Captain’s Log, Stardate 06

More Particles of Space

Particle Delta-4

Moon’s libration & Volcanoes

Recall: we only see one side of the moon from earth.

The moon exhibits a phenomenon called ‘libration’ – this is a slight wobble to the positioning of the moon relative to the earth. Over a full lunar month (time for moon to orbit earth = time between a full moon cycle) the libration wobble would also have completed a ‘cycle’.

Libration can loosely be observed by standing in front of a mirror – make a point on the mirror, stand so that your nose reflection is on the point, offset your nose by a couple of centimetres, move your head to scribe a circle with your nose around the point – this is the effect of libration.

What causes the moon to librate?

If we think further about star/planets systems as simply being SUPER-MOTORS – and the sun’s radiated energy inducing currents into the moon:

- Because the moon is not spinning on its own axis and because it rotates/orbits about the earth it then follows that the induced currents within the moon are changing direction (polarity) as the moon moves from one side facing the sun to the other side facing, and back again.

Bearing in mind that the moon’s ‘inner’ magnetic axis is near-perpendicular to the earth’s magnetic axis, and is the reason for the non-rotation of the moon (on its own axis), it follows that the induced currents & resultant magnetic fields (which are also changing polarity as the moon orbits the earth, because the moon’s position to the sun reverses) are part of the cause of the libration (Is it the only cause? Doubtful, but logically it would seem to be the main cause; the earth would also impact upon the moon’s libration).

Consequently the alternating induced currents (cycling with the lunar cycle) are creating an alternating magnetic field which is constantly impacting upon the moon’s prevalent magnetic axis (near-perpendicular to earth), and giving slight variations to the summed magnetic axis – which causes the constant, but slight, shifting of the moon’s face that is pointing to the earth – hence a wobble, libration, throughout its lunar cycle.

The fact that the moon does experience a lunar orbit that is eccentric to the sun, which causes a reversal of induced currents into the moon, is a further argument to prove that the moon does NOT rotate on its own axis - synchronous or asynchronous. (Think about this, we see only one side of the moon but the sun sees ALL sides, but since moon is not rotating it means that induced currents into the moon are changing polarity, i.e. the reversal of induced currents would be alternating forces acting on the moon.)

The fact that the earth does rotate on its own axis means that some power source must be causing the rotation – and the only logical power source is the sun – it follows then that since the moon is clearly not rotating on its own axis that likewise there must be some force preventing it – the only logical explanation is that the moon’s axis is near-perpendicular to the earth’s axis.

BUT, it may be argued that since the moon’s induced currents are reversing that gravity would also reverse -> Not true. If we accept that gravity is simply immense static-electric force then we can see from simple experiment that static-electricity is uni-directional – simply rub a ruler in one direction, it draws objects towards it; reverse the rubbing direction, it still draws objects towards it.

We can also see this with Venus – this planet rotates opposite to the earth’s rotation (because its magnetic axis is opposite to earth’s axis) –> Venus still has a gravitational force, inwards, the same as earth.

The fact that Venus, the moon, & the earth all exhibit gravity, yet have differing behavioural characteristics (rotations), it supports the contention that gravity is simply an immense static-electric force.

Tony Robinson (Time Team) hosted a Channel 4 (4oD) documentary ‘Catastrophe’ relating the history of our earth & planets. In the first episode a scientist had ascertained, through measurements with a laser beam reflected back from mirrors positioned on the moon, that the moon was moving away from the earth a few centimetres each year.

This confirms the intuitive discussion in earlier papers and the fact that the moon shifting its position relative to earth would cause the earth/moon to vary its orbit about the sun. With the moon moving away the spin of the earth/moon would slow down (similar to a ballet dancer doing a pirouette; drawing in the arms causes the spin to increase; arms out, the spin to decrease), hence the centrifugal force would diminish and the earth/moon would be drawn magnetically (NOT gravitationally) closer to the sun & the earth would warm up. Vice versa, if moon was moving toward earth it would increase the spin, centrifugal force would increase and oppose the sun’s magnetic pull and the earth/moon would move away from sun and get colder –> as in the ice-age.

(This argument does not preclude other factors that would accelerate the ice-age freeze.)

Since we know that the last extreme was an ice-age it follows that the opposite of the cycle will be a hot-age. Just how hot remains to be seen, but it is not impossible that the earth could face a full or partial remelt.

It is quite possible that the earth has gone through a number of full, or partial, remelts, and a remelt would explain ‘lost’ civilisations, obscure archaeological finds etc.

Recall, that it was generally assumed that the universe was expanding rapidly at the speed of light, if, as discussed in this series of papers, we accept a drift velocity for light particles (i.e. light is propagated at speed c, light particles do not travel at speed c) then the life of the universe to date is much, much, much longer than previously thought.

Hence a number of remelt/freeze cycles could have occurred.

BUT, it is also possible that the oscillations of the ice/hot cycles are diminishing (converging to stable oscillations) – which if they are then we are unlikely to have another remelt – we would probably just need oodles of sun lotion.

In the second series of Catastrophe experts argued that the ice-age had kilometres-thick ice over the entire earth. It was numerous volcanic eruptions that broke through this ice & started a warming process. It would also have required that the earth start to move closer to the sun for overall warm-up.

A couple of important points should be noted:

- For volcanic eruptions to occur there has to be external energy forces, if not then there could be no volcanic eruptions. Compare to pot on stove, put on the lid it bubbles over; remove pot from heat bubbling stops => bubbling (volcano action) requires ongoing energy. Thus volcano action can only be logically provided from radiated energy from the sun being induced into the earth & the earth behaving as an induction furnace.

- Experts stated that 85% of light is reflected off of ice; from the aforegoing point, since the volcanic eruption is powered by induced energy it means that light information is a miniscule component of total radiated sun energy. As discussed in earlier papers, compare this to light from a torch, we get light information being propagated but negligible energy.

Chris Addington Pr. Eng.

www.cdadd.com

(Under enforced exile from South Africa due to ANC government’s oppressive XDR-nazi system and oppressive economic isolation by corporate & academic worlds.

Also under severe economic oppression due to Ireland & UK government dishonesty.

XDR = Extreme Democracy Resistant.)

###### END OF Particle Delta-4 #####