Image

TOM MANGO supports Scafetta 2016 research on the role of the planetary gas giants on earths climate

Dr Scafetta has a new paper out in 2016

https://weathercycles.wordpress.com/2016/05/21/nicola-scafetta-high-resolution-coherence-analysis-between-planetary-and-climate-oscillations/

Tom has contacted me with some of his own calculations to support Scafettas findings

He wrote

“Hey Sue,

Scafetta’s new paper is all about validating the 60 year
cycle using highly technical methods.
I use an extremely simple method of sums with

very interesting results.

Here’s a table and a graph I’ve put together:’
————————————————————
l WILL LET TOM EXPLAIN HIS WORK IN THE COMMENTS SECTION BELOW
PLEASE CLICK ON THE TITLE OF THIS POST TO LOAD ALL FURTHER COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION BELOW
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTRIBUTEjup_sat_inequality2btom2bmango2bmay2b2016
synodic_table2btom2bmangomarch2b2016
STORAGE OF THE ABOVE GRAPHS ARE LOCATED  HERE
The above works belongs to TOM MANGO

CONTACT TOM MANGO HERE
Readers can contact me at TLMango10@gmail.com
or via this post in the comments section below..

Advertisements

14 comments on “TOM MANGO supports Scafetta 2016 research on the role of the planetary gas giants on earths climate

  1. Thanks so much Sue for posting my graphs.

    The table above is based on the 2012 Scafetta paper:
    ‘Multi-scale harmonic model for solar and climate cyclical variation
    throughout the Holocene…..’ Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 80, 296-311.
    His paper puts Ogurtsov’s 114 year signal together with the 61
    year Jupiter/Saturn beat.
    The table is set up like a spreadsheet, each colored section holds
    a number of beats between:
    60.94838271 /1 and 57.01397771 /1 (first sect.)
    60.94838271 / 2 to 57.01397771 / 2 (second sect.)
    60.94838271 / 3 to 57.01397771 / 3 (third sect.) . . . / 12 (12th sect.)
    ………. where: P1 x P2 / ( P1 – P2 ) = P3
    ………. when: P1 is empty P3 = P2
    Each section forms a pattern where S is increased by 5 and J is
    increased by 2, producing 90 of Jupiter and Saturn’s stronger beats.

    …….57.01397771 = 114.02795542 / 2 (Ogurtsov, 2002)

  2. The graph above is based on the P3 values from this table.
    ……. Y = the Sum of Cos[2 Pi year / P3]
    Each cosine function has a maximum value of 1, so the Y values
    can range from -90 to +90. To get the focus just right we had to
    limit the view from -6.5 to +10.0. Here, we’re not extracting the 61
    and 114 year signals, we’re inserting them to see how they interact.

  3. In order to fully understand what this graph is saying it is
    necessary to first read a paper written by Hans Jelbring:
    … ‘Celestial commensurabilities: some special cases’
    … Pattern Recognition in Physics 1, 143-146, 2013
    … page 145 … 4.5 The Jupiter-Saturn commensurability

    Jelbring found that there was a very close approximation
    regarding the orbital periods of Jupiter and Saturn:
    … 11.862242 (149) ~= 29.457784 (60) ~= 19.85931224 (89)

    This 149:60 (~2.483) ratio is special because it also happens to be
    equivalent to 29.457784:11.862242 (~2.4833). When using the synodic formula:
    ……………… (J / A) x (S / B) / ( J / A – S / B) = P
    if A:B or B:A ~= 2.483 then the period seems to have a special significance.

    The earth’s elliptical orbit expands and contracts to a ~99582 year cycle.
    ……. (2) (J / 60) x (S / 149) / (J / 60 – S / 149) = 99582.6054692 years.
    …… 149 : 60 ~= 2.4833

    Axial precession:
    ……. (43 / 3) (S / 72) x (J / 29) / (S / 72 – J / 29) = 25775.93525 years.
    ……. 72 : 29 ~= 2.4828

    Obliquity:
    ……. (22) (S / 221) x (J / 89) / (S / 221 – J / 89) = 41045.5112124 years.
    ……. 221 : 89 ~= 2.4831

    Earth’s orbital precession of perihelion:
    ……. (135 / 2) (J / 91) x (S / 226) / (J / 91 – S / 226) = 113209.087559 years.
    ……. 226 : 91 ~= 2.4835

  4. Notice where the graph is labeled 1766 years. Jelbring found that
    11.862242 (149) , 29.457784 (60) and 19.85931224 (89) all ~= 1767.47 years.
    There are areas in the graph above that show a confluence of values
    (commensurate), such as at {0, 883, 1766, 2649}.

    The orbital periods for Jupiter and Saturn have some irregularity about
    them, so there is a lot of disagreement about their exact values. Surprisingly
    there really isn’t as much room for tweaking these numbers as some would
    believe. The exact number of days is pretty solid, it’s the additional hours
    that are causing fights to break out. It is important that we address this
    issue before we move on.

    The best values can be found at: nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet
    by author Dr David R. Williams: using sidereal periods S = 29.457 and
    J = 11.862.

    Avoid using: the data at ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/?planet_phys_par
    This data had a mislabeling problem in which the tropical periods were
    listed as sidereal. An attempt to correct the problem resulted in a
    period of S = 29.447 years sidereal and S = 29.42351935 tropical.

    The Williams data at nssdc.gsfc also had a tropical period of S = 29.424
    years, suggesting that the ssd.jpl sidereal period of S = 29.447 is most
    likely a typo.

    Like I said earlier, there isn’t a lot of room for this much error. The difference
    between the sidereal values of 29.447 (ssd.jpl) and 29.457 (nssdc.gsfc)
    would be more than 3 and a half days, an obvious typo.

    Now we can move on to extol the virtue of Jelbring’s commensurate
    orbital periods and why I believe they may be the most accurate of all.

  5. The values that are closest to the actual orbital periods of Jupiter and Saturn
    can be found in the factsheets (nssdc.gsfc) authored by Dr David R. Williams.
    This would be: S = 29.4571 and J = 11.862 year sidereal periods.

    Earlier I stated that I believed that Hans Jelbring’s commensurate orbital periods
    ( of S = 29.457784 and J = 11.862242 sidereal ) were even more accurate. How
    could this possibly be true? Jelbring’s values are quite a bit higher than the actual
    orbital periods of Jupiter and Saturn, especially the Saturn value. The reason for
    this is simply: the Jelbring periods “are” commensurate with most of the solar
    system’s major beats and the Williams periods, at their current values, are not.
    But they can be! If we add an “84” on the end of S = 29.4571, we now have
    S = 29.457184 and J = 11.862 sidereal periods. These new values “are”
    commensurate with all the solar system’s major Jup/Sat beats. In the following
    posts I will attempt to prove all these claims.

    I hope to persuade others just how important and necessary commensurate
    orbital periods really are. Please stick around….

  6. Hans used the 149:60 ratio, in other words 11.862242 (149) ~= 29.457784 (60).
    This is a very close approximation but there is an exact ratio that we can use
    instead. With a microscopic adjustment to the orbital periods, the ratio
    67159:27044 should give us exact values (at least 16 decimal places).

    Let’s begin with the ratio 67159:27044 and the sidereal periods
    Saturn = 29.457784 and Jupiter = 11.862242.

    (11.862242 x 67159 + 29.457784 x 27044) / 2 = 796656.310487 years
    the new adjusted S = 796656.310487 / 27044 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29.457783999667208992752551398D
    the new adjusted J = 796656.310487 / 67159 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.862242000134010333685730877D

    S x J / (S – J) = 796656.310487 / 40115 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.859312239486476380406331794D
    J x (S / 3) / (J – S / 3) = 796656.310487 / 13973 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57.013977706076003721462821158D
    (S / 2) x J / (S / 2 – J) = 796656.310487 / 13071 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60.948382716471578303113763277D
    (2)(J / 60) x (S / 149) / (J / 60 – S / 149) = 796656.310487 / 8 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99582.03881087499999999426283D
    (S / 72) x (J / 29) / (S / 72 – J / 29) = 796656.310487 / 443 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25775.937811091798344620005306D x (3 / 43)
    (S / 221) x (J / 89) / (S / 221 – J / 89) = 796656.310487 / 427 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41045.524193709601873536174321D / (22)
    (J / 91) x (S / 226) / (J / 91 – S / 226) = 796656.310487 / 475 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113209.0564815263157894784416D x (2 / 135)

    If we experimented with any of the 90 beats in our table (using the adjusted S & J)
    they would all show the same great results. But… we can do even better than
    this if we adjust the orbital periods to be more in line with the actual values for
    Jupiter and Saturn (J = 11.862 and S = 29.457184).
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .We’ll do that next…..

  7. Now, let’s experiment with commensurate orbital periods that are more
    in line with those found at nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/factsheet (Dr D.R. Williams):

    . . . J = 11.862 . . . . . . S = 29.457184 . . . .
    Let’s use the ratio (1841074 : 741375)
    . . . 11.862 x 1841074 = 21838819.788
    . . . 29.457184 x 741375 = 21838819.788

    21838819.788 years:
    . . . / 1099699 = 19.858906653547925 = S x J / (S – J)
    . . . / 383051 = 57.01282541489253 = . . J x S / 3 / (J – S / 3)
    . . . / 358324 = 60.9471310545763 = . . . S / 2 x J / (S / 2 – J)
    . . . / 24727 = 883.19730610264083 = . . J / 2 x S / 5 / (J / 2 – S / 5)
    . . . / 453 = 100408.36684137931034 / 2 = J / 60 x S / 149 / (J / 60 – S / 149)
    . . . / 11711 = 41025.876128084706686 / 22 =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S / 221 x J / 89 / (S / 221 – J / 89)
    . . . / 12146 = 1798.0256700148196937 = S / 72 x J / 29 / (S / 72 – J / 29)
    . . . / 12146 = 25771.70127021241561 x (3 / 43) ‘ axial precession
    . . . / 13016 = 113254.481844652735095 x (2 / 135) =
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J / 91 x S / 226 / (J / 91 – S / 226)

    Notice that when we are more in line with the Dr Williams orbital periods
    for Jupiter and Saturn, the axial precession value is closer to 25772 years.
    Dr J.L. Hilton estimated axial precession to be approximately 25772 years.

    Hilton, J.L., et al., 2006. Report of the International Astronomical Union
    . . Division I Working Group on Precession and the Ecliptic. Celestial
    . . Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 94, 351-367.

  8. When: . . . J = 11.862 . . . . . . S = 29.457184 . . . ratio: 2.48332355
    . . . S / 72 x J / 29 / (S / 72 – J / 29) = 1798.0256700148 years

    When: . . . J = 11.862242 . . . S = 29.457784 . . . ratio: 2.48332347
    . . . S / 72 x J / 29 / (S / 72 – J / 29) = 1798.321064019 years

    This 1798 year period is the Keeling and Whorf oceanic tidal cycle.
    Keeling, C.D., Whorf, T.P., 2000. The 1,800-year oceanic tidal cycles:
    . . . A possible cause of rapid climate change.
    . . . Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 97(8), 3814 – 3819.

    The 1798 year oceanic tidal cycle is linked to the axial precession cycle
    and there is a very good reason why this is so. In the next posts I hope
    to explain this.
    . . . . . . . . . . . Please stick around . . .

  9. using: . . . . . . J = 11.862242 . . . . . . . . . . . S = 29.457784
    Jupiter is approximately 72% of the mass orbiting the Sun. Because of
    this, Jupiter and the Sun share a binary attribute, they always oppose one
    another. Jupiter is a massive planet, but this is more about percentages
    than about mass. To share this binary attribute with the Sun, a planet need
    only be more than 50% of the mass orbiting the Sun. Saturn is approximately
    21% of the mass, so consequently Saturn will be regularly found on the
    same side of the center of mass as our Sun. But… if we were to remove Jupiter
    from our solar system, Saturn would then be 66+% of the mass and would
    develop a similar binary relationship with the Sun. Our sun would no longer
    orbit the center of mass in 11.862242 years but in 29.457784 years.

    The Sun’s orbital pattern is not usually viewed as an 11.862242 year 360 degree
    trip around the center of mass. The Sun orbits the center of mass in a looping
    pattern called an epi-trochiod which is a 19.8593122389 year 602.6982425434
    degree excursion.
    . . . . (19.8593122389 / 11.862242) 360 deg = 602.6982425434 deg.
    . . . . . . . 602.6982425434 deg – 360 deg = 242.6982425434 deg

    The Sun’s pattern of motion rotates ~242.6982425434 degrees in a
    counter-clockwise direction every 19.8593122389 years (Jupiter/Saturn
    synodic period). This could also be viewed as an ~117.30175745651 degree
    clockwise rotation.

    Because they are separated by ~117.30175745651 degrees, three successive
    synodic loops form the distinct shape of a three leaf clover. But this tri-synodic
    period of 59.57793671687 years does not complete a full 360 degree
    rotation.

    . . . . . . . . 360 deg – (117.30175745651 deg) 3 = 8.09472763044 deg

    Each successive tri-synodic pattern rotates ~8.09472763044 degrees in
    a counter-clockwise direction every 59.57793671687 years, eventually
    turning 360 degrees in 2649.63297065 years.

    (360 deg / 8.09472763044 deg) 59.57793671687 = 2649.63297065322 yrs

    We could also have calculated the number of years that
    pass with each degree of rotation:
    . . . . . 59.57793671687 / 8.09472763044 deg = 7.360091586 years/deg
    . . . . . (7.360091586 years/deg) 360 deg = 2649.63297065322 years

    The 2649.63297065322 year cycle belongs to an exclusive group of
    frequencies that have a 360 degree rotation characteristic. There’s a
    patterned formula for viewing these frequencies in pairs and the
    2649.63 year cycle is one of these significant periods.

    continued . . .

  10. using: . . . . . J = 11.862242 . . . . . . . S = 29.457784 . . . . . . .
    There is an exclusive group of frequencies that have a 360 degree
    rotation characteristic. We can view these frequencies in pairs with
    these formulas:
    . . . (a) 19.8593122389 x N x 360 / (117.3017574565 x N – 360 x M)
    . . . (b) 19.8593122389 x N x 360 / (242.6982425434 x N – 360 x M)
    . . . where: 360 x M reduces the denominator so as to fall within
    . . . a range of 0 to 360 degrees

    when N = {3, 6, 9, 12, 15, . . . 132} using formula (b) we get
    2649.63297065322 years

    when N = {2, 4} using formula (b) we get 114.02975542582 years

    when N = {1, 2, 3} using formula (a) we get 60.94838271 years

    when N = {43, 86, 129, 172, . . .} using formula (a) we get
    77327.805752832 years = 1798.321064019 (43) ‘ Keeling & Whorf
    77327.805752832 years = 25775.935290544 (3) ‘ axial precession

    If we take the first N from each set we can find the root of any
    period that is derived using these formulas:
    2649.63297065322 / 3 = . (J / 2)(S / 5) / (J / 2 – S / 5)
    114.02975542582 / 2 = . . J (S / 3) / (J – S / 3)
    60.9483827100845 / 1 = . (S / 2) J / (S / 2 – J)
    77327.805752832 / 43 = . (S / 72)(J / 29) / (S / 72 – J / 29)

    When N = {132, 264, 396, . . .} using formula (a) we get
    246273.06727448875 years = 1865.70505510976 (132)
    1865.70505510976 (22) = 41045.51121241479 years ‘ obliquity
    246273.06727448875 / 132 = (S / 221)(J / 89) / (S / 221 – J / 89)

    . . . . continued . . .

  11. using: . . . . . J = 11.862242 . . . . S = 29.457784 . . . . .
    . . (a) 19.8593122389 x N x 360 / (117.3017574565 x N – 360 x M)
    . . (b) 19.8593122389 x N x 360 / (242.6982425434 x N – 360 x M)

    when N = {89, 178, 267, . . . } using formula (b) we get
    4431425.94338327044742 years = 49791.302734643488 (89)
    49791.302734643488 (2) = 99582.605469286976 years ‘ earth’s eccentric orbit
    4431425.94338327044742 / 89 = (J / 60)(S / 149) / (J / 60 – S / 149)

    Hans Jelbring found that his commensurate orbital periods had the ratios:
    . . . 11.862242 (149) ~ = 29.457784 (60) ~ = 19.8593122389 (89)

    I hope that folks following these posts will agree that the Milankovic
    cycles belong to an exclusive group of frequencies that have a 360
    degree rotation characteristic.

    Milankovic theory is not universally accepted and for good reason. In my
    estimation, the current view of this theory is a bit turned around. The
    actual role that these cycles have in climate is so much more beautiful
    than the oversimplified version that is served up.

    . . . We’ll go there next . . . please stick around . . .

  12. The Milankovic cycles belong to an exclusive group of frequencies
    that have a 360 degree rotation characteristic. This has significant
    importance when we consider how the sun moves around the solar
    system’s center of mass.
    When the sun decelerates, it moves in closer to the center of mass.
    And when the sun accelerates, it moves away from the center of mass.
    The sun has an inwardly directed deceleration and an outwardly directed
    acceleration.
    The Milankovic cycles derive their power from the 360 degree rotation of
    the sun’s outwardly directed acceleration. Because the Milankovic cycles
    describe physical motions of the earth, it is widely accepted that these
    cycles are exclusively ‘earth’s cycles’. But this is simply not true. The
    Milankovic cycles are the sole property of the sun and all of the sun’s
    satellites feel the same accelerations of the sun.
    Among the sun’s satellites, the earth is unique in having a single large
    moon. Our 25775.9 (77327.8 / 3) year axial precession cycle is a result
    of being caught up between an accelerating sun and a large moon ( see
    the june 23, 9:25 post above). But… all of the sun’s satellites receive the
    same 77327.8 year pulse that we get from the sun. We may all have
    different precession rates but we all get our marching orders from the
    same place, the sun.

    continued . . .

  13. In my estimation, Milankovic theory ‘is’ completely turned around
    backwards.

    The earth’s inner core is continually cranked by an
    accelerating sun and a large moon. It’s axis swings up and down
    every 41000 years while it precesses (25772 yrs) like a football
    and i’ts eccentric orbit expands and contracts (100000 yrs). These
    are just a few of the motions the earth has inherited from an
    accelerating sun. They all have something in common, they cause
    the earth to produce an incredibly strong magnetic field.

    The most plausible explanation for re-occurring ice age cycles is:
    the substantial loss of magnetic field. Current Milankovic theory
    does not address the magnetic field. How light changes with a
    weaker field. How the chemistry of the atmosphere changes with
    different light. ( for more on this visit Reality348)

    One of the contradictions raised by Milankovic theory is the issue of
    eccentricity. Milankovic theory suggests that every 100000 years the
    earth’s eccentric orbit will increase and the sun’s light will be diffused
    enough to initiate an ice-age. Also… the severity of this ice-age will be
    determined by many other factors including obliquity and axial precession.
    So… this presents a problem, can the very same motions that are
    responsible for creating our magnetic field also be responsible for
    an ice-age cycle? Probably not.

    Even though Milankovic got it wrong, eccentricity for other reasons is one
    of the most important factors involved in the ice-age cycle.

    We’ll go there next, please stick around.

  14. Can the very same motions that are responsible for creating our
    magnetic field also be responsible for an ice-age cycle? Only if
    we’re talking about the loss of obliquity, the loss of axial precession
    and especially the loss of eccentricity.

    Where there is eccentricity there is acceleration and where there is
    acceleration there is magnetic field production. When acceleration
    diminishes so does magnetic field strength. When a bodies eccentricity
    value goes to zero, it’s magnetic field is weakened.

    The sun orbits the solar system’s center of mass in a looping pattern
    called an epi-trochoid. We don’t normally look at the sun’s orbit as
    having eccentricity, but it most certainly does and it gets this eccentricity
    almost entirely from the gas giants. This eccentricity is manifested as
    acceleration and distance from the center of mass. If the gas giants
    were to down shift into zero eccentricity values, the sun’s orbit would
    look much different. It’s smaller loop would be much broader and rounded.
    The two open ends would not extend out as far from the center, due to
    the decrease in acceleration. The magnetic field strength of the gas giants
    and the sun would all be decreased. The sun’s solar cycle would be extended
    out to about 11.86 years from 11 years. Also… solar minimum would occur
    at the same position on the ecliptic most of the time.

    It’s not a large eccentric value for earth that we should be concerned about.
    It’s a solar-system-wide loss of magnetic field strength.

    continued . . .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s