The Recent Organization 
of the Solar System
by Patten & Windsor  ©1995


Go to Main: 
Patten Index
Main Page
Title Page
About Authors
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
Chapter 11

The Acquisition of Planetary Spins

  • When I wrote my treatise about the system [the solar system], I had an eye upon such principles as might work with considering men for the belief in a Deity, and nothing can rejoice me more than to find it useful for that purpose. - Isaac Newton
  • In any assessment of Solar System origin, it must be recognized that planet spin rates happen to occur in pairs - at least three times. In astronomical and cosmological texts written by gradualists, we find no indication that this basic observation has been assessed or addressed.

    This feature of twin spins recurs at least three times, if indeed not four times in this solar system. For over a century, cosmologists have supposed that the twin spin rates of Jupiter and Saturn are a coincidence. Two more coincidences are (2) the Mars and the Earth pair and (3) the Neptune-Uranus pair.

    Chance Versus Catastrophic Process (Flybys)

    The three pairs of twin spins in our solar system are:

    l. Mars and the Earth 1,477 minutes to 1,436

    2. Neptune and Uranus 948 minutes to 970

    3. Saturn and Jupiter 615 minutes to 590

    The Mars-Earth spin rates are 97.2% similar. The Neptune-Uranus spins are 96.5% similar and the Saturn-Jupiter spins are 96.0% similar.

    If such similarities are coincidences, then a gradualist, or an ex nihilo creationist needs to face the fact that he must affirm "coincidence" raised to the third power. In gradu xalistic dogma, perhaps it is by a chance of 1 in 100 that the Earth and Mars happen to have twin spins.

    The Jupiter and Saturn pair, the second pair, raise coincidence to the second power; l00 x 100, or one chance in 10,000. And Neptune and Uranus pair, the third pair, raise coincidence to the third power, 100 x 100 x 100, or one chance in a million. Now we are getting into a range of numbers with which gradualists have some familiarity. And perhaps that is only the beginning rather than the end of the list of mysterious solar system "coincidences". For example, Mars and the Earth have twin spin axis tilts too.

    Ex nihilo creationists are in the same dilemma as gradualists. However, they would never be comfortable explaining the unknown by "coincidence". But they do not understand this kind of design. It has been known for three and a half centuries that the rotation rates of Mars and the Earth are similar. It has also been known for over three centuries that the spin rates of Jupiter and Saturn are similar. But the spin rates of Uranus and Neptune have been difficult to determine, since their visible surface is unmarked atmosphere.

    But with the recent Voyager mission in the 1980's, data has been compiled on the rotation rates of this outer pair. Perhaps it was a surprise, but for the third time, twin spin rates was discovered. Thus, as Sherlock Holmes would say, "Watson, the plot thickens."

    A Badly-Needed Gyroscopic Perspective

    Up to the present time, there is virtually nothing written about planets as behaving like gyroscopes. This is so because close, catastrophic planetary flybys have never been given credence. So they have yet to be studied in either modern astronomy or cosmology.

    A close planetary flyby will create a "torque" on a rotating planet. In fact, each planet puts a torque on the other, resulting in a pair of reciprocal torques at similar angles on each gyro. If there were no close planetary flybys, torques and gyroscopic behavior would be irrelevant. But are they?

  • A definition of a gyroscope, or "gyro" is as follows:

    GYROSCOPE; A massive wheel which is universally mounted and spins on smooth bearings. It has many technical applications, among them the directional gyro, the gyrocompass and the gyrostabilizer.

    Gyroscopes also serve as controls in various types of modern guidance systems, such as those in rockets. The usefulness of the gyroscope derives from its tendency to undergo processional motion ... under the action of an external torque.F1

  • Accompanying the definition of a gyro should be that of a torque, and its process, torsion.

  • TORSION; The twisting of structural elements such as shafts in response to a torsional moment. Such moments cause shear stresses which can be calculated .... Deformations caused by torsion are measured in terms of the unit angle of twist, or angle of detrusion, i.e. angle (in radians) through which two transverse planes, a distance apart, will twist with respect to each other.F2

    TORQUE: A torque is a measure of the effectiveness of a force in producing rotation about a particular reference axis.

  • Planets are gyros, although it can be said that Venus and Mercury only marginally qualify, due to their slowness of rotation. The Sun, rotating at 26.8 days at its equator, is also a gyro, a giant gyro by any standard. The Sun and Jupiter are the two biggest gyros in this solar system. Jupiter and Saturn are the fastest gyros. The Sun is among the slowest in spin rate.

    The physical characteristics of the planets began to be studied through telescopes at the time of Galileo in the early 1600's. However, physical traits of gyros began to be studied in Germany by Bohnenberger as late as 18l0 and in England by Lang in l836. In Paris in the 1850's, Foucalt demonstrated the strange behavior of gyros in public demonstrations, and they were sensational. Foucalt is the one who gave the name "gyroscope" to rotating object.

    A gyro usually is made of metal. But gyros may also be made of glass, wood, plastic or some other solid material. But gyros are a matter of perception. For instance, a round, polished stick of mountain ash, 2 to 4 inches in diameter and 36 inches long is a baseball bat to some; it is a stick of wood to others. A basketball shot with back spin is "reverse English" to athletes but it, too, is a gyro. So it is with gyros. Rarely is it perceived that our rotating planet is a gyro. In fact it is the biggest gyro within 92,959,000 miles. It is the fastest gyro within 350,000,000 miles. The Moon is not a gyro since it doesn't rotate about an internal spin axis.

    The Jupiter–Saturn Case of Spin Acquisition

    The Second Story

    Jupiter and Saturn are neighbors today, as are Neptune and Uranus. Jupiter is 319 times as massive as the Earth and Saturn is 95 times as massive. Thus Jupiter is 3.35 times as massive as Saturn. Saturn is only 30% of Jupiter's mass.

    But Saturn rotates rapidly; in fact, it spins at a rate 95.9% of Jupiter's rapid rate. Giant Saturn spins in 615 minutes, and the even larger giant, Jupiter, rotates in 590 minutes. Their twin spin rates, at 95.9%, closely resemble the 97.7% similarity in spins of the Neptune-Uranus pair of gyros. Let us assume that formerly, a long time ago, Jupiter and Saturn also were something over 1,000 a.u., perhaps even 1,500 a.u. or 2,000 from the Sun. The Sun's gravitational force in that region is over a million times weaker in that distant region. Perhaps they wandered across each other's path, were attracted to each other. They began to co-orbit.

    Perhaps, in that realm of low Sun influence, the orbit of Saturn around Jupiter had an eccentricity of .90 or higher. This means It was a long, narrow orbit. Saturn approached Jupiter, increased in velocity, and looped or pivoted rapidly around Jupiter.

    Suppose that the "perigee" of Saturn's orbit was between 100,000 and 130,000 miles from Jupiter. This would be twice as close as the Moon comes to the Earth. Under this circumstance, Saturn would have made a swift pivot, a 180-degree turn around Jupiter in 3 to 3.5 hours.

    Suppose Saturn had an "apogee" or "ap-Jove" of 20,000,000 or 30,000,000 miles to go with its "peri-Jove" of 100,000 miles, or perhaps 130,000 miles. This gives Saturn an orbit of 400 to 500 days. Saturn would make one four-hour swift swing, a 180-degree pivot once every 450± days.

    In this quick pivot, Saturn would act as a torque on Jupiter, and vice versa. They would "co-twist," each other. They were reciprocal torques of the same angle on each other, except, to an engineer, Saturn's torque on Jupiter was a tiny bit stronger. Saturn made the pivot around Jupiter. A multiplicity of such flyby days means a multiplicity of such reciprocal torqueís. What happened is that the reciprocal torques converted a minute bit of orbital energy spin energy each flyby occasion. Figure 2 illustrates the "Big Crank". Saturn cranked Jupiter's spin rate, and vice versa. Torques are what create spin, and repeated torques are what created rapid rotation. Torques in space are reciprocal; that is why there are so many cases of twin spins. This condition existed until the Jupiter-Saturn, as a binary co-orbiting pair, were captured and delivered to the doorstep of the Sun by the delivery system, the United Parcel system of the cosmos. More attention will be given to the delivery system later in the next chapter.

    Suffice it to say that the same delivery system that delivered the Earth-Moon system to the Sun's doorstep also delivered the Jupiter-Saturn binary. The only differences are that the Jupiter-Saturn binary was dropped off first, and it was dismembered by the Sun because the "apo-Jove" or apogee of Saturn was too far from Jupiter to be kept. The Sun's "Radius of Action" intervened, and separated the two. (As was mentioned earlier, the Moon's apogee was always close and stayed well within the Earth's Radius of Action, or "Zone of control.")

    Cosmic Cranks and The Genesis of Twin Spins

    Jupiter and Saturn today comprise some 90% of the angular momentum of the solar system. Gradualists traditionally look to the Sun for the genesis of that angular momentum; INNOCENTLY, they are merely looking in the wrong direction. (Alfven is an exception).

    But the acquisition of Jupiter and Saturn as new, inner planets did bring about significant changes to the Sun. Jupiter raises 36% of the Sun's tides and Saturn another 2%. The Earth, Venus and Mercury raise the other 62% collectively. Those virgin tides in the Sun's volatile plasma helped the Sun to increase its internal turbulence and a new, higher permanent level of radiation. The newly adopted planets and an acquisition of minor elements from "L.B." probably turned the Sun on with respect to short-wave and mid-range radiation.

    Given this context, and the "Three Planetary Cranks" illustrated in Figure 2, it is easy to understand how spins were created by planetary catastrophism - close flybys, in reciprocal pairs, all in remote space 1,000 a.u. or more from the Sun. The gaining of twin spins by Jupiter and Saturn are the second story of our 70-story skyscraper of cosmology. Gradualism never will have a logical explanation for this phenomenal set of twin spins for Jove and Saturn.

    The Uranus–Neptune Case of Spin Acquisition

    The Third Story

    In remote space, 1,000 a.u. or beyond, let us assume a second pair of planets, Neptune and Uranus came close to each other. Their velocities were under 2,000 mph; the Sun's influence was weak, and this pair also began to co-revolve. Perhaps Uranus co-revolved with Neptune on a long, narrow orbit with an eccentricity of .98. Perhaps their "perigee" was 75,000 miles, or even as close as 50,000 miles of each other.

    Assume an "apogee" of 12,000,000 miles, and a co-orbital period of five to ten years. Neptune and Uranus are similar in mass; Neptune is 17.2 Earth masses and Uranus is 14.5. In this case, they would make a combined 180-degree turn around the other in six to eight hours.

    Each would function as a torque on the other. Given this condition, they would create reciprocal torqueís, one at a 100% rate and the other only 4% slower. The closer the ancient flybys, the fewer trips "around Go" would be needed for Uranus and Neptune to acquire, amid planetary catastrophism and mutual torqueís, the spin rates that are exhibited today. Figure 2 illustrates this case in principle also. Gyroscopes today are always studied in engineering courses in universities, but almost never in astronomical courses. This needs to change. The existing idea of grains accreting into planets, and somehow (hocus pocus and abracadabra) creating the observed spin is on the same side of the street as Baum's "The Wizard of Oz", and Carroll's "Alice in Wonderland".

    But, to their credit, weak as their case is, gradualists have attempted to address the issue. There is no record of ex nihilo creationists being concerned with such the genesis of planetary spin, much less of planet spins in pairs. In fact there is no record of ex nihilo creationists being interested in planetary catastrophism. Ex nihilo creationists prefer holy magic, whereas the cosmologists of gradualism prefer unholy magic (accretion).

    Just like the Saturn-Jupiter binary, so also the Neptune-Uranus binary was delivered to the doorstep of the Sun. In fact, the Neptune-Uranus co-orbiting pair was delivered first, at a distance of 20 to 30 a.u. and the Saturn-Jupiter pair was second. This explains why (a) the Uranus and Neptune pair still are next to each other. It explains (b) why the Jupiter and Saturn pair are still next to each other. And it explains (c) why the Uranus-Neptune pair was adopted first. It was the more distant of the pairs circling the delivery system, also known as the United Parcel of the cosmos. The Jupiter-Saturn pair were separated next. Last but not least, the Earth-Venus binary was delivered and dismembered, all except the Moon could not be separated from the Earth. But Mars was. Story 3 in our 70-story skyscraper is how, and to some extent where, the planets Neptune and Uranus acquired their twin spins. We challenge all gradualists to come up with an alternative explanation, one l0% as logical as this one.

    The Mars–Earth Case of Spin Acquisition

    The Fourth Story

    The Earth rotates in 1,436 minutes if measured in sidereal terms, that is, according to the fixed stars. There are 365.2564 such days in a sidereal year. The tropical year has a slightly different value, and has reference to the vernal equinox, which itself precesses a little. There are 365.242199 days in a tropical year. There is yet a third kind of year, the anomalistic year, the time span from one perihelion to the next. There are 365.2596 of these days in a year.

    Astronomers use the sidereal year for comparison purposes. To some it will appear odd that we ascribe 1,436 minutes instead of 1,440 to the year. But that is the period of time the Earth rotates from the view of the fixed stars.

    The sidereal spin rate of the Earth is 1,436 minutes. The sidereal spin rate for Mars is 1,477 minutes, which is just 41 minutes slower. In decimals, the Earth's spin rate is in 23.92 hours and the Martian one is in 24.62 hours. If the Earth's spin rate is considered 100%, that of the smaller Mars is 97.2%. This is likened to the 96% by the Jupiter-Saturn pair, and to the 96.5% of the Neptune-Uranus pair.

    The Earth evidently captured the Moon something like 1,000 a.u. or more from the Sun. In that remote, frigid environment, why couldn't the Earth also capture another smallish satellite, one 11% as massive as the Earth? On a slightly different plane? We suggest that is precisely what happened, and the evidence is seen in the twin spins, the twin tilts, and the ancient literature of the Mars-Earth Wars. Ancient man saw the close Mars flybys, dreaded them, worshipped the "host of heaven", and named some of his races after them; witness, the "Indo-Aryan race. In Indo-European languages Ares as Mars; in Indic languages it was Indra. Mars comings and goings were as worrisome to the Indic peoples as they were to the rest of the races of mankind.

    First the Earth co-orbit with Venus. Second, the Earth captured the Moon as was discussed in the previous chapter. Third, and finally, also in that remote region, 1,000 a.u. or more removed from the Sun, the Earth captured Mars. Mars assumed a long, narrow orbit (of high eccentricity), like Saturn and Neptune in the previous examples. It pivoted sharply around the Earth.

    But we are getting ahead of ourselves. As it was with Saturn and Neptune, so it was with Mars. Mars was the little "crank" while the Earth was the crankee. In order to create a spin rate of 1,436 minutes for the Earth, Mars had to make a 180-degree pivot in under 11 hours, and more probably, in less than 10 hours.

    To do so, Mars had to pivot around the Earth in remote space, and do so with a perigee (closest approach) distance of 30,000 miles. Then on going out it had to miss the Moon. And Mercury. And Venus. How the Sun acquired this quintet of inner planets is discussed in our Chapter Six.

    To summarize, gradualists and/or nihilists must explain the gaining of spin for planets in three distinct pairs. The pairs are Neptune-Uranus, Saturn-Jupiter and Mars-Earth. It is interesting to note that all three are still next to each other. This is a reflection of them having been paired in their original orbits in remote space.

    And it is a reflection that they were delivered to the Sun in three separate packages. One package contained the Uranus/Miranda/Ariel/Umbriel/Titania/Oberon group plus the Neptune/Triton/Nereid group. The second package contained the Jupiter/Io/Europa/Ganymede/Callisto group plus the other cluster, the Saturn and satellites group. The third and last package was delivered closest to the Sun's doorstep. It was the Earth-Venus group. See Chapter 6.

    A Further Similarity That Also Is Not Coincidental

    Twin Spin Axis - Tilts Too

    As it so happens, the tilts of the two spin axes of Mars and the Earth are also almost identical. One is at 23.44° and the other is at 23.59°. This similarity also can be explained, but it is for another, entirely different reason, totally unrelated to the pairing of their spin rates.

    That similarity will be explained in Volume 2, "The Mars-Earth Wars." The explanation of the Mars-Earth pair of twin spins is the fourth story in our reconstruction of modern cosmology. Sixty six to go.

    To the ancients, the workings of the heavens and the Earth was the supreme important issue. A cosmic question of nature was put to Job 3,700 years ago:

  • Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all. Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof? Job: 38:18-19
  • Conclusion

    We cite evidence that when spin rates were acquired, invariably it was in pairs. It requires a remote environment comparable to the one where the Earth captured the Moon. Such an environment is where, evidently, Neptune and Uranus began to co-revolve. It is where Jupiter and Saturn began to co-revolve. And it is where, evidently, Mars and the Earth also began to co-revolve. In addition, as was mentioned earlier, it is where the Moon received over 99% of its rather substantial count of craters as did Mercury.

    Acquisition of spin was neither by the process of accretion, an impossibility, nor did it require 4 billion years. It occurred as a process, but that process was located at least as far as 900 a.u. of the Sun, probably farther.

    In trying to explain this, the gradualists on one hand have done rather poorly, and the ex nihilo creationists on the other hand, from a scientific view have done even worse. One appeals to accretion, an impossibility, and the other appeals to magic where in reality a design is present. Neither of these 18th and 19th century explanations are happy alternatives.

    Stories 2, 3 and 4 of our skyscraper of Solar System cosmology are now completed. The fifth floor is next. And the view is improving with each new story.


    F1 Harper's Encyclopedia of Science. New York, Harper & Row, 1967, p. 537.

    F2 Ibid., p. 1195

    The Recent Organization of The Solar System  by Patten & Windsor

    Main:  Patten
    <<  PREV
    NEXT  >>