WRITTEN IN THE STARS

What we don’t know about common items like atoms, nucleus and electrons is stunning. For some reason, as larger atoms are formed (created?), the nucleus particles are added with great precision and the shell position of the electrons forms with astounding precision measured in the wavelengths of the spectra. We don’t really know the precise rules for nuclear growth but we can see that there are rules that are very consistent. It is simply a matter of fact that all materials are put together following very precise rules.

If we move up to larger bodies such as planets and stars, there is even less agreement. For decades, mainstream science has shunned the Titius-Bode Law for formation of planets on some orderly basis.  Try to grasp this stunning demonstration of hard heads. At least seven of the planets hit on this law but because Neptune/Pluto zone did not, then you throw out the whole thing and make people who want to study it lose their funding. Apparently mainstream astronomy failed to grasp the significance of the Kuiper Belt bodies and how those millions of bodies might distort the Titius-Bode Law in the zone near the Kuiper Belt. (see www.Titius-Bode.blogspot.com )

 

The folks at www.thunderbolts.info are making a major effort to develop the Theory of Electric Universe.  This breakthrough in modern science will greatly rearrange the rules for the formation of the universe, and potential parallel universes. Strange enough, this theory came into existence largely on the observation of ancient cave artwork.

 

Unless you have been living under a big rock, you have to realize that there is human life all over the place and they visit us regularly, some communicating with earth humans. For very simple reasons, they do not make an overt contact on the White House lawn. (see www.Billy-Meier-case-is-real.blogspot.com ) There are rules of engagement for humans who fall on their sword and enter into a period of regressive knowledge like we have.

 

If stars are formed in an electric and magnetic field as suggested in these new theories, there is every reason to believe there are creative forces at play. (see www.magical-magnetics.blogspot.com ) We currently have no idea how stars could possibly be organized but the following paper attempts to present some new ideas based on relatively easy to observe fundamentals.

 

If we look up at stars, we see them in two dimensions like we would if they were marked on a sheet of curved paper. Could a reasonable person ever get around the fact that stars are moving away from us in the third “unseen direction” and that it takes maybe thousands of years for the light to get here that we are seeing order now? If there is order as viewed from earth in the 2000 epoch, what could it possibly mean, if anything? Perhaps just a hint to look harder.

 

From the data in the Bright Star Catalogue for the 2000 epoch, the inserted graph shows Ursa Minor with Ursa Major in mirror image and rotated to align at the focal point and along the left line of the Ursa Minor image.  The data was converted to Cartesian coordinates with a suitable scale to fit into a CAD system screen. There is a good article on Spherical coordinates in Wikipedia.

 

The two images were “grouped” and moved as a group to keep the original relationship within the group.  They can then be “unfrozen” and measurements made representative of each image.

 

The four stars forming the cup of each constellation are used to find a focal point and then the stars in the handles are connected to that focal point. There are many items that seem to nest together much better than we would expect from a complete random event.

 

 

                                                            Figure 1

Note one line in UMA is almost atop a line in UMI with only 0.1367323 degrees of separation. The overall angle of UMI in red at 50.5721960 degrees compares well with corresponding angle in UMA at 51.7240937. These angles are related to each other below. A dashed line connects UMI 1 to UMA 4 across the top.  Another dashed line connects UMI 2 with UMA 3. Those lines intersect and their midpoints are almost atop each other, marked with a blue and a red cross. The angle between the two dashed lines is 1.1101030 and that is discussed below.

 

Keep in mind that there are seven stars in each constellation and they both are in the shape of a dipper, though the UMA is more like a pan where the end of the handle is nearly parallel to the top of the cup.  UMI is a classic dipper sold routinely today. Now that the images are in a CAD system, angles, areas, perimeters and dimensionless length ratios can be accurately measured.

 
The drawing below shows the evolution from the original data to the superimposed mirror images and rotation of UMA.  In order to calculate areas and perimeters in the handles, another line was added connecting the end handle star with the bottom cup star.

 

In the top half of the drawing each constellation is shown in their proper relationship.  UMI  dumps water so to speak into the UMA. A few other stars are shown as circles but don’t enter into the calculations.

 

In the bottom right, Ursa Major is mirror flipped and the far left lines are atop each other. Of course, the overall angle remains the same close fit. But now a different pair of lines is atop each other, marked in green. The difference is 0.054193 degree. This small angle can only be noticed in a CAD system analysis.  This seems a long way from random coincidence.

 

                                                             Figure 2

There are not that many bright stars in the northern sky so these two constellations are readily noticed. The rotation of the earth makes them look like they are spinning since the axis of the earth is pointed pretty directly to the North Star, Polaris….for the time being. It doesn’t matter that it might change in thousands of years.  It is now that we are observing. And the timing on observing may have everything to do with it.

 

It could easily be argued that there are so many stars in the sky, at least when viewed thru a telescope, that one could find any pattern out there at least once.  But for two similar naked eye patterns to be formed immediately above the north pole of the earth is actually statistically very unlikely. If one looks primarily at the bright stars over the North Pole, it could be argued in favor of order rather than chaos.

 

For most mainstream scientists, the thought of the universe being created is a real stench. It took science a long time to get past the idea that God created the universe and they never did drag mainstream religion away from it. As mentioned in other blogs, for a long time text books stated, “Water is created when hydrogen and oxygen are combined.”  They finally settled on, “Water is formed when hydrogen and oxygen are combined.” While we know a lot more than we did from Biblical times, we still don’t really know all we need to know to understand the “Creation of Water”. Mainstream science is “chest thumping sure” that water is not created by somebody doing the backstroke thru the universe, taking charge of each atom and guiding it into relationships.

 

There is plenty of proof that the universe has “creative forces” alive and well, thank you. Please see www.titius-bode-law.blogspot.com and www.magical-magnetics.blogspot.com.  We still have no idea how electrons are so brilliantly organized in each atom and how the shells even exist, let alone understand.  How can the atom be managed by a probability that can so precisely develop specific wavelengths for each atom.

 

So what in the world could organize the universe?  If one takes some time and studies The Electric Universe (see www.thunderbolts.info)  provides many opportunities for an “organizing force.”  But if this force exists, why is it, in the case of the dippers, viewable from earth? We know from quantum mechanics that measurements by humans can have an impact on reality. But one might argue that this is only in very tiny environments.  So let us keep an open mind and just go with the flow that the universe reveals to us via our painfully slow adjustment to facts.

 

AutoCAD Measurements

 

Relation 1

 

Be sure to read down thru several of these relations before forming an opinion.

 

The overall angle of the diagram for Ursa Major is 51.7240937 and the similar angle for Ursa Minor is 50.5721960 for a difference of just over one degree. But as will be developed below, sometimes even these small differences can show significant order in themselves. Note the following dimensionless ratio works for degrees of different size than 360 per circle. This is an inverted conjugate ratio.

 

(200 * (diff in angles / sum of angles))^(2/3) * 1.2 = 2.061755978

 

While few may care that 206.17 is one of the widths of the King’s Chamber in the Great Pyramid, what might it do in the real world.  The function X^(1/X) = Y forms a maximum of 1.444667861 when X = 2.71828…if X is allowed from 0 to infinity. 

 

2.061755294 ^ (1 / 2.061755294) = 1.420405752 cycles per nanosecond, the very fundamental hyperfine frequency of the hydrogen atom and if someone were trying to “red flag” our attention, a good number to use. Is it remotely possible that there exists a human-like intelligence that can maneuver stars or star data?

 

 

Figure 3

Relation 2

 

If the total angles are important, then the ratio of the angles might indicate something similar.  In the diagram above we see that the angle between the common line on Ursa Minor and that of the end of the cup on Ursa Major is 121.5000027 degrees.  The angle from the same line on Ursa Minor and the bottom of the cup on Ursa Major is 38.6354137.

 

 (38.6354137*4/121.5000027)^(9/4)*1.2=2.061755231

 

Note this number is equal to 2.061755294 with 8 digit, more precise than the original Bright Star Catalogue data. One should also note that the exponent 9/4 is 3/2 squared and exponent 3/2 or 2/3 is the fundamental relationship of gravity demonstrated in the dimensionless planetary orbital distances and periods. It seems to me the chance of this happening randomly is extremely slim to none.

 

Relation 3

 

If there is something to this type of analysis, then one might expect the total area of each diagram (including focal points) to be related.  In ACAD these areas are below and made to be a dimensionless conjugate ratio once again.

 

(6.6825401+5.7228921)/(6.6825401-5.7228921) = 12.92706513

 

100000000/[E^(12.92706513)  * 2]= 121.5673504

 

The number E = 2.718281828 is the natural log base.  The number 121.5673504 is astoundingly similar to 121.5674 nanometers for the second most abundant wavelength of hydrogen spectra in the Lyman Series. This now makes three hydrogen events which may be starting a focus towards some type of math-science language based upon standard units of measure.

 

 

 

Relation 4

 

If we are learning anything from Relations 1- 3 above, we might use the 12.92… number in a self-determining function as for the development of the hydrogen frequency.

 

12.92706513^(1/12.92706513) /8 *10 = 1.52367521

 

The natural log base = 2.718281828 and Pi = 3.141592654 then Pi^(1/E) = 1.523671055

 

The dimensionless ratio of mars average orbital distance to that of earth is 1.5236777911.  If we take the average of the Pi to E relationship coupled with the latter Mars/Earth relationship, we get 1.5236744 which is very close to the original star relationship. If these are “meant” to attract our attention, they would not need to have standalone meaning.

 

Isn’t there a major hint here to use these self-determining functions and re-examine planetary relationships?  (See www.titius-bode.blogspot.com )

 

Relation 5

 

One can easily measure the area of the Ursa Major cup and the area of the handle including the lines connecting the further handle star to the bottom of the cup as shown in the lower left diagram of Figure 1 above.  The units need to cancel out so that the ratio is “dimensionless” and that is done by taking the sum of the areas and dividing by the difference of the areas leaving a dimensionless ratio. This number is then divided by two and then taken to the square root. Halving a number or doubling was done routinely in ancient mathematics and is also the way that octaves are found in the musical world if we are talking frequencies.

 

[(1.1308562+1.0996093)/ (1.1308562-1.0996093)/2]^(1/2) = 5.97419355

 

The mass of the earth was 5.9742 x 10^24 kg in early 2006.

 

If we do about the same approach on the Ursa Minor diagram, we see the following:

 

Relation 6

 

Ln{1000/[(.6570475/.4524394/5)^(1/2)/pi * 1.2 * 4)]}/5 = 1.420407392

 

The repeated use of this number is very interesting. One can see that the calculated number is apparently accurate to almost seven digits and perhaps is as accurate as the original data from the Bright Star Catalog. The fact that these two calculations are very similar adds suspicion of some interconnectedness.

 

Relation 7

 

If we look to check the ratio of cups sum divided by difference in cups we see another occurrence:

 

(1.1308562+.4524394)/(1.1308562-.4524394) = 2.333809540

 

The number (7 + 1/700)/3 = 2.33809524.  By itself this might not gain much attention but in association with the other numbers seems to add some additional likelihood of order. It seems to fit in well with seven stars in each constellation.

 

Relation 8

 

If we do a similar process using the perimeter of the overall diagram and combine that with the area ratio 12.92… from Relation 3 above, we see the following:

 

(8.884971910/12.92706513)*2.5 = 1.718288688

 

Of course, natural log E -1 = 1.718281828 but actually the number 1.718281828 is the far more important portion of the natural log base, being the sum of the factorials 1/1!+1/2!+1/3!.....to infinity.  The ancients tended to view 25 as a sacred number and this may have been handed down for some reason we have yet to discover. What is a sacred number?

 

In the bottom right image of figure 2 there are two small angles measuring from UMI to UMA such that the same number is found with even more precision. The first one is from the green line to the black one just counterclockwise.  The second is from the UMA left cup angle to the next handle stars in the UMI.

 

(4.2139205 / 4.6206335 * 16 * 1.420405752)^(2) * 4 = 1718.281967

 

The dimensionless ratio combines doubling 4 times and the hydrogen frequency to end up with almost 8 digits of precision which is more preciseness than there is in the initial star data.

 

Another pair of angles is approximately equal at 3.94 degrees.

 

e^(3.9474084 / 3.9434156 / 2) * 1 / 8 / 1.2 * 10=1.718287673

 

 

                                        Figure 4

Relation 9 

Just as an example of how much further this can go, the above analysis suggests that one could pursue something a bit more complex but still continue using dimensionless ratios.  This time the sum of distances between each star of the constellation is used (sum of the lines forming just the constellation and not the focal point). We combine the plain ratio with the sum and difference ratio and get a very common number

 

5.4066759/7.2998905/8*(7.2998905+5.4066759)/(7.2998905-5.4066759) = .621372987  

 

The standard conversion used currently for miles and kilometers is .6213711922 but at one time not too long ago it was .621372.  Maybe we are running behind schedule finding the interconnectedness if it was planned.

 

Relation 10

 

Using the top half of the diagrams in Figure 1, we can compare the area of the far left triangle formed from the focal point in Ursa Major to the far right triangle in Ursa Minor.

 

2.008789/.8799805 * 160 = 365.2424571 which is remarkably close to 365.2422 days in the tropical year, the most common periodic cycle of the earth.

 

There are many more relationships and perhaps a lot more important than these.  But the consistency of these makes them more likely to be the result of some type of order than to be coincidental occurrences. The types of numbers above seem to indicate a “calling” and not so much a definitive message themselves. Perhaps this makes the concept of “written in the stars” much more interesting.

 

It can be argued that if you “try enough functions” you will get some relationship.  But the relationships above use only a few constants over and over and to have them fit to seven digits makes it very unlikely of being random accidents.  There is a Professor Simon Plouffe on the web that has a computer program site using millions of mathematical relationships to show how you might develop the number you input in the program.  But when you get to 7 digits, even this computer is often stumped.  It does not find any relationship for 1.420405752 even though this is the most fundamental number sequence in the creation of the universe.  If one enters the number with a couple less digits as 1.420406 it comes up with the most complicated group of sequences and functions one could imagine. Hardly a match for the eloquence of X^(1/X) = Y.

 

So did the ancients look to the stars for guidance?  Perhaps they in fact did and perhaps they received it.  I can’t imagine how they would do it without a computer but then one doesn’t really know how even a modern day autistic can do what they do with numbers.  If there is order as described in the relationships above, was it in the plan from the Big Bang and the timing was such that it would show up in 2006?  Or as speculated earlier, has our collective consciousness maybe massaged it into place? Did I essentially run the old experiment to check an electron for wave-like or particle-like characteristics and created the apparent order?  All options seem a bit hard to swallow.  I wonder if there are not some other options yet to be considered.

 

Jim Branson

Copyright 2005-2017

All Rights Reserved

Knowhow at ctcweb dot net