the sunlight. Light also follows the flow of electrons, which anyone watching a lightning display understands. These
http://www.zetatalk2.com/index/zeta430.htm[2/5/2012 11:55:12 AM]
ZetaTalk: Light Towers
light particles were not generated from thin air by the flow of electrons. They were attracted to the charge and bent to
follow the flow, and thus emerged into view in the vicinity of the lightning path. The tail of Planet X is charged due to
the iron oxide dust particles disbursed throughout the tail. This charge has nowhere to go, as the tail is not grounded. It
is essentially static electricity. But when the red dust and petrochemical components in the tail waft into Earth's
atmosphere where there is free oxygen and nitrogen, chemical reactions not occurring out in space are possible.
Man is used to thinking of chemical reactions involving petrochemical components and
oxygen as an explosion, happening suddenly - boom! But where disbursed and present
in barely perceptible quantities, it is more akin to a slow swoosh, creating a spiral of
heat that starts a tornado effect in the atmosphere. Where a slow explosion has passed,
the smoke created can linger, looking like a dark tornado floating in the air. Where the
slow explosion occurs at night, the light can seem dramatic for the few minutes it lasts.
This is a chemical reaction in the atmosphere, as we stated earlier in response to the
initial report from Iraq. More such light towers can be anticipated, but beyond this,
more effects from the tail of Planet X can be anticipated as the tail components increase
in density in the atmosphere of Earth. What these effects will be we will not say, as we
prefer to have the establishment caught off guard so that the cover-up stumbles and the public learns the truth. The
establishment knows what is coming, but is keeping the truth from the public, who like the elite have a right to know.
I thought first it was a tornado, but then it started to glow and the stripe become brighter.
http://www.zetatalk2.com/index/zeta430.htm[2/5/2012 11:55:12 AM]
ZetaTalk: Light Towers
http://www.zetatalk2.com/index/zeta430.htm[2/5/2012 11:55:12 AM]
ZetaTalk: Planets
Mail this Pageto a Friend.
ZetaTalk: Planets
Note: written on Mar 15, 1996.
Some of the larger planets are assumed to be primarily gaseous, small Suns, perhaps, that didn't make the grade
because they were too small, their lack of bulk preventing them from either lighting or attracting planets themselves.
This concept is in the main correct, beyond the fundamental fact that suns and gaseous planets are not composed
entirely of light elements. Quite the contrary, and they invariably have heavy elements at their core, though large,
gaseous planets should be looked upon as no different than the small but more dense planets when contemplating their
influence on a solar system.
Planets find their niche, based on how crowded the solar system is and their relative mass. For instance, if Jupiter were
not in your Solar System, the planets close in to the Sun would have essentially the same orbits, though would fan out
a bit more. A planet's position is based primarily on the gravity attraction between it and its sun and the concurrent
repulsion force invoked. If the niche a planet would normally assume is already taken, as was the case when the
clobbered Earth wobbled out of the Asteroid Belt into her current orbit, then more than one planet may settle into the
same orbit, sharing this. Why then are smaller planets, such as Mars and Pluto, further out? Small planets may fail to
drift into a closer orbit due to the buffering action of larger planets closer in. Essentially a bumping occurs, where the
smaller planet is repulsed outward by a larger planet. Timing is everything in this matter, as twins in an orbit may
occur if they come into the orbit at a distance from each other, where a close passage at key points would produce
bumping.
All rights reserved: ZetaTalk@ZetaTalk.com
http://www.zetatalk2.com/science/s63.htm[2/5/2012 11:55:13 AM]
Mail this Pageto a Friend.
ZetaTalk: Orbits
Note: written on Jan 15, 1996.
The orbit of planets is guided by several factors, only one of which is the gravitational influence of the Sun, though
that is, of course, the strongest. Humans ascribe an inordinate amount of weight, in orbits, to what they perceive as the
existing, or static, motion. They assume the orbit is constant, having been in place since the inception of the Solar
System. They assume the distance from the Sun is maintained by centrifugal force, pulling away from the Sun. They
assume the rotation of planets is a constant, and having no explanation for rotation ascribe it also to motion having
been in place since the inception of the Solar System. Humans view the result of many factors they do not understand,
and ascribe this result to inappropriate causes. They are wrong on all counts, but as the Solar System does not change
in its motion before their eyes, this is not often up for debate. Rigid minds have no reason to change. Comfortable
theories have no uncomfortable challenges.
The orbiting planets are indeed caught in the Sun's gravitational field, but there is more than gravity and motion at play
in maintaining the distance they do from the Sun. The orbits are scarcely fast enough to create a centrifugal force
strong enough to keep them at a distance from the Sun. Planets do not drift into the Sun, in the main, due to a
repulsion force generated in both bodies. Where the force of gravity is constant, and steadily pulls a smaller object
toward a larger, a repulsion force is generated between objects, and only becomes strong enough when the mass of the
two objects is sufficient. Do binary Sun's maintain their dance around each other, always at the same distance, by
accident? Tiny objects, such as comets or meteors which regularly crash into the Sun or the orbiting planets, do not
generate a repulsion force sufficient to counteract gravity, due to their tiny mass in proportion to the Sun or planet.
When their paths bring them close, they are caught in the gravity pull.
Orbiting planets are in motion because they are attracted to more than the Sun's gravitational field, more than the Sun's dark twin which acts as the 12th Planet's second focus, and certainly more than each other, although that is a small
factor. Do the stars maintain their distance from each other by accident? For those who doubt that there are
gravitational influences outside of the Solar System, pulling on the orbiting planets, we would point to the elliptical
path that planets assume. Why an ellipse? If the planets were concerned only with the Sun, or with each other, they
would not assume the path they do. Planets assume an elliptical orbit for the same reason that comets leave the Solar
System. They are listening to more than one voice. As to why this voice but not another calls to this planet but not
another, the answer lies in the force of gravity, which is not at all as simple as humans assume. Gravity has many
nuances, depending on composition and distance, and what influences one body toward another may have little effect
on other bodies.
Why do repeating comets, which clearly set into an orbit around the Sun during a good portion of their time within the
Solar System, escape? If one assumes that planets are not escaping because the circular or elliptical orbit is stable, then
why not apply the same logic to comets? Hu
mans do not apply this logic to comets because it doesn't compute, so deal
with the contradiction by falling into magical explanations for the behavior of comets. The answer to this riddle is that
neither orbit is stable, but that the comet, being tiny, can escape from the Sun's gravitational pull more easily than the larger planets, just as it can be caught in a collision course to the Sun or a planet, due to its tiny size. Even repeating
comets, which are assumed to have only one focus, the Sun, are listening to more than one voice. They leave the Sun,
having settled momentarily into an orbit around the Sun, and head toward the one or more other gravitational influence
that dominates their life. Some comets orbit, briefly, these other foci, and some simply get drawn back toward the Sun.
In this case they appear to humans to have a long ellipse orbit.
Elliptical orbits have no explanation if one is to consider that the Sun or other planets are the only gravitational
influences. In particular, the elliptical orbit of a repeating comet cannot be explained, as when it leaves the Sun it is
heading straight away, and has no curve or angular momentum that would bring it round to where it is seen reentering
http://www.zetatalk2.com/science/s53.htm[2/5/2012 11:55:14 AM]
ZetaTalk: Orbits
the Solar System. When out in space, slowing due to the gravitational pull of the Sun to its back, it drifts toward the
other gravitational focus it is sensitive to. There are three voices the repeating comet is listening to at this point.
the Sun behind its back, which is an increasing voice as the comet loses speed due to this same gravitational pull
the second gravitational influence, which it begins curving toward
its momentum away from the Sun
By the time its momentum stops, as stop it does, the comet is positioned such that it will return to the Solar System in
what appears to humans to be an elliptical manner, and not return whence it came. The position of the apparent ellipse
of a repeating comet's orbit is in fact caused by the position of the second or more gravitational foci of this comet.
All rights reserved: ZetaTalk@ZetaTalk.com
http://www.zetatalk2.com/science/s53.htm[2/5/2012 11:55:14 AM]
ZetaTalk: Elliptical Orbits
Mail this Pageto a Friend.
ZetaTalk: Elliptical
Note: written during the 2001 sci.astro debates.
Clearly, more than the regular flow of gravity particles from and back into a Sun is at play in planetary orbits, else all
these orbits would be circular. There are countless influences, but these influences can be summarized into their effect, which accounts for an elliptical orbit.
Secondary Gravity Influence
Planets that orbit both binary suns do so in a figure 8, pulling toward the second binary at the
juncture where the planet is positioned between the binaries, but propelled by momentum to
continue its orbital curve while moving toward the second binary. But planets caught between
binary suns, but orbiting a single sun, pull wider toward the second binary in their orbit, creating an
ellipse that leans toward the second binary.
Escape Attempt
Just as two North Poles in a magnetic object will avoid each other, pushing the lighter object to
align with the heavier object, other repulsion forces can push an orbiting planet closer to its Sun
than the flow of gravity particles would ordinarily allow, putting the planet in a squeeze between
these repulsion forces. The result is a rush to leave the squeeze, such that the planet accelerates at
this point in its orbit, giving it momentum as it stretches into the long part of the ellipse.
Dithering
Planets positioned such that they have several attractions can be slowed in their orbit due to
dithering. Such dither points are not even in the orbit, so create a speeding up as the planet
approaches the dither point, and a slowing down as it leaves this point. Rushing to an attraction
causes the orbit to draw long at that point, a factor of momentum on the orbiting planet, which is an
influence toward an elliptical orbit. Where no apparent gravitational giant exists to explain the
elliptical orbit, particle flows other than gravity are the dominant influence on the shape of the orbit.
All rights reserved: ZetaTalk@ZetaTalk.com
http://www.zetatalk2.com/science/s109.htm[2/5/2012 11:55:14 AM]
ZetaTalk: Slowing Probes
Mail this Pageto a Friend.
ZetaTalk: Slowing Probes
Note: written during the 2001 sci.astro debates.
An unknown force seeming to pull on a pair of distant space probes has left astronomers with a weighty mystery,
one that appears to defy the conventional laws of physics. The Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 spacecraft, which for
decades have steadily traveled in opposite directions in the solar system, have covered significantly less space then
they should have.
CNN
Why do the probes slow? It is not gravity, the Sun pulling these probes back, but particle flows that mankind is
currently unaware of. Why do the planets in the solar system all line up into the ecliptic plane? This phenomena occurs
in the rings around Saturn also, and in the oceans of Earth which are fatter at the equator than at the poles. Visible
matter, the planets and rings and oceans, that mankind can see, are slung faster from the waist of a rotating sun or
planet than at the poles, a matter of momentum But it is not the sling that keeps them at the waist, as a sling alone
would not keep them nicely in place, a ring around the waist. There is a return of some type, with the return coming
back into the rotating sun or planet at the poles, and then flowing in the direction of the waist, to fill the gap caused by
the sling. This is not caused by the flow of gravity particles, as the flow of gravity particles is even. Does an object
weigh more at the poles than at the equator? Nor is this the flow of magnetic particles, as the rings around Saturn and
the planets in the ecliptic assume their position regardless of magnetic properties.
The solar wind is not visible to man, yet its effect on comet tails is quite visible. Likewise, the flow of these particles,
unknown to mankind, which force the planets into the ecliptic plane, can be inferred from the fact that the ecliptic
exists, alone. The probes, propelled beyond the grip of the Sun’s gravitational field to where their momentum can
counteract this draw, were expected to float along at a predictable rate, yet are doing so more slowly. The answer lies
in the wash back of the particle flows that keep the planets bobbling in the ecliptic plane and the rings of Saturn so
neatly in a thin line. Just as the fatter oceans around Earth’s equator flow toward the poles, thence wrapping around in
deep ocean current back toward the equator, this particle flow is not even in the pressure it exerts. There is pressure
from the side as well as back toward the rotating sun or planet that is the gravitational giant holding the bobbling
matter in its grip. The closer the bobbling matter is to the equator of a rotating object, the more pressure there is from
the side, pushing the matter into the ring or ecliptic plane.
The probes were in part sent out to explore the planets in the solar system, and were directed by their jets or a
gravitational sling around the planets being visited during their voyage. Thus, the force of gravity from the Sun alone
was not the single force influencing the probes until they floated to where they are today. They now, presumably, have
only their mom
entum and the gravity pull from the Sun as factors in their pace. Add to this the factor of a returning
particle flow, pushing outward at the ecliptic but immediately upon leaving the ecliptic plane flowing back toward the
Sun. As the particle flow leaves the ecliptic, it is flowing toward the side, away from the ecliptic, but in the backward trip, it is buffeting from the other side, as the currents of this flow become circular around the ecliptic close in, as well
as circular in broad circles that extent to the poles of the Sun. This buffeting from the side affects the rate of escape in
the probes, as they are making side trips, this way and that, however infinitesimal, and this likewise takes time. How
would it not? If a man walks in a forward motion only, he will arrive faster than another who takes the time to dance
to the side, this way or that, now and then.
All rights reserved: ZetaTalk@ZetaTalk.com
http://www.zetatalk2.com/science/s108.htm[2/5/2012 11:55:15 AM]
ZetaTalk: Orbital Plane
Mail this Pageto a Friend.
ZetaTalk: Orbital Plane
Note: written on Apr 15, 1996.
Planets orbiting a sun invariably line up into an orbital plane, looking a bit, if one were to speed up the process, like a
flying saucer. Why would this be so, and is there a relationship to the shape that solar systems take and the familiar
shape of our ships? There is indeed a relationship, as what is termed the flying saucer is shaped to simulate the gravity
dynamics of a solar system so that it can become its own little solar system when instigating its own gravity field. A
flying saucer in motion can turn sideways or upside down, and the passengers are unaffected. They are, gravity-wise,
in their own little world. Solar systems do not take this shape by accident, though there is no comparable effect on
Earth for man to study and point to. Gaseous planets, such as Saturn, have rings in a plane, but nothing orbiting the
Earth, man-made or otherwise, is so affected.
The planets are lined up in a plane not because of anything inherent in themselves, but because of a drama that is