What do you envision as the structure of the Earth and other solar planets, and the motions of the bodies of the solar systems? How does this relate to the structure of the observable universe?
The Tychonic model explains the phenomena as well or better than the Copernican. There are so many issues with the Big Bang and modern cosmology that the entire standard-model is bereft not only of proof, but of common sense. To justify Copernicanism they (the science, the priests, the cult) need to resort to fantasies and maths which at their core are simply tautological. Put it this way, if the Earth moved as we all believe or are told, we must be able to mechanically measure it, without much difficulty, using light measurements on this planet (interference, water etc).
Fascinating stuff. What's interesting to me about this is how vehement the heliocentists are. Why do they care so much? This suggests ulterior motives. Like you said, it's possible that the earth moves, it can't be definitely proven and might not even be a meaningful distinction since there is no 3rd fixed point of reference outside the universe. So normally a true scientist would admit that, even though he might believe the balance of evidence leans towards heliocentrism. If we were discussing, say, whether the center of the earth is cold or hot, there would probably not be some kind of pogram against people who have non-mainstream views, since it's mainly an academic question. Maybe, you could teach the "standard" view only in undergraduate courses, and then study arguments for the other side at the graduate level, or something like that, if you're concerned about misleading non-specialists. But, of course, the reason geocentrism is different is because it supports Genesis and traditional Christian cosmology. Whereas heliocentrism is foundational to the Enlightenment narrative, second only to evolution probably. That's why it's an absolute non-negotiable with moralistic undertones, instead of a normal scientific theory. It would be interesting to ask some ardent heliocentrists the question, "if geocentrism was definitively proven or at least shown to be much more likely than heliocentrism, would you change your beliefs?" and see what they say.
You are right about 'non negotiable' and you are right about the 'Enlightenment' (another myth) and its philosophies. Heliocentricity must be 'right' at all costs, yet not a single experiment can prove this large orb moves, and consider the velocities they propose of this planet, our solar system, our galaxy through the universe. Yet consider something obvious. Sidereal time is 23 hours 56 minutes....we lose 4 minutes a day. If we move around the Sun (we might but the proof is thin), we lose 28 minutes a week, nearly 2 hours a month, and over 6 months...12 hours. Why then do we not see such a difference reflected in what is observed every 6 months (unchanging, always the same forever). Or consider that Venus and Mars' rotations are changing (former slowing down, latter speeding up) - why isn't this planet suffering the same? etc etc.
Love your work. I'm curious, are you aware of James DeMeo? He interprets some of these studies differently, specifically stating that Dayton Miller and Wilhelm Reich observed data that is consistent with the ether being "entrained" within the earth, where the entrainment is stronger at lower altitudes. Can't this explain the apparent lack of an expected strong ether wind? Both found a more noticeable ether wind at higher altitudes and in environments that lacked heavy metal materials. Would love to know what you think, cheers man!
Thanks for the compliment. Yes indeed, I know James and his work is fascinating though ignored. He bases his asssessment on facts not maths. Dayton Miller is covered on this substack as well - the unknown physicist who disproved Relativity (some 300.000 times, https://unstabbinated.substack.com/p/dayton-miller?utm_source=publication-search). Einstein admitted that Miller destroyed his work. Reich is a good insight, and I should add a post or two on his work.
Aether wind is real, the only question is how does it operate ? (entrained, partial, full etc) https://unstabbinated.substack.com/p/entrained-aether-theories-cannot?utm_source=publication-search The aether nullifies STR and GTR. It also helps explain plasma physics, though many of the plasma scientists don't call the medium an aether. Penrose and other physicists who are sufficiently independent and venerated admit there is an aether though one can never utter the word. If there is no aether, there is no light transmission, there is no life, there is nothing.
Thank you so much for the quick reply man. I'll be diving into your links. Love your work and keep it up. We need more people speaking out like you. It's getting harder and hard to find true research like yours
Yes indeed. Drugs, drugs, drugs. Surgeries. Operations. Chemo. Profits. No homeopathy, no naturopathy because natural ingredients are anti-science... How many trillions now spent on 'cancer research', yet nary a single one of them can identify liver destruction as the main locus of why cancer forms (from toxins)....cancer research is just money laundering.
This kind of stuff is nothing but a distraction from the real issues of the day. The strategy of the people behind it is to create information overload so nobody looks at the real game being played. The same thing goes for all the flat earthers out there. It's such an easy thing to spot it is a wonder that so many people are falling for it.
What do you envision as the structure of the Earth and other solar planets, and the motions of the bodies of the solar systems? How does this relate to the structure of the observable universe?
The Tychonic model explains the phenomena as well or better than the Copernican. There are so many issues with the Big Bang and modern cosmology that the entire standard-model is bereft not only of proof, but of common sense. To justify Copernicanism they (the science, the priests, the cult) need to resort to fantasies and maths which at their core are simply tautological. Put it this way, if the Earth moved as we all believe or are told, we must be able to mechanically measure it, without much difficulty, using light measurements on this planet (interference, water etc).
Are you speculating that we are in a geocentric solar system configuration?
Geo-Helio-centricity or a mix of the 2 models (Tychonic). Copernicanism does not stand up to proof or scrutiny. This is what the evidence, even from WMAP, JWT etc are offering as well. 'The Axis of Evil' pace 'the science'. https://unstabbinated.substack.com/p/wilkinson-microwave-anisotropy-probe?utm_source=publication-search
Thanks for the clarification and link. Appreciated.
Fascinating stuff. What's interesting to me about this is how vehement the heliocentists are. Why do they care so much? This suggests ulterior motives. Like you said, it's possible that the earth moves, it can't be definitely proven and might not even be a meaningful distinction since there is no 3rd fixed point of reference outside the universe. So normally a true scientist would admit that, even though he might believe the balance of evidence leans towards heliocentrism. If we were discussing, say, whether the center of the earth is cold or hot, there would probably not be some kind of pogram against people who have non-mainstream views, since it's mainly an academic question. Maybe, you could teach the "standard" view only in undergraduate courses, and then study arguments for the other side at the graduate level, or something like that, if you're concerned about misleading non-specialists. But, of course, the reason geocentrism is different is because it supports Genesis and traditional Christian cosmology. Whereas heliocentrism is foundational to the Enlightenment narrative, second only to evolution probably. That's why it's an absolute non-negotiable with moralistic undertones, instead of a normal scientific theory. It would be interesting to ask some ardent heliocentrists the question, "if geocentrism was definitively proven or at least shown to be much more likely than heliocentrism, would you change your beliefs?" and see what they say.
You are right about 'non negotiable' and you are right about the 'Enlightenment' (another myth) and its philosophies. Heliocentricity must be 'right' at all costs, yet not a single experiment can prove this large orb moves, and consider the velocities they propose of this planet, our solar system, our galaxy through the universe. Yet consider something obvious. Sidereal time is 23 hours 56 minutes....we lose 4 minutes a day. If we move around the Sun (we might but the proof is thin), we lose 28 minutes a week, nearly 2 hours a month, and over 6 months...12 hours. Why then do we not see such a difference reflected in what is observed every 6 months (unchanging, always the same forever). Or consider that Venus and Mars' rotations are changing (former slowing down, latter speeding up) - why isn't this planet suffering the same? etc etc.
Love your work. I'm curious, are you aware of James DeMeo? He interprets some of these studies differently, specifically stating that Dayton Miller and Wilhelm Reich observed data that is consistent with the ether being "entrained" within the earth, where the entrainment is stronger at lower altitudes. Can't this explain the apparent lack of an expected strong ether wind? Both found a more noticeable ether wind at higher altitudes and in environments that lacked heavy metal materials. Would love to know what you think, cheers man!
Thanks for the compliment. Yes indeed, I know James and his work is fascinating though ignored. He bases his asssessment on facts not maths. Dayton Miller is covered on this substack as well - the unknown physicist who disproved Relativity (some 300.000 times, https://unstabbinated.substack.com/p/dayton-miller?utm_source=publication-search). Einstein admitted that Miller destroyed his work. Reich is a good insight, and I should add a post or two on his work.
Aether wind is real, the only question is how does it operate ? (entrained, partial, full etc) https://unstabbinated.substack.com/p/entrained-aether-theories-cannot?utm_source=publication-search The aether nullifies STR and GTR. It also helps explain plasma physics, though many of the plasma scientists don't call the medium an aether. Penrose and other physicists who are sufficiently independent and venerated admit there is an aether though one can never utter the word. If there is no aether, there is no light transmission, there is no life, there is nothing.
Thank you so much for the quick reply man. I'll be diving into your links. Love your work and keep it up. We need more people speaking out like you. It's getting harder and hard to find true research like yours
Well, it’s true: the sun rises and the sun sets. None of the theory of the earth madly rotating, and orbiting the sun.
So, Medical Priests are the same as Physicist Priests. They both practice Witchcraft.
Yes indeed. Drugs, drugs, drugs. Surgeries. Operations. Chemo. Profits. No homeopathy, no naturopathy because natural ingredients are anti-science... How many trillions now spent on 'cancer research', yet nary a single one of them can identify liver destruction as the main locus of why cancer forms (from toxins)....cancer research is just money laundering.
This kind of stuff is nothing but a distraction from the real issues of the day. The strategy of the people behind it is to create information overload so nobody looks at the real game being played. The same thing goes for all the flat earthers out there. It's such an easy thing to spot it is a wonder that so many people are falling for it.
Fascinating.
What do you think the implications are?
Have comparable experiments been run on Space Probes at varying distances from the Sun?