The Exponential Analysis and graphs
Technical Data.
Here is indicated one of many original map plottings based on the data that when transposed onto a grid with the width indicating the latitude and the length indicating time showed progressive sine waves that appeared to be repetitive. Was this an illusion or a reality. Only mathematics could tell with so much data. It certainly appeared so. The area covered is that of 130 degrees west to thirty degrees east. There is no northsouth as the constant is time relative to latitude or longitude. Never latitude or longitude at the same time. It certainly looked promising.
I then contacted the noted author and Physicist Mr Chistopher Illert and mentioned my theory of non random occurrences of phenomena possibly being based on repetitive sine waves. Mr Illert tested my data using an exponential graph based on the decay rate of an Alpha particle as the constant.
After many months of my once weekly entering of my data into a data program Mr Illert had designed several projections based on the data contained in this text that indicated repetition or periodicity.
The next graph is that of the data curve that the Proserpine or Persephone curve with a time length of 550 Earth years was extrapolated from after the exponential projection based on the decay rate of the Alpha particle was made. Later when we compared periodicities of our phenomena with the periodicities of the major planets in our Solar System we had a great surprise. The yearly periodicity was also approximate to the period of Sidereal Revolution of the major planets or the time that it takes them to get around the Sun on their elliptical orbits. If this subhypothesis was valid then we could effectively postulate that there was a planetary mass as distinct from the Oort Cloud at the edge of our Solar System that had an orbit around the Sun of 550 years. At first we thought that it was a rogue moon of Uranus as it was quite close to it at times but on closer examination we found it to have a transit much further out but coming close to Uranus twice in in its periodic cycle. Remember that orbits are elliptical not circular. Our supposedly random or nonexistent phenomena had periodicities, not necessarily those of the major planets but still indicative of periodicities which by their features are repetitive and ongoing. Our data, or at least the energy force behind them, was not random at all but predictably regular.
Pluto has a cycle of 225 years and is half that of the Persephone Cycle. It was not worth graphing as it was too large and would show no detail. The detail only emerges when we reach the Neptune Cycle of 112.5 years in the graph following. The actual sidereal path of Neptune around the Sun is 164 years but for ease of mental convenience we use the name of the planetary object with the nearest cycle. It is just very interesting that there are cycles so close in time as well as positioning in our Solar System.
The next graph is that of the Uranus Cycle with a periodicity of 90 years which is not much different to that of the Sidereal path of 84 years that Uranus actually travels on.
The next graph is of the Saturn Cycle with a periodicity of 38 years, actual Sidereal Time of 29 years. This is the smallest cycle that Mr Illert could deduce from the data as the rest of the cycles disintegrated into noise and were too difficult to differentiate. Remember that our data is supposedly random and possibly only a core sample with many other reports either not reported or missing, especially in the Nineteenth Century examples so our smaller cycles would be very hard to get a mathematical fix on. But so far we have periodicities that are strikingly similar, in fact similar enough to postulate the existence of a transPlutonian planet from.
So far we have Persephone or Proserpine at 550 years, Pluto at 225, Neptune at 112.5, Uranus at 90 and Saturn at 38 years compared to Persephone at unknown due to its accepted nonexistence, Pluto at 248 years, Neptune at 164 years, Uranus at 84 years and Saturn at 29 years. For supposedly nonexistent phenomena it is still amazingly coincidental that there are even any similarities at all. Periodicities or no periodicities, there was still provable regular mathematical proof the timing of the phenomena were of a regular nature and that is all that I wanted to have deduced from the data. Was it random or was it regular. Random and it is not worth persuing as any multitude of reasons from schizophrenia to misidentification could be the causes ofour phenomena. But with a mathematically determined periodicity we now have sequential events that even if we cannot determine their origin we at least now know that they are definitely not random.
Illert's planetary comparisons in the rough.
You be the Judge!

_text_