suhail jalbout

New Member
Revising Bode’s Law – “Planeteroid”


How can one determine the number of planets that were formed at the time the solar system was born? The answer to this difficult question may be found by studying Bode’s theory. Johan Bode, a German astronomer, was interested in the solar planetary system. In 1772 he claimed that there must be a planet between Mars and Jupiter basing his reasoning on the following mathematical analysis. He took two numbers 0 and 3, then he doubled 3 to get 6, and 6 to get 12, and so on. He then added 4 to each resultant number in the series and divided the results by 10, as such:

Step 1: 0 – 3

Step 2: 0 – 3 – 6 – 12 – 24 – 48 – 96 – 192, …

Step 3: 4 – 7 – 10 – 16 – 28 – 52 – 100 – 196, …

Step 4: 0.4 – 0.7 – 1.0 – 1.6 – 2.8 – 5.2 – 10.0 – 19.6, …

He claimed that the results of step 4 represent the distance of each planet from the Sun multiplied by the distance from Earth to the Sun. It should be noted that the planets Uranus, Neptune and Pluto were discovered in 1781, 1846, and 1930 respectively; in other words, after Bode formulated his theory. The results of Bode’s theory are in table 1 below.1

The distance of the planets
from the Sun according to Bode’s theory*

Bode’s Series
Bode’s Distance
Actual Mean Distance
Percentage Error**
4 + 0
0- 2.5
4 + 3
0+ 2.8
4 + 6
0 0.0
4 + 12
0- 5.0
4 + 24
4 + 48
0 00.0
4 + 96
0- 4.6
4 + 192
0- 2.1
4 + 384
- 22.5
4 + 768
- 48.9

* Based on Bode’s theory in: <>

**A negative error indicates that the planet is nearer to the Sun than Bode predicted and a positive error is vice versa.

From these results, Bode concluded that there must be a planet between Mars and Jupiter at a distance of 2.8 times the Earth’s distance from the Sun. Such a planet could not be found until 1801 when the Sicilian astronomer, Giuseppi Piazzi, spotted a small object in orbit near where Bode had predicted its location. This object turned out to have a diameter of about 1,000 kilometers. Later, it was discovered that this is not the only object in orbit, but that there are hundreds of thousands of similar asteroids and millions of meteorites all revolving around the Sun in what has become known as the asteroid belt. The orbit of some of these asteroids comes very close to Earth from time to time as did Hermes Asteroid in 1937.2 Most asteroids are made of either nickel and iron, or a combination of rock and metals, while others are mainly matter.3 Such a composition is what scientists would expect to find among the remains of a shattered planet. If the original Bode’s planet did exist, what caused it to explode and shatter to pieces, thus forming the asteroid belt? To answer this question, Bode’s theory must be revised.

It is evident that Bode’s theory works very well up to Uranus, but Neptune and Pluto are completely out of the range. This means that the Sun’s gravitation has different effects on planets nearer to it than those farther away from it. The following example supports this logic:

Scientists could not explain why Mercury’s orbit is highly eccentric. They attributed its behavior to a body in its vicinity, but no such planet could be found.4 However, when Einstein formulated his gravitational equation, scientists were able to understand why Mercury was behaving in that way. The Sun’s gravitational field is enormous near its neighbors, which represents a large quantity of energy. Since mass and energy are interrelated, then the large quantity of its energy could be considered as an additional small mass exerting additional gravitational pulls on Mercury, causing its unusual behavior.

If planets act differently when they are nearer the Sun, we can conclude that planets very far away from the Sun will also behave differently. In the latter case, the Sun’s gravitational pull is weak, causing the farthest planets to form at distances much nearer to the Sun than Bode’s predictions. This is so because gravitation is necessary for the formation of spheres. Consequently, Bode’s theory must be revised and a correction factor applied.

Since the correction factor must be applied from the farthest planet to the nearest, I reversed the logic that Bode used. Instead of using 3 as a base and multiplying by 2, I used 2 as a base and multiplied by 3. This gave the following figures for the correction factors:

2 – 6 – 18 – 54 – 162 – 486 – 1,458 – 4,374 – 13,122.

Applying these numbers to Bode’s theory gives us new results represented in table 2 (refer to my D formula on page xx).

The distance of the planets from the Sun according to my revised version of Bode’s Theory

Mercury 4 + 0 x (1─0) 00.40* 00.39 - 2.5
Venus 4 + 3 x (1─1/13122) 00.70 00.72 + 2.8
Earth 4 + 6 x (1─1/4374) 01.00 01.00 0.0
Mars 4 + 12 x (1─1/1458) 01.60 01.52 - 5.0
Bode 4 + 24 x (1─1/486) 02.79 0----- -----
Jupiter 4 + 48 x (1─1/162) 05.17 05.20 + 0.6
Saturn 4 + 96 x (1─1/54) 09.82 09.54 - 2.8
Uranus 4 + 192 x (1─1/18) 18.53 19.18 + 3.4
Neptune 4 + 384 x (1─1/6) 32.40 30.06 - 7.2
Pluto 4 + 768 x (1─1/2) 38.80 39.44 + 1.6

On comparing the percentage error columns in tables 1 and 2, we note that the latter has improved tremendously. The errors of all the planets are very reasonable except for Mars and Neptune, (- 5.0%) and (- 7.2%) respectively. Why do these two planets have such a large error, and why are they nearer to the Sun than the predicted corrected distance? The answer is quite simple. Both Mars and Neptune had planets beyond their orbits which were exerting outward gravitational pulls on them. Mars was experiencing two gravitational pulls in opposite directions. One from Earth pulling Mars towards the Sun and the other from Bode’s planet pulling Mars away from the Sun. When Bode’s planet was shattered, as we shall discuss later, Mars was displaced nearer to the Sun because the outward pull of Bode’s planet no longer existed. Similarly, Neptune was experiencing two gravitational pulls in opposite directions. One was exerted by Uranus pulling Neptune towards the Sun, and the other by an unknown planet pulling it away from the Sun. In the absence of the unknown planet, which I shall name “Planeteroid”,5 Neptune no longer had the gravitational force pulling it away from the Sun, causing it to be displaced to a distance nearer the Sun than was predicted.

One wonders as to why is the size of Pluto so small, 2,274 km in diameter, relative to the ‘giant’ planets (Jupiter is 143,000 km, Saturn 120,500 km, Uranus 51,100 km and Neptune 49,500 km).6 How can the diameter of a planet included within the category of the ‘giants’ be so dramatically smaller than the others? Pluto’s size resembles that of the moons not the planets. Judging from the size of the neighboring planets, the one that should have been formed in place of Pluto must have been larger. In order to produce (-7.2%) error for Neptune, “Planeteroid” ought to have an estimated mass of 2.78 times the mass of Earth. If we assume its density to be 0.7 g/cm3, the same as Pluto, then its diameter must be approx. 35,700 km; the Earth’s diameter is only 12,756 km. If “Planeteroid” did exist, then what has become of it, or where is it now?

Let us draw an analogy between the atom and the solar system. In an atom, electrons revolve around the nucleus in a similar way to how the planets revolve around the Sun. The electrons in the outer orbit of atoms in conductors are not very stable; they can be dislodged from their orbit very easily under conditions such as heat or potential and wander freely from one atom to another. Similarly, in our solar system, “Planeteroid” did not have a stable orbit because the grip of the Sun was gradually decreasing with time. The more mass was lost from the surface of the Sun, due to its nuclear activity, the weaker became its gravitational pull at such an enormous distance. As a result, “Planeteroid” became unstable likely to be disloged from its erratic orbit by the influence of external forces. This means that Neptune’s large mass controlled the destiny of “Planeteroid”. Every time Neptune completed a revolution around the Sun, it passed in the vicinity of “Planeteroid”. Due to its gravitation, it pulled “Planeteroid” nearer to the Sun, causing it to follow, every Neptune year, a new shorter spiralling trajectory around the Sun. As energy is needed to dislodge outer electrons, so energy is needed to dislodge “Planeteroid”. This energy can be attributed to Neptune’s strong gravitation and the gravitational pull of other planets when they line up. The more planets lined up, the more “Planeteroid” approached Neptune. The nearer the proximity, the greater the likelihood that Neptune will pull it nearer to the Sun. This phenomena will eventualy leads to a catastrophic event. The unstable “Planeteroid” will eventualy leave its orbit and will follow a new trajectory around the Sun.

There are at least six important effects that the new trajectory of “Planeteroid” has inflicted upon the solar system:

1. The wobbly performance of Neptune.

2. The retrograde orbit of Triton, Neptune’s moon.

3. The massive axial tilt of Uranus.

4. The explosion of Bode’s planet between Mars and Jupiter.

5. The slow clockwise rotation of Venus.

6. The powerful magnetic field of Mercury.

1. Neptune is a wobbly planet and no one knows why.7 When “Planeteroid” was pulled away from its orbit, a gravitational perturbation was introduced in the vicinity of Neptune. Such a perturbation would cause Neptune to wobble. Because of Neptune’s huge volume, the Sun’s weak gravitational pull on it at such a great distance and the absence of a dampening medium, Neptune will continue to wobble.

2. Triton is the only moon in our solar system to orbit a planet in an opposite direction.8 The cause may be explained either by assuming that it was a moon of “Planeteroid”, which was captured by Neptune during the pulling process, or that it had an encounter with “Planeteroid” when the latter passed near Neptune, causing it to have a retrograde orbit. It is to be noted that all the other retrograde “moons” that are orbiting the planets at the present time are captured asteroids. They did not orbit the relavent plants at the time the solar system was formed.

3. One of the most distinctive features of Uranus is its massive axial tilt.9 Up to date, the reason for this tilt is still unknown. When “Planteroid” was pulled away from its orbit, it zoomed near Uranus on one of its revolutions around the Sun causing it to have a huge axial tilt.

4. As mentioned before, Bode predicted the existence of a planet between Mars and Jupiter. A belt of asteroids exists now in its place. These asteroids seem to have originated from a smashed planet. Let us assume that Bode’s planet existed at the time the solar system was born. Let us also assume that when “Planeteroid” was placed in its new orbit, it passed near Bode’s planet and introduced a deviation in the latter’s path. If the deviation was of a large magnitude, it would have caused Bodes’s planet to have an acute orbital excentricity and cross the Roche Limit (near Jupiter). The Roche Limit is the minimum distance to which a small solar body can approach a larger body without being torn apart into pieces by tidal forces. The French astronomer, D. Roche, calculated the theoretical limit to be 2½ to 3 times the radius of the larger solar body.10 The possibility that Bode’s planet did cross Roche’s limit is high because Bode’s planet used to complete its orbit around the Sun in 4.7 years and passed by Jupiter once during this period. Consequently, it is plausible to guess that the encounter between “Planeteroid” and Bode’s planet caused the latter to shatter when it crossed the Roche limit. The results were the asteroid belt and the strange huge potato shapes of Mars’ two moons. The other shattered pieces of Bode’s planet probably contributed to the large number of craters on our moon while the balance were lost in space and/or became a part of the neighbering planets.

What is the estimated date for the formation of “Planeteroid” and the shattering of Bode’s planet? The Apollo Lunar Landing astronauts found ‘breccias’ rocks on the moon. They are rocks made from the debris of meteor and asteroid impacts on the Moon. These rocks are formed due to the shattering of solid rock, melting, and then re-welding following an encounter with extreme and sudden heat. They are the most common rock type on the Moon.11 Further, celestial bodies the size of cities came crashing down on the moon, heating, melting and welding rocks, and forming gigantic basins, mountains, and craters. It is estimated that the cataclysmic period on the Moon occurred some 1 billion years after the date of its creation. Thus, if the Moon was born with the solar system about 4.6 billion years ago, its cataclysm would have occurred 3.6 billion years ago. If the shattering of Bode’s planet caused the Moon’s cataclysm, and if it was shattered at the time when “Planeteroid” was placed in to a new orbit, we can conclude that the catastrophic event of the latter is at least 3.6 billion years ago.

5. Venus is a planet in the solar system that spins on its axis in a clockwise direction; most of the other planets spin counter-clockwise.12 Logic dictates that Venus should follow the same axial rotation as the other planets unless subjected to an external force. In addition, the period of revolution of Venus around its axis is 243 days, whereas, its revolution around the Sun is completed in 225 days.13 All other planets complete their axial rotation in hours except for Pluto (6 days) and Mercury (59 days); even the Sun takes only 27 days to finish its axial revolution.14

The relatively long axial revolution of Mercury is due to the strong gravitational field of the Sun which acts as a break to reduce its spinning period. But the same cannot be said about Venus which is much farther away from the Sun. The Sun could not have been the cause for its slow rotation to 243 days nor for its clockwise spin. The only logical explanation to Venus’ behavior is the effect of “Planeteroid” on it during their encounter. If Venus was rotating counterclockwise like all the other neighboring planets, the passage of “Planeteroid” in its neighborhood would cause a prolonged celestial shock. This shock would produce strong and long gravitational pulls, which could account for the strange behavior of Venus. When both “Planeteroid” and Venus rotate side by side around the Sun, the tremendous gravitational force between them would cause Venus to spin clockwise around its axis with variable periods of axial rotations, as will be discussed below. The first encounter between “Planeteroid” and Venus, about 3.6 billion years ago, must have caused a massive cataclysm on the latter.

6. In 1973, planetary scientists were shocked to discover that Mercury has a powerful magnetic field. How could a small planet, like Mercury, possess such a strong magnetic field? Scientists explain this phenomenon by saying that ‘Mercury might have once been a bigger planet and somehow got its outer layers [shell] stripped off.’15 The passage of “Planeteroid” between Venus and Mercury could have stripped the latter’s outer shell.

From these six reference points we can estimate the orbital trajectory of “Planeteroid” in the solar system. As “Planeteroid” approaches the Sun from space, it crosses the paths of Pluto, Neptune, Uranus, Saturn, Jupiter, the asteroid belt, Mars, Earth, and Venus. It rotates somewhere between Venus and Mercury, and moves on its outward journey, again, crossing the orbital paths of Venus, Earth, Mars, the asteroid belt, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. This trajectory leads us to the following important conclusions:

1. Because of the enormous difference between the revolution periods of the ‘giant’ planets with respect to the smaller ones, the probability of “Planeteroid” encountering Mars, Earth, and Venus is great. This means that gravitational perturbations are more frequent with respect to the smaller planets than the ‘giants’. Consequently, and depending on the relative position of the three planets with respect to “Planeteroid” orbital crossing, any or all of the following events may occur:

a. Mars, Earth, and Venus may all spiral inwards towards the Sun or outwards away from it. This means that the distance of these planets from the Sun may increase or decrease. Therefore, the periods of revolution around the Sun of the planets Mars, Earth, and Venus may increase or decrease, resulting in longer or shorter days per their respective years.

b. Mars, Earth, and Venus may have different spiraling directions. One may spiral in towards the Sun while the others may spiral out away from it. This means that the distance of Earth from Mars or from Venus may increase or decrease. So, the ancients must have seen the moons of Mars (the two horses in the Greek legend) at such a time when Earth was at a very close distance to Mars.

c. Cosmic shocks may occur to Mars, Earth, and Venus when they encounter “Planeteroid” at the crossing points. Consequently, the revolution of these planets around their axis may increase or decrease depending on their relative position with respect to “Planeteroid” and the magnitude of the cosmic shock, which is a byproduct of the distance. This means that the days of the relevant planets may have more or less hours.

2. Since “Planeteroid” orbits the Sun near Venus, the probability of having gravitational perturbations on Venus, as compared to Earth or Mars, are extremely high. This means that the chances of altering the orbital path of Venus and its axial rotation are great. Hence, Venus may have a slow or a very slow clockwise axial rotation depending on its relevant position with respect to “Planeteroid” when they orbit the Sun beside each other. No wonder Venus has a clockwise axial rotation.

3. The asteroid belt is the ammunition belt for “Planeteroid”. Since it crosses the belt twice on each journey, it will dislodge asteroids from their orbits, causing them to fall on planets or moons. It will also pull a huge amount of meteorites, leaving them in the orbital paths of planets.

4. On its journey into space, “Planeteroid” will trigger few of the billions of the small icy balls causing them to change their trajectories and orbit the Sun as comets.

In brief, I believe that the solar system consisted of 1 Sun and 10 planets when it was formed 4.6 billion years ago: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Bode, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and “Planeteroid”. A catastrophe happened in our solar system 3.6 billion years ago. The orbital path of “Planeteroid”became a narrow elliptical trajectory around the Sun. Pluto, the moon on “Planeteriod” was left in the place of the later to orbit the Sun in a trajectory different than all the other planets while Bode’s planet exploded.

According to NASA, the recent detected deviations in the movements of Uranus and Neptune is a convincing evidence to prove the existence of an unknown solar body of, at least, 4 to 8 times the mass of Earth at an estimated distance of 7,000,000,000 km from the Sun.16 Could “Planeteroid” be NASA’s planet?

The Egyptian historian, al-Masudi, stated that ‘The Great Pyramid was inscribed with the heavenly spheres, and figures representing the stars and planets in the forms in which they were worshipped. Also the position of the stars and their cycles, together with the history and chronicles of time past, of that which is to come, and of every future event which would take place in Egypt.’17 Was “Planeteroid” one of these inscribed heavenly spheres?


I have developed the following formula, based on my revised version of Bode’s Law, to calculate the mean distance from the Sun of the original ‘ten’ planets in our solar system. These planets were: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Bode, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and “Planeteroid”.18

D = [3 x 2 n-2 x (1-1/2x3 N-n) +4] x d



D = the mean distance of the planet from the Sun

d = the mean distance of Earth, the 3rd planet, from the Sun

n = the numerical number of the planet counting from the Sun outwards

N = the number of the original planets in the solar system

Here are two applications for the formula:

1. The mean distance of Mercury, the 1st planet, from the Sun.

D = [3 x 2 1-2 x (1-1/2x3 10-1) + 4] x d = 0.55 x d


The original mean distance of Mercury from the Sun according to this formula is 0.55d. However,the actual mean distance of Mercury from the Sun is 0.39 x d. This means that there is a theoretical mass, due to the huge energy of the Sun, that pulls Mercury nearer to the Sun. The theoretical mass is defined in Einstein’s equation as m = E/(c/cos0)2 where E = energy, m = mass and c = speed of light). From this obvious displacement of Mercury (0.55 x d – 0.39 x d), it is possible to calculate the theoretical mass (m) and the Sun’s energy (E) near Mercury.

2. The mean distance of Earth, the 3rd planet, from the Sun.

D = [3 x 2 3-2 x (1-1/2x3 10-3) +4] x d = 1.00 x d