Hi "sans" my apologies for being overly abrupt and making accusations. Sometimes I just get plain frustrated.
The numbers we are employing are the semi-major axis of the planets. Here is a definition of this term:
Definitions of Semi-major axis on the Web:
* The major axis of an ellipse is its longest diameter, a line that runs through the centre and both foci, its ends being at the widest points of the shape. The semi-major axis is one half of the major axis, and thus runs from the centre, through a focus, and to the edge of the ellipse. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-major_axis
* Half the distance across an ellipse measured along a line through its foci.
www.astunit.com/tutorials/glossary.htm
* Either of the equal line segments into which the major axis of an ellipse is divided by the center of symmetry.
www.csa.com/discoveryguides/planetary/gloss.php
* The semi-major axis of the orbit of the extrasolar planet, in Astronomical Units (AU).
heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/W3Browse/star-catalog/exoplanets.html
In other words it is basically halfway between the closest and further approach of a planet to The Sun. Example for Mercury:
Aphelion (furthest point) 69,816,900 km 0.466 697 AU
Perihelion (closest point) 46,001,200 km 0.307 499 AU
Semi-major axis (average) 57,909,100 km 0.387 098 AU
You are correct in implying that we should be able to map the ellipses of these planets and I have found tantalizing evidence that it is there but first things first. We search for the semi major axis first then we will try to expand the search.
On a website of mine I found that adding the diameters of all the planets together yields Pi x 10 Earth diameters or 31.4159 times the diameter of The Earth. An interesting
"co-incidence" and now Nick has found that changing the distances to miles yields the total distances of the 8 planets from The Sun being equal to the periemter of the rectangle as defined at Giza using the pyramids
and which is basically of a 9 x 11 grid and using a 1 cubit to 1 mile scale. Regardless whether you wish to accept that this was encoded deliberately at Giza or not, it is there. Personally I think it is showing us the simplistic nature of the geometry that makes up our solar system.
The Giza Plateau is built apparently on a rectangle of a modified square root of 2 (x 1000) by square root of 3 (x 1000) cubits. This is refined to equal exactly a 9 by 11 grid where each unit is equal to 157.48 cubits. It can further be reduced to a 36 by 44 grid in which case each unit is 39.37. Since The Great Pyramid is 440 cubits (+ or -) we have this (440 cubits) equaling 3.937 of the overall height as defined by our 44 grid units. And amazingly this corresponds precisely with the fact that if one takes the NASA accepted distance of Mercury from The Sun and multiply it by 3.937 we get the distance to Mars.
Although it could just be a fluke that Giza shows this the fact remains that the math is correct. Mars is 3.937 Mercurial distances from The Sun. This was found using a simple 9 by 11 grid as inspired by The Giza Plateau. So whether you wish to accept that Giza was planned to show this or not the fact remains that our solar system seems to be built on some very simplistic geometrical designs and for now we are just starting to observe what they might be.
Best Regards
Don Barone
"There is nothing as impenetrable as a closed mind"
and ..." if everything is a coincidence what is the point of studying or measuring or analyzing anything ?" db