Introducing the TYCHOS

Simon Shack's (Tycho Brahe-inspired) geoaxial binary system. Discuss the book and website for the most accurate configuration of our solar system ever devised - which soundly puts to rest the geometrically impossible Copernican-Keplerian model.

Re: Introducing the TYCHOS

Postby patrix on April 15th, 2018, 9:03 pm

PianoRacer,

These are exactly my thoughts. And from a technical viewpoint this is perfectly doable. But for the upcoming release I will focus on getting Simons values from Tychosium 2D transferred and if time allows, put some key stars and reference lines in place. The grunt of the work has been to redesign the time system from the lessons learned from T2D.

The camera system I use for Tychosium 3D is a generic one that only allows some rudimentary positioning, but it's perfectly doable to build a custom system that attaches the camera to a place on our rotating Earth and shows a view of the model as it would look in Stellarium or Neave.

I'm the only developer working on this currently, but my hope is that when this first release is out the door and people start to catch on we will soon reach a point where this can be a community developed software hosted on for example Github.

Working with Tychosium has been a way for me to understand Simons work and there is no doubt in my mind that Tychos will be the first model of the Solar system in history that can be displayed in the way you describe and that that will help put an end to the 400 years long Copernican delusion.

Simon shows with excellent detail and clarity why the Copernican model is impossible in his book. But it's a hard and abstract subject and sadly many people don't read books anymore. Most watch television or YouTube to learn about things. And that has it's problems as we know...

Edit:
Pianoracer wrote
Those objects, after all, are what Simon is proposing a new model for, not so much the stars (as far as I understand).

The key thing with Simons model is that it works both in respect to the stars and planets. And that is also the Achilles heel of the Copernican model. Planets line up with stars (confirmable in the sky, Neave or any other observation based planetariums) that is not possible if that model was correct.
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: December 14th, 2016, 11:24 am

Re: Introducing the TYCHOS

Postby PianoRacer on April 16th, 2018, 5:20 am

Patrix,

I completely understand and am so pleased that you share my opinion that such a feature would truly elevate Tychosium 3D into something unprecedented, namely a 3D model of the cosmos that 100% accurately predicts the motions of the sun, moon, planets and stars in all places and at all times, is able to show the location, speed and path of those celestial objects, and reflects precisely that which can be observed from anywhere on Earth. Frankly I was shocked when I realized that despite the readily available technology, there seemed to be no implementation of the Heliocentric model that was able to do this. How on Earth (no pun intended) was NASA supposed to have been able to send spacecraft to our moon and other planets if they didn't know exactly where those destinations would be at any specific time? And if the knowledge was available half a century ago, surely someone had turned it into a web app and monetized it by now, right? Apparently not...

I look forward to observing your progress with the software, and my hat is off to you for what is clearly very fine work. Simon is very fortunate to have someone with your talents to collaborate with - a testament to the caliber of person who is drawn to his work, to be sure! If you are able to implement what you seem confident that you can, you will definitely add me to the list of converts to the Tychos model. No pressure Patrix! :D

-PR
PianoRacer
Member
 
Posts: 19
Joined: November 10th, 2016, 2:13 am

Re: Introducing the TYCHOS

Postby patrix on April 16th, 2018, 6:01 am

PianoRacer » April 16th, 2018, 5:20 am wrote:If you are able to implement what you seem confident that you can, you will definitely add me to the list of converts to the Tychos model. No pressure Patrix! :D
-PR


PR,

Thank you for the encouragement and kind words. This feature is only a matter of time. When Simons TYCHOS is implemented in a 3d model, it's possible to set a camera that shows it from any viewpoint, including a constantly rotating and slightly moving one such as Earth.

I feel, as I've said many times to Simon, as the luckiest guy alive to be able to help Simon with this, but technically it's not rocket science (meaning it's not impossible :) ).

We've all seen how far 3d tech has come. Games are constantly produced with breathtaking 3d visuals, and those creating ones enforcing the current Nutwork religion (that rockets and satellites fly around in a Copernican universe) gets awarded http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2014/06/16/elit ... warded-obe

But these days are numbered now I would say, and more will catch on, including skilled 3d programmers (as opposed to me) and they will be eager to help.

This is not the end of the Nutwork age, but definitely the beginning of that end :)
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: December 14th, 2016, 11:24 am

Re: Introducing the TYCHOS

Postby Seneca on April 16th, 2018, 2:09 pm

patrix » 16 Apr 2018, 07:01 wrote:This feature is only a matter of time. When Simons TYCHOS is implemented in a 3d model, it's possible to set a camera that shows it from any viewpoint, including a constantly rotating and slightly moving one such as Earth.


When you succeed in doing this, would it be a lot of work to do the same for the Copernican model, using official calculations?
This seems a good way for people all over the world to test this. Look at the night sky and see which model predicts best what can be seen.

Here you can find the calculations used by NASA "in the planning and design of spacecraft missions": https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/txt/aprx_pos_planets.pdf
full quote:
Lower accuracy formulae for planetary positions have a number of important applications when one doesn't need the full accuracy of an integrated ephemeris. They are often used in observation scheduling, telescope pointing and prediction of certain phenomena as well as in the planning and design of spacecraft missions.
Approximate positions of the nine major planets may be found by using Keplerian formulae with their associated elements and rates. Such elements are not intended to represent any sort of mean; they are simply the result of being adjusted for a best fit. As such, it must be noted that the elements are not valid outside the given time-interval over which they were fit.


The time-interval is 1800 AD-2500 AD. BTW this looks a bit fishy to me, reminding me of climate modeling.
Seneca
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:36 pm

Re: Introducing the TYCHOS

Postby ghostofpedro on April 16th, 2018, 8:07 pm

simonshack » March 27th, 2018, 4:26 pm wrote:
ghostofpedro wrote: But he's relying on media fakery as evidence of the heliocentric theory.


Indeed, dear Ghostofpedro.

And since I started to notice that media fakery and scientific matters are so intimately intertwined, I decided to embark in this astronomical research - about five years ago. It should be obvious to everyone that, if I believed in space travel (as peddled by NASA & co), my brain would never have envisaged the possibility that the Copernican model of our solar system (as we were all taught at school) was questionable - let alone impossible (as my TYCHOS model demonstrates).

As I see it, this is the beauty and power of Cluesforum. By bouncing ideas between each other, those ideas can 'snowball' into even larger discoveries.


Simon, I tried to get the same colleague to watch the Tychosium 3D preview on youtube. His response was "You need to stop listening to these people. This makes no sense."

The TYCHOS' explanation of Mars Retrograde makes perfect sense to me... So does Cognitive Dissonance.
ghostofpedro
Member
 
Posts: 11
Joined: March 17th, 2015, 3:23 am

Re: Introducing the TYCHOS

Postby Seneca on April 17th, 2018, 6:25 pm

simonshack »10 Apr 2018, 00:00 wrote:

Well, the TYCHOS model provides the simplest & most logical resolution imaginable to those seemingly unanswerable questions. Since Earth slowly orbits WITHIN the Sun's orbit, the distribution of the stellar parallaxes (positive / negative/ and zero) will indeed be expected to be as they are, in fact, observed :

Image


Hello Simon.
In order for your model to be able to predict this observed distribution of stellar parallaxes, there are some assumptions that have to apply.
1)in all directions shown in the figure, the number of observable stars is roughly similar.
2)the proportion of observable stars that are too distant to have a measurable parallax is not too high.

1) If most of the stars are concentrated in a disc (as according to mainstream science), the distribution of parallaxes would obviously be skewed. So I guess you don't agree with that shape?



2) For example, if we suppose that 50% of the observable stars were too distant to measure parallax, even under the best conditions (perpendicular to the PVP orbit), the proportion of stars with zero parallaxes would be much higher than is observed now (toward 75%). Even if only 10% of observable stars are too distant to measure parallax, the predicted distribution will probably be different.


regarding 1):In areas without light pollution it is possible to see the milky way. So it looks like the stars are not distributed evenly across space.
Image

Edit for further clarification:

Image
This is a cartoon representation of structure in our Milky Way galaxy. Open clusters of stars are formed in the galactic disc. As shown, there are two distinct components of this disc, the “thick” and “thin”, whose origins are still debated. Image Credit: Swinburne University of Technology.

Our solar system would be situated about halfway between the center and the edge. Suppose for example that the orientation of this disc is parallel to the blue arrow in your figure. Then the concentration of stars would be much less in the "up" and "down" quadrants. If this was the case then your model would predict that there would be much less stars with positive and negative parallax than there would be that have zero parallax. That is an extreme example to show that the orientation of the galaxy matters. The supposed orientation of the galaxy is actually at an angle of about 60° with the celestial equator. I think this means that there are more stars in the "up" and "down" quadrants, so proportionally less stars with zero parallax.

So my point is: no matter how good your model of the solar system is, you can't predict the distribution of the stellar parallaxes without taking into consideration the distribution of stars in space.
Last edited by Seneca on April 18th, 2018, 7:44 am, edited 5 times in total.
Seneca
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:36 pm

Re: Introducing the TYCHOS

Postby simonshack on April 17th, 2018, 9:50 pm

*
Dear Seneca, I have difficulty understanding what your point is. Perhaps we could just talk over Skype or Google Hangouts about it?
In medieval times it would have taken weeks for two minds like ours to communicate - but today we can do it almost instantly!

My Skype username is : simon.shack
My Google Hangout username is : Simon Shack

Please contact me by e-mail to let me know if / when you are available for a voice chat.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6484
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Introducing the TYCHOS

Postby Seneca on April 18th, 2018, 7:04 am

Thanks Simon, that's a good idea, I will do that. I edited my post in order to try to clarify my point.
Seneca
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:36 pm

Previous

Return to The TYCHOS model

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest