of the planets is based upon the true force of 'gravity' being away from mass and the manifestation of this force as a circle in space altering the vertical nature of space in a finite universe.
The first thing to note is the inner two planets are like the moon. Have rotation periods of the order of their orbital periods.
The Mercury year length is 88 earth days and the Mercury rotation period is 58.65 earth days.
The Venus year length is 224.7 earth days and the Venus day length is 243.02 earth days.
After that, the facts astronomers are giving us about the inner (three) planets are Venus turns backwards on its axis once whilst this planet does almost exactly 2/3's of its 'orbit' around the sun. That is Venus rotates 3 times on its axis while the earth completes 2 years. And, every 584 earth days, the same face of Venus is almost precisely towards the earth when Venus passes between the earth and the sun. There are a few other little rotational/cyclical near exact ratios between the inner three planets as well. For instance, a Venus sunrise occurs every 117. something earth days. Meaning there is almost precisely 5 Venus sunrises to each Venus transit of the earth. And Mercury rotates twice on its axis every 117.3 days.
The next thing to note is.........................
The next thing to note is.........................
To see the similarities, refer to an astronomer's table. They are getting more accurate all the time.
On these adjacent inner planet a quarter of an orbit advanced beyond a transit diagrams, planetary speed magnitudes come tidal axii speed magnitudes are relative to each other. With respect of the motion of the sun, the diagrams are all timeless and the push vectors instantaneous forces. Minus the ellipses, the diagrams are scale diagrams. Basically, in these times of uncertain world affairs and even if there is nothing in them, looking at the diagrams is a bit of off the planet fun. Significantly, the Venus - earth relationship is the odd one out with the approximate right angle. Without the ellipses and for rest of the planets with a slight exception for the Mars - Jupiter relationship, the outer planet works into just beyond the tangential position after the inner planet has performed a 1/4 cycle advancement around the sun.
If you are part of an up and coming generation of young people or whoever, seriously, have a think. After the journey to discern it, declaring the outer planet rotation rate pair similarities to be coincidence without certainty would be doing animals a disservice. The prima facie evidence is it is up there with the best of telescopic finds. Unless there is something astray with the diagrams, it is almost inconceivable that anyone with an awareness of the solar system couldn't be fascinated by the similarity of planetary pair positions after the inner planet has passed through 90 degrees after its transit of the outer one.
Uranus looks like being tidally jammed between Neptune and Saturn. If it is on the right track, the 24 hours in our day and the 23 degrees of our axis of rotation would be a consequence of the uniqueness of the solar system. The more you involve yourself with the table, the more wondrous our existence seems to be. It's not just a question of could there be other life supporting planets. The covering question is could there be other solar systems that so do.
The way Kepler presented his great work is probably where the post Newton mathematical genius thought pattern troubles begin and reside. Time squared in the third law means nothing. Likewise the fact that a planet sweeps out equal areas in equal times in his second law.
1/ The first law says the paths of the planets around the sun are elliptical when the sun is fixed and with the sun being at one foci of the ellipse.
2/ The second law says the speed of an individual planet relative to a moving sun varies with the inverse of its distance from the sun.
3/ The third law says the average speed of any planet relative to a moving sun varies with the inverse square of distance from the sun.
(link)Did Newton answer Halley's question.
The Galilean rocket science problem of the planets ascending and descending at the same time aside, the answer to Halley's question was a circle. Not an ellipse. Somehow Sir Isaac has attributed the equal areas in equal times to the sun's inverse square law. All the equal areas in equal times means is as specified in 2/ above. Plus the striking relative speed conflict with the third law.
The suggested likelihood is the push vectors of the adjacent planet diagrams explain the second law - third law relative speed conflict and also the day lengths of all the planets.
Even if this rotation cause addition to the rotation rate table is unable to explain day lengths, congratulations to modern astronomers for the second column.