Many astronomy orbits are Ovals, not ellipses. The 20th century never learned the Oval, to them everything was ellipse as if oval was an outcast.

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo, King of Science diploma & portfolio
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
3:02 PM (8 minutes ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe

Many astronomy orbits are Ovals, not ellipses. The 20th century never learned the Oval, to them everything was ellipse as if oval was an outcast.

On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 2:57:13 PM UTC-6, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Archimedes Plutonium
> 2:52 PM (1 minute ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to sci.math,sci.physics, plutonium-atom-universe
> 
> On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 1:16:34 PM UTC-6, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 4:22:28 AM UTC-8, FromTheRafters wrote:
> > > FredJeffries expressed precisely :
> > > > On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 1:49:50 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium
> > > > wrote:
> > > >> On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 7:00:38 PM UTC-6, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > >>> *
> > > >>> Several of you have questioned: Is the ellipse a conic section? The answer
> > > >>> depends. If you are Archimedes Plutonium, the answer is no. If you are one
> > > >>> of the other 398,726 mahematicians living today, the answer is yes.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> earle
> > > >>> *
> > > >> The failed meathead Earle Jones, looks like you have 398,726 subtract 1, as
> > > >> it appears Fred Jeffries below in this thread is starting to question the
> > > >> second axis of symmetry in the slant cut of cone. On Friday, December 16,
> > > >> 2022 at 5:41:05 PM UTC-6, FredJeffries wrote:
> > > >>> On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 6:23:18 PM UTC-8, Chris M. Thomasson
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Disney did a nice animation on it:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> https: probably Mi6 tracker or hacker
> > > >>> But it also fails to show how to find the second axis of symmetry
> > > >> But this does not change the scene by much for every math professor across
> > > >> the globe fails simple geometry with their memorized answer-- ellipse a
> > > >> conic section when it never was, for most math professors are lazy couch
> > > >> potatoes unwilling to experiment with paper cone and drop a coin inside and
> > > >> see that it is impossible to have a 2nd axis of symmetry as Fred Jeffries
> > > >> points out.
> > > >
> > > > He 'points out' no such thing. He does NOT point out that it is IMPOSSIBLE to
> > > > have a second axis of symmetry. He only points out that the particular video
> > > > does not find that second axis of symmetry.
> > > >
> > > > And while he has read very few of the messages on that subject, he will point
> > > > out that none of the detractors have shown how to find the second axis of
> > > > symmetry, or even understood that it is a problem.
> > > Also, a second axis of symmetry is necessary but not sufficient to make
> > > an 'oval' prove to be an ellipse.
> > Are there two ellipses for orbital geometry?
> > Stable orbits have the cylinder intersection.
> > Unstable have the conic difference.
>
> Good point MitchR. Looking up the astronomy orbits-- most earth satellites have an *** oval orbit *** not ellipse.
>
> In fact, Earth's orbit itself is not an ellipse, for we have 1 point in the Year that we are closest to the Sun, and that asymmetry means the orbit of Earth is Oval, not ellipse.
> 
>
> 221st published book
>
> An Education Ladder Guideline for teaching mathematics and a Test to see if you are cut out to be a mathematician//Teaching True Mathematics
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
>
> Preface: This book is written to improve math education in school and at home. Trouble is, you cannot improve math education if the professors of mathematics have much of their teachings in error. So I write this book mostly as a test for math professors because to shine a light on math professor failure is the best way to improve math teaching, and thereby improve school curriculums especially colleges and universities. But others, such as laypersons are welcomed to join in. And it is the laypersons and students that will make the greatest amount of use of this book because math professors are usually stubborn and idiotic and hard to change for the better. And so when students and laypersons keep asking questions of their math professors, their brainwashing and thus poor teaching, they eventually come around to the truth and then change their bad behavior and bad misunderstanding; to proper true mathematics.
>
> Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a rubber washer inside a plastic cone. The washer is at a steep slant angle to the cone perpendicular. Notice the washer near the apex is fully touching the side of the cone, but the washer directed towards the base has not yet cut through the side of the cone, and you can see a rainbow or a crescent shape of area where the washer will intersect the side of the cone, (where my two finger are), making a total figure of a Oval, never the ellipse. I was taking this picture as one person, so I had the iphone camera in one hand and the cone in another hand, and had to use a rubber washer to stay in place. The same green plastic cone used in this picture appears in both of my published books of the proof slant cut of cone is oval, never the ellipse.
>
> My 3rd published book with the same green cone on cover.
> AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> My 68th published book with the same green cone on cover.
> Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BQDYMYKQ
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 16, 2022
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 551 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 65 pages
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
unread,
3:09 PM (now)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
Many astronomy orbits are Ovals, not ellipses. The 20th century never learned the Oval, to them everything was ellipse as if oval was an outcast.

I have yet to find the oval in the AP-EM equations, the 6 equations from New Ohm's Law V = i*B*E and taking derivative of all permutations.

The modern definition of Oval, by AP, is a closed loop constructed by adding together 1/2 of ellipse with a different 1/2 of a second ellipse. And the final figure of this construction is enclosed by a isosceles trapezoid in which only 4 points of the oval intersect the isosceles trapezoid. The ellipse is defined as a rectangle enclosure of 4 points of intersection. Circle is dealt with a square of 4 point intersection.

AP

As we see the definition of Oval as the adjoining of 1/2 of a ellipse with another 1/2 of a different ellipse to form the oval-- a figure of only 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry.

So now I can better see why the Earth and satellites have oval orbits. The Sun on Earth causes 1/2 ellipse but the tug on Earth by Moon causes the oval shape. For satellites, the Earth is 1/2 ellipse, but the tug by Moon and Sun cause another Oval orbit.

Ovals are where bodies have 2 or more tugs of gravity imposed.

Witness: Venus is the closest to circular orbit of all the planets.

AP

On 12/18/2022 2:01 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> As we see the definition of Oval as the adjoining of 1/2 of a ellipse with another 1/2 of a different ellipse to form the oval-- a figure of only 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry.
>
> So now I can better see why the Earth and satellites have oval orbits. The Sun on Earth causes 1/2 ellipse but the tug on Earth by Moon causes the oval shape. For satellites, the Earth is 1/2 ellipse, but the tug by Moon and Sun cause another Oval orbit.
>
> Ovals are where bodies have 2 or more tugs of gravity imposed.
>
> Witness: Venus is the closest to circular orbit of all the planets.

Keep in mind that any ellipse you can envision can be "thought of" as a
circle rotated in 3d space wrt the current point of view of an observer.

On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 2:01:11 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> As we see the definition of Oval as the adjoining of 1/2 of a ellipse with another 1/2 of a different ellipse to form the oval-- a figure of only 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry.
>
> So now I can better see why the Earth and satellites have oval orbits. The Sun on Earth causes 1/2 ellipse but the tug on Earth by Moon causes the oval shape. For satellites, the Earth is 1/2 ellipse, but the tug by Moon and Sun cause another Oval orbit.
>
> Ovals are where bodies have 2 or more tugs of gravity imposed.

How does the Sun tug on the Moon?
If not why not?

>
> Witness: Venus is the closest to circular orbit of all the planets.
>
> AP

There are two kinds of ellipse. Conic and cylinder.
They are for unstable and stable orbit There can be round orbit as well.

Mitchell Raemsch

On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 2:01:11 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> As we see the definition of Oval as the adjoining of 1/2 of a ellipse with another 1/2 of a different ellipse to form the oval-- a figure of only 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry.
....
> AP

Finally after nearly a decade you have actually introduced an equation for your oval claim.

Now can you use very very VERY convincing proof, geometric or algebraic or even numeric,
to convince everyone that the widest point of the intersection of a cone and a plane is at
exactly where your two semi-ellipses are joined at point c where x=0,
if I precisely correctly understand your claim.

You can't just say "because of your jar lid" or "because of your paper cone" or "because of lack
of symmetry" or "because it is" or "because you can see it", as you have seen consistently for
a decade, no, you need to come up with a really REALLY convincing argument that will
CONVINCE EVERYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD. Not a single person in the world believes any of
the claims that you have EVER made, you and I and everyone else knows that.

You DESPERATELY want to be recognized for your greatness.
ALL you need to do is produce an argument that CONVINCES everyone else in the world.
Really REALLY convince everyone that the intersection of a cone and a plane is two
non-congruent semi-ellipses joined where x=0. That will do it.
Convince EVERYONE and you will get your name in the NYT.

The simple algebra steps I used proved EXACTLY the opposite of what you claim.
But you can find and point out the exact error in that after you have CONVINCED
the rest of the world that the intersection of a plane and cone is two non-congruent
semi-ellipses with a widest point at x=0.

Go for it Archie.
IF you succeed at this and are thus famous around the world
THEN you will be taken FAR more seriously when you make your next claim.

On 12/18/2022 7:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 2:01:11 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>> As we see the definition of Oval as the adjoining of 1/2 of a ellipse with another 1/2 of a different ellipse to form the oval-- a figure of only 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry.
>>
>> So now I can better see why the Earth and satellites have oval orbits. The Sun on Earth causes 1/2 ellipse but the tug on Earth by Moon causes the oval shape. For satellites, the Earth is 1/2 ellipse, but the tug by Moon and Sun cause another Oval orbit.
>>
>> Ovals are where bodies have 2 or more tugs of gravity imposed.
>
> How does the Sun tug on the Moon?

It's called "gravity", Roy. You can see the sun's effects on the moon
via Google.

It's not simple. See the N body problem in Newtonian physics.

> There are two kinds of ellipse. Conic and cylinder.
> They are for unstable and stable orbit There can be round orbit as well.
>
There is just one kind of ellipse, just different parameters such as
eccentricity.

By unstable orbits do you mean parabolic or hyperbolic interactions
which are conic sections like ellipses, but are not closed orbits?

"Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> writes:
> On 12/18/2022 2:01 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>> As we see the definition of Oval as the adjoining of 1/2 of a
>> ellipse with another 1/2 of a different ellipse to form the oval-- a
>> figure of only 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2 axes of
>> symmetry.
>>
>> So now I can better see why the Earth and satellites have oval
>> orbits. The Sun on Earth causes 1/2 ellipse but the tug on Earth by
>> Moon causes the oval shape. For satellites, the Earth is 1/2
>> ellipse, but the tug by Moon and Sun cause another Oval orbit.
>>
>> Ovals are where bodies have 2 or more tugs of gravity imposed.
>>
>> Witness: Venus is the closest to circular orbit of all the planets.
>
> Keep in mind that any ellipse you can envision can be "thought of" as
> a circle rotated in 3d space wrt the current point of view of an
> observer.

It can't. A circle in 3D space is always a circle.

If you wish to introduce the concept of projection onto a plane,
then feel free, that might push your statement towards truthiness.

However, if you're going instead to mention a "point of view of
an observer" in a 3D context with no preferred direction, then
you're dancing dangerously close to a spherical projection being
assumed, in which case, you're gonna be pretty darn lucky if
you even end up with anything planar from your circle.

Phil
--
We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have
gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast
aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization.
-- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/

On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 9:16:05 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 12/18/2022 7:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 2:01:11 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >> As we see the definition of Oval as the adjoining of 1/2 of a ellipse with another 1/2 of a different ellipse to form the oval-- a figure of only 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry.
> >>
> >> So now I can better see why the Earth and satellites have oval orbits. The Sun on Earth causes 1/2 ellipse but the tug on Earth by Moon causes the oval shape. For satellites, the Earth is 1/2 ellipse, but the tug by Moon and Sun cause another Oval orbit.
> >>
> >> Ovals are where bodies have 2 or more tugs of gravity imposed.
> >
> > How does the Sun tug on the Moon?
> It's called "gravity", Roy. You can see the sun's effects on the moon
> via Google.

What is the Sun doing to the Moon that you can prove?
The Sun curve meets the Moon directly in space.
So what does that do to it?

>
> It's not simple. See the N body problem in Newtonian physics.
> > There are two kinds of ellipse. Conic and cylinder.
> > They are for unstable and stable orbit There can be round orbit as well..
> >
> There is just one kind of ellipse, just different parameters such as
> eccentricity.

There are two ellipses. Conic and cylinder.
>
> By unstable orbits do you mean parabolic or hyperbolic interactions
> which are conic sections like ellipses, but are not closed orbits?

Orbits have to be closed. Other curves of motion can be open.

Mitchell Raemsch

on 12/19/2022, mitchr...@gmail.com supposed :
> On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 9:16:05 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 12/18/2022 7:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 2:01:11 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium
>>> wrote:
>>>> As we see the definition of Oval as the adjoining of 1/2 of a ellipse with
>>>> another 1/2 of a different ellipse to form the oval-- a figure of only 1
>>>> axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry.
>>>>
>>>> So now I can better see why the Earth and satellites have oval orbits. The
>>>> Sun on Earth causes 1/2 ellipse but the tug on Earth by Moon causes the
>>>> oval shape. For satellites, the Earth is 1/2 ellipse, but the tug by Moon
>>>> and Sun cause another Oval orbit.
>>>>
>>>> Ovals are where bodies have 2 or more tugs of gravity imposed.
>>>
>>> How does the Sun tug on the Moon?
>> It's called "gravity", Roy. You can see the sun's effects on the moon
>> via Google.
>
> What is the Sun doing to the Moon that you can prove?
> The Sun curve meets the Moon directly in space.
> So what does that do to it?
>
>>
>> It's not simple. See the N body problem in Newtonian physics.
>>> There are two kinds of ellipse. Conic and cylinder.
>>> They are for unstable and stable orbit There can be round orbit as well.
>>>
>> There is just one kind of ellipse, just different parameters such as
>> eccentricity.
>
> There are two ellipses. Conic and cylinder.

The cylinder is a special case of cone, so no.

On 12/19/2022 10:55 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 9:16:05 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 12/18/2022 7:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 2:01:11 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>>> As we see the definition of Oval as the adjoining of 1/2 of a ellipse with another 1/2 of a different ellipse to form the oval-- a figure of only 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry.
>>>>
>>>> So now I can better see why the Earth and satellites have oval orbits. The Sun on Earth causes 1/2 ellipse but the tug on Earth by Moon causes the oval shape. For satellites, the Earth is 1/2 ellipse, but the tug by Moon and Sun cause another Oval orbit.
>>>>
>>>> Ovals are where bodies have 2 or more tugs of gravity imposed.
>>>
>>> How does the Sun tug on the Moon?
>> It's called "gravity", Roy. You can see the sun's effects on the moon
>> via Google.
>
> What is the Sun doing to the Moon that you can prove?
> The Sun curve meets the Moon directly in space.
> So what does that do to it?

Once again, Roy, google how the sun's gravity affects the moon in orbit.
Images are especially helpful.
>
>>
>> It's not simple. See the N body problem in Newtonian physics.
>>> There are two kinds of ellipse. Conic and cylinder.
>>> They are for unstable and stable orbit There can be round orbit as well.
>>>
>> There is just one kind of ellipse, just different parameters such as
>> eccentricity.
>
> There are two ellipses. Conic and cylinder.

And your evidence of this is what? What's the difference between them?
If I show you an ellipse, how can you tell whether it's a a conic
ellipse or a cylinder ellipse?
>>
>> By unstable orbits do you mean parabolic or hyperbolic interactions
>> which are conic sections like ellipses, but are not closed orbits?
>
> Orbits have to be closed. Other curves of motion can be open.
>
Which is what I implied. What is an unstable, closed orbit?

On 12/20/2022 4:08 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
> on 12/19/2022, mitchr...@gmail.com supposed :
>> On Monday, December 19, 2022
>> at 9:16:05 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:

>>> There is just one kind of ellipse, just
>>> different parameters such as eccentricity.
>>
>> There are two ellipses. Conic and cylinder.
>
> The cylinder is a special case of cone, so no.

A good way to look at this!
Special cases, limiting cases.

A cylinder is the limiting case of
tall, thin cones.
A plane is the limiting cases of
short, fat cones.

Consider two cones intersecting in an
oval-like way.
(I'm sure there's a better description
(but I'm being lazy.

Those aren't the only two cones with
that oval-like intersection.
There are cones between those two with
that oval-like intersection.
There are fatter and thinner cones with
that oval-like intersection.

Extending this family of cones out to the
limiting cases, cylinders and planes,
there are cylinders and planes with
that oval-like intersection.

All with the same shape intersection,
cones and cylinders and planes,
AKA ellipses.