The TYCHOSIUM: Proving the TYCHOS with 3D modeling

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: Proving the TYCHOS model with 3D modelling

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Sat Mar 30, 2019 10:44 pm

You guys are too kind. Simon did all the hardest work, and Patrix all the hardest programming work. All I did was a little editing and tidying for easy digestion.

Speaking of easy digestion, I will be presenting the TYCHOS at a science gathering next month thanks to the great efforts of our mutual friend Gopi who has arranged a "reinvigoration of science" meeting.

If you could summarize your latest most exciting findings since the last iteration of the TYCHOS book, would you be so kind as to direct my attention to them? I am happy to summarize the work (in one of the brief times allotted to each presenter) however I would love to have new questions-and-answers that jump out at you as "critical" new additions. (Since it seems every week you have another answer to a question that was confusing the heliocentrists).

I understand that we now have some sort of update on the P-type planets, but is there any more I should be aware of in case questions come up that you now have the answer to? Naturally, I'll be directing people mostly to tychos.info however maybe there is some new "solution" that is good for me to share understandings about.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5058
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Proving the TYCHOS model with 3D modelling

Unread postby patrix on Sun Mar 31, 2019 9:59 am

Of course dear Hoi,

So happy to get a qualified question from someone not convinced it must be BS that I'm jumping the gun. Simon can fill in since he's the one doing the actual research. I'm coding Tychosium and following along on the first seat.

In short the latest is that Tychosium demonstrates that Tycho Brahes configuration of the planets - all but Earth/Moon orbits the Sun, is the correct one. The ones in question was the outer p-planets. See Simons posts on this.

Now we're working on Mercury. Simon has just confirmed that an oscillating orbit that changes it's tilt slightly from year to year will make observations match Tychosium perfectly and I'm working on building support for that in Tychosium. Next I think will be the first correct demonstration of our Moons movements - Newtons headache. :)
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: Proving the TYCHOS model with 3D modelling

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Sun Mar 31, 2019 10:38 pm

Really? Have people shown they are convinced it's BS? I'm sorry. Then they obviously haven't tried to study or understand it . . . or the problems with the stars in the heliocentric system. The TYCHOS is obviously the more thorough and more physically correct option. We humans are often our own worst(/best) gatekeepers I suppose.

Well, that's a great summary for now and what you've written is probably all I have time to cover outside of the more crucial details from the book, but that's peachy. Would you mind please indulging me and linking to the exact post(s) you mention where Simon talks about the new P-planet adjustments? The only text I know of right now is this from the previous page of this thread: viewtopic.php?p=2412232#p2412232

If that's the one, then I will find time to study it properly before the science gathering.

As for the Sun's moon Mercury needing an adjustment can you provide any more precise descriptive details about what this means?

What is tilting:
Mercury?
Its orbit?
Both together?
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5058
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Proving the TYCHOS model with 3D modelling

Unread postby patrix on Sat Apr 13, 2019 6:45 am

Just a small announcement that Simon has worked on the Moon movements the last weeks and made it correct against the existing observations and models (probably more correct than the currently existing solar system simulators).
Tychosium 3D is now updated with this
https://codepen.io/pholmq/full/XGPrPd

It's a strange feeling that these historical moments go by like this, but I'm sure it will be a bit more noticed in the future.

Oh, and Simon is currently working on a post to document his process here on CF.

If you want to see some of the simple beauty of nature, set the speed in Tychosium to 1sec equals 1year and turn of all objects in the objects menu. Then check line under trace, and then check/uncheck Moon. See picture.

Image
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: Proving the TYCHOS model with 3D modelling

Unread postby simonshack on Tue Apr 16, 2019 9:20 pm

*

THE MOON'S ORBITAL DANCE - IN THE TYCHOSIUM

Dear friends,

I've been "walking on the moon" for the last few weeks and - step by step - my lunar dwellings have turned into a "fantabulous moondance"...

The Tychosium interactive simulator has already proved to be of enormous help to visualize the actual orbital motions in our solar system. This time, I must say that the TYCHOSIUM has surpassed itself in terms of illustrative / explicative power; our Moon has notoriously exhibited the most complex (and thus misunderstood) "orbital behavior" of them all. To be sure, even Sir Isaac gave up trying to wrap his head around our Moon's observed precessional motions - what with its truly daunting complexity (for any earthly observer) that has haunted the astronomers of this world for many centuries:

"The problem of the Moon's motion is dauntingly complex, and Newton never published an accurate gravitational model of the Moon's apsidal precession." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_theorem_of_revolving_orbits

Therefore, I hope no one will blame me for not explaining EXACTLY WHY the Moon moves the way it does. As I have often stated in previous writings, the TYCHOS model doesn't pretend to formulate a "TOE" (Theory of Everything"): however, at this point, I will confidently say that the TYCHOS model has already proved to be decidedly superior than the so-called Copernican model - insofar as its geometrical configuration has been shown to be far more consistent with empirical observation than the heliocentric theory - as "established" by Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Einstein et al. Quite frankly, I didn't expect the TYCHOS model to go as far as demonstrating and depicting - graphically - the actual motions of our Moon, yet this is what the TYCHOSIUM 3D simulator (patiently elaborated by Patrik and yours truly) is able to do today.

To watch the afore-mentioned "fantabulous moondance" in action, here is what you will have to do (you won't regret spending a little time doing this, I can assure you! What you will witness with your own eyes is, as Patrik wrote above, "a simple beauty of nature"!) :

- Open the TYCHOSIUM 3D simulator : https://codepen.io/pholmq/full/XGPrPd

- Use the wheel of your mouse to enlarge the Earth-Moon system (to a size similar to that shown in the below screenshot). Next:

STEP1 : Set the speed of the simulator to "1 second = 1 year" (as shown below) - and start the Tychosium by checking the "RUN" box. You will now see our Moon's orbit performing its lovely precessional moondance - as it alternatively drifts from perigee to apogee (i.e. closer or further from Earth).
STEP2 : Check the "Lines" box - and then check the "Moon" box (as shown below). You will now see a most beautiful 'spirographic' pattern getting traced and gradually forming a neat, symmetrical "donut" - or, more technically-speaking, a toroid :

Moon_Tychosium_steps_01.jpg

If you now uncheck the "Lines" box and reduce the TRACE size to "0.1", here's how the TYCHOSIUM will plot the Moon's toroidal orbit :

TOROIDAL_Moon_Path_01.jpg

A most astounding aspect of all this - is that the observed value of the oscillation of the Moon's perigee (closest to furthest perigee) is 14044 km*. Well, this "just happens" to be almost precisely the annual distance covered by Earth (14036 km) as stipulated in the TYCHOS model ! Moreover, the observed value of the mean / total oscillation of the Moon from perigee to apogee is 42108 km (which is exactly 3X 14036 km !).
*As more thoroughly expounded here: viewtopic.php?p=2409064#p2409064

In my TYCHOS book - which was released more than a year ago - I submitted this (bold yet cautious) question: was Kepler perhaps wrong when he stated that all orbits are elliptical - and that all the celestial bodies (planets & moons) of our solar system "ACCELERATE or DECELERATE" as they find themselves closer or further from the Sun? Well, I have already fully disproved this latter Keplerian theory - by pointing out that Earth clearly appears to ACCELERATE (in relation to the Sun) between June and July, that is, at a time when Earth is furthest from the Sun*. Kepler's "laws" are therefore definitively falsified.

*This fact is empirically proven by the analemma, i.e. the 8-shaped pattern that the Sun traces yearly in our skies.

As for Kepler's idea of "elliptical" orbits, here's a quite conceptual (and slightly humorous) graphic of mine showing that our Moon's orbit needs not to be elliptical at all. You will have to imagine that bicycle wheel to be the Moon's orbit, while "God" wiggles his forefinger and makes the (tilted) bicycle wheel spin around. The pink section on the bicycle wheel represents a "heavier" part of the lunar globe which might cause the Moon's orbit to bob up and down by about 5° (just as we observe the Moon's orbit to be tilted in relation to the ecliptic). Of course, you'll also have to imagine Earth being located around the axis of the bicycle wheel. In any event, this doesn't mean that the shape of the bicycle wheel (i.e. the Moon's orbit) is elliptical ! (in the TYCHOSIUM, of course, the Moon's orbit is perfectly circular).

BicycleWheel_MOON_orbit_01.jpg

The "N1" and "N2" dots are the famed nodes of the Moon's orbit which, of course, determine when a solar eclipse will occur. In these last weeks, in fact, I have worked at making these nodes coincide with the ACTUAL solar eclipses recorded over the centuries - with some pretty good success (see below).


Here's a gif animation I found on Wikipedia. I find it quite useful to show how we earthly observers may (erroneously) interpret any given circular orbit (as viewed from Earth) as being elliptical. Imagine yourself standing at the Earth's equator, circling by 360° once a day (you are that green dot moving horizontally back and forth / left to right in the below gif). The blue and red dots ("planets") will appear to revolve around elliptical orbits - although they may well be, in reality, perfectly circular:
Image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipse

Let me now quote a short section of my TYCHOS book:

In the TYCHOS model, the orbital speed of Mars is shown to be uniform and constant since it always returns at (near-)equidistant* points of its “opposition ring”. Hence, those “elliptical orbits” and “accelerating / decelerating orbital speeds” (as promulgated by Kepler’s “Laws of planetary motion”) could well be illusory and may have to be revised, or possibly discarded altogether. Before Kepler’s laws came along, astronomers all over the world had been relentlessly pursuing the ideal concept of uniform circular motion. In fact so had Kepler himself before he started stretching and squeezing those recalcitrant Martian motions (observed by Tycho Brahe) in order to make them obey his ever-more-complex equations.
Image

[* Note: by "(near-)equidistant" I refer to how Mars returns to opposition in the TYCHOS at similar longitudinal separations - although of course always at different distances from Earth, as illustrated in my book - see the "Mars opposition ring" diagram].

So Kepler actually PREFERRED (the quite natural notion) that all orbits are perfectly circular! But what about Kepler's ultimate claim that "all orbits are elliptical"? Well, under the TYCHOS model, it is easily understood just WHY all planetary orbits surrounding us will APPEAR to be elliptical: since Earth moves very slowly (at about 1.6 km/h) around its PVP orbit, all our surrounding planets (and moons) will seem to move slightly faster or slower (against the "fixed" stars) depending on the direction of their motions in relation to Earth. Simple as that!

Here's a diagram that I made a while ago - showing why the Moon will APPEAR (as viewed from Earth) to "slightly speed up or slow down" (i.e. to move at fluctuating speeds) - depending on whether it moves in the same/ or opposed direction of Earth's 1.6-km-h-motion) :

MOON_speedvariations_02.jpg

In any case, dear friends, the TYCHOSIUM is slowly but surely becoming the most accurate digital simulator of our solar system. I have verified the solar eclipses since the 16th century - and all the way to those predicted for the 30th century (i.e. over a 1400-year-timespan) - and for now, they are remarkably precise (within about 1° or so *). You may actually verify this by yourselves by using the "Elongation" function in the TYCHOSIUM. More work is needed, for sure, (to achieve absolute accuracy) but consider this: if my working postulation that Earth travels at 1.6km/h were totally wrong, these solar eclipses would be "off" by many, many degrees (since Earth would move, in those 1400 years, by about 20 million km in the opposite direction of the Sun)!

*Note that for the TYCHOSIUM to show the solar eclipses within a 1°precision "tolerance" (vis-à-vis the existing solar eclipse tables which list UTC timestamps for all eclipses) may well be an accceptable error margin, since the latitude & longitude of any given eclipse can differ by +/- 2°depending on the observer's earthly location:

MOON_perspectives_from_Earth.jpg

All in all, I am more than happy (in fact, happier than ever) with the TYCHOS model's consistency with empirically-verifiable reality.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6711
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Proving the TYCHOS model with 3D modelling

Unread postby simonshack on Wed Apr 17, 2019 10:41 pm

*

VERIFYING MARS - IN THE TYCHOSIUM

Dear friends,

The verification of the Tychosium's accuracy goes on, day by day... and I hope that at least some of you will find it as exciting as I do ! ^_^

So today I was wondering whether Mars (which of course is the "key planet" in the TYCHOS model - since it is deemed to be the binary companion of our Sun) could sustain an EXTREMELY LONG TERM verification of its orbital motion. Of course, there was never any guarantee (as I started this research more than half-a-decade ago) that my findings and computations - based on Tycho Brahe's masterful observations - would lead to the astounding accuracy which I am about to illustrate.

Keep in mind that my main contribution to/ and correction of Tycho Brahe's work is what I like to call the "missing piece of the puzzle" of his proposed solar system model, i.e. the PVP orbit, around which Earth proceeds "clockwise" (i.e. in the opposite direction of all of our solar system's bodies) at the tranquil speed of 1.6 km/h (or just about 1 mph) and thus accounting for the famed "precession of the equinoxes".

Image

To tell you truth, I remember finding and reading the below-linked article by Jeffrey D. Beish several years ago. Yet, at the time, I couldn't possibly have realized its significance. I encourage anyone interested to read it in full. However, for the laziest of you, here's a brief quote from that excellent scientific paper:

Our quest to find the last time Mars and Earth was as close as it was in 2003 was off by 79 years. This has been corrected as stated above by a second computation. First to publish anything on this problem was Belgian author and mathematician Jean Meeus. He calculated that Mars has not been closer to Earth since the year 73,000 B.C.. However, Meeus based his initial calculations on the work of French astronomer Pierre Bretagnon and was off by more than 20,000 years. After Jean’s book was published, he contacted Italian mathematician Aldo Vitagliano (Naples University, Italy) and asked him to investigate the motion of Mars by numerical integration. Vitagliano reported back that the last time Mars was closer to Earth than during the 2003 opposition was on September 12 of the year 57,617 B.C. *.
http://www.alpo-astronomy.org/jbeish/op ... _cycle.htm

* Note that this date will actually correspond to September 2 (not 12) 57,617 B.C. - since 10 days were added to our calendar count back in the 16th century as the Gregorian reform was implemented so as to correct for / or at least mitigate the Julian calendar's increasing inaccuracy.

Well, here's what you need to know, dear reader: only about 16 years ago (on August 28, 2003) Mars came as close to the Earth as it has ever been for the last ...60000 years! This historical event was widely celebrated among the astronomical community but, of course, I'm sure most people won't have heard about this (and I certainly don't blame them! Who gives a damn nowadays about how close Mars passes to Earth? We all have other things to worry about in our daily lives!)

However, if you do care about how our solar system is geometrically configured, here's how the TYCHOSIUM simulator depicts these two historical, extremely close passages of Mars:

The recent SUPER-CLOSE passage of Mars:
MARSopposition_Aug_28_2013.jpg

The SUPER-CLOSE passage that occurred about 60000 years ago:
MARSopposition_Sept_2_57617.jpg

Needless to say, if my computations of Earth's and /or Mars' orbital speeds and sizes were totally (or even only slightly) wrong, these two historical, super-close Mars passages / oppositions would certainly not match up in the TYCHOSIUM simulator.

The TYCHOSIUM may well become the best instrument available on Earth to predict the future - and document the past!... :)

*******
As always, I encourage everyone to verify all this for themselves - perusing the TYCHOSIUM 3D simulator: https://codepen.io/pholmq/full/XGPrPd
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6711
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The TYCHOSIUM: Proving the TYCHOS with 3D modeling

Unread postby patrix on Thu Apr 18, 2019 4:19 pm

Absolutely amazing Simon. Happy Easter to you and everyone reading.
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: The TYCHOSIUM: Proving the TYCHOS with 3D modeling

Unread postby simonshack on Sun Apr 28, 2019 2:17 pm

*

VENUS "SEDUCED" BY THE TYCHOSIUM


Dear friends,

It is with great joy that I can announce the "wedding" between Venus and the Tychosium. Venus is, of course, a most charming goddess :

"Venus embodies sex, love, beauty, enticement, seduction, and persuasive female charm among the community of immortal gods; in Latin orthography, her name is indistinguishable from the Latin noun venus ("sexual love" and "sexual desire"), from which it derives."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_(mythology)

Mythology and sexual considerations aside, the TYCHOS model has shown that what we have always known as "planet Venus" is nothing but one - the largest - of the Sun's two moons (Mercury being the smaller one). Venus is, of course, the celestial body of our solar system that passes CLOSEST to Earth - as well as being almost the same size of our planet. How can any earthlings not be in love with Venus?

More seriously now, it was obviously of crucial importance for the Tychosium (the interactive simulator of the TYCHOS model) to "agree" with the secular motions of Venus - as this sexy lady dances around the Sun and Earth (which, as proposed in the TYCHOS, moves at about 1mph - or 1.6km/h). Since the TYCHOS model also proposes that all the orbits of our solar system are uniformly circular (as opposed to elliptical) and that they move at constant speeds (as opposed to the bizarre, fluctuating speeds proposed by Kepler & Newton), ALL of these "bold" TYCHOS propositions had to stand up to the test.

The most fundamental test was, of course, to verify whether ALL of the Venus transits across the Sun's disk would match up in the Tychosium - while rigorously respecting the mean/average (and constant) speed of Venus, as described in my TYCHOS book. In other words, the astronomical tables of the solar transits of Venus (as empirically observed and recorded across the centuries) constitute a formidable challenge for any new model of our solar system (such as the TYCHOS) to overcome. Failing this (i.e. failing to be in accordance with the empirically-observed Venus transits) any new model has to be discarded as a credible alternative / replacement to the Copernican model. As Venus transits across the Sun's disk, a valid solar system simulator has to show that it does so within a tiny 0.53° "slice" of its annual celestial positions (0.53° being the angular diameter subtended by the Sun in our skies) - and it has to do so, consistently, across the centuries.

Now, please know that Venus has been observed transiting across the Sun's disk ONLY ON 10 OCCASIONS - since the year 1518.

Well, here are the results yielded (so far) by the TYCHOSIUM solar system simulator:

DATE________________TCT_____________ACE

1518-06-05_________01:55:59_________0.237°
1526-06-02_________19:34:59_________0.142°
1631-12-07_________05:19:00_________0.200°
1639-12-04_________18:25:00_________0.204°
1761-06-06_________05:19:00_________0.107°
1769-06-03_________22:25:00_________0.123°
1874-12-09_________04:07:00_________0.041°
1882-12-06_________17:06:00_________0.150°
2004-06-08_________08:20:00_________0.103°
2012-06-06_________01:29:00_________0.140°


(Legend > TCT= Time of Central Transit ___ACE= Angle of Central Elongation, i.e the distance of Venus from the Sun disk's center)

Needless to say, for the Tychosium simulator to agree with such accuracy with ALL of the Venus transits throughout these last 500 years cannot be reasonably considered / dismissed as coincidental - or to be just a matter of sheer "luck" or happenstance. For sure, Patrik and I have had to invest many patient man hours fine-tuning the orbital motions of Venus in order to make all of these transits match within the Tychosium simulator (the Venus orbit is slightly tilted in relation to the ecliptic - so the challenge was to find its exact inclination with respect to Earth) - but at no stage have we engaged in any sort of fudging of the empirically determined (and officially recorded) data gathered by equally patient astronomers throughout the centuries.

Let us all celebrate this "wedding" between Venus and the Tychosium as a proof of concept of the TYCHOS model which, as I must remind everyone from time to time, proposes that Earth moves VERY SLOWLY (yet covers about 7 million kilometers in 500 years) - and needs NO elliptical orbits nor ANY accelerations/decelerations of our solar system's bodies, as proposed by Johannes Kepler, Tycho Brahe's young apprentice mathema(g)ician. In any event, the Tychosium conforms with the observed motions of Venus to a high degree of precision (and well beyond my wildest hopes, as I started my TYCHOS research more than half a decade ago).


*************************
To those interested, I highly recommend reading the absolutely epic account of how the transits of Venus enthralled the scientific community of yore - and how several valiant astronomers (roaming across the world to catch a glimpse of her solar transits) even gave / lost their lives pursuing the motions of this sexy cosmic lady :

A (Not So) Brief History of the Transits of Venus
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/253282448_A_Not_So_Brief_History_of_the_Transits_of_Venus
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6711
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The TYCHOSIUM: Proving the TYCHOS with 3D modeling

Unread postby Kham on Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:50 am

Simon, what extraordinary news about Venus. The TYCHOSIUM Solar simulator is the FIRST Wonder of the modern world!
Kham
Admin
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:30 am

Re: The TYCHOSIUM: Proving the TYCHOS with 3D modeling

Unread postby simonshack on Tue May 14, 2019 7:41 pm

*

MARS vs THE STARS - the Tychosium explains their "bizarre" / irregular conjunctions

Dear friends,

As Patrik and I keep refining the TYCHOSIUM (the 3-d interactive simulator of my proposed TYCHOS solar system model), we will do our best to keep you all updated about the progress of our work. In the last few weeks, we have considerably improved its general accuracy in simulating the empirically-observable motions (and secular positions) of our solar system's "cosmic family members", that is, of those currently depicted in the TYCHOSIUM (i.e. Earth, the Moon, the Sun, Mars, Mercury, Venus, Jupiter and Saturn - while Uranus, Neptune and Pluto/Charon will follow, as time and patience permits!).

Of course, the TYCHOSIUM is still a long way from becoming a full-fledged planetarium (stars and all) - but we are already testing the positions of our "cosmic family members" in relation to the stars. Since Mars is the Sun's companion, we have naturally concentrated our efforts towards the fine-tuning of Mars's celestial positions throughout the centuries. Today, we are happy to announce that Mars is now virtually "in the bag", so to speak.

In Chapter 7 of my TYCHOS book, I used a star called Delta Capricorni (a.k.a. Deneb Algedi) to show that the Copernican model is geometrically impossible. The issue was that Mars is observed to align with that star - over very different periods.

Here are the facts:

More often than not (i.e. about 7 times out of 8) Mars returns aligned with that star every 707 days (on average).

Yet, the 8th time, Mars returns aligned with that star in only about 550 days! (on average)

How can this possibly occur under the Copernican model? Short answer: it cannot possibly occur. Long answer: keep reading!

Here's how a conventional solar system simulator (the JS ORRERY) depicts a so-called "short ESI"(Empiric Sidereal Period) of Mars of about 550 days :

SLIDE_25.jpg

As you can personally verify for yourself in the real world, and just by raising your forefinger in front of your eyes, a nearby object held in front of your eyes cannot possibly remain aligned with a distant object - if YOU and the nearby object were to move laterally by a few meters (or in this case, by almost 300,000,000 kilometers!). Don't let anyone tell you that this is actually possible "due to the stars being unimaginably distant" - for this is the "standard explanation" that Copernican astronomers will (unfailingly) offer you... The "Copernicans" actually DENY that Mars will exhibit ANY detectable parallax against the starry background - even though Earth and the nearby Mars are supposed to move laterally (every six months) by 300 million kilometers. And this, in spite of Cassini and his colleague Jean Richer being able to detect some amount of Martian parallax - although these two earthly observers were separated by only 7000 km (the distance between Paris and Cayenne) !

Instead, under the TYCHOS model, Mars will quite naturally (and demonstrably) realign / reconjunct with any given star in this (averaged) sequence:

707days/ 707days/ 707days/ 707days/ 707days/ 707days/ 707days/ 550 days

This, due to the peculiar "spirographic" path of Mars around its "binary mother", the Sun. This spirographic path will occasionally (yet quite naturally, in geometric terms) cause a shorter sideral period of Mars as illustrated in this old diagram of mine:

SLIDE_26.jpg

As it is, I have often used the STAR ATLAS (another conventional Copernican solar system simulator) as a "control reference" to verify the accuracy of the TYCHOSIUM simulator. Well, the below tables show just how well the two simulators now agree with regards to the Mars>Deneb Algedi [a.k.a. Delta Capricorni] conjunctions between the year 1900 and 2099. (Note: the first column of these tables shows the days elapsed between each Mars>Deneb Algedi conjunction.)

(And don't let the occasional 1-day discrepancies fool you: the maximum "disagreements" between the two simulators remain within about +/-1.5min of RA) :

MARS>DENEB ALGEDI conjunction tables compared (between the Star Atlas and the Tychosium)
Mars_Deneb_Algedi_conjunctiontables.jpg

But wait! What on Earth do we see happening in 2050??? (as highlighted in red in the above tables)

Well, ladies & gents, in 2050 we will have a TRIPLE Mars-Deneb Algedi conjunction (two of those separated by a mere 48 / or 69 days !).

We can therefore quite legitimately ask ourselves the following questions:

- HOW could such TRIPLE conjunctions possibly occur - within the Copernican model? If - as we were all taught in school - the retrograde motions are just an optical illusion of perspective (caused by Earth "overtaking" Mars), why wouldn't ALL of these "overtaking events" generate a TRIPLE conjunction of Mars each and every time that we would "overtake" Mars while it transits in front of any given star?

- More specifically, if Mars can align with the same star (as viewed from Earth) NO MATTER the relative positions of Earth and Mars around their respective orbits (as of the Copernican model) WHY wouldn't ALL the transits of Mars in front of any given star generate TRIPLE conjunction events?


Well, don't worry folks: The TYCHOSIUM provides a (breathtakingly) simple answer to the above, seemingly irresolvable questions.

The reason why we will have a TRIPLE conjunction between Mars and Deneb Algedi around the year 2050 is due to the fact that, in that particular time period, Mars will actually retrograde within (and transit around both sides of) the line-of-sight vector joining Earth and that particular star. This will cause Mars to conjunct with star Deneb Algedi on three occasions (A - B - C) - within that short time period.

As they say, an image speaks more than a thousand words - so here we go:

Mars_Deneb_Algedi_conjunctions_01.jpg

As it is, according to the TYCHOSIUM's Mars>Deneb Algedi data (see the above conjunction tables), EACH AND EVERY TIME that Mars transits at 21h47min of RA in our skies, it will be conjuncting with star DENEB ALGEDI. Simple as that. In other words, ALL of Mars's transits (throughout the centuries) in front of that particular star can be plotted on that yellow dotted line in my above diagram. Hardly a random coincidence - in my honest opinion.

I rest my case. The TYCHOS model is here to stay. The Copernican/Keplerian model is broken.
Newton may have been on to something though. But he called it "gravity" instead of "magnetism".
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6711
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The TYCHOSIUM: Proving the TYCHOS with 3D modeling

Unread postby patrix on Wed May 15, 2019 12:18 pm

I rest my case. The TYCHOS model is here to stay. The Copernican/Keplerian model is broken.
Newton may have been on to something though. But he called it "gravity" instead of "magnetism".


Aye to that. I could never have dreamed where our work with Tychosium would lead us when we started only two years ago, but here we are :-) And for the record and historical accuracy, my role in this have been to follow along Simons footsteps and reasoning and to build the digital orrery needed for Simon to figure out what he has. Indeed the most remarkable intellectual achievement I've ever heard of.
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Previous

Return to The TYCHOS model

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests