The Helical Model part 2 – Our Galaxy is a Vortex

NEW: get the sound track!

Part II of the Helical video series is finished, after two months of research, designing, editing and rendering… it shows our path through the Milky Way.

Get the soundtrack here for free:

Here are my notes on this video. It is far from perfect, and I have a lot to say about it.

== the Milky Way ==================================================

– The Milky Way itself travels through space at appr. 600 km/s (
– The image used for texturing the Milky Way is NOT a picture of the Milky Way. There are no pictures of the outside of the Milky Way.
– There could either be a black hole or a central sun in the center of the Milky Way. I went with the texture image and made it shine.
– A complete revolution around the galaxy takes 226 million years (
– Do not confuse the Galactic Plane with the Galactic Equator: the Sun never “crosses” the Galactic Equator because the Sun is always on the Galactic Equator, by definition.

== Precession cycle ===============================================

– One precession cycle takes 25,920 years. (
– Since one revolution takes 226 mln years, this would mean that there are appr. 8692 precessional cycles in one revolution. In this animation there are only 60.

== Scale & distance ==============================================

– the Sun is 109 times bigger and 333,000 times heavier than Earth. If this animation was to scale, the planets would be invisible.
– Our Solar System should be a gazillion times smaller compared to the Milky Way. If this animation was to scale, you could not see the Solar System, the Sun or any of the planets.
– The software used to create this animation is unable to work with extreme sizes and scales that are so far apart. This limited how big the biggest, and how small the smallest object could be.

== Why I left out the Photon Belt ================================

– The alledged location and size of the photon belt is unclear. Some sources say it’s vertical, others say it’s horizontal. I tried to model both, and in no way I could make it so that there was a “2,000 year pass-through”.
– In the vertical setup the band had to be very narrow (2,000 / 226,000,000 => only 0,003185838 degrees of the galactic orbit) (example of vertical band here:
– In the horizontal setup there was no 226,000,000 year orbit (example of horizontal setup here:
– It is widely describes as “10,000 years of darkness, 2,000 years of light” and this does not match any of the orbits I know.
– I’m NOT saying there is no photon belt, I’m just UNABLE to include it in the animation due to lack of good solid evidence.
– Worth reading:

== Sound & music ==================================================

– I know there is no sound in space, but the roaller coaster effect was just too cool – think of it as internal engine noise of our space ship :-)
– The sound track is called “Enter The Stream” and I created it specifically for this animation.
You can listen to it on my website:

119 thoughts on “The Helical Model part 2 – Our Galaxy is a Vortex

  1. Спасибо! Великолепно!
    “26“Raise ​YOUR​ eyes high up and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who is bringing forth the army of them even by number, all of whom he calls even by name. Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one [of them] is missing.” (Isaiah 40:26) //

    1. Sure Jim, another video that calls me “incompetent”. We all know what you think of me by now. You should stick to factual arguments, continuously calling me ‘crank’ or ‘incompetent’ is not doing you any good.

      Let me set something straight here. Contrary to what you state in your video, I have never claimed that scientists “don’t know that we travel through space”. This is ridiculous. Of course they know that.

      My problem is with the model and the diagrams that has been shown to the public for decades. This clockwork model gives off a very wrong signal, and has led people to believe that we are in some kind of “stationary system”. THAT is my issue. How come that a large percentage of the people do not even know the solar system is moving? Because of this stationary clockwork model of our solar system.

      Sure, focus on the details, ooh he got the angle wrong, and the number of wobbles – but sure as hell DON’T mention the fact that I’m right in my main point: the flat clockwork model is incomplete and sends off wrong signals. We can debate about the angle of the solar system, whether the sun is leading us through space, whether we can call the sun “comet-like”, and a bunch of other details that were NOT the point of the video.

      The point of this first “vortex video” was to show how our orbits look when you include our space journey. Helical.
      And all the criticism is about other details – and NONE of these so called scientists have dared to acknowledge that our orbits look indeed helical over time. And none of them have denied it either. They have avoided it so far, you included. The videos have been cherry picked for errors, and the message has been ignored.

      So let me ask you the big question, Jim: how do our orbits look over time, solar system space travel included. What, you mean like helical?

  2. I’ll be happy to let people watch my videos and decide for themselves how accurate your characterization of them is.

    1. And again, avoiding the big question.
      So let me ask you the big question again, Jim: how do our orbits look over time, solar system space travel included. What, you mean like helical?

  3. I address that question in my comments on my video of which I informed you:

    “The Sun’s not a ‘Comet’, and the Solar System’s not a ‘Vortex’”,

    You’re welcome to respond there. Please note that your page

    embeds the Kurdistan Planetarium video from 2008

    “Earth Rotation & Revolution around a moving Sun”

    that I reference at 1:30 in the video we’re discussing, and in my comments thereon.

    Also, please note that the diagram that you describe on that same page as “UPDATE: the FIRST NASA image that shows it like it is”, is not, in fact, from NASA. That’s why it plainly says, “Copyright 2007 Nasif Nahle”. Google his name, and “biocarb’ (which appears in your page’s link for that image), and some of the other information given on that image, and you’ll find that Nahle used this NASA image


    and added other information (including an incorrect value of “almost 90 degrees” for the angle of the Solar System, and erroneous “informtion” about a radial component of the Solar System’s motion around the Galactic center)…


    to produce the image that you showed on your page:


    1. The “almost 90 degrees” is as seen from above, not from the side. In my video the solar system’s angle as seen from the side is 60 degrees.
      Still dodging the question, your video does not provide an answer either. Your video only covers the motion of our solar system in the galaxy, but that is not what my question was about.
      So let me rephrase it so you might understand better what I mean: If we plot the paths of the planets over time (so including the motion of our solar system), how do these paths look in 3D?

  4. Why not look up Viktor Schuanberger and take a look at a book, “Living Energies” by Callum Coats?

    As a side note. Did anyone consider that red shift is only the effect of this spiral movement away from the galaxy core?

  5. Excellent work! I wanted to ask a question: The planets have the geographic north pole directed forward or backward? ie their north poles are facing what is to come or what has already happened?

  6. You might wish to comment on my new video, “What is the Sun’s True Motion?”

    I conclude that because the predictions that you base upon your model are conclusively refuted by Solar conjunctions of superior planets, your efforts to support that model with fringe theories like the Electric Universe are a fool’s errand.

    Since you suspect that the “Establishment” is trying to keep the public unaware that the Solar System moves, the video description gives several links (which I found in 5 minutes with Google) for information on the Sun’s motion around the Galaxy. One, from an astronomer, pre-dates your videos by 80 years. Here are those links, for your convenience. You’ll note that they some are from anti-Establishment sources like Harvard, Cornell, and Scientific American.

    Pre-DjSadhu sources on Movement of Sun and Earth around the Galaxy:

    May, 1932….1..175A&db_key=AST&page_ind=0&plate_select=NO&data_type=GIF&type=SCREEN_GIF&classic=YES



    October 26, 1998

    June 17, 2005

    Spring 2007

    18 June 2010

    Oct 24, 2010

    1. Well there you have your helix. It’s a bit tilted, but it sure looks helical to me. And for the links: do you really think that I could not find that info? You think I searched for ‘solar system speed’ or ‘motion of the sun’ and found nothing? Unfortunately you misrepresent my statements (again), and then refute a claim that I did not make. “One, from an astronomer, predates your videos by 80 years” – you really make it sound like I think I “invented” the forward motion of the sun, and that nobody except me knew about this, this is just stupid. Really cute, a list with dates and everything, as if I claimed that “nobody knew about this”. I already had a bunch of links to similar research on the info page. So nothing new there; your list is unnecessary (and kind of silly if you think about it). My point is not that the info about the sun’s journey can not be found, but that it is not in the standard models and diagrams. Sure, if you go out there and look for it, you’ll find it – and yet we have a stationary-looking disk model everywhere. Humor yourself, and do a image search for “solar system” – all that comes up is that stationary looking clockwork model. Despite the fact that we know we’re traveling and that our orbits look very different (helical) over time, it is not in the standard diagrams. Regardless whether you take my 90 degree animation, or your 60 degree one, THAT is how the model should look – helical, traveling, on a journey through space. Not sitting there going round and round. You could easily agree with me on that, but since you’re all dug in I don’t think you’ll ever see it. At least you finally kind of answered the Big Question: how do our orbits look over time? Helical. By the way Jim, the video you posted above has the same helical diagram I have in my animation:  Look at 1:55 – maybe you want to contact the author so he can correct this grave error.

  7. Dear DjSadhu,

    You really made a nice work! Congratulations!

    I am doing a research about climate cycles and I found some interesting relations with astronomic movements, climate and extinction events.

    I have some doubts about the up-down oscillation around the galactic plane. You said that this oscillation is related to the Precession cycle, of about 26,000 years.

    But I think (maybe I am wrong), that this precession movement is different from the
    galactic plane oscillation.

    My view is based on the this statement:

    “The records of cratering and mass extinction show a correlation, and might be explained by a combination of periodic and stochastic impactors. The mass extinction record shows evidence for a periodic component of about 26 to 30 Myr, and an ~30 Myr periodic component has been detected in impact craters by some workers, with recent pulses of impacts in the last 2-3 million years, and at ~35, 65, and 95 million years ago. A cyclical astronomical pacemaker for such pulses of impacts may involve the motions of the Earth through the Milky Way Galaxy. As the Solar System revolves around the galactic center, it also oscillates up and down through the plane of the disk-shaped galaxy with a half-cycle 30 +/- 3 Myr. This cycle should lead to quasi-periodic encounters with interstellar clouds, and periodic variations in the galactic tidal force with maxima at times of plane crossing. This “galactic carrousel” effect may provide a viable perturber of the Oort Cloud comets, producing periodic showers of comets in the inner Solar System. These impact pulses, along with stochastic impactors, may represent the major punctuations in earth history.”

    “If the periodic component of ~26 to 30 Myr in the mass extinction and impact cratering pulses is real, then it may be related to the carrousel-like movement of the Solar System through the Milky Way Galaxy. Increased flux of comets (comet showers) might come gravitational perturbations of Oort comet cloud during the periodic passage of the Solar System through the central plane of the Galaxy (the half-cycle of the oscillation is estimated to be ~26 to 36 Myr depending on galactic models), although this scenario has been criticised on various grounds.”

    The reference source is: The “Shiva Hypothesis”: Impacts, Mass Extinctions, and the Galaxy. By Rampino, Michael R.; Haggerty, Bruce M. (1996).

    It is available here (If you can’t access it, request it to me):…72..441R

    So, what do you think about it?
    Is it possible to have two different movements? One for precession and another for the “galactic carrousel”? I think yes, and they are independent.

    Please, see this video at ~ 4:30 (in Italian, but no problem too understand):

    I think that the precession movement is incorrectly shown in this video:

    The second video is mixing two distinct movements!

    From the wikipedia article ( ):

    “The precession of the equinoxes is caused by the gravitational forces of the Sun and the Moon, and to a lesser extent other bodies”.

    So, besides the quotation from the scientific article above, about the “galactic carrousel”, this is another argument for my view.

    Another argument from :

    “(…) the Sun oscillates up and down relative to the Galactic plane approximately 2.7 times per orbit (…). These oscillations were until recently thought to coincide with mass lifeform extinction periods on Earth.”

    Take a look at this article too:

    Gillman, Michael and Erenler, Hilary (2008). The galactic cycle of extinction. International Journal of Astrobiology, 7(1) pp. 17–26.

    Avaiable at:

    There are a lot of more resources, but this is sufficient.

    Please, I will be glad to have your valuable answer/opinion.

    Best regards.

    PS: Sorry about any English mistake, I am from Brazil.

  8. Dear DjSadhu,

    Complementing the last post…

    Another argument to confirm my view.
    Considering that “The Sun’s past oscillations perpendicular to the galactic plane have probably always been confined within |z| < 300 pc (…)", from "Terrestrial record of the Solar System's oscillation about the galactic plane".

    If you use the 26,000 period to calculate the up-down velocity (considering 300 parsec as the size of the oscillation), I found the number 22,611 km/s. But, if you consider the period of 26 Myr, then this new up-down velocity is ~ 22 km/s, a more coherent number with the one you said in a previous post: "up/down 7km/s".

    If you agree, the only thing to correct in the video is to change the "26,000 cycle" label by the 26 Myr cycle.

    Thanks for your attention.
    Best regards.


    1. Hi Marcus,

      Thanks for your comments and links. Yeah astronomers also said “I confused the two”. Still processing all the new research that came up after releasing this video.
      You could very well be right, if the precession cycle differs from the up-and-down cycle. I am however sure that precession is not just a local wobble, it is linked to the ‘external mechanics’ – especially magnetism.

      One thing seems to be certain: our up-and-down motion makes the solar system go through less dense (below the galactic plane) and denser (above) plasma – this causes the sun to go weird, increased solar activity, earth quakes, strange oscillating weather and so on. It is not car engine emissions (sure, that’s baaaad), but a much bigger galactic issue that changes our climate.

      If you are researching climate change due to galactic influences, here’s a must-read: Helical Universe.
      I’m currently collaborating with the author, Jamal Shrair, for a revised version of the galaxy video based on his research of the past 10 years, here’s a short clip:

      And don’t worry about your English, I’m from Holland :-)

  9. Hi DJSadhu!

    Thank you very much for the reply!
    I bought the “Helical Universe” and I will read carefully this when I have some time. Thanks for the recommendation.

    Try to read this article:


    If you can’t access it, request to my e-mail.

    Keep your good work!!

    Best regards.

  10. Thanks DJSadhu your videos about helical universe theory are fantastic.
    I’m not an astronomer, but trying to understand the Mayan concept of time, I have made the image you can see in the link below.
    I come to this idea just thinking about the movement of the moon orbiting around the earth, that is orbiting around the sun.
    Why should it be different for the solar system, and the galaxies?
    Thank you very much for your work!*Gm6UawJKdYsiMbJt6fWBpFvs9ishh6YYfgNQY6UpaZBa711SnifE2AYe5aHIO3JPYA96xqlN1NaJ6sLuyoGJWjnAxxaf/Diapositiva09.png?width=750

    El Sistema Solar y el grupo local de estrellas  

  11. It would seem to me that this model challenges traditional physics model of gravity. I’m just a lay person however, it would appear that this model says that the planetary movement around the sun is tied to the angular momentum of the solar system; that the planets are bearing the same momentum as the sun and floating through space weightless. The orbital dance is but a homeostatic rythm arrived at after billions of years of chaos.

  12. Dear DJSadhu,

    according to my last knowledge our solar system is a part of a constellation which called as Pleiades (M45). In this constellation there are 10 main solar systems, namely Alcyone, Atlas, Pleione, Merope, Maia, Asterope, Taygeta, Electra, Celaena and Helios (our solar system).

    Central point of the Pleiades is approx. the Alcyone, so all other 9 solar systems orbiting around it (our solar system too).

    I think it would be perfect when you take this motion into considering during your planning.
    Unfortunately I have no clear information about motion of Alcyone, but according to your Torus based motion of our solar system, the Alcyone should always orbiting on Galactic Plane around the central sun of Milky Way!?

    What do you think, do you have more precise information abouit it? Could you extend your animation with Pleiades motion?

    Best regards,

  13. Very nice video, You must have some good video making skills, what programs did you use, any tips? I would like to see a model that is closer to a 3D vortex. Can you make a model where the planets lag behind further, like a 3D vortex, your model is a bit flat, the outer planets cannot travel fast enough. You can see a model of the sun’s vortex and where the planets fit at the following link:

  14. Mr. DJSadhu
    It is true that the Milky Way does not extend from the North Pole to the South Pole otherwise your animation in 3d regarding our Galactocentric System is a pathbreaking piece of work. Congratulations.

  15. Beautiful work congratulations! I understand that our sun actually rotates around another star, Alcyon and that Alcyon revolves around Sirius, I was hoping to see a video showing this interaction between stars, THAT would be awesome! Perhaps your next challenge?
    Does the science you are aware of support this type of interplay between stars? I understand the ionic cloud is a result of the Suns’ rotation around Alcyon, & that this cloud of energy whether one defines it as a photon cloud, ionic cloud, toroid whatever(I am not a scientist, so I can’t delve into it any deeper than that) is what is responsible for the boost of energy the solar system is experiencing, and the cause of global weirding and that all the planets in our ss are heating up, not just Earth. Any astrophysicists out there that can support the ss heating up? Thank you for listening, I hope you make more!

  16. Hi Sadhu
    Thank you so much for your beautiful and amazing work. I also understand that our Sun rotates around Alcyon, but being a musician, I would love it if you found NASA’s recordings of the sound of the planet’s orbits around the Sun. Some time ago I had access to them. There is definitely sound in space! Each planet in its orbit creates a different sound, a drone, you could say, I think according to mass, speed and oscillation, not different from a string of a violin creating what we perceive as sound.
    I know there is no air in outer space, but there is no real “void” either!

  17. Have you seen anything concerning the elertric model of the universe? Thunderbolts project dot info/ has answered many of the questions that are left open here in this presentation/research.

    I really appreciate the modelling of the movement of sun and planets. It adds an dimension to being on this journey through the cosmos.

    Thanks for your.

  18. Please excuse me. I don’t know English. But I have information in English (and I know the translation into the language). So, two authors. The Russian author – Peter D. Ouspensky. And the English author – Rodney Collin Smith (Uspensky’s pupil). If I was a programmer… I would create model… Read please completely!

    Peter D. Ouspensky “New Model of the Universe”:

    Atomic matter makes our consciousness aware of its existence through its
    motion. If the motion inside atoms were to stop, matter would turn into emptiness,
    into nothing. The effect of materiality, the impression of mass, is produced by the
    motion of the minutest particles, which demands time. If we take away time, if we
    imagine atoms without time, that is, if we imagine all the electrons constituting the
    atom as immovable, there will be no matter. Motionless small quantities are outside
    our scale of perception. We perceive not them, but their orbits, or the orbits of their

    If we wish to represent graphically the paths of this motion, we shall represent
    the path of the sun as a line, the path of the earth
    as a spiral winding round this line, and the path of the moon as a spiral winding round
    the spiral of the earth. If we wish to represent the path of the whole solar system, we
    shall have to represent the paths of all the planets and asteroids as spirals winding
    round the central line of the sun, and the paths of the planets’ satellites as spirals
    round the spirals of the planets. Such a drawing would be very difficult to make, in
    fact with asteroids it would be impossible; and it would be still more difficult to
    construct an exact model from this drawing, especially if all the interrelations,
    distances, exact thickness of the spirals, etc., were to be strictly observed. But if we
    were to succeed in building such a model, it would be an exact model of a small
    particle of matter enlarged many times. The same model, reduced a required number
    of times, would appear to us as impenetrable matter, exactly identical with all the
    matter which surrounds us.
    Matter or substances of which our bodies and all the objects surrounding us
    consist is built in exactly the same way as the solar system; only we are incapable of
    perceiving electrons and atoms as immovable points but perceive them in the form of
    the complex, and entangled traces of their movement which produce the effect of
    mass. If we were able to perceive the solar system on a much smaller scale, it would
    produce on us the effect of matter. There would be no emptiness in the solar system
    for us, just as there is no emptiness in the matter surrounding us.

  19. continuation


    Now the situation of our Solar System within the Milky Way is almost exactly that
    of a single blood-cell within the human body. A white corpuscle is also composed of a
    nucleus or sun, with its cytoplasm or sphere of influence, and it too is surrounded on all
    sides by untold millions of similar cells or systems, the whole forming a great being
    whose nature it could hardly be expected to imagine.

    If, however, we compare the human body to some great body of the Milky Way, and
    one cell of it to our Solar System, and we wish to find a viewpoint comparable to that
    of a human astronomer on earth, we should have to try to imagine the perception of
    something like a single electron of a molecule of this cell. What could such an electron
    know about the human body? What indeed could it know about its cell, or even its
    molecule? Such organisms would be so vast, subtle, eternal and omnipotent in relation
    to it, that their true meaning would be utterly beyond its comprehension. Yet no doubt
    the electron could perceive something of its surrounding universe; and though this
    impression would be very far from reality, it is interesting for us to imagine it.

    For these electrons, by the insignificance of their size and duration, would also, like
    men within the Milky Way, be fixed one-dimensional points, unable to change their
    view of their human universe by a single hair’s-breadth. It is true that their cell would
    be travelling along its artery – as the Sun along its track in the Milky Way – and that
    this cell might be expected to make many thousand circuits of the great body within the
    course of its existence. But to the electron this would mean nothing, for in the whole
    duration of his spark of life, the cell would have advanced no measurable distance at

    As points then, the electrons would look out upon a stationary cross
    section of the human body, at right angles to the artery in which their cell
    was destined to move. This cross-section would constitute their visible
    universe, or the present. Within this universe they would first and above all
    be aware of the blazing nucleus of their cell, the source of all light and life
    for them and for the whole system of worlds in which they lived. Looking
    beyond this system into the zenith – that is, out of their cross-section and up
    into the artery – they would see nothing. For that would be where their cell
    and its universe was going in the future. Equally empty space would lie
    below them in the nadir. For that would be where their universe had come
    from, or the past.


  20. Dear Mr.DjSadhu: I’m amazed with your Helical Model’s videos and grateful to you for your explanations about the difference between heliocentric motion and helical motion, confirming that our galaxy is a vortex.
    I’m not an astronomer nor an Astronomy student, but I hope you’ll accept my question even knowing that it sounds naive:

    Let’s imagine a rocket sent from Earth to the Moon and its trajectory in accordance with the stationary clockwork model.
    -Is similar the trajectory in the helical model, considering speed and orbit?
    -The angle required to enter the Earth becomes easier o more difficult to reach?

    Best regards.

    1. The calculations are the same for both models. The heliocentric model has our local system as a frame of reference, the helical model looks from the outside and includes the forward movement of the solar system. So the movements in between planets are still the same. The reason why I favor the helical model is that it is more complete and includes our journey through space. The heliocentric model “ignores” this completely, and I don’t like that.

  21. You said, “The calculations are the same for both models”. (Thursday, 20. February 2014 20:26)

    You lying, two-faced fraud.

    Previously, you emphasized that your model does NOT give the same results as the geocentric, and bragged that you could prove that yours is correct:

    “I am currently trying to reproduce the retrograde in a “flat” solar system, and it can’t be done. There’s “depth” in the retrograde loop, pointing downwards, and in a flat system this is impossible. However, if I use the “non-flat”, cone-shaped Bhat model (with the sun leading and the planets trailing behind) then I can easily reproduce this observed phenomenon. “The claim that the Sun is at the tip of the solar system with the planets trailing behind is also demonstrably wrong” — well, it can be demonstrated to be right. Scientist or not — I will post this ‘retrograde animation’ once it’s finished, and yes there will be music.”)

    BTW, you are invited to comment on my new video, which discusses your claims. But be sure to watch to the end, to see the rules.

    1. Understand that my videos discuss different models.

      The first video (Solar System) shows our movement over time, resulting in a helical path for the planets. It does NOT show the “cone shaped” model, which is not my model but dr Bhat’s.
      Attempts to make a better version have shown how little there is “all wrong” with mine: I switched two orbits, and I got a 90 degree instead of a 60 degree angle.
      The very point of the first video still stands: compared to the helical model, the flat ‘dinner plate’ heliocentric model is quite boring. This is my opinion, and I express this in this video. Some people agree, some don’t.

      The second video (Galaxy) demonstrates how the Bhat model would look with the sun leading and the planets trailing behind.

      So, the question asked by Isha was “are the calculations the same for the helical and the heliocentric model?” The answer is YES – it’s a change in frame of reference.
      Would the question have been “are the calculations the same for the heliocentric and the cone-shaped Bhat model?” then the answer would have been NO – the physics are totally different.

      I have no problem holding different models in my mind, investigating them and demonstrating them. This does not make me “two faced”, it makes me curious and open-minded.
      As opposed to going into mental “lock down mode” and becoming furious when something is different from one’s world view. This is the very definition of ‘closed-minded’.
      Some people have made this an “all or nothing” two-sides battle, which is preventing them from seeing ANY “right”, they only see the “wrong”. Once an idea has been labeled “all wrong”, then it must be fought with all means! Dig in!

      Good luck with that mind set, I try and keep my view wide, and my mind open. And I try to stay nice.

  22. 8 лет назад я опубликовал на своём сайте статью “Мои представления о материальном мире”, где впервые я описал движение планет и Солнца так как показано на анимации.
    Причём эти расчёты мною были сделаны в 1968 году. вот ссылка http://xn--80aaacgejhn5euj.xn--p1ai/Mir.html

  23. DjSadhu – Einstein said it well. Imagination is more important than knowledge. It’s fact, progress especially conflicting with the security of falsehoods render deep emotional responses. This is the bases of the Spiritual Journey ‘Time’ sets all upon.As Voyager remains in our Solar System as a reminder ‘Time’ itself is set within confines. These ‘confines’, disperse as the Universe expands. Expanding because it is acceleration is due again to the ‘ingathering ‘of matter. There are two great ‘Black Holes’ one nearer to the center field of our galaxy, the other a bit farther away from it’s center. First, we witness the ‘Outer’ System then, the ‘Inner’ System forming. When the ‘Inner System’ becomes heavier the ‘Outer One’ becomes sparser. Like an anchor weighs a Ship down in the Storm. As ‘Time’ becomes stretched as a thin rubber band, becoming less and less influential as formation of matter progresses with it’s passage. As Voyager’s Space Travel becomes father away from it’s anchor.The Outer Solar System reverses Poles and it’s influences on gravity. In this regard ‘Time’ literally would disappear virtually as would all solid matter, were it not for the existence of the gravitational reversal within trajectory pathways.Locked, as it were into orbital sequence, as a ‘death star’ pulls objects into it’s Mass closer to ‘Time’s influence. As our Milky Way Galaxy has two great Black Holes off center of the Galaxy Center, one nearer and one farther away Like an enormous ‘Time Clock’ ticking away by the Pendulum effect of the two Black Hole’s Vibration.
    “Time’ is, a fluid momentum. Difficult to gauge or calculate in an atmosphere of anomalies which exist in the ‘Outer Universe.’ These Videos of yours are restricted by the ability to demonstrate what you know, in a technical way. Interestingly, the mind is not so limited.Your mention of the ‘Proton Belt’ is a good one. It is an expansive origin of matter, or as a literal Nuclear Field of Dreams. Nothing exists apart from it. This ‘Belt’ is a residual stream of light [raw Energy ] from the initial burst of ‘The Light.’ The essence of which has been long-debated. As man directs his venture apart from ‘The Creator’ his inquiry contains the ‘Darkness.’ All is held in it’s course by Light, both the unseen Master in Spirit made visible throughout the visible creation.
    Isaac newton wasn’t widely applauded for his empirical observations. Aristotle, another who gained credibility in future generations. As truths are disdained, the further away from it’s Source man goes. Waste no time on conversions of the doubtful. Carry on.

  24. To see the brilliance of what you have done just by reading the comments that you have posted is great we are one small world in the vast universe. But a lot of minds working together is the most effective way to the creativity of our species. To aquaier answers. I have question for you or anyone that knows were is earth right now in relation to the galactic plane like when are we going to pass through it in years from now. We have survived so far but there are many its outther we have no idea in our life time. I do believe there are more answers out there about past civilization that were erased before they reached our present technology.A no one can guide our path throughout the GalaxyS or know when something is going to fly in or close to our sun but it is nice to see we are all part of this conciseness. Thank you again

    1. I think we are currently above the galactic plane, approaching the area of maximum solar activity… check for earth quakes, sink holes, vulcanic activity.

  25. i do have one question i cant get off my mind,

    if the sun and the planets are in motion, what is pulling them or how are they able to move

  26. I have not studied the planetary or galactic motion so as to form an opinion as to the accuracy of this theory of motion, I think however, that I have been given the secret to intergalatic travel. Now….how to accomplish it!

  27. Very cool but I wish we could see the video without the credit and website in the foreground. Particularly in a case with smooth, constant motion behind the static foreground floating objects it ruins the mood.

  28. I found this presentation to be enjoyably hypnotic and what I believe to be an accurate rendition of reality. How about going from the infinitely large to the infinitely small? What would you do with the paradigm suggested in
    It takes the concept of vortices in the other direction.
    Jack Wenger

  29. mash’Allah :)

    Allah(swt) in the Holy Kuran tells us about it more than 1600 years ago.. Allahu akbar .. I just posted ones ayat about the running of the sun but if you are going to stady it you can find many ayat where Allah(swt) explane the movement of the solar sistem in the space.. I postes one of your best pic (gif) that explane this.. hope you like it :) salam

  30. Hello! first of all: The music is great , this video has made me think about how the universe works, I find it interesting the approach about the vortex , me only one question arises : how the rotation of the earth around the sun is justified ? I mean about the seasons , as I understand that the winter happens because the earth is farther from the sun than when it is in summer. congratulations on the blog is very good!

  31. I love the effort! Congratulations! Any work that receives so much criticism is something of inherently high value!!!

    So please allow me to give you a small bit of criticism about the things we KNOW. The Read : A FAREWELL TO REALITY, because it is all about the perspective viewpoint. Everything we observe is relational.

    Our solar system is a disc. Some think it is swirling around a perpendicular central axis of our galaxy in relatively plane fashion, like our planets around the sun.

    However. Our disc just may be rotating too like a sphere, because of the influences of original capture and of motion/energy related confluences of other nearby solar systems. There are, after all, billions of these, all relative to proximity by their interaction.

    And our spiral is always assumed to be directional to its axis, but, who knows THAT? It depends upon the observers perspective. I believe our MW galaxy is moving perpendicular to the disc, fueled by the ‘exhaust’ of our continuously collapsing black hole, ‘sucking itself forward in the dark matter holes we cannot yet observe.

    Back to our sol system. Its all very, very slow, again, relatively to our definition of time/existence. . But in its amplitude it never exceeds anywhere near the outer plane of the volume of stars and dust we are in. And unlike your corkscrew, it cannot vary into this dimension (closer or further radii) without loss/gain of relative velocity, energy. From what?

    Read the Three governing Laws of Thermodynamics. OK, Four, the Zeroth, too. The closer it gets, the faster it must move, relative to other influencing objects, stars systems and rubble, esp. at the center of our MW, our own real, full blown BLACK HOLE (we cannot see, but have now proven to exist.) Its where things go when density is a weak force….

    Actually, your first model. this too, is incorrect. You, too, are thinking linearly. This all depends upon the actual relativity of the viewer.

    Yes, this particular parallax view is possible, but only likely if you are curving in space time, parallel to the directed motion you placed Sol in. Our solar system is moving in a clearly defined spiral with several billion other stars in our Milky Way. And our entire Galaxy itself is moving – axially – in a direction the central “black Hole” of ours is pushing it through. In the not too distant future, several billion of our puny years away, our Galaxy will be colliding with our next nearest Galaxy, Andromeda, and this too will re-define specific directionality of our travels in regard to the three dimensions we understand.

    Life is not a vortex, as you now know, it is a HELIX. So, in the fourth dimension we acknowledge life thinking ‘presence’ as a string with a defined start birth and a certain ending death (for now anyway). There is nothing else. Energy and matter simply ARE. Always.

    In the all too distant real future all galaxies, all nebula, all elementary fogs and matter/energy will in itself return to collapsing upon itself , once again then creating the cause/effect of big bang from whence we came. This has to happen because the energy and matter of the small forces must combine with a Grand Unification Theory, (Hawking GUT) just to appease our obsessive / compulsive modern physicist dreamers with their (totally incorrect ) notions of multiverses, parallel universes, multi-dimensional systems and planets -just to understand their incorrect mathematical equations.

    Brians ELEGANT UNIVERSE has compulsion. Direct cause, direct effect, always. Plato was right about us being in a cave seeing shadows on the wall and never understanding exactly what it means….

    Thats whats so sad about MooV INTERSTELLAR. No matter, or energy combines in/near/around a black hole. It just disintegrates going in. Time does NOT EXIST THERE. Neither does motion, matter or energy. All of what we recall as reality (Turing) must cease to exist so that the strong forces can combine with the weak force as gravity requires.

    Everything is always relative to a specific viewpoint in X,Y, Z axis and with these, a specific time coordinate added. That time coordinate too must have certain limit. Consequential to action, what isn’t does NOT EXIST. This too, must be relational, otherwise RELATIVITY to any observers viewpoint, anywhere at any time, cannot apply.

  32. Bloody great info and perspective – never thought of it like that!

    I do have one little doo-dad to correct you on. When you depict our sun making it’s trek around the galaxy, you’ve depicted a bow shock. It’s been recently discovered that the sun is moving slower than originally thought, so it doesn’t have the velocity to create that bow shock, but more like a wave motion.

    I got that info from:


    1. Thanks!
      I based the bow shock on data that NASA had at the time.. but our knowledge of the outer regions of the solar system is very limited, and changes almost daily.

  33. Gracias, me encanta…. ¿Porque el plano de la galaxia se comporta como un plano? En mi opinión lo movería en forma helical, igual que el sistema solar…

  34. I have known about this for years yet it is quite a different experience to have it visualized so beautifully and dramatically as you have done here. Having dabbled in 3D animations myself, I am in awe of your skill and the patience I know it took to make this. My hat is off to you. Kudos. Well done.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>