The TYCHOSIUM 3D simulator

Try this link…

Dear Peaker,

The chap is actually using Saturn as an example of (annual) retrogradation and, in fact, Saturn is observed to retrograde every year for about 138 days. Mars, on the other hand, is of course observed to retrograde every other year (for 72 days on average - i.e. for min. 61d and max 83d). Now, to visualize how heliocentrists ‘explain’ this fact, I encourage you to play around with the (Copernican) JS Orrery simulator (linked below): you will find that in the heliocentric model, Mars (and Mars only) would indeed be expected to retrograde only every other year - as the Earth would ‘overtake’ Mars only every 2.13 years or so. However, here’s the problem: as I thoroughly expound and illustrate at the end of Chapter 5 of my book, whenever Mars transits (in opposition) closest to the Earth, the amount of its ANGULAR SHIFT caused by its retrograde motion against the background stars should be larger than when it transits farthest from the Earth. Instead, the exact opposite is observed ! Hence, the Copernican ‘explanation’ for the retrograde motions is fatally flawed - beyond appeal.

The JS ORRERY (a heliocentric simulator) : jsOrrery - Javascript Solar System Simulator

So for how long do each of our various planets (and moons) retrograde, you might wonder?
Here you go (all values are mean / average figures) :

Mercury: ≈ 21 days (yearly) <— The Sun’s minor moon
Venus: ≈ 41 days (yearly) <— The Sun’s major moon
Mars: ≈ 72 days (biyearly) <— The Sun’s binary companion
Jupiter: ≈ 121 days (yearly)
Saturn: ≈ 138 days (yearly)
Uranus: ≈ 151 days (yearly)
Neptune: ≈ 158 days (yearly)

To be sure - and as anyone can verify for themselves - in the TYCHOSIUM 3D simulator, all our planets regularly reverse direction (as viewed from Earth) precisely as is observed in reality.

This is a good reply, Simon. It really develops this idea well. This YT that I linked to is already old, ten years or more.

I am shocked in some fundamental way that my fellow man, especially the educated ones, have no idea of retrograde motion. But then again, how did I come to know of it? Certainly did not get taught at school.

And without knowing anything about the retrograde of a planet how could one understand that it is the build block of a larger pattern… something like ‘the rose of venus’.


In these last few months, I have justly been asked (by some highly qualified / academic / veteran astronomers) about the accuracy of the Tychosium 3D simulator: Their queries can be summarized as follows:

“Does the Tychosium agree with all documented astronomical observations gathered over the centuries?”

Well, before answering this important question, let me firstly remind everyone that the Tychosium 3D simulator is still a work in progress - and that it is the work of only two individuals (Patrik and I) - and we are not claiming that it has reached absolute perfection. So far though, I’m reasonably satisfied with its performance - and have good reasons to believe that, given more time & effort, it will ultimately become the most accurate simulator of our solar system ever devised, as it should also agree with the observed PLANETS-to-STARS conjunctions (unlike any Copernican / heliocentric simulator). But let’s not go there for now - and just focus on what we CAN verify at this moment in the Tychosium simulator - in its current state of development.


We all know that Venus and Mercury are periodically observed to transit across the Sun’s disk. Venus does so very rarely - and Mercury does so more frequently. So let’s see how the Tychosium simulator performs in this respect. Now, for a transit of Venus or Mercury across the solar disk to be “valid” in the Tychosium, it has to occur within 0.5° of solar elongation (the Tychosium has an ‘elongation’ feature which shows any given planet’s alignment / conjunction with the Sun - as seen from the Earth). Since the Sun subtends 0.5° in our sky, we shall call this 0.5° value the “transit tolerance”. It only takes a few hours for Venus and Mercury to transit across the solar disk: this test is thus a great way of verifying the accuracy of the Tychosium simulator. So here we go:


(please click twice on below image to enlarge it)

All in all, the accuracy of the Tychosium simulator appears to be very good. All of the Venus and Mercury transits across the Sun’s disk (as observed over these last 5 centuries or so) check out quite nicely. Yes, a few transits are slightly ‘off’ (i.e. somewhat larger than the 0.5° “transit tolerance”) yet the overall performance of the Tychosium over five centuries (with regards to Venus’ & Mercury’s solar transits) yields average figures of about 0.35°.

And remember: in the TYCHOS model, ALL of the bodies in our solar system revolve around their orbits at constant speeds and uniformly circular (albeit trochoidal) orbits - as opposed to Kepler’s bizarre variable speeds and elliptical orbits. Hence, for the Tychosium simulator to agree with all the observed Venus & Mercury transits across the solar disk (in these last 5 centuries) can hardly be a matter of pure happenstance - could it? In any event, it would certainly seem to support the validity of the TYCHOS model’s geo-heliocentric configuration - and its proposed principles of planetary motions.


Next, we shall see how the Tychosium performs with respect to the Jupiter-Saturn conjunctions. In the below ‘sample table’, I have selected 6 such conjunctions spanning between 1583 and 2020 - and compared the celestial longitudes (RA) and latitudes (DECL) of our two gas planets with the famed STELLARIUM simulator. (the values in red type are from the Stellarium simulator). As you can see, the Tychosium is in excellent accordance with the Stellarium simulator


Of course, this is just a small sample of the many Jupiter-Saturn conjunctions (which occur every 20 years or so) - as it would be a tedious affair to list them all here. However, anyone armed with due patience can look up the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction table to be found at this Wikipedia page and further verify the accuracy of the TYCHOSIUM simulator for themselves.


Next, we shall compare (between the Tychosium and Stellarium simulators) a number of solar eclipses that have occurred throughout the centuries. Again, the values in red type are from the Stellarium simulator. As you can see, the two simulators are in very good accordance with each other:

I will however hasten to say that the Moon (in the Tychosium simulator) is still a work in progress, as it can oftentimes be found at incorrect celestial latitudes (a.k.a. “DECLINATIONS”) in the current version of the simulator. As any astronomer will know, our Moon’s orbit (which is tilted at about 5°) oscillates ‘up and down’ in a quite complex manner and rate. I am however confident that, given more time, effort and fine-tuning, this problem will be resolved in the future, upgraded versions of the Tychosium simulator which, at this time, is being developed by just two enthusiasts (Patrik and I) with limited resources and computational power! :slight_smile:


A few years ago, a Swedish veteran astronomer (professor Paul Schlyter) wished to put to the test the accuracy of the TYCHOSIUM simulator. I invited him to verify the motions of Mars - which he did, using the STAR ATLAS heliocentric simulator as a benchmark for comparison. His method consisted in comparing the dates (between the years1900 and 2099) on which Mars conjuncted - or is predicted to conjunct - with a given star (for this test, the star Deneb Algedi was chosen as ‘control star’. It is located at 21h47m of RA in our skies). The results of Paul Schlyter’s investigation are listed in the below table:

As you can see, the STAR ATLAS and the TYCHOSIUM simulators are in most excellent agreement throughout this 199-year timespan (i.e. 1900 > 2099). Note that Mars usually employs about 707 days to return facing the star, yet - every 15 or 17 years - it only employs about 546 days to do so. This fact alone constitutes an insurmountable problem for the heliocentric / Copernican model (more about this issue is discussed and illustrated in Chapter 7 of my book.)

But wait! What do we see happening in the year 2050? Well, in 2050 we will see a triple conjunction of Mars and star Deneb Algedi (unfolding over a short, 117-day timespan). The question is: WHY? How could such a triple conjunction possibly occur in the Copernican model? And if Mars gets overtaken by Earth (every 2.13 years or so), why wouldn’t such triple conjunctions be observed each and every time that Earth overtakes Mars? This spiny question finds a plain and demonstrable answer in the TYCHOS model - as illustrated in my below screenshot from the Tychosium simulator:

As you can see, the triple conjunctions of Mars with Deneb Algedi (or, in fact, with any given star) will only occur on the rare occasions in which Mars retrogrades just around the celestial longitude of that star (in this case 21h47m of RA). An earthly observer will thus experience a triple Mars>star conjunction within a short amount of days (in this case 117 days). This is not something that can be rationally explained under the heliocentric paradigm. Therefore, the Copernican configuration of our solar system is geometrically impossible - and has to be abandoned.

This concludes my present demonstration of the accuracy of the Tychosium simulator - and of its attestable superiority over its ‘rival’, heliocentric simulators. I am confident that any inaccuracies that may be still found in the current (2022) version of the Tychosium will be resolved in future upgrades of the same - while maintaining its core / underlying principles; namely, that all the bodies in our solar system revolve at constant speeds around uniformly circular (albeit trochoidal) orbits.

1 Like

Simon (or Patrick)

Thank you both for everything you’ve done and are doing. I stumbled on a Tychos Model video one day on YouTube and kinda laughed it off just looking at the description. Growing up and being taught the traditional (Copernican) views on the solar system, I of course had resistance to your model. However, I’ve vowed to keep an open mind in my older years and question (almost) everything. It didn’t take me long to realize my entire view of our solar system was flawed at best. As I was watching the video, I’d go to your book and model to verify what I was watching. Just amazing stuff. Kudos to you.

One of my newer passions is celestial navigation. I’m a sailor and there’s something soothing to the soul when you’re 250 nm from land, pull out a sextant, do some simple calculations, pull out a plotting sheet and determine your lat/long within 5 nm (confirming with the GPS). I also feel more connected with nature and just more aware when I look up at the sky even walking out of my house. The Mars retrograde and “earths wobble” has been a pesky curiosity to me. Your model clears it up without doubt. Especially the “wobble” theory that changes our north star every 24,000 years. “Oh, it’s just the wobble”. I’m like how is it happening? I never get a good answer. I can now tell others what it is and watch them look at me like I have three eyes.

One thing I started doing was trying to compare your model to the yearly nautical almanac. I think I know the answer to this but wanted to ask anyway. The model has the drop down with star, planet, and moon positions. the level of detail, number of decimal places, angular values down to the second, etc insinuate it’s that accurate to decimals and seconds. However, when I try to compare to the nautical almanac, that’s not necessarily the case. They can be close, but I wouldn’t be able to use the values for navigation. Please don’t take this as a criticism. For visualization purposes, the model if fantastic and is accurate enough to evaluate planetary movements over a long period of time. My question is do you expect to tighten up the position values or would that be too much of an undertaking? I’m preparing to send the book and model to a few other celestial navigator friends and wanted to provide some input before I get questioned on it.

Again, thank you for all you do. I plan to be a regular on this forum. I’ve enjoyed reading yours and others posts on the subject. Just a great way to share ideas and thoughts.

Hello Chris - and welcome to the forum.

Thanks for your kind and supportive words regarding the TYCHOS model’s basic premises and geometric configuration of our Solar System. Of course, Patrik and I believe it is the correct one - for a long series of reasons that are listed in the upcoming 2nd Edition of my book. We believe that these reasons are founded on such fundamental things as plain logic, statistical probability and common sense - the sort of which the human mind is naturally equipped with. Yet, we are only two passionate individuals working on a zero budget - and we are quite aware of the current limits of accuracy of our Tychosium simulator - for use as a day-by-day navigational instrument (such as Loran or GPS). To reach such pinpoint accuracy, more work and effort is needed - but we are confident that this can be achieved - given more time, computational resources (and outside help!). Patrik is now hard at work on an updated version of the Tychosium, the current version of which is - after all - just the result of my own, amateurish calculations and ‘trial & error’ togglings aimed at demonstrating that all our planets & moons may well move at constant speeds and uniformly circular (albeit trochoidal) orbits. So far though, the overall secular motions of our system’s bodies (in the Tychosium) seem to agree quite nicely with the observational tables recorded by astronomers throughout the centuries.

For example, just consider this : according to the heliocentric / Copernican theory, the orbital speed of Mercury is supposed to vary (i.e. accelerate and decelerate) by as much as 34% as it revolves around the Sun. Well, if this truly were the case, there would be no chance in hell (or in Heaven!) that the Tychosium would simulate Mercury’s daily / monthly / annual / secular ephemerides as precisely as it currently does!

On an anecdotal aside, and since you are a sailor and navigator, a not-so-distant cousin of my Norwegian father was Thor Heyerdahl who famously navigated his Kon-Tiki balsa wood raft from Peru to Polynesia. I met him in Rome shortly before he passed away in 2002, but I truly wish he were still alive today to help us out upgrading the Tychosium into a useful navigational tool ! :slight_smile:


Thank you for that quick and informative reply. That all makes sense and I’ll view (and reference to those I send this to) the model as an approximation to the nautical almanac.

Concerning the 2nd edition of your book. Obviously we can view it online, but you do have any plans to offer it as a hard copy? I know publishing isn’t easy, but I’m assuming a print on demand company would take it on?

Anyway, thanks again for all you do. The Tezel observations of the Mars retrograde you reference in a previous post above and how it matches your model is fantastic. I don’t know how any astronomer can look at that and not question everything (or at least a little bit) he’s ever been taught about the Copernican model. Really incredible stuff.

And I’ll do some research on Thor!

I’ll be sure to send a small donation for the cause. Thanks again.


1 Like


Thank you so much for the feedback, it really means a lot. I’m a boat person myself and that experience helped me when I started looking into Simons model some years ago. I’ve never mastered celestial navigation but I remembered something from a course I took in it many years ago. One of the first things the teacher told us was that even though Earth orbits the Sun, we always, for practical reason, imagine that it’s the Sun that orbits the Earth in celestial navigation. Well what Simon has shown and that I’ve had the privilege and honor to help him demonstrate with the Tychosium, is that this is not only a practical way to look at it, but the only way that is geometrically possible.

As for the current accuracy of Tychosium, stay tuned. A new version is under way that will make it easier for Simon (and anyone that wants to help out) to improve it. The main objective with the current Tychosium is to demonstrate that a Geo-Heliocentric model is the only one that works and that the simple and physically plausible axiom - celestial bodies move in circles at constant speed is superior to ellipses and varying speeds (aka Newtonian celestial mechanics)



Thanks for the reply. It’s actually amazing you guys have gotten the model dialed in as well as you have. I’ll keep checking in and offer any help I can.

Great comment on how we actually view the sun, stars, and planets in celestial navigation. Yep, we treat them all as if they’re all orbiting earth. Ironic.

Oh, and sorry I misspelled your name in my original post.


1 Like

Dear Chris, yes indeed ! The 2nd Edition is currently being proofread in Brazil (by my friend Jesper, a professional American-Danish proofreader and translator of scientific / technical papers) - and the book’s layout is being elegantly composed in Sweden (by my friend Per, an expert book designer). I feel extremely lucky to enjoy the assistance of what I like to call the "Tychos Dream Team, i.e. Patrik, Jesper, Per, and Timo (our webmaster), four fine Nordic (*) gentlemen highly proficient in their respective fields. If all goes according to plan, the 2nd Edition should be available in hard copy by the spring equinox (March 21) - in time for the 5th anniversary of the 1st Edition of the Tychos book (released on March 21, 2018). Needless to say, I’m madly excited about it all - and cannot wait to hold the physical hard copy in my hands… By the look of the first few chapters that Per has composed so far, the richly-illustrated book, what with its stylish and effective layout, should be a joy to read - and a pretty instructive one at that! :slight_smile:

(*) That’s right: if - or when - the TYCHOS model (based on the 435-year-old discoveries of Tycho Brahe) becomes the generally-accepted ‘cosmic configuration’, it will be another “win for the Vikings”, similar to their discovery of the American continent - 470 years before Columbus ! :smiley:



Dear all, today I would like to illustrate how the wondrous Tychosium 3D simulator can help us understand some fundamental aspects of life on Earth, namely the seasonal fluctuations of our (northern hemisphere’s / European) temperatures. For the last thirty years or so I’ve been living in the outskirts of Rome (Italy) and have often been wondering why Roman summers and winters can have such substantial temperature variations. To be sure, summer in Rome can be sweltering hot (reaching “African” temperatures of up to 40°C), whereas winter can be pretty damn cold (several degrees below 0°C)… For instance, in February 2012 we had an abundant snowfall and record-low temperatures of about -7.5°C.

Here’s a picture from my garden in the winter of 2012:

Yet, in the summer months, Rome can be almost unbearably hot (so much so that I often migrate to my homeland Sweden for some ‘heat relief’). Now, it is one thing to know that the Earth’s axis is tilted at 23.4° (and that this goes to explain these seasonal temperature variations) but it is quite another thing to visualize precisely how this axial tilt affects the northern hemisphere. Well, this is when the Tychosium simulator does a great job explaining VISUALLY just what causes these stark seasonal variations. Of course, since Earth’s axis is tilted by 23.4° vis-à-vis the ecliptic, this means that it will ‘flip’ by a hefty 46.8° (23.4 X 2) between summer and winter.

The below screenshot from the Tychosium shows how the sunrays will be angled (almost perpendicularly) in relation to Rome at the summer solstice (June 21):

The below screenshot from the Tychosium shows how the sunrays will be angled (almost ‘tangentially’) in relation to Rome at the winter solstice (December 21):

No wonder then that Rome (which most people - including myself - usually think of as a “warm / southernly location”) can be bitterly cold in the winter!


Could the polar shift events happen because our earth is travelling through a cosmic magnetic field from one polarity to another as we cross the suns disc of negative or positive?

Simon, I realize this is bit late on this post, however, I must ask; how are the astronomers calculating their planetary positions? What is a Star Atlas and how does it work?

I clicked on the wiki link you posted on the great conjunction and recently, 19 Mar 21, a png showing a trochoidal pattern for Saturn has appeared there. Were you aware of this? It looks suspiciously like yours and Patrik’s work…

crdit Tomruen

Dear Mikael - sorry for late reply (I’ve been particularly busy of late with assorted, daily house matters - as well as with editing the upcoming 2nd Edition of the TYCHOS book…). I wish to WARMLY thank you for your question, since it inspired me to take a deeper look into the peculiar subject matter of “magnetic shift events” (a field of study that I had neglected until now)… This led me to yet another astounding realization which, as explicated below, spectacularly goes to corroborate the tenets of the TYCHOS model. I have now added this new discovery to my upcoming book, (“The TYCHOS - Our Geoaxial Binary System” -2nd Edition).- at the end of the newly revised Chapter 20 .

The TYCHOS and the magnetic pole reversals of the Sun and Earth

The so-called ‘magnetic pole reversals’ of the Sun and the Earth are a subject of much debate and popular fascination. Yet, no firm explanation has been proposed to this day as to the causality of these magnetic reversals, nor much less as to the diverse rates at which they occur. The TYCHOS model, short of explaining exactly why these reversals take place, provides nonetheless a compelling proposition which would account - quantitatively - for the vastly different periods of magnetic reversals of the Sun (ca. 11.5 years) and the Earth (ca. 800000 years).

Let us first take a brief look at the Sun’s ‘magnetic field reversal’ period - as of the official reckoning :

“During what is known as the solar cycle, the magnetic field of the Sun has reversed every 11 years over the past centuries. This flip, where the south magnetic pole switches to north and vice versa, occurs during the peak of each solar cycle and originates from a process called a “dynamo”. Magnetic fields are generated by a dynamo, which involves the rotation of the star as well as convection and the rising and falling of hot gas in the star’s interior.” 3D simulations reveals why the Sun flips its magnetic field every 11 years

So the Sun’s magnetic field, we are told, reverses in the very short period of 11 years. However, this is not an exact value since this period can vary from 9 to 14 years:

“Most people think of the solar cycle as having a fixed length of 11 years. This is not strictly true as cycles vary considerably in length from as little as 9 years to almost 14 years.” The Length of the Solar Cycle

It should therefore be more correct to say that the mean of this solar cycle amounts to about 11.5 years (9+14=23/2=11.5).

Do scientists have any clue as to why this solar cycle exists? Well, no:

“If you’re confused about the sun’s impending magnetic field flip, don’t feel bad — scientists don’t fully understand it, either. The sun’s magnetic field will reverse its polarity three or four months from now, researchers say, just as it does every 11 years at the peak of the solar activity cycle. While solar physicists know enough about this strange phenomenon to predict when it will occur, its ultimate causes remain mysterious.” What Causes the Sun’s Magnetic Field Flip?

In Chapter 16, we saw that the most recent geomagnetic reversal of the Earth’s poles occurred roughly 800000 years ago. More precisely, what is known as the “Brunhes-Matuyama reversal” is reckoned to have occurred 781000 years ago.

A conventional illustration of the concept of pole reversal of the Earth:

In the TYCHOS model, the Earth’s orbital speed (1.601169 km/h) is a mere 0.00149326% of the Sun’s orbital speed (107226 km/h). So let’s see how this pans out mathematically - with regards to the respective magnetic reversal periods of the Sun and the Earth:

0.00149326% of 781000 years amounts to ≈ 11.6624 years

In other words, it would appear that the magnetic reversals of the Sun and the Earth are regulated by - and are commensurate to - their respective orbital speeds! Another way to express this astonishing relationship would be:

  • Earth’s orbital speed is 66967.3 X slower than the Sun’s orbital speed (107226 / 1.601169 ≈ 66967.3)
  • Earth’s magnetic reversals occur 66967.3 X less frequently than those of the Sun (781000 y / 11.6624 y ≈ 66967.3)

This sort of remarkable realization is, of course, only possible when viewed through the ‘TYCHOS lens’. To be sure, no ‘heliocentric’ thesis has ever been attempted to account for the vastly different recurrence rates of the Earth’s and the Sun’s magnetic reversals. Thus, in absence of any official explanation for their respective periodicities, one may say that the TYCHOS model “wins by default”, much like when a basketball team fails to show up at a tournament…


As you may agree, you can’t make this up! The TYCHOS’ explanatory power is simply phenomenal ! :slight_smile:


Wow so it led to another piece of evidence for the Tycho’s model. Great!




The Moon (in the Tychosium simulator) is still a work in progress, as it can oftentimes be found at incorrect celestial latitudes (a.k.a. “DECLINATIONS”) in the current version of the simulator. As any astronomer will know, our Moon’s orbit (which is tilted at about 5°) oscillates ‘up and down’ in a quite complex manner and rate […].

Hi Patrik, Simon,

Any progress on adding the Moon’s correct declination in the Tychosium? Does any current online simulator do this?


Hi Greg,

The issue of the Moon’s declinations in the Tychosium (henceforth “TS”) has proven to be quite a tricky matter for a number of reasons which we hope to work around and resolve in the upcoming update(s) of the simulator. The current version does however - as remarkable as it may seem - perform quite nicely with regards to all past (and future) solar and lunar eclipses which, of course, occur whenever the Sun and the Moon are aligned in both RA and DECL. At other times though, the Moon can be “off” (in DECLINATION) by as many as 5°, five degrees being the known inclination of the Moon’s orbit to the ecliptic. The issue is thus ostensibly related to the rate of oscillation (over time) of the lunar orbit’s tilt - for which I have tried various solutions, so far without success. I suspect however that the main problem lies with the graphic constraints inherent with the TS which, in order to make the Moon’s tiny orbit visible at all on the screen, have required its orbit to be ‘artificially’ enlarged (proportionally to all planetary orbits) in the javascript database. As I’ve discussed with Patrik, the new TS version should therefore feature a separate ‘ghost script’ of the true lunar motions - while maintaining the visibility of the Moon’s orbit on the computer screen.

And no, I’m not aware of any online “3D Space View” simulator (i.e. similar to the TS) that allows you to track the Moon’s motions and day-by-day ephemerides. Only “Earth View” simulators (such as the famous Stellarium) offer this sort of precision tracking - yet, they can occasionally be “off” by several degrees (e.g. solar eclipse of 2019-07-02 at 19:24:00 UTC in the Stellarium).

I remain confident that we will sort out the ‘special case’ of the Moon’s declinations in the TS. For now, I’m fairly satisfied with the fact that the Moon’s absolute speed, solar & lunar eclipses and Earth-Moon distances appear to agree with several centuries of documented observations - as well as with the Moon’s synchronicity with ALL of our Solar System’s bodies over as many as 811000 years ! .

Hi, I stumble upon a solar system with bird eye view and stars/constellations. Its called “Solar System Scope”. You have to purchase it to be able to advance many years. Inmediatelly went to see the triple conjuction of mars with Deneb Algedi. This is what it shows:

I saw it also has the moon… maybe a few test could be done. I check the selenelion eclipse of december 2011 in the tychos and it finally make sense to me.

Have your heard of this solar system scope before?

Yes, dear argjuan - I’m quite familiar with the SCOPE simulator (since many years).

For instance, in Chapter 13 of my book I show how the SCOPE simulator cannot realistically account for the Moon’s observed alignments / conjunctions with the stars:

See my ‘star Vernalis example’ :

GOAT. As usual… thank you!

1 Like