Requiem for Relativity

text of Joseph C. Keller's poster for Oct. 10, 2009 CPAK conf. (U. of California - Irvine), p. 10

BARBAROSSA HAS TYPICAL BINARY ORBIT

Large binary orbits typically have eccentricities like Barbarossa's. On the average, the less massive (i.e., "late" spectral type) the binary companion of a sunlike star, the more distant. Semimajor axes of more than 100 AU are common for red dwarf or brown dwarf companions of sunlike stars.

PARTLY EXPLAINS PIONEER PROBE ANOMALOUS ACCELERATION

The most accurate estimate of Barbarossa's mass, or rather the combined mass of the Barbarossa system, is by the "resonance of precession" explained on another sheet. This is a sensitive function of the semimajor axis and eccentricity, so I give Barbarossa's mass simply as 0.01 solar. The acceleration (relative to the Sun) of Pioneer 10 & 11 due to Barbarossa, when subtracted from recent estimates of the Pioneer anomaly, leaves a remaining anomaly that is a more smoothly decreasing function of distance from the sun, more amenable to various theoretical explanations.

ALL "PLANET X" SEEKERS PREDICTED BARBAROSSA

Barbarossa's direction, distance and mass all are roughly consistent with the Planet X predictions of David Todd, Percival Lowell, and Robert Harrington, though, as Lowell said, it is practically impossible to decide between a nearer, lighter Planet X, and a farther, heavier one, by planetary influence alone. Barbarossa also is consistent with the ephemeris residuals found by Newcomb and by Eckert.

text of Joseph C. Keller's poster for Oct. 10, 2009 CPAK conf. (U. of California - Irvine), p. 11

(diagram of Jupiter's, Neptune's and Barbarossa's orbital poles, here)

BARBAROSSA CAUSES RESONANCE OF PRECESSION

Barbarossa torques Neptune's orbit, but the rest of the solar system also torques it. The torque on Neptune, per degree of inclination, from Barbarossa vs. the rest of the solar system, is in the ratio 1:. Neptune precesses around a pole that is 3 times closer to the solar system's pole (3 deg) than to Barbarossa's orbital pole (9 deg). If, for example, Neptune's original orbital pole were the same as the solar system's, Barbarossa never would cause Neptune's pole to move more than 3x2=6 deg away.

Pluto also is torqued by Barbarossa and by the rest of the solar system, but in the ratio 1::2. (In computing this, one must realize that Pluto's perihelion avoids Neptune.) A typical classical Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt object is torqued in the ratio 1::1 (per degree of inclination). What causes these simple ratios, if not Barbarossa?

Eventually the planets transmit the torques to each other, and the principal plane of the solar system precesses about Barbarossa's orbit. This is much slower than, say, the orbital precession of Earth due to Jupiter.

text of Joseph C. Keller's poster for Oct. 10, 2009 CPAK conf. (U. of California - Irvine), p. 12

(sketch of inner & outer protoplanet orbits, here)

BARBAROSSA CAUSED RESONANCE OF ORBITS

Jupiter's orbital period is in exactly l:534 resonance with Barbarossa's. Suppose Jupiter + Saturn once were one protoplanet having their combined mass and orbital (kinetic plus potential) energy. This protoplanet, J+S, would have been in exactly l:452 orbital resonance with Barbarossa. Even earlier supposed protoplanets, J+S+Uranus and J+S+U+Neptune, would have been in 1:436 and 1:416 resonance with Barbarossa, respectively. (In computing this, one must find the orbital period from the semimajor axis according to Kepler, and include even the mass of moons and the gravity of planets.) These ratios are so close to whole numbers, that the statistical significance is p = 0.001 %.

What Barbarossa did for the outer planets, Jupiter did for the inner planets. The supposed protoplanet, Venus+Earth+Luna, would have been in l:15 orbital resonance with Jupiter. Apparently Mars and Mercury separated before Jupiter and Saturn, because the protoplanet Mercury+Venus+Earth+Luna+Mars would have been in 1:18 resonance with the protoplanet Jupiter+Saturn.

text of Joseph C. Keller's poster for Oct. 10, 2009 CPAK conf. (U. of California - Irvine), p. 13

BARBAROSSA RESONATES WITH "URANUS MINUS NEPTUNE"

The most accepted values for the periods of Uranus and Neptune, are 84.01 and 164.79 yr, resp. If these are accurate to the last digit, then Uranus passes Neptune 36.994 times per 6340.0 yr Barbarossa orbit.

THERE IS A NEBULA

Among nearby bright stars, those with the strongest interstellar absorption, are those nearest Barbarossa. Systematic inconsistency of USNO-B Red, and Blue, magnitudes occurs near, or slightly retrograde of, Barbarossa, as though a nebula has moved into the region, or recently formed there.

UNDISCOVERED FORCES?

The (+) CMB dipole is slightly retrograde of Barbarossa. Barbarossa presently moves only a degree in 8 yr, and the accuracy of WMAP vs. COBE CMB dipoles, doesn't suffice to prove that the dipole isn't following Barbarossa.

According to modern calculations, future planetary collisions in our solar system (a la Velikovsky) are very unlikely. Yet a nearby sunlike solar system has dust resembling an acute planetary collision. Maybe this "collision" really is something else.

Earth's Younger Dryas period, is marked by rare hexagonal nanodiamonds, but if these came from comet(s), why so few craters and so little iridium? Maybe something made them from our atmospheric CO2.

Many known millisecond pulsars are slowing as if accelerating away from us at: the Hubble parameter times the speed of light. When near its latus rectum, Barbarossa will be accelerating (radially) toward us this much.

text of Joseph C. Keller's poster for Oct. 10, 2009 CPAK conf. (U. of California - Irvine), p. 14

ANCIENTS SAW BARBAROSSA

Arguably, the bronze calculating wheels found in the Roman shipwreck off Antikythera, are technology more advanced than the telescope. Telescopes aren't very durable.

Alternatively, Barbarossa might have been visible to the unaided eye. "Catastrophic and cataclysmic variables" brighten 100x, perhaps by gravitational infall. The energy of gravitational infall could brighten Barbarossa 1,000,000x ( = 15 magnitudes) intermittently. Or, the brightening might be from a kind of energy yet undiscovered.

Contributors to Dr. Van Flandern's messageboard, recently told me that some ancient texts say Sirius was red. Maybe the Sirius system had a dusty catastrophe. Maybe the memory of Barbarossa became confused with Sirius.

The star-studded horns of Hathor resemble Crater more than Taurus, especially when corrected for proper motion. Crater is next to Hydra, the water snake. Rising, the upside-down Crater looks like a house. Hathor was "the house of Horus". Egyptians called Mars "the red Horus". Statues show a sunlike "eye of Re" perched between the horns of Hathor, as Barbarossa will be between the horns of Crater in 2012. "The cobra snake of Re" (the uraeus)(Hydra?) wrought destruction.

The major unexplained azimuthal orientation of Egyptian (and to a lesser extent European and Mesoamerican) temples, is toward the rising of Barbarossa at c. 4329BC.

text of Joseph C. Keller's poster for Oct. 10, 2009 CPAK conf. (U. of California - Irvine), p. 15

KNOWLEDGE OF GEODESY

From British megaliths to Chaco Canyon, lunar "standstill" alignments used for correlating the monthly cycle of lunar declination, with moonrises, allowed determination of longitude.

Bert Janssen noticed that the slopes of the Giza pyramids, roughly equal the slope from the equator, of a great circle to Stonehenge. I go further. Geodesics on an oblate spheroid require calculus, but straight lines through the Earth can be found without calculus. Consider the straight lines through the Earth from Menkaure's pyramid to Stonehenge, and from Menkaure's pyramid to the North Pole. Let the angle between them, be theta. The complement of theta is analogous to Janssen's slope of the great circle. This complement of theta, equals the slope of the granite casing of Menkaure's pyramid, to the accuracy that Petrie was able to determine that slope.

Janssen also noticed that his angle roughly equalled the latitude of Stonehenge. Again I go further. I account for Earth's flattening and for the small pole shift implied by the orientation (not true N) and latitude (not exactly 30N) of the Great Pyramid. The angle theta defined above, differs from the geographic colatitude of Stonehenge by only 0.001 degree: less than the uncertainty of the ancient pole.

To within the accuracy with which Petrie could determine the total height of Khafre's pyramid (i.e., the height above Khufu's base as the reference) Khafre's height :: lunar proxigee (i.e., nearest perigee) = one day :: 6340yr. Such people would have been able to plot Barbarossa's orbit.