Evidence for a 160 minute oscillation affecting Galaxies and the Solar System

Posted: April 23, 2012 by Rog Tallbloke in Astronomy, Astrophysics, Cycles, Energy, Gravity, Solar physics, solar system dynamics

Now we’ll head into some more controversial territory, and explore a phenomenon which the mainstream has averted its eyes from. Many celestial objects have parameters which correspond to a fundamental frequency of 160.0101 minutes. Why 160.0101? Because that’s the figure determined by Valery Kotov, who devoted a substantial portion of his career to investigating an oscillation of that period he found on the Sun. What causes it? Nobody knows yet, but the empirical evidence is overwhelming that this is a non-local phenomenon despite a 1989 paper which is used as a rebuttal of Kotov’s work on the basis that 160 minutes is exactly 1/9 of an Earth day. The last mention I find of Kotov banging the 160.01 minute drum is at a conference in 2003, at, of all places, Stanford University, home of one Leif Svalgaard, where the U.S. Team was based which confirmed Kotov’s discovery in 1977. Let’s take a brief tour of just a few examples of the existence of the 160 minute wave before we move on to examine this frequency in relation to the solar system.

From http://lempel.pagesperso-orange.fr/entree_uk.htm

In 1974, a periodic infrasonic oscillations, measured by doppler effect, on the surface of the sun (2km, speed 1m/s) , in 160,01 minutes, is discovered by two independent groups:

  1. Severny, Kotov, Tsapp (Astrophysical observatory of Crimea –  KrAO) [1]

  2. Brookes et al. [2] (University of Birmingham) [2]

A little later it is confirmed by two other teams. [3-6]

  1. KrAO 1974 – 1982, with a period of oscillation of 160.0101 ± 0.0016 minutes [7]

  2. Stanford 1977 – 1980 P0 With a period of oscillation of 160.0095 ± 0.0010 minutes. [6]

Variation of the Luminosity of the Sun and some other stars :

The satellite SOHO probably showed the presence of a period of 160-min and\or 80-min in the luminosity of the sun. [11 - 12]
The most commensurable period of the pulsations of Delta Scuti Stars is : 162 ± 4 min (3.8σ/proba .= 0.02 %). [13]
For the variable RR Lyrae Stars, we find 161,4 ±1,6 min

It would thus seem, that at least in our galaxy, this wave is a rather general phenomenon for stars of various types.

  1. Brookes J.R. et al.: 1976. Nat. V. 259. P. 92.

  2. Severny A.B. et al.: 1976. Nat. V. 259. P. 87.

  3. Scherrer P.H. et al.: 1979. Nat. V. 277. P. 635.

  4. Grec G. et al.: 1980. Nat. V. 288. P. 541.

  5. Scherrer P.H. et al.: 1980. ApJ. V. 237. P. L97.

  6. Scherrer P.H., Wilcox J.M.: 1983. Sol. Phys. V. 82. P. 37.

  7. Kotov V.A. et al.: 1997. Sol. Phys. V. 176. P. 45.

  8. Kotov V.A., Tsap T.T.: 1990. Sol. Phys. V. 128. P. 269.

  9. Bai T.: 2003. Sol. Phys. V. 215. P. 327.

  10. Kotov V.A., Scherrer P.H.: 1992. Not published.

  11. Finsterle W., Frohlich C.: 1998. World Radiation Center.
    Annual Rep. 1997. Davos: PMOD/WRC. P. 9.

  12. Kotov V.A. et al. , Kinematica I fiz. Nebes. Tel. V. 16
    P.49

  13. Kotov S.V, Kotov V.A., 1997, Astron. Nachr. 318,
    121-128

____________________________________________

In 1990, after the discovery of the Wave of Kotov in the Sun and in a certain number of stars of the Milky way, is published, in the “Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences” in Paris, a document showing the appearance, in about twenty nucleuses of active Galaxies and Quasars, of a wave of 160,01 minutes, therefore similar, except the amplitude, to the one that already had been detected in the Sun.

  1. NGC 1275, NGC 3516, NGC 4051, NGC 4151, NGC 5506, NGC 5548, NGC 6814, NGC 7314, NGC 7469

  2. 3C 66A, 3C 273, 3C 371, 3C 454.3, 4C 29.45

  3. III Zw 2, Mrk 335, Mrk 421, Mrk 501, OJ 287, MCG-6-30-15

  4. EXO 1128+691, PKS 2155-304.

As well as for the stars, no Doppler effect (Redshift) is measurable and the phase is constant on more of thirty years of data collected so much in USSR that to USA.
One notes that:

  1. The effect is measurable on all the Earth (south pole, USA, Crimea,)

  2. The phase is different from one quasar to another. The cause of the wave of Kotov is therefore external to the solar system.

  3. The galaxies and the Quasars are dispersed in the full celestial sphere. Would the cause be extra galactic?

  1. Ch. Bizouard – “Discussion sur les oscillations cosmiques, les nombres sans dimension et les périodicités en microphysique et cosmologie” – 02/27/2004 – Collège de France. (With a very complete bibliography)

  2. Supermassive binary black hole system in the quasar 3C 345.pdf

__________________________________________

Our old friend Ray Tomes from the Cycles Research Institute who gave me the link to M. Lempel’s site is many years ahead of us (as usual :) ) on this 160 minute stuff :

And on that page he includes the abstract of a 1987 Paper by Kotov & Koutchmy and  and a dead link:

V. A. Kotov and S. Koutchmy

“The discovery of global pulsations on the Sun with period Po = 160 min enables us to consider a characteristic wavelength for the solar system L = cPo = 19.24 a.u., where c is the velocity of light. The planetary distances show a statistically significant quasicommensurability between L and 2.p.ai for the inner planets or between 2.p.ai and L for the outer ones (ai is the major semiaxis of the orbit). This L commensurability leads to a new approach to the Titius-Bode planetary distance law. The physical mechanism responsible for this L commensurability in the solar system is evidently related to gravitational waves from an external source of unknown nature.”

Ray has dug out a copy of this paper off an old hard drive for me and I’ll publish it as a separate post next.

So why does the mainstream write off this empirical evidence? Judging by the wiki page, they want to avoid having their inboxes inundated by New Agers, Creationists, Astrologers and other assorted ne’er do wells, who of course, we will be lumped in with by the labellers. :)

Leif tells us that the modern helioseismology instruments don’t find this 160.01 minute period and so Kotov is dismissed. However, it seems that the probes in question weren’t looking for it, and found instead the strongest signal at around 24 minutes. It turns out that this period relates to 160 minutes in an intriguing way, but I’ll leave that for a further post too. One other interesting detail is that Kotov found that the signal modulated to a side-lobe frequency ~159 minutes every 400 days, which just happens to be the Earth – Jupiter synodic cycle.

[ removed google tracking link --Tim]

Comments
  1. tallbloke says:

    Email from Ray this morning:

    “Some time back some Americans said that it was not real. Subsequent to
    that, a paper that showed that three different detections of the
    oscillation – in Russia, USA and Antarctica – all had identical phase
    and that it was significantly different from 1/9 of a day (a possible
    terrestrial effect). For some reason this did not end the matter, and
    various sources (American I think) continue to quote the old discredited
    argument.

    If it is not real, then why do three different classes of binary
    variable stars show the exact same period as a tendency to quantisation?
    The binary stat periods are not atmospheric effects. I have no doubt
    that there is a universal oscillation of period 160.0101 minutes that
    affects many things.

    My own analysis of galactic Black Hole masses (not very accurate values)
    shows there is a tendency to values that when translated to distances of
    period (radius of BH etc) shows a pattern very similar to the outer
    planet distances and with multiples and fractions of light 160 minutes
    radius.”

  2. Scute says:

    The semi-major axis of Uranus is almost exactly L. It was this planet’s unresolved residuals that brought me, via a circuitous search experience, to the Tallbloke blog. So I’ve gone full circle even if Uranus hasn’t!

  3. tallbloke says:

    Scute: I wonder if that fact is related to Uranus’ oddball axial tilt? Or why the gas giants put out more energy than they receive from the Sun.

  4. Jeremy says:

    I’m confused. This oscillation was observed as seismic waves in the sun. How are we getting seismic wave data from stars, galaxies and quasars many thousands of light years away?

  5. adolfogiurfa says:

    @TB: There is still a step forward, apart from knowing the Solar System wavelength. Knowing that a well polished surface ( a mirror) reflects almost all emission waves turning them around almost 360º, then go to the nearest mirror and watch a universe from the outside. :-)

  6. tallbloke says:

    Jeremy: it’s not siesmic data from the far flung objects, it’s orbital parameter data. Or maybe pulsation data but we don’t recognise it as such under the current paradigm. E.g. Pulsars which are thought to have amazingly high rotational rates may in fact be pulsating fast rather then spinning fast.

  7. adolfogiurfa says:

    That sun´s core in the diagram above….is it cold or hot?

    [Reply] Pixels on a TFT display are all pretty much the same temperature. :)

  8. adolfogiurfa says:

    @TB: 160/240= 0.66666= 2/3

    [Reply] Getting warm, keep trying. :)

  9. Scute says:

    Tallbloke: you are on the money there. I was looking at the relationship between the residuals of Uranus and its equinoxes. The search term I did was ‘uranus spin orbit’ so of course, I ended up here.
    It is uncanny that Uranus’ aphelion/perihelion coincide with its equinoxes and there seems to be a loose connection with the residuals in that they fit a sine wave of 41.5 yrs for latitude residuals and 50.5 for longitude:
    http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1988A%26A…203..170G/0000173.000.html

    This doesnt quite fit in phase (in time) with the equinoxes but I’ve seen other fits that seem to fit roughly to them (a NASA paper that I can’t now find).

  10. tallbloke says:

    Scute: Interesting. A simple quick and dirty average of those two periods gives 46 years. Plenty of resonances at around that period, as detailed by Ian Wilson a couple of weeks ago here:

    “The Jovian planets act like a large washing
    machine, stirring the inner terrestrial planets with a
    gravitational force that varies with a frequency that is
    determined by the beat period between two main competing
    Jovian planetary alignments.

    The first is that produced by the the retrograde tri-synodic
    period of Jupiter/Saturn ( = 59.577 yrs) and the second is
    the pro-grade synodic period of Uranus/Neptune (171.41 yrs):

    (59.577 x 171.41) / (171.41 + 59.577) = 44.21 yrs
    [Note that this figure is close to two Hale Cycles and will vary a little due to angular momentum exchange between the Jovian planets over various timescales. To be investigated - TB]

    This driving period of the Jovian planets closely matches
    the synodic periods of the three largest Terrestrial planets
    with Jupiter:

    69 × SVJ = 44.770 yrs SVJ = synodic period Venus/Jupiter
    41 × SEJ = 44.774 yrs SEJ = synodic period Earth/Jupiter
    20 × SMJ = 44.704 yrs SMJ = synodic period Mars/Jupiter”

  11. Scute says:

    Tallbloke: Yes, I was particularly interested in that post because it threw up this 44 year period which any spin/orbit person is going to notice as significant. This might also interest some people, just to finish up the Uranus tilt relationships:
    http://astrosymm.com/solar.htm
    (see text near bottom of page)

    I should have emphasised the fact that the sine wave peaks in my link, or at least one of them, was almost exactly half a Uranian orbit, and of course, the equinox happens every half orbit, corresponding with either an aphelion or a perihelion.

  12. tchannon says:

    My immediate thoughts were do not underestimate Nyquist, with a parameter of the common platform, earth, very dodgy.

    No data or method is presented.

    On accessing the 1989 paper, I agree. Sorry to be a wet fish.

  13. tallbloke says:

    Tim, no problem. We need to find the paper which supports this comment from Ray (first comment below the article) before we can do the rolled up papers at dawn thing:

    ““Some time back some Americans said that it was not real. Subsequent to
    that, a paper that showed that three different detections of the
    oscillation – in Russia, USA and Antarctica – all had identical phase
    and that it was significantly different from 1/9 of a day (a possible
    terrestrial effect). For some reason this did not end the matter, and
    various sources (American I think) continue to quote the old discredited
    argument.”

    The argument seems to turn on the issue of whether the value is 160min or 160.0101min.
    Kotov is adamant it’s the latter, and this is sufficiently different from 160min to exclude the terrestrial artifact possibility. The American paper says that it is 160min after studying the longer dataset. Hmmmm.

    I think we also need to consider the possibility that the reason the probe didn’t pick up the oscillation is that it is oscillating at the same frequency along with everything else directly exposed in space.

  14. Again, thank you.

    What fascinates me is the mathematical harmony of both space and time:

    Uranus’ orbit is ~20AU, Neptune ~30AU, Pluto ~40AU, Saturn ~10AU, Jupiter ~5AU
    Uranus’ period is ~84yr, Neptune’s is ~2 x 84yr (1.9% diff), Pluto’s is ~3 x 84yr (1.6% diff)
    Uranus is 7 Jupiter periods and Jupiter is 12 Earths, both 7 and 12 are key cosmic numbers.
    Saturn doesn’t fit the time pattern well, but its period is the same number of years as is that of the synodic period of the Moon in days (0.2% error). And there’s more, lots more.

    A Little Book of Coincidence has many, many further harmonies, and at far greater levels of exactitude. And the “aberrations” from exactitude also see to have reasons/harmonies, when I look at them, so there may well be something in the difference between 160 and 160.0101

  15. tallbloke says:

    Thanks Lucy. As Kotov says, no-one is seriously arguing that the spacing of the planets is random. It just seems that finding out what the underlying principle is concerns some more than others. NASA are more bothered about measuring it than understanding it.

    I think this is the paper Ray referred to:

    160 minute solar variations and the 22 year cycle

    V. A. Kotov and T. T. Tsap

    From the issue entitled “Inside the
    Solar Physics
    Volume 128, Number 1 (1990), 269-280, DOI: 10.1007/BF00154163

    http://www.springerlink.com/content/v5110n4h84006vt2/

    I’ll grab a copy later today.

  16. Wayne Job says:

    The music of the spheres writ large, the harmonic nodes of chaos are such that they are mathematically beautiful and unvarying in their effect over the entire universe. It is harmonics all the way.
    Maths only lies when it is convenient to do so. Much has been done that has either been forgotten, pilloried or ignored. Modern instrumentation and our forays into space, have and will displace much of what has been held as dear.

    To the Lucy Skywalkers of the world thankyou, much needs to be understood and much needs to be binned.

  17. adolfogiurfa says:

    The cited above frequency is equal to 160.0101 x 60 (seconds per minute)= One every 9600.606 seconds = 0.00010416009156 cycles per second. then wavelength would be = 2880´181,800.025 km./ 149598000 km, 19.2528 AU
    And that´s the approximate wavelength of the old Kronos (Saturn):
    http://www.holoscience.com/views/view_other.htm

  18. adolfogiurfa says:

    We are just one step away of accepting the obvious: That missing word (“verbum dismissum”), “Electron”, that assigned to “Amber” not only because when amber is rubbed it produces electricity, but when “seen” this all pervading “Mount Tabor” light it is amber in color.

  19. tallbloke says:

    Tim, I’ve uploaded Kotov’s 1990 paper which addresses the 1989 Elsworth paper here:
    https://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/kotov1990.pdf
    Please take a look and let us have your thoughts.

  20. adolfogiurfa says:

    Kotov. If our suggestion of a plausible connection between the 11 (22) yr solar cycle and the
    doublet (or multiplet?) structure of the 160 rain periodicity is found to be valid, this may
    give rise to interesting speculations as to the possible physical association between
    160 min oscillations and the solar cycle. Further, we also suggest that the splitting (of
    the 160 min periodicity) might result, in some substantial part, from the possible rapid
    rotation (often discussed in recent years) of the central solar core and its interaction with
    the global 160 rain oscillation of the Sun as a whole. It is worth referring here to
    Roxburgh’s (1974) hypothesis that the central region of the present-day Sun spins at an
    extremely fast rate, with a period in the order of 1 hour.

    “Rather than relying on kinetic energy, Electric Universe advocates assume that the oscillations in pulsars are due to synchronous vibrations in electric circuits. Electricity stored in double layers is responsible for their energetic outbursts.”
    http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/01/30/pulsar-wind-nebulae/

  21. tallbloke says:

    Adolfo, it sounds more likely than ludicrous rates of spin anyway. ;)

    But my primary interest in that paper is not the speculative part at the end but the evidence which proves the 160.01 minute pulsation is on the Sun and not an artifact of terrestrial atmospherics. Along with the solar flare study it successfully rebuts the Elsworth et al paper IMO.

    But the other important evidence that comes to light is the beat period of 19.5 +/-1.5 years. This is much closer to the Jupiter – Saturn synodic period than the Hale cycle. Added to the fact that Kotov found an oscillation between the 160.0101 period and the 159.9 period over 400 days (the Earth – Jupiter synodic period, I think we have something of great interest here.

    Further, I know Ian Wilson has something very relevant up his sleeve which he emailed me about last year. I hope he might feel the time is right to reveal it.

  22. ferd berple says:

    But the other important evidence that comes to light is the beat period of 19.5 +/-1.5 years.

    A couple of days ago I followed a link on WUWT that led to a 2000+ year old poem that talked about among other things the 19 year sun cycle and gave it a proper name after a person. Of course can’t find the link now.

  23. ferd berple says:

    Found it. Meton of Athens. The 19 year Metonic cycle.

  24. ferd berple says:

    came across this paper on the Metonic cycle

    How General Relativity Solves the Metonic Cycle.

    http://milesmathis.com/meton.html

    The site has a number of interesting papers:

    http://milesmathis.com/index.html

  25. Hans says:

    Rog,
    Thanks for bringing this phenomenon to my attention since I had never heard of it. After reading most of the links and posts it is for certain that life is not long enough to investigate all interesting topics within inorganic physics. The 160 minute solar oscillation is just fascinating and so is the efforts to claim that all data sets are produced by artifacts.

    My gut feeling in combination with what my personal reasearch has produced tells me that the 160 minute solar variation do emante from earth. It is sure that the earth/lunar system modulates the sunspot amplitude which was known 100 years ago (Otto Pettersson and a female Brittish researcher) plus my own work.

    We don´t understand how this can happen. We don´t know why the 160 minute cycle seems to be observed in all direction and in (all?) shining objects. There seems to be a “time” delay when observing the distant objects.

    I have great respect for Kotov´s work and will continue to ponder about his “160 minute solar variations and the 22 year cycle”. There are many ways to change a signal of 160.00 minutes to 160.0101 besides telling that it is possible to model such a difference by an ad hoc mathematical assumption and telling that it disproves Kotov´s and several others measurements.

    You are really picking up many old, relevant and interesting scientific findings that need to be better scrutinized and not just be forgotten and ignored.

  26. tallbloke says:

    Hans, thanks, I needed that. To me, it seems to me like there are too many ifs buts and maybes in the Elsworth paper to justify sweeping Kotov’s work under the carpet. Plus Elsworth totally ignores the other corroborating evidence which cannot be a terrestrial artifact.

    It’s clear that a consistent non-redshifted frequency appearing in many celestial objects is in contradiction to the big bang theory, and so this is probably why Valery Kotov got the ‘Halton Arp’ treatment from the NASA boys.

  27. dp says:

    160 minutes is an unimportant unit of time that is man’s invention and possibly a distraction. Somewhere in the universe there is a unit that is a fundamental number, a natural oscillation frequency of some physical process, that is actually significant to this mystery – a pendulum, swinging helplessly to the rhythm an unknown natural cause, and there, you will find your answer. Associate the natural oscillations to each other to find the connecting forces. The sun is in harmony with something at a frequency we call a 160 minute cycle. What is it in terms of the speed of sound in the solar atmosphere, for example? What size cavity or shell or distance between boundaries might exist to produce this frequency? On Earth, for example, 10 kHz is an important radio frequency and was chosen for the Omega radio navigation system. At this frequency the Earth was a natural wave guide for the transmission.

  28. tallbloke says:

    Hi dp: very good points and questions. 160 mins is 1/9 of an Earth day. I’m still trying to track down a copy of Kotov’s paper on other solar system axial spin rates. Given that he found that solar flares also exhibit the frequency, your question about the acoustics and distance between boundary layers is pertinent to the issue.

  29. [...] Evidence for a 160 minute oscillation affecting Galaxies and the Solar System [...]

  30. Jackpot!

    Thought I’d see how far a beam of light could travel in 160.01 minutes. Turns out it is 19.239AU. Uranus’ semi-major axis is 19.229AU.

    Error is 0.05%.

    Not the first time I’ve found Uranus to be of primary importance. But that is for another day.

  31. Now if each cycle is 0.01sec longer than one-ninth of a day, there’s a lag of 0.09 sec each day. In 400 days the lag is 36 seconds. Then comes the ~159 minute cycle (maybe 159 min 24 seconds).

    Looks as if Earth-Jupiter resynchronize the Sun.

  32. Perhaps I shouldn’t say “Uranus… primary importance”. That’s not scientific enough. OK, how about “gobsmacking coincidence” and “another suggestion of universal harmonies of time and space”. To someone like myself who has seen (and researched) out-and-out miracles, there comes a point when it seems simply rude to Great Spirit, as well as bad science, to discount the notion of a universe built from deep harmonies. that show in both the mathematics and geometries of time and space.

    And of course, I have Kepler and Newton and Einstein on my side in this.