Reading through the Gaia release from ESA at the end of Ch. 25 where they tap dance around why they keep the negative parallax’s in the catalog, it dawned on me that the negative parallax data, which correlates with your explanation of how negative parallax occurs, only reaffirms that they are gathering the data from an earth bound source. As your graphic shows the trochoidal pattern and time frame create the direction of the parallax. An instrument in space would seemingly avoid the oscillations associated with ground based observations.
1 Like
Yes, dear schoepffer - the stellar parallax data is obviously gathered from an earth bound source, how could it possibly be otherwise? Yet, we are told (by ESA and NASA) that they are gathered by multi-million-dollar, tinfoil-hatted satellites (hurtling around the Earth at hypersonic speeds) such as this:
The “Hipparcos space telescope” - image source: official NASA website
Anyone who buys into this utter idiocy must be very gullible indeed,.
We live in a world of silly fairy tales - but the storytellers laugh all the way to the bank.
2 Likes
I agree Simon, but their findings are seemingly a “contrary indicator” that is a useful tool especially for you, for I imagine that this data helped you ascertain the validity of your model, specifically the findings taken from different earthly locations.
Honestly, I think this chapter should be nearer to the front of the book, this evidence is really irrefutable. There can be no negative parallax, it falsifies their model.
I wanted to add that your model will have some predictive capacity as well in the future (long after we’re gone). As earth “rounds the corner” of it’s PVP orbit, the stars will begin exhibiting different parallax’s, provided they are still measuring it the same way. Do I have this correct?
Yes, dear schoepffer - you are quite correct: for instance, in 6336 years from now the Earth will have covered 90° of its PVP orbit and will thus be moving ‘perpendicularly’ to its current translational direction in space (as can be envisioned in my below graphic). Hence, all parallax measurements of our surrounding stars will be different from today since we’ll be moving ‘southwards’ rather than ‘westwards’.
The Earth moves from position “0” to position “3” in 6336 years.
In fact, this goes to explain the ‘mystery’ of the exponentilally increasing rate of the General Precession - as expounded in Chapter 19 of my book - and illustrated with this other graphic:
As for your suggestion to put the negative parallax issue nearer the front of the book, you will surely realize that one of the most difficult choices I was faced when ‘assembling’ into a book my decade-long research material - was precisely that of the sequence of the chapters. For instance, it would have been impossible to place the negative parallax issue before the chapters which dealt with the PVP orbit’s very existence… However, you are quite right: the negative parallax question is a big nail in the coffin of the Copernican / heliocentric model - but certainly not the only one! 