Dear members of orbital group.

I wonder if each member would introduce themselves and tell what it is
they hope to get from the group. Here is my own reasons for wanting
such a thing, copied from a recent post I made in cyclesi group.

First some background, then on to the present idea.

A number of serious scientists including some at NASA have made studies
of planetary configurations and the correlations with solar phenomena,
particularly sunspots. There have been a number of proposed mechanisms.
I don't propose to fully deal with the background but recommend the web
site of Jean-Pierre Desmoulins who is a member of this group. His web
site seems to have disappeared. The main two proposals have been tidal
effects which are dominated by J-V-E (letters for planets Jupiter Venus
Earth) and these do have a 22.15 year cycle and a so-called COM (Centre
Of Mass) motion of the sun relative to the COM of the solar system. This
later idea actually has no mechanism as the COM is just an idea and the
motion of the Sun relative to it has no known physical effects.

In the early 1990s I realised that the GR (General Relativity) effect on
light being double what it is on matter was a possible mechanism for
explaining how the planets might cause the solar cycle. Essentially,
Einstein showed that light is bent by the Sun twice as much as is
expected by Newtonian gravity. The same holds in reverse, that the
planets can affect light in the solar core which takes millions of years
to reach the surface. This means that the planets accelerate the solar
interior at a different rate to the surface because of the variation in
photonic energy proportion with depth. Although the effects are
extremely small, they can be calculated and do lead to significant
results because over a large period of time (say 5 years) even a small
acceleration can cause a significant displacement (remember d = 1/2 a t^2).

Initially I thought that this would cause accelerations on the solar
interior in the plane of the solarv system and that if these had
components matching the solar rotation rate then effects would build up.
Eventually I realised that by ignoring the N-S component in favour of
the larger component in the solar system plane I was missing the point.
The N-S component is NOT reversed like the other components every time
the sun does half a rotation. Rather, about 1/10 of the effect is in the
N-S direction and not cancelled by rotation because the solar axis is
tilted some 7 degrees relative to the planets orbits. This means that
the planets cause a N-S convection pattern in the sun. My calculations
showed that a 0.66 correlation could be achieved between the calculated
planetary forces on the solar interior and the observed sunspot numbers
if it was assumed that the sun has a natural 10.5 year resonance. This
is strongly indicative as correct physics and is unknown to most solar
physicists.

Present proposal to calculate Earth magnetic field reversals

The same thing applies to any planet as to the sun. However in the case
of the earth, the interior has a much smaller proportion of photonic
energy than the sun, because it is not a raging nuclear bomb. However
teh interior of the earth is substantially hotter than the surface and
so does have a bigger proportion of photonic energy than the surface.
This is the required condition for photonic convection currents to be
established by other bodies in the solar system. Because of the much
smaller proportion of photons in the earth we would not be surprised
that the earth's magnetic field reversals to be much slower than the
sun's - typically nearly a million years compared to a decade.

To test this hypothesis accurately requires calculation of planetary
orbits over many million years. Recently such accurate solar system
dynamical models have been developed and matched to geological cycles
(including mainly Milankovitch cycles) for a period of 23 million years
with further extensions expected. The astronomical solution is now the
preferred method for dating in geology for the last 23 million years. So
the methodology exists but requires additional calculations in this case.

Some hints of the possibility of the model being correct:

The attachment shows actual reversals of the earth's magentic field. I
sent this to cyclesi some time back I think. Traditionally it is said
that the reversals are not periodic. This is correct, however the
graphic also shows two cycles that are present along with some
additional effects for sure. The two cycles are 1.1 million years and 9
million years. The 1.1 million year period is particularly interesting
because long term studies of the solar system report this as an energy
exchange between Jupiter and Neptune. So we have at least one case where
a olar system dynamics period is matched by a magnetic reversal period.
This makes it look worthwhile to investigate further.

Chuck, at this point I would be interested in your comments. I am
putting forward the proposal that magnetic fields may be understood as
resulting from N-S currents in astronomical bodies with excess internal
photons (meaning significantly hotter inside than outside) and the
combined accelerations along the rotation axis of all the other bodies
in the solar system resulting from orbital motions. No fundamental
theory at present exists to explain planetary magnetism and why it
happens only for large bodies. This could give the answer.

regards
Ray