Was the Planet Venus a Comet??

Of all the planets in the Solar System, Venus is the only one in retrograde motion.
That's surprising to say the least. So what's special about Venus?

Could it have entered the Solar System in the not too distant past as a comet which was captured by the suns gravitational force? Why a comet?

Velikovsky claimed that his theories could be substantiated if Venus were found to be still hot (evidence of its recent birth), enveloped in hydrocarbon clouds (remnants of its comet’s tail), and had anomalous rotational motion (evidence that it had suffered unusual perturbations before settling into its orbit as a comet).

In 1963, the space probe Mariner II confirmed that the temperature of Venus was 800 degrees Fahrenheit.

It possessed a 15-mile thick envelope composed, not of carbon dioxide or water as was previously supposed, but of heavy molecules of hydrocarbons.

Observations taken by the US Naval Research Laboratory indicated that Venus has a slow retrograde motion, a characteristic unique among the planets.

More...
www.wovoca.com...

It does sound strange. But what strikes me as most intriguing is its rotation which is opposite to that of all other planets in the Solar System.

I doubt it was a comet.

If it was though, I did'nt know comets could be so huge.

Aslo, are'nt comets just to put it simply, big dirty snowballs
flying around, and if that's the case, than Venus was'nt a comet.

Uranus also has a retrograde rotation. (Although its almost rotating on its side with respect to its orbit).

Please note that when saying Venus has retrograde rotation, this is different to having a retrograde orbit. It still orbits in the same direction as the other planets (and almost all the moons, barring some captured by the gas giants).

Venus itself takes longer to rotate around its own axis than it does to orbit around the sun, and it has the closest to circular orbit of any of planets in the solar system. Not exactly what you'd expect of a body that was captured a mere 3,500 years ago. Barely the blink of an eye on a planetary scale. Let alone the lack of any evidence in the orbits of the other planets, including Earth, and you find its a rather ridiculous idea.

To clarify for those who are wondering:
retrograde basically means in a backwards direction. The sun, when viewed from "above" (ie over its North Pole) rotates counter-clockwise. All of the planets move around their orbits in a counter-clockwise direction when viewed from above the solar north pole.
Most also rotate counter-clockwise about their own axis, retrograde rotation would mean they rotate clockwise when viewed from above, retrograte orbit would mean they orbit clockwise when viewed from above.

[edit on 30-8-2006 by Kano]

Originally posted by mikesingh
Of all the planets in the Solar System, Venus is the only one in retrograde motion.
That's surprising to say the least. So what's special about Venus?

Could it have entered the Solar System in the not too distant past as a comet which was captured by the suns gravitational force? Why a comet?

Velikovsky claimed that his theories could be substantiated if Venus were found to be still hot (evidence of its recent birth), enveloped in hydrocarbon clouds (remnants of its comet’s tail), and had anomalous rotational motion (evidence that it had suffered unusual perturbations before settling into its orbit as a comet).

In 1963, the space probe Mariner II confirmed that the temperature of Venus was 800 degrees Fahrenheit.

It possessed a 15-mile thick envelope composed, not of carbon dioxide or water as was previously supposed, but of heavy molecules of hydrocarbons.

Observations taken by the US Naval Research Laboratory indicated that Venus has a slow retrograde motion, a characteristic unique among the planets.

More...
www.wovoca.com...

It does sound strange. But what strikes me as most intriguing is its rotation which is opposite to that of all other planets in the Solar System.

That guy had all kinds of theorys about Venus which were thought to be crazy talk until all of his hypothesis about the planet were confirmed. Except we probably wont ever confirm that venus was a comet however.

He ties in ancient storys like the Exodus and plagues and explains them with his theory. All the calendars had 360 days before venus passed by, then had 365 after. And a difference of 5 days would become extremely obvious to an agrarian society in less that one persons life span. So it is unlikely to be an error. All the storys about a god fighting a dragon, lightning bolts, and huge walls of water can all be tied into this theory. Even the pole shift or moutains rising out of the sea and a huge flood could be explained by Venus. Imagine the waves on earth if the moon was as big as venus! It would rip the crust apart!

The panet was the god and its tail was the dragon. A show of lightning between the planet (+) and the tail (-) looked like gods fighting with lightning bolts.. The tail was filled with carbon which was later confirmed in venus' extremely thinck atmosphere; and this tail covered the earth an created rainfall consisting of basically food (mana to the hebrews who were now wandering the desert following a huge pillar of fire and smoke).

The meteors dragged along with venus fell to the earth in a hail storm of fire. The red dust turned the rivers and lakes into blood (which has happened in recent history from meteors). Venus left and came back 52(?) years later then left to its present orbit. Ths 52, or so, year period fits with old story's like the exodus.

Im not exactly sure about every theory this guy had and how it all fits, but its pretty interesting so Im gonna read more and let you guys know later hopefully.

Coincidentally.. He thinks Venus came from Jupiter, maybe it was a moon or was pulled into the solar system by Jupiter. Lucifer is another name for venus and Jupiter is Zeus+Pater or God The Father. So Lucifer fell from God towards the Sun (firey pit, anyone?). Guess Im off-topic for the space foum.

Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a
charm.
Lisa: That's spacious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, dear.
Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Oh, how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

This about sums it up methinks.

Was the Planet Venus a Comet??

No.


Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 17-2-2009 by elevatedone]

Originally posted by Mogget

Was the Planet Venus a Comet??

No.

Wow! That's what I call an intelligent discussion!! One liners. No. It's one rung higher. One word wonders!

I suggest you read this link carefully.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I suspect those rules apply to pointless posts. I was responding to your question with a single, simple statement of fact. No explanation was required.

I dont see how anyone can just say "no" to this question. Theres probably no way to ever know for sure barring time travel, but Jupiter does pull objects into the solar system. The sun might be like almost every other star and be a binary-star. This star twin could have its own solar system that gets close to ours every so many millions of years. Why is it totally unthinkable that venus could have been a comet or planet dragged in here?

Because Venus has a stable, nearly circular solar orbit. It was formed from the accretion of rocky debris that littered the inner Solar System around five billion years ago.

Comets are icy bodies that were formed in the outer Solar System (since ice tends to vaporise when near the Sun).

In other words, Venus would have been made of much lighter, icy material if it had ever been a comet. Assuming (and it's an assumption of colossal proportions) that Venus did form in the outer Solar System, it would have needed to have experienced a unique combination of gravitational perturbations to get it to settle down in a circular orbit so close to the Sun (and without making a complete mess of the orbits of the other inner planets). The ices would then have melted/vaporised rapidly, and there wouldn't be much left today.

Trust me. Venus was never a comet.


[edit on 1-9-2006 by Mogget]

Originally posted by ViolatoR
I dont see how anyone can just say "no" to this question.

Amyone with the slighest knowldege of geo or astro physics. Or even who has read a book about our solar system, can say "no" with absolute confidence.

There are many things Venus could have been - a giant marshmallow, for example - but a comet is not one of them.

Theres probably no way to ever know for sure barring time travel, but Jupiter does pull objects into the solar system.

No it doesn't. The Sun does. But Jupiter's gravitational mass does tend to attract many of thos objects once they enter the solar system, thus helping reduce the chances of objects impacting with the inner planets.

The sun might be like almost every other star and be a binary-star. This star twin could have its own solar system that gets close to ours every so many millions of years. Why is it totally unthinkable that venus could have been a comet or planet dragged in here?

Could. Theoretically a brown dwarf could have remained invisble to us, though this does seem unlikely. But even if the sun does have a dark twin, it still remains impossible for an object orbiting it to be dragged into the inner Solar System and then become fixed into a circular orbit. Furthermore, if that were the case, what happened to the planet which (in accordance with Bodes Law) we would have expected to have been orbiting where Venus now is?

What's more likely? That Venus is the planet that has always orbited the sun in its current position? Or that's it's the super-massive rocky core (complete with mountain ranges etc) of a mega-comet that happened to get dragged into the solar system, destroyed the planet that previously orbited the sun between Mercury and Earth (so completely that all traces have disappeared), developed a dense atmosphere, and then miraculously moved into a perfectly circular orbit in exactly the same position as the previous planet?

What would William of Ockham say?

[edit on 1-9-2006 by Essan]

Originally posted by mikesingh

It possessed a 15-mile thick envelope composed, not of carbon dioxide or water as was previously supposed, but of heavy molecules of hydrocarbons.

Are you sure?
Because Venus atmosphere is made almost entirely of CO2 (96.5%) and N2 (3.5%)
a random link for this information
So where are those heavy molecules of hydrocarbons?

Originally posted by Apass

Originally posted by mikesingh

It possessed a 15-mile thick envelope composed, not of carbon dioxide or water as was previously supposed, but of heavy molecules of hydrocarbons.

Are you sure?
Because Venus atmosphere is made almost entirely of CO2 (96.5%) and N2 (3.5%)
a random link for this information
So where are those heavy molecules of hydrocarbons?

www.holoscience.com...
The new Scientist report (11/6) also says: Titan is thought to have a thick crust of water ice mixed with ammonia, but evidence is emerging that this may be covered by another layer of organic material. During the fly-by on 26 October, Cassini picked up microwaves from the surface that look like the thermal glow of hydrocarbon molecules. "Titan really is covered in organics," says radar team member Ralph Lorenz of the University of Arizona in Tucson. Scientists believe these hydrocarbons are created in the atmosphere when methane is broken down by sunlight and its components recombine into more complex molecules - a theory supported by the detection last week of benzene and acetylene high in the atmosphere.

Comment: If the Venusian surface were much cooler it would probably be covered in organic material too. There are many mysteries remaining about the atmosphere and clouds of that planet. There have been various claims that hydrocarbons exist in Venus' atmosphere but there seems to be a reluctance to pursue such a possibility despite the fact that model atmospheres with sulfuric acid clouds cannot explain all of the features of the clouds on that planet. On Feb. 26, 1963, making known the results of the Mariner probe, Dr. Homer Newell of NASA announced that, in his judgment of those responsible for that part of the program, "Venus is enshrouded in an envelope of hydrocarbon gases and dust, 15 miles thick, 45 miles above the ground of the planet.' The conclusion was based on the work of L. D. Kaplan, who noted that lower cloud layers on Venus were homogeneous from top to bottom over a temperature range of 160˚C. His conclusion was that only compounds with multiple C-H (carbon-hydrogen) bonds have the same physical characteristics over such a temperature range

The theory at least as early as 1963 seems to be that only carbon-hydrogen bonds could be homogeneous for several miles and at a range of temperatures.

Unforunately there are no sources in modern times that could have saw the planet venus make its first appearance. And theres no way to tell that some totally unnatural and strange miracle didnt do the impossible and bring venus in here. Heck, I've heard of a miracle or two in recent times. In modern terms the idea that venus was a comet is crazy talk. And I agree with the moden terms in this respect. Only, I still think there are secrets from the past than may still yet be learned today even if they dont fit the current world view or are very unlikely.

Here are what people used to believe:
Im gonna to add comments followed by "- violator"

According to Histoire des nations civilisees du mexique:
The sun was attacked by Quetzal-cohuatl; after the disappearnace of this serpent-shaped [comet tail? -violator] heavenly body, the sun refused to shine, and during four days the world was deprived of its light; ... Thereafter, the snakelike body transformed itself into a great star. The star retained the name of Quetzal-cohuatl. This great and brilliant star appeared for the first time in the east.

According to Gesammelte Abhandlungen:
Quetzal-cohuatl is the well-known name of the planet Venus.

- [After the comet called venus came near the earth and changed its rotation (360 day calanders around the world suddenly had 5 extra days) - violator]:

"The sequence of of seasons and the duration of days and nights became disarranged. It was then that the people of Mexico regulated anew the reckoning of days, nights, and hours, according to the difference in time" (Sources de l'histoire primitive du Mexique)

"The morning star appeared for the first time following the convulsions of the earth and overwhelmed by a deluge." (Sources de l'histoire primitive du Mexique)

In Of the Race of the Roman People:
There occured a remarkable celestial portent; for Castor records that in the brilliant star Venus, called Vesperugo by Plautus and the lovely Hesperus by Homer, there occured so strange a prodigy, that it changed its color, size, form, course, which never happened before nor since.

Augustine: "Certainly that phenomenon disturbed the canons of the astronomers . . . so as to take upon them to affirm that this which happened to the Morning Star (Venus) never happened before nor since."

In Ginzberg Legends in the time of Joshua "a new star was born in the east against which all magic was in vain."

In China "a brilliant star appeared in the days of Yahu." (The Chinese Classics)

Wikipedia: "Phaeton wanted to drive his (his=Phaeton's father Helios) chariot (the sun) for a day. Though Helios tried to talk him out of it, Phaeton was adamant. When the day came, Phaeton panicked and lost control of the white horses that drew the chariot. First it veered too high, so that the earth grew chill. Then it dipped too close, and the vegetation dried and burned. He accidentally turned most of Africa into desert; Eventually, Zeus (Jupiter -violator) was forced to intervene by striking the runaway chariot with a lightning bolt to stop it, and Phaëthon plunged into the river Eridanus (the Po)."

Hyginus in Astronomy tells how Phaethon caused the conflagration of the world, was struck by a lightning bolt from Jupiter and was placed by the sun among the stars (planets).

Hesiod wrote that Phaethon "Blazing Star" became the "Morning Star."

- ((according to Wiki Phaethon is also a name for the 'planet' that may have been where the asteroid belt is, but I never heard this one before - violator))

The birth of the Morning Star or the transformation of a legendary person into it is a widespread motif in the folklore of the oriental and occidental peoples. Ginzberg

Tahitian, Mangaian, Buraits, Kirghiz and Yakuts and the eskimos tell of the birth of Venus.

- Third millennium astronomical texts have a 4-planet system, second millennium have a 5-planet system (- violator) :

In the ancient Hindu table of planets, Venus is the only visible planet missing.
The Brahmans of the early period did not have 5 planets. Not until the middle period.
Babylonian astronomy had a 4-planet system. Ancient prayers of Saturn, Jupiter, Mars and Mercury are invoked, but no prayers to Venus are. (Histoire de l'astronomie ancienne, Astronomie, Astrologie und Mathematik

Apollonius Rhodius refered to a time "when not all the orbs were yet in the heavens."

Aristotle, Meteorologica: On a later date the planet Venus receives the appellative: 'The great star that joins the great stars.' The great stars are, of course, the four planets Mercury, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn . . . and Venus joins them as the fifth planet."

Democritus is quoted by Plutarch speaking about Venus like it is not one of the planets. Democritus also wrote "The worlds are unequally distributed in space; here there are more, there fewer; . . . The cause of their perishing is collision with one another." "The planets are at unequal distances from us." "Stars have been seen when comets dissolve."

The Pythagoreans believed that "the comet is one of the planets, but that it appears at great intervals of time and only rises a little above the horizon. This is the case with Mercury too; because it only rises a little above the horizon it often fails to be seen and consequently appears at graet intervals of time."

- Because for a time when Venus was easily observable it had a tail, there are stories of the star having smoke or a beard, etc. - violator

"The star that smoked, . . . which the Spainards call Venus." "Now I ask, what optical illusion could give Venus the appearance of a star throwing out smoke?" The Mexicans called Venus "the star that smoked" In the Vedas, Venus "looks like fire with smoke." The Talmud, "Fire is hanging down from the planet Venus." To the Chaldeans Venus "was said to have a beard."

- Being closer to earth in those times, Venus mut have been pretty birght. Brighter than 1,000,000th as bright as the sun today as it is today - violator

The Chaldeans described Venus as: "Bright torch of heaven," "diamond that illuminates like the sun," "A stupendous prodigy in the sky,"

The Hebrews said: "The brilliant light of Venus blazes from one end of the cosmos to the other end."

Chinese astronomical text refer to a time when "Venus was visible in full daylight and, while moving across the sky, rivaled the sun in brightness."

[edit on 9/2/2006 by ViolatoR]

Well, since 1963 there was about 24 other missions to venus (25 if you take into account also Venus Express) and among them were 8 (by my count) landers and 6 atmospheric probes so I guess we would have know by now if there were hydrocarbons in venus atmosphere.
www.solarviews.com...

Originally posted by Apass
Well, since 1963 there was about 24 other missions to venus (25 if you take into account also Venus Express) and among them were 8 (by my count) landers and 6 atmospheric probes so I guess we would have know by now if there were hydrocarbons in venus atmosphere.

Venus Express is currently in orbit and sending back data

sci.esa.int...

But hey, what would you rather believe? The results of 25 scientific space missions, or someone's interpretations of a translation of an old folk tale?

Fact is, it's possible that Venus was once a comet in the same way it's possible that Earth was once a comet.

The fact that some one interprets old texts as implying that Venus was not originally the planet it is today, in order to support his theory that Venus was not originally the planet it is today, is not evidence of anything...

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by Apass
Well, since 1963 there was about 24 other missions to venus (25 if you take into account also Venus Express) and among them were 8 (by my count) landers and 6 atmospheric probes so I guess we would have know by now if there were hydrocarbons in venus atmosphere.

But hey, what would you rather believe? The results of 25 scientific space missions, or someone's interpretations of a translation of an old folk tale?

Agreed !!
But why would ancient texts speak of only Venus? Probably because it was the brightest and easily visible?

But then there were stories about Mars too. And nobody called it a comet.

[edit on 4-9-2006 by mikesingh]

The Romans thought something strange was going on:

In Of the Race of the Roman People:
There occured a remarkable celestial portent; for Castor records that in the brilliant star Venus, called Vesperugo by Plautus and the lovely Hesperus by Homer, there occured so strange a prodigy, that it changed its color, size, form, course, which never happened before nor since.

Augustine: "Certainly that phenomenon disturbed the canons of the astronomers . . . so as to take upon them to affirm that this which happened to the Morning Star (Venus) never happened before nor since."

All these tales can relate to a simple cosmic phenomenon. A conjuction/occulation between the planet Venus and a comet. Seen from Earth, one would percieve the comet moving toward Venus and engulfing it (a dragon raping the god) and then the comet moving away from Venus leaving it unchanghed (the god defeating the dragon).
As for the 360 days calendar this can relate to the moon calendar (wich had 354 days) or to the egyptian calendar wich had 360 days in 12 months of 30 days, plus 5 extra days at the end

edited for some spelling

[edit on 5-9-2006 by Apass]