In the previous post we discussed the work of Johannes Kepler and the ratios he found in the orbits and eccentricities of the inner solar system planets. It was also mentioned that in addition to the careful and accurate (given the observational data he gained full access to when Tycho Brahe died) work he did, he allowed himself some speculation regarding the Sun in the epilogue of his summum bonum work ‘Harmonice Mundi’ – The Harmonies of the World’. He appeared to posit a relationship between the motion of the planets and the sun’s activity, an intuition which would wait 370 years for confirmation, despite investigation by many scientists ranging from William Herschel in the early C18th, Rudolf Wolff in the C19th, to Paul D José in the later C20th.
The breakthough came not from mainstream solar scientists, who had rejected the idea that the planets could affect the Sun’s activity, but from astrologer and independent solar system dynamics researcher Theodor Landscheidt. He achieved this by considering the motion of the Sun about the centre of mass of the solar system, the solar system barycentre (SSB).
This solar inertial motion (SIM) had been investigated by José and Ivanka Charvatova amongst others, including Australian scientist Rhodes Fairbridge. Fairbridge, who also investigated terrestrial climate cyclicities and weather phenomena, discovered important planetary periodicities in the paleoclimate data.
Lanscheidt’s approach was novel, he considered cyclicities to be working as ‘wheels within wheels’ whereby longer term cycles cause phase reversals in shorter term cycles when they reached maxima and minima at times when the shorter term cycles are vulnerable to a switch in state. Analysing datasets of solar proton events and large flares, he uncovered a rhythmic pattern in their appearance, which linked their occurrence to planetary cycles.
Experimenting with methods, he tried a fit with the accelerations caused by Jupiter Earth and Venus, plotting the solar events in relation to this motion.
To forestall dismissal of the method through accusations of ‘curve fitting’ Landscheit had made predictions and lodged them with The Space Environmental Services facility at Boulder, Colorado. When he later plotted results, the match was excellent, and statistical work was undertaken to determine the significance of the results.
After this earlier success Landscheit turned to Kepler, and abstracted a more generalised principle to test, using the ratios 4:5:6 and scaling the combination of the sine waves to the erratic orbits of the SSB made by the Sun.
Again, Landscheidt made predictions and lodged them with The Space Environmental Services facility at Boulder, Colorado. These were also confirmed by scientist Hubertus Wohl of the Frieberg Institute for Solar Physics
In his 1988 book Sun-Earth-Man landscheidt said:
A pearson test [for statistical significance] yields X2=35.8 for 1 degree of freedom; P=7×10-10 [for the likelihood of the result being random chance]
The results presented here are only a first step in a new direction. It is intriguing that the ratio of the superimposed harmonics 4:5:6 is that of the major perfect chord in musical harmony. Kepler had found just this chord C-E-G when he analysed the ratios of the velocities of different planets at aphelion and perihelion. Kepler’s finding is also valid for the outer planets Uranus and Pluto. Thus, the major perfect chord turns out to be a fundamental structural element of the planetary system. The results presented here are a new substantiation of the Pythagorean harmony of the spheres at a complex level that relates planetary configurations to the Sun’s oscillations about the centre of mass, solar rotation, the sun’s activity, and solar-terrestrial interaction.
Following Landscheidt’s death in 2004, a new generation of researchers has taken up the torch he relit and are actively researching Solar-Planetary relationships and solar system dynamics. The results of their work can be found in many of the posts and discussions on this website. But you won’t find him much cited or referred to in the mainstream literature, because although he was a proud and longstanding member of the American Geophysical Union, his work is dismissed as ‘astrology’ by mainstream scientists such as Geoffrey Dean. His work is banned from discussion at major popular science websites such as wattsupwiththat.com, where resident computer programmer and solar data collator Leif Svalgaard misrespresents his discoveries and blackens his name whenever it is mentioned.
Easter Sunday seems an appropriate day on which to resurrect interest in Theodor Landscheidt’s work and begin to restore him to his rightful place in the history of science.