The posing of the question of a possible artificial interference in the formation of the solar system is far from new
Alim Wojciechowski, Ph. D. in technical sciences, back in 1993 published the book "The Solar System - a Creation of Reason?", However, it is mainly based on the analysis of nonstationary phenomena.
Senior Researcher at the Institute of Solar-Terrestrial Physics SB RAS, Ph. D. Sci. Sergei Yazev five years ago wrote an article "Occam's Razor and the Structure of the Solar System", which considers a model of artificial interference in the formation of planetary orbits billions of years ago.
On October 12, 2005, an article was published in "Komsomolskaya Pravda" "Was the solar system built by aliens?" (https://www.kp.ru/daily/23594/45408), which was reproduced by electronic media.
Not all of the arguments could be accepted. I believed and still believe that the main attention should have been paid not to UFOs and light flashes, but rather to the analysis of the elements of the orbits of celestial bodies and stationary phenomena (first of all, the surface relief of planets and satellites). That is, everything that is the result of many years of astronomical observations and research of spacecraft, and, therefore, can be subjected to subsequent verification.
There is a need to systematize data that meet these criteria. I decided to start an Internet research, and anonymously - using the nickname uncle_Serg on the Web, and the pseudonym “Fedor Dergachev” in print media. On September 29, 2005 on the server lib.userline.ru (finally closed in August 2007) the article "An artifact named" Solar system "was posted. Since then, it has been supplemented many times, and now it is a voluminous work in seven parts and three appendices, available at
We must not forget, however, that Artefact, for all its merits, is not a scientific work, but only a selection of materials on a specific topic.
To come to certain conclusions, it is necessary to re-read the main theses of the "Artifact". I will only note that here I do not cite links everywhere, since some of the cited materials have been removed from the Internet. However, all links can be verified on the above site.
Promotional video:
Part one. "Description of the Artifact"
There are quite enough materials on the anomalies of planets and their satellites. I would like to present them within the framework of a logical structure that is clear for readers. This is how the idea was born to use the phenomenon of resonance, which permeates the entire solar system, to "structure" the theme.
Section: "Resonant rotation of Venus and Mercury"
“The movement of Mercury is coordinated with the movement of the Earth. From time to time, Mercury is in the lower conjunction with the Earth. This is the name of the position when the Earth and Mercury are on the same side of the Sun, lining up with it on one straight line.
The lower conjunction repeats every 116 days, which coincides with the time of two full revolutions of Mercury and, meeting with the Earth, Mercury always faces it with the same side. But what force makes Mercury equal not with the Sun, but with the Earth. Or is it an accident? Even more weirdness in the rotation of Venus …
Venus has many unsolvable mysteries. Why doesn't it have a magnetic field and radiation belts? Why is water from the bowels of a heavy and heated planet not being squeezed out into the atmosphere, as it happened on Earth? Why does Venus rotate not from west to east, like all planets, but from east to west? Maybe she turned upside down and her north pole became south? Or someone threw it into orbit, having previously twisted it in the other direction? And the most striking thing is that for the Earth there is also the eternal mockery of the "morning star": with a periodicity of 584 days, it approaches the Earth at a minimum distance, finding itself in the lower conjunction, and at these moments Venus always faces the Earth with the same side. This strange look, eye to eye, cannot be explained from the point of view of classical celestial mechanics. "(M. Karpenko." Intelligent Universe ";" Izvestia ",July 24, 2002).
S. Yazev reports the following about other resonances of the planets:
“The orbit of Saturn shows a resonance 2: 5 relative to Jupiter, the formula“2WJupiter - 5Wsaturn = 0”belongs to Laplace …
It is known that the orbit of Uranus has a 1: 3 resonance relative to Saturn, the orbit of Neptune has a 1: 2 resonance relative to Uranus, and Pluto's orbit has a 1: 3 resonance relative to Neptune.
In the book of L. V. Xanfomality "Parade of planets" indicates that the structure of the solar system, apparently, was determined by Jupiter, since the parameters of the orbits of all planets are in the correct ratio with its orbit. It also mentions works claiming that the formation of Jupiter in its current orbit is an unlikely event. Apparently, despite the large number … of models explaining the resonant properties of the solar system, one can also bear in mind the model of artificial interference. " ("Occam's Razor and the Structure of the Solar System").
Section: "Coincidence of the angular sizes of the Sun and the Moon"
S. Yazev did not forget about the Moon:
“- Equality of the angular sizes of the Sun and the Moon in observations from the Earth, habitual since childhood, and providing us with the opportunity to observe total (not annular) solar eclipses.
- Equality of the ratio of the diameter of the Sun to the diameter of the Earth and the distance from the Sun to the Earth to the diameter of the Sun with an accuracy of 1% can also cause some interest. When expressed in kilometers, it looks like this:
1390000: 12751 = 109
149600000: 1390000 = 108
- The equality of the period of the Moon's revolution around the Earth to the period of its rotation around the axis (sidereal lunar month, 27.32 days) and the Carrington period of the Sun's rotation (27.28 days) also looks interesting. Shugrin and Obut indicate that 600-650 million years ago, the synodic lunar month was equal to 27 modern days, i.e. there was an exact resonance with the Sun. " ("Occam's Razor and the Structure of the Solar System").
Section: "Facing one side of the planet"
Returning to the topic of resonances, it should be noted that the Moon is also a celestial body, one side of which is constantly facing our planet (which, in fact, means “equality of the period of the Moon's revolution around the Earth to the period of its rotation around the axis”).
Topic: "The moon is facing the Earth with one side"
"The moon is facing the Earth on one side (resonant rotation 1: 1)." (Forum of the site "Astrolab. Ru").
And the record holder for resonances is, of course, the Pluto - Charon pair. They rotate, always facing the same sides to each other. For space elevator designers, they would be an ideal testing ground for technology.
Pluto and Charon
“Charon is located at a distance of 19,405 km from the center of Pluto and moves in an orbit located in the equatorial plane of the planet. It constantly faces Pluto with one side, like the Moon to Earth. But the ideality of this synchronously moving pair lies in the fact that Pluto is always turned to Charon by the same hemisphere. In other words, the periods of rotation of both bodies around their axes and the orbital period of Charon coincide, it is equal to 6.4 days. Perhaps our planet will face the same fate in the distant future. Pluto's diameter is 2,390 kilometers, and its satellite is 1186 kilometers. A truly unique couple!Nowhere else in the solar system is it found that a planet is only twice the size of its satellite. Quite rightly, Pluto is called a double planet. " (Project "Astrogalaxy". Astrogalaxy.ru/056.html).
The next step was quite logical to consider anomalies of other satellites, the axial rotation of which is synchronous with the orbital. There were a great many of them, to be more precise, almost all of them.
Astronomical sites state that the satellites of the Earth, Mars, Saturn (except for Hyperion, Phoebe and Ymir), Uranus, Neptune (except for Nereid) and Pluto revolve synchronously around their planets (constantly facing them with one side). In the Jupiter system, such a rotation is characteristic of a significant part of the satellites, including all the Galilean ones.
Synchronous rotation is most often explained by tidal interactions. However, there are questions here. I will return to this topic later.
Pluto found two new moons
“According to preliminary data, the satellites revolve around Pluto in circular orbits in the same plane with Charon …
New satellites make it difficult to explain the origin of the Pluto system. It is unclear how they could condense in the immediate vicinity of massive Charon. But the hypothesis of the gravitational capture of satellites also does not work, since the orbits of the captured bodies are extremely rarely circular [? - uncle_Serg] ". (elementy.ru/news/164939).
It is also accepted to consider satellites with irregular (retrograde) orbital motion "captured" and therefore do not have synchronization of axial and orbital rotation. In this case, they usually refer to the moon of Saturn, Phoebe, whose photographs taken by Cassini confirm its origin from the Kuiper Belt. However, below I will show that this opinion is fundamentally wrong.
A feature of many satellites with synchronous rotation is ideal circular orbits and the coincidence of the satellite's orbital plane with the planet's equatorial plane. (Table 1-4).
Tables of characteristics of the orbits of some satellites with synchronous rotation
Tab. 1. Weakly eccentric (almost circular) orbits
Satellite planet |
Orbital eccentricity |
| Phobos (satellite of Mars) | 0.015 |
| Amalthea (moon of Jupiter) | 0.003 |
| And about | 0.004 |
| Europe | 0.009 |
| Ganymede | 0.002 |
| Callisto | 0.007 |
| Enceladus (moon of Saturn) | 0.0045 |
| Miranda (satellite of Uranus) | 0.0027 |
| Umbriel | 0.0050 |
| Oberon | 0.0008 |
| Charon (satellite of Pluto) | 0.0076 |
Tab. 2. Ideal circular orbits
Satellite planet |
Orbital eccentricity |
| Deimos (satellite of Mars) | |
| Tethys (moon of Saturn) | |
| Triton (satellite of Neptune) | 0 (10 * -17) [! - uncle_Serg] |
Triton has a retrograde (reverse) rotation around Neptune
Tab. 3. The plane of the satellite's orbit is close to the plane of the planet's equator
Satellite planet |
Orbital inclination to the equator in degrees |
| Phobos (satellite of Mars) | 1.0 |
| Deimos | 1.9 (0.9 - 2.7) |
| Amalthea (moon of Jupiter) | 0.4 |
| You | 1.0659 |
| And about | 0.04 |
| Europe | 0.47 |
| Ganymede | 0.21 |
| Callisto | 0.51 |
| Titan (moon of Saturn) | 0.33 |
| Tethys | 1.86 |
| Umbriel (satellite of Uranus) | 0.36 |
| Oberon | 0.10 |
Tab. 4. The plane of the satellite's orbit ideally coincides with the plane of the planet's equator
Satellite planet |
Orbital inclination to the equator in degrees |
| Enceladus (moon of Saturn) | |
| Charon (satellite of Pluto) |
But this raises the first questions.
Consider the almost generally accepted opinion that Phobos and Deimos are former asteroids that entered their current orbit after they were gravitationally captured by Mars from their previous trajectory in the plane of the ecliptic. Recall that the axial deviation of Mars is 25.2 °. This is how much it took to rotate the plane of the orbits of Phobos and Deimos, at the same time turning them from elongated elliptical to perfectly circular and synchronizing the axial rotation with the orbital.
Then, the Moon is more likely to be an asteroid captured by the Earth: after all, the plane of its orbit comes close enough to the ecliptic.
“The moon revolves around the earth not at all in the plane of the earth's equator, as it should be for a real satellite. The plane of its orbit comes close enough to the ecliptic, that is, to the plane in which the planets usually revolve around the Sun. (A_leksey. Forum "Is the moon a satellite of the Earth or an independent planet?" Of the site "Stargazer").
Topic: "The satellites of Mars Phobos and Deimos: axial rotation synchronously with the orbital"
“Just the satellites of Mars, unlike the Moon, are“correct”, albeit small. They both rotate in the same plane (a difference of 1.7 degrees), and in the plane of the equator of the planet, and if you look at other natural satellites of the planets, they all, without exception, rotate in the plane of the equator. And the orbits of the Martian moons are a regular circle. And the fact that they are "captured" contradicts many factors. Asteroid "satellites", for example, Jupiter, describe such pretzels … and they rotate in all planes of the planet, and indeed there is an opinion that Phobos and Deimos are fragments of one once existing Martian "Moon" crushed by gravity of the planet at the dawn of the creation of the Solar systems. Plus they have a similar structure. " (Alexey).
“I was also always amazed how, after gravitational capture, you can get a circular orbit?
And in the case of Mars, there are even two satellites, and both have a circle in the equatorial plane …”(Parfen).
"It is very difficult to believe that two different captured satellites are rotating in the same plane, even if we imagine that the fact that their orbit passes along the planet's equator is just an accident." (A_leksey, Forum "Is the moon a satellite of the Earth or an independent planet?" Of the site "Stargazer").
“Most scientists are still inclined to believe that Phobos and Deimos are asteroids caught in the gravitational captivity of Mars. However, this theory, according to University of Virginia professor Fred Singer, conflicts with the laws of physics and cannot explain why both satellites move around the planet in almost circular and equatorial orbits. The periods of rotation around the axis of each of the satellites coincides with the period of revolution around Mars. (y-net.narod.ru/astro/a_news18.htm)
"Apparently Phobos and Deimos were captured about a billion years ago." (D. Rothery. "Planets", p. 131).
The truth, as always, is somewhere in between. Phobos and Deimos could not get from the Asteroid Belt into a beautiful orbit around Mars (that is, the forum participants and F. Singer are right), but they still got there (this is the correctness of the "official" planetology). Finding out who (or what) helped them in this about a billion years ago is the goal of this study.
Topic: "Satellite Amalthea rotates synchronously around Jupiter"
“Somewhere in a parallel branch it was said about Amalthea, and also, one of the options is gravitational capture, because it could not form so close to Jupiter. And again - the circle and the plane of the equator … Maybe the Galilean satellites acted on it and stabilized the orbit.
And who stabilized Phobos and Deimos? Probably mathematicians have a model, so everything is clear to them … "(Parfen. Forum" Is the moon a satellite of the Earth or an independent planet? "Of the Stargazer website).
“The four small inner satellites closer to Io are now identified as satellites in the ring forming Jupiter's ring system. These are Metis, Adrastea and Teba, discovered by Voyager 1 in 1979, and Amalthea, discovered by Barnard in 1892. The Galileo spacecraft received detailed images of these satellites, which showed their irregular, bizarre shapes and highly cratered surfaces. These satellites are in synchronous rotation and have large geological features in the form of impact craters …
Amalthea is in synchronous rotation with Jupiter, that is, the period of rotation of the satellite around Jupiter is equal to the period of rotation of Amalthea around its own axis (0.498179 days)”. (lnfm1.sai.msu.ru/neb/rk/natsat/jup_sat/amalth.htm)
“The ring of Jupiter is a mysterious phenomenon, it is not clear how it can exist at all. Initial analysis showed that the particles in the ring are mostly small. If so, the mystery will become even more difficult to solve, because the smaller the particles, the more difficult it is for them to stay in orbit around the planet and not settle on it. (Yearbook "Science and Humanity. 1981". "Annals of Science", p. 333).
“The conventional model for the formation of Jupiter's moons suggests that satellites closer to the planet are made of denser material than those in distant orbits. This is based on the theory that young Jupiter, like a diminished likeness of the early Sun, was incandescent. Because of this, the nearest Jupiter moons could not hold ice, frozen gases and other fusible and low density materials. Jupiter's four largest moons fit this pattern. The innermost of these, Io, is also the most dense, consisting mainly of stone and iron. However, new data from Galileo suggests that even if Amalthea is pretty leaky, it doesn't matter the material of the individual fragments, of which it consists, has a lower density than Io. (grani.ru/Society/Science/m.16861.html)
Amalthea could not have formed so close to Jupiter - the original protoplanetary nebula in such an orbit would not have allowed the giant planet's gravity to condense. But it is even more difficult to imagine the movement of Amalthea from an orbit in the Asteroid Belt to a perfectly circular one in the vicinity of the gas giant (2.55 Jupiter's radius) and the subsequent synchronization of axial rotation with the orbital one. Note that the latter does not happen "automatically" - not all satellites in the Jupiter system have resonant rotation.
And yet the "impossible move" happened.
In order not to return later to explain the reasons, I will make an assumption. The one who, millions of years ago, launched the mechanism that moved Amalthea (and maybe all four small internal satellites closer to Io) wanted to use them as "ring satellites" that form Jupiter's ring system. True, in this case it is more important to find out not "why", but "how."
Topic: "Satellite Triton rotates synchronously around Neptune"
“ Triton has an unusual orbit. It moves in the direction opposite to the rotation of Neptune, while its orbit is strongly inclined to the plane of the planet's equator and to the plane of the ecliptic. It is the only large satellite moving in the opposite direction. Another feature of Triton's orbit is that it is a perfectly regular circle (its eccentricity is equal to the value with 16 zeros after the decimal point)."
www.automotonews.biz/wiki/Triton_(satellite)
“As you know, Triton (whose mass (2.15x10 * 22 kg) is about 40 percent greater than the mass of Pluto, and the diameter is about 2 700 kilometers) has an inclined orbit and moves in the direction opposite to the rotation of Neptune itself (that is, it is characterized by the so-called "Irregular" orbital motion). This is a sure sign that such a satellite was once captured, and not born near the giant, but astronomers have long failed to understand the mechanism of this capture. The problem was that Triton had to somehow lose energy in order to go into its current almost perfectly circular orbit. A collision with any ancient Neptune moon could, in principle, slow down the movement of Triton, but such a hypothesis has its own difficulties: if the target moon were small,then the capture of Triton would simply not have been possible, while an impact on a satellite of a sufficiently large size would almost inevitably have to destroy Triton itself …
Well, other available theories (for example, Triton could still "slow down", passing through a more extensive system of Neptune rings than now, or experience the effect of aerodynamic braking from its primordial gas disk) are forced to deal with less probable processes (it is necessary to "pick up" some "particularly successful" moment in the history of the development of the solar system, when the disk near Neptune after the deceleration of Triton would immediately scatter, and not slow it down to the point that the satellite would simply crash into the planet) …
There were earlier guesses about the connection between the fate of Triton and Pluto, whose orbit, as you know, crosses the orbit of Neptune, but it is unclear whether such a connection was verified using any serious modeling.
Triton's orbit is located between a group of relatively small inner moons with "regular", regular orbits and the outer group, again small satellites with irregular (retrograde) orbits. Due to the "wrong" orbital motion, the tidal interaction between Neptune and Triton takes energy from Triton, which leads to a lowering of its orbit. In the distant future, the satellite will either collapse (possibly turning into a ring) or fall on Neptune. " (galspace.spb.ru/nature.file/sol.html)
"Astronomers have established that Triton is always facing Neptune with the same side. " (BI Silkin. "In the world of many moons. Satellites of the planets", p. 192).
The situation with the satellite of Neptune is completely unambiguous. Absolutely all researchers agree that Triton with its retrograde rotation could not have formed from the original protosolar nebula in its present orbit, it was formed in some other place (possibly in the Kuiper Belt) and was later "captured" by Neptune.
An obvious conclusion follows from this: satellites, whose axial rotation is synchronous with the orbital, did not necessarily form in the vicinity of their planets. They can be "captured", and only then go into a circular orbit and acquire an orbital resonance.
Another thing is that scientists cannot clearly explain even the "rough" seizure, as evidenced by the above article from the site "galspace.spb.ru". And the question of the "ideality" of Triton's circular orbit and its synchronous rotation, they quietly "put on the brakes."
So the question is posed. It's time to move on to what traces were left on the surface of satellites with resonant rotation by the ancient mechanism that carried out all these "jewelry" operations with giant celestial bodies.
But first, consider a satellite that does not in the slightest degree have synchronous rotation.
The chaotic rotation of Hyperion, the moon of Saturn
(Photo of the satellite of Saturn Hyperion. Antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap051003.html). A huge crater covers almost the entire side of the satellite.
“Hyperion is remarkable in that, as it moves along its orbit, it rotates randomly, that is, its period and axis of rotation change absolutely chaotically. This is the result of the tidal pull from Saturn. [? - uncle_Serg]. The same explains the eccentric orbit of Hyperion and its elongated shape. " (D. Rothery. "Planets", p. 207).
“Being a satellite of Saturn, you can't really spin:).
In theory (I did not find exact data) for him [Iapetus, - uncle _ Serg] (as well as for our Moon) the period of revolution coincides with the length of the day.
Otherwise, the gravity of Saturn will arrange such a "massage" that you can crumble. " (zyxman07. Forum "Iapetus" of the site "Membrana").
Despite its eccentric orbit, Hyperion is not considered a "captured" asteroid, at least I have not seen any such opinion in print or on the Internet. The "elongated" shape "did not prevent" the transition to a synchronous orbit, for example, Phobos and Amalthea.
Photo
See also the "Flight to Hyperion" animation.
But the main thing is that the powerful gravity of Saturn "for some reason" did not even think of "synchronizing" the rotation of the satellite, although, according to the general opinion, it "gave a massage" to the much more distant Iapetus (whose distance is 3.5 million km from Saturn versus 1.5 million km at Hyperion).
Let's return to the previous topic and once again compare the satellites with retrograde orbital motion - Phoebe and Triton, which came from the Kuiper Belt. The tidal forces of Saturn did not "level" the orbit of Phoebe and slow down its axial rotation (similarly to the gravity of Jupiter, its retrograde satellites Ananke, Karma, Pasithea and Sinop were "left alone"). But the retrograde Triton, the tidal attraction of Neptune for some reason "lovingly" (exaggerating on purpose) transferred it to a perfectly circular orbit and synchronized its axial rotation with the orbital one.
So I draw a conclusion: it is not necessary to say that the resonance of the satellites, the axial rotation of which is synchronous with the orbital, "is the result of tidal attraction from the planet" is not necessary.
I do not argue that the tidal forces of the planet can support the resonance already obtained. For this there are simple (without regard to scale) techniques. But more on that later.
How, then, do satellites (asteroids, Kuiper belt objects) move to ideal circular orbits exactly in the equatorial plane, and even get synchronized rotation?
Let's look at the photo of the "chaotic" Hyperion (Image 1). A huge impact crater covers almost the entire side of the satellite. After such a collision, the chaotic rotation and eccentric orbit of the satellite are not surprising. Nothing surprising at all. “Just” a natural companion.
Unlike most others.
But for other satellites (which received synchronous rotation), impact craters, unlike Hyperion, for some reason did not lead to such stunning results.
Tab. 5. Impact craters of satellites with synchronous rotation
Satellite planet |
Diameter (dimensions), km |
Crater |
Crater diameter, (depth), km |
Satellite side |
| Moon | 3476 | Basin South Pole - Aitken |
1400 * (depth 13) |
Feedback |
| Phobos | 28x20x18 | Sticky | ten | Feedback |
| Amalthea | 262x146x134 | Pan | 90 | Leading |
| You | 126x84 | Zetas | Feedback | |
| Callisto | 4806 |
Valhalla ("Bulls-eye") |
600 ** | |
| Mimas | 398 | Herschel |
130 (depth 9) |
|
| Tethys | 1058 | Odysseus |
400 (depth 15) |
Near, leading |
| Rhea | 1528 | Tirawa | 400 | |
| Titanium | 5150 | 400 | ||
| Titania | 1580 | Gertrude | 275 | Driven |
| Oberon | 1520 | Hamlet |
* The diameter of the outer ring of the basin reaches 2500 km.
** Valhalla is surrounded by rings of concentric faults, the outermost of which is 4000 km in diameter.
