Except for Earth and Luna, everything revolves around the sun, which in turn revolves around the earth. Apparently these are the facts. I will probably go to my grave trying to understand what is so astoundingly special about the Earth/Moon system as to commandeer all these bodies into such a cosmic waltz. It is as if there is a bond between Sol and Earth that differs fundamentally from the bond between Sol and the other planets. This is the most mind bogling rabbit hole yet.
1 Like
My best guess is that they simply were here first. Perhaps Earth and Moon was once a binary pair that the Sun-Mars formed around. And in eons Mars might become the moon of the now planet Sun that the binary pair Jupiter-Saturn has formed around. Who knows.
1 Like
It is a question most fundamental that will haunt me. Earth must be bonded to Sol by an entirely different force than that which bonds the planets to Sol, or else Earth must be stabilized by a force that none of the other planets, including the sun, have. In order to be the center of the system, and drag the entire solar system around itâs PVP orbit, Earth must also be bonded or pushed by something external to the system. The helical charge trajectory of plasma physics can explain the latter. Perhaps longitudinal waves can lead to an explanation of the former.
I wouldnât say that. I find it reasonable that the same (probably electromagnetic) force is what keeps the Sun in orbit around Earth and the planets in orbits around the Sun. The Sun is arguably of much lower mass than Earth since it although large is made of hot nitrogen and helium according to spectrography.
2 Likes
True. I am trying to reconcile Birkeland currents to this structure. At the center of the helix may be a stable position, but something is missing. If Earth were on the central strand of current, then Sol could be at the center of a strand on the next shell out. Mercury and Venus could then be on the first and second shells out from Sol, on Solâs strand, but the way the outer planets orbit the sun makes this scheme questionable; they are so far out they upstage the Earthâs central location, making it seem untenable. And yet here we are, centrally locatedâŚ
On the other hand, Sol may carry a strong enough electric charge to commandeer the outer planets, and this at least seems reasonable, evidenced by the powerful coronal discharge in plain view. That explains the outer planets, Mercury, and Venus all orbiting the sun. It must be electrical attraction. It has been said that all the planets, including Earth, are within Solâs atmosphere, all the way out to the heliopause. The question arises then âWhy does the sun orbit the earth?â
Lunaâs orbit commands all the orbits, so perhaps the lunar orbit is responsible for a rotating magnetic field that synchronizes the entire affair.
I will post a speculation, for the purpose of getting to the bottom of the physics behind the Tychos orbits. Here are some propositions:
1: Heavenly bodies within the influence of an active star will grow in size and mass, as periodic solar novas throw off dust clouds, which add to the masses of planets in the vicinity.
2: Active stars will diminish in mass gradually as each nova throws off material.
3: As planets grow, they will be incrementally moved (by the nova events) to higher orbits, and polar axis alignments will be modified (by the magnetic pulse), so that orbital configurations will then change every time there is a nova.
4: A central group of bodies (such as Earth/Luna) must establish orbital resonances for the entire system. For an as yet unknown reason, the centrality of this group goes unaffected by the novas, yet they are bombarded with the same radiation and dust clouds as the other planets.
This is an extremely interesting question. I like the plasma cosmology approach to the physics of the Solar system, but still think we must expand our thinking quite a bit further to be able to really understand things. My best guess relates to the idea of thinking about the Solar system as an organism (perhaps even a âlivingâ organism in some expanded meaning of the word), analogous in some sense to a human body, for example (esoteric ideas are only esoteric so far as we donât understand them). Living organisms donât behave just due to the simple laws of physics. They have an organizing principle that cannot be described physically (at least current science is unable to do that). When a living organism dies, it loses that organizing principle and decays due to the laws described by science.
Btw, as I understand the Tychos model, the Sun orbits the same barycenter that the Earth is orbiting, so neither really orbits another.
1 Like
Dear Ville - welcome to the forum.
You wrote: âBtw, as I understand the Tychos model, the Sun orbits the same barycenter that the Earth is orbiting, so neither really orbits another.â
Not so - but I understand why you would be under that impression, since I have been unsure myself
(over the years) as to what exactly constitutes the barycenter of our Solar System (SS). At the end of Chapter 6 of my new, 2nd Edition of the TYCHOS book, I illustrate (with the below, speculative / conceptual graphic) how our SS and the Sirius A-B system would revolve around each other - much like a âdouble-doubleâ binary system (similar to, for instance, the Epsilon Lyrae âdouble-doubleâ system).
As viewed from above our North Pole, our entire Solar System would thus slowly rotate in a clockwise direction - as it revolves around the Sirius A-B binary system. This would neatly go to explain why the Earth revolves clockwise around its 25344-year PVP orbit. However, this doesnât necessarily mean that the barycenter of our SS is located at the center of the PVP orbit. The Earth itself may well be the actual barycenter of our SS - and this, regardless of what the respective masses of the Sun and Mars are currently believed to be. The Sun, of course, is thought to be made of 97% of the lightest gases in nature (hydrogen and helium) - whereas Mars is thought to be made of mostly sedimentary rock and iron (elements which are, of course, several orders of magnitude denser than hydrogen and helium!).
At the end of Chapter 16 of my new book, you may also read about the very long 811000-year period - which could possibly be the time employed by our Solar System and the Sirius System to revolve around each other.
If the solar system obeys the laws of plasma physics, minus gravity, it will be fairly easy to simulate because there are so few planets. Iâm waiting to post on this topic on cluesforum.com, as soon as they approve my registration. As for the Tychoseum, it appears that the sun orbits the earth, and everything else (except the moon) orbits the sun. Iâm assuming this to be a fact for now, until some new discovery about the orbits comes to light.
Is the PVP orbit actually bigger than depicted in the Tychoseum?
No, the Earthâs PVP orbit is perfectly âto-scaleâ in the Tychosium 3D simulator.
The only orbit that is not-to-scale (due to graphic constraints) in the Tychosium is the orbit of our Moon (itâs about 39X larger than it is in reality).
1 Like
So Sirius canât be involved in the PVP orbit then. If we are a twin binary system, Sol and Sirius, orbiting each other, this must be a higher order motion, that is, an orbit of much larger diameter. Correct? Pardon me, but Iâm not an astronomer, which is probably for the best.
Sirius calculates to be 106 light minutes from us, or less than two hours. These distances make a lot of sense to me. Betelgeuse calculates to be 5 light days. Knowing how fast light travels, it all makes so much more sense. I never could get my head around millions or billions of light years.
The closest star, Proxima Centauri, calculates to be only 52 light minutes away. I think itâs quite possible we are being visited by stellar neighbors, who are much closer than weâve been told.
Thatâs right, dear FMS: Sol and Sirius would be orbiting each other around a much bigger orbit - much like all other known âdouble-doubleâ systems (such as, for instance, the Epsilon Lyrae âdouble-doubleâ system):
You may read about the Epsilon Lyrae system here: Epsilon Lyrae is the famous Double Double star | Astronomy Essentials | EarthSky
âThe northern star of the pair is known as Epsilon 1 while the southern star is Epsilon 2. Theyâre thought to be about 10,500 times the sun-Earth distance apart and probably take over hundreds of thousands of years to orbit each other.â
I have a hunch that Sol and Sirius may employ 811000 years to revolve around each other - since this is the time interval under which all the components of our âinnerâ solar system (i.e. Mars, Venus, Mercury, the Sun and our Moon) ALL return to the same relative places in the sky - as shown in the Tychosium simulator
1 Like
Very cool stuff. This is a cowabunga rabbit hole.
Thank you, Simon, for correcting me on that! I havenât yet dived deep enough into your 2nd editionâŚ
This new more specific view on our relationship with the Sirius system meets very nicely with some ideas Iâve received from elsewhere and further validates the model for me. Is there any clear weakness in the Tychos system?
1 Like
Dear Ville, you wrote:
âIs there any clear weakness in the Tychos system?â
Haha - well I should probably defer the answer to that question to someone else than myself! 
But since you ask me, I would say: NO. There is no clear weakness in the TYCHOS model. Geometrically-speaking, it is the only existing model that agrees with empirical observation. This fact alone puts it head & shoulders above any other solar system configuration proposed to this day. On the other hand, the currently-accepted Copernican/heliocentric model is marred by several insurmountable âweaknessesââŚ
As you can read in Chapter 31 of my new book, the TYCHOS elucidates and/or resolves as many as 41 different extant issues, puzzles or âmysteriesâ of astronomy - one by one⌠I dare say NO other model / or theory of our Solar System can claim to do so.
I may be proven wrong, but the only thing I can find about it that seems wrong to me, is the idea that the tilt of the spin axis of Earth âleans outwardâ away from the barycenter of the PVP orbit. I can think of no way to prove this one way or the other, and I donât believe itâs officially part of the Tychos (correct me if Iâm wrong), but I lean toward stability of the spin axis as Earth revolves around itâs PVP orbit. A âleaning outâ resurrects the idea of precession which, though at least in the right direction in this case, somehow bothers me. I assume it would take thousands of empirical years to test it though, so it is unimportant.
Dear FSM, I address the topic of Earthâs axial tilt in Chapter 9 of my book. Check it out. I would like to stress once again that I have come to believe that the Earth itself may be the actual barycenter of our solar system. The âapparent centerâ of the PVP orbit is just a âvirtualâ point in space which ALSO proceeds around a trochoidal path (as we all slowly travel âclockwiseâ around the Sirius binary system). This, due to the âeccentric natureâ of our entire SS - what with ALL of our planetary orbits lacking a clear / distinguishable center (a fact which, incidentally, rules out the helliocentric notion of the Sun making up 99.8% of our systemâs massâŚ) .
Moreover, the very term âprecessionâ is probably misleading / obsolete - and should ideally be replaced with âbarycentric motionâ. As we slowly revolve around the Sirius system, the Earth-Moon system would thus constitute - at all times - the ârevolving barycenterâ of our entire solar system.
Lastly, the fact that the Earthâs axis is tilted at about 23.4° in relation to its orbital path may seem puzzling - but keep in mind that so is Mars (by about 25.2°) - and most of all our planets are tilted at varying degrees (see below-linked article). Actually - and most interestingly - only Venus and Mercury exhibit almost no âorbital obliquityâ, and this should tell us something about them being, in fact, the moons of the Sun (as stipulated by the TYCHOS) !
https://earthlymission.com/rotation-rates-tilts-of-planets/
2 Likes