FN editor’s note: Bart Jordan’s sister mailed me a copy of following article; likely published by QUEST For Knowledge (a British science publication) , which published Moons of Mars. Note that Jordan, via Hammond Wright, had these four measures published in the statistical box of Encyclopaedia Britannica’s article on Mars, running from 1966 to 1973.
Man behind the Martian moon theory
By Robert Kinnison
Featured in this week’s edition is Bart Jordan’s article on the Moons of Mars. What is of interest to us is that he is a classical guitarist by training and practice. He studied with the great Andres Segovia at El Escorial, the monastery outside Madrid. How he became involved with the Martian moons is a story in itself.
When he read Gulliver’s Travels at age seven, he noted that the author accorded two moons to Mars. The author, Jonathan Swift, was a contemporary of Newton who certainly knew nothing of two Martian moons. Swift wrote fiction but was surprisingly close to the truth. Jordan wanted to know the EXACT revolutions and distances of the two moons because he thought they might hold a key to their actual dimensions. Their dimensions after all, were the unknown.
After reading his article on the Moons of Mars and some of his earlier entries in this paper, I thought a question and answer format might be helpful to the reader.
Q. You documented your harmonious number from which you drew 27 22 19km for Phobos and 15 12 11km for Deimos. According to NASA, you got six unknowns out of six right. How do you feel about that?
A. I can only hope that a full review of my findings with regard t Phobos and Deimos will be taken up by some journal prepared to ask for commentary.
Q. You have proposed that the moons of Mars were culled from the Asteroid Belt between Jupiter and Mars. They were then positioned in chosen orbits about Mars. Who did this?
A. Man, a long time ago. All the paired arithmetic signatures I have exposed in my papers or my lectures are the work of man from Earth’s perspective.
Q. Can you furnish other examples of these paired arithmetic signatures?
A. Yes. 9366km as 9+366 and 23520km as 23+520 comes to 918. Phobos, Deimos, and Harmonia each take 280 days to be born, and 78 days is one tenth of 780 days for the apparent or synodical revolution of Mars: total 918.
Q. Is there a time signature which yields yet another time signature?
A. Decidedly! 27554s as 27+554 and 109075s as 109+075 yielding 765. We have 7.65h for Phobos’ revolution about Mars.
Q. Phobos 4591818 Deimos are given in minutes and easily memorized. What do you think of it as a tool for memory and cognition?
A. It speaks volumes as an intentionally unified time signature. It is well within the grasp of the common man’s cognitive capacity. I personally think it should be taught to every school child.
Q. Your Cesium Second Equation is the most spectacular of all the evidence you present in the paper. It’s four arithmetic signatures resolve into one. Man is clearly the author of the event. Was he content to show his arithmetic genius and technical prowess by installing two asteroid moons about Mars? If not, it certainly would have been enough! What else do you think he had in mind?
A. Ancient man’s arithmetic genius and technical prowess are obvious enough, if we can accept it. The marvel of it all is surpassing, ranging from its simplicity to its complexity. Man seems to be saying that we must not forget any of it. We must remember it all and keep it holy – from the Five Ancient Planets to the Cesium Second Equation. We have come this way before, along an atomic path which may have destroyed itself as we are doing now. Mars is a wasteland. I ask that Phobos and Deimos be viewed as a warning of our atomic and space technologies. We have choices. We have time. We have examples from which to learn: Phobos, Deimos, and Mars.
For more information go to
21 April, 2015 – Youtube – 0:07:09