The Helical Model – vortex solar system animation

Get the soundtrack here for free:

Forget the old heliocentric model – our solar system is a vortex!

The old Newtonion/Copernican Heliocentric model of our solar system is an unproven theory.
A bright fellow named Dr. Pallathadka Keshava Bhat came up with quite a different way to think of our Solar System.

There are a couple of reasons why I think this model could just be right.

First of all, the heliocentrical model has always been presented (especially by NASA) as a “frisbee” model.

NASA frisbee model
[image taken from here]

Think about this for a minute. In this diagram it seems the Solar System travel to the left. When the Earth is also traveling to the left (for half a year) it must go faster than the Sun. Then in the second half of the year, it travels in a “relative opposite direction” so it must go slower than the Sun. Then, after completing one orbit, it must increase speed to overtake the Sun in half a year. And this would go for all the planets. Just like any point you draw on a frisbee will not have a constant speed, neither will any planet.

Secondly, most planets are visible throughout the entire year. In a “flat” model, every single planet would hide behind the Sun at least once a year. They don’t. Now the heliocentric model isn’t entirely flat, but mostly.

IF the travel direction of the Solar System is “up” or “down” – why haven’t I heard from this in my entire life? Why do I need to run into the dr Bhat material to see the “spiral” for the first time? The opposition is divided into two groups: one group thinks the helical model is wrong, the other group says that there’s no or little difference with the current model – very curious.

UPDATE: the FIRST NASA image that shows it like it is

Finally I found ONE image from NASA that shows the angle and travel direction of our solar system:



Fact of the matter is that if the helical model is correct and our Solar System is a traveling vortex, it will change how we feel about our journey. For me personally the heliocentric model feels like a useless merry-go-round: after one year we are back to square one. The helical model feels much more like progress, growth, a journey through space in which we never ever come back to our starting point. We are NOT in a big marry-go-round. We are on a journey.

A circle is a spiral with the progress taken out

And then I get very suspicious because this kind of tricks have been used before.
Compare the Mayan calendar with the Gregorian one: the Mayan calendar has an intricate system to guide you in your personal spiritual evolution and growth. It has days for making new friends, days for self-reflection, and so on. If you were to live by this calendar, you would never stop moving forwards.

The Gregorian calendar on the other hand tells you only a few things: your week starts at Monday, you’re free on Saturday and Sunday, and you work till you drop dead. Very handy if you’re part of the establishment, not very useful if you’re an individual looking for ways to better yourself.

Related YouTube videos

Links and resources

planets visible throughout the year.

Download the original “Helical Helix PDF” from dr Bhat (24Mb).

Mayan Calendar explained

Gregorian calendar

Date: Saturday, 15. December 2012 13:25
Trackback: Trackback-URL

Feed for the post RSS 2.0 Comment this post


  1. 1

    Thank you for that explanation. Really great work.

  2. 2

    Wow. Just Wow. Love the tune with our traveling Sun!

  3. 3

    I find this very interesting and logical. However, I am a neophyte when it comes to astronomy and astrophysics but I do have a question. If this were the case and we were traveling so fast as a Solar System, would not our view of the stars change drastically over the years? I would appreciate your thoughts. Thanks!

    Great video!


  4. 4

    Even the nearest star Alpha Centauri is 4.2 lightyears from us (appr 25 trillion miles), so a couple of years would not be enough to see anything change. Just like things on the horizon seem not to move when you travel on the highway.

  5. 5

    umm, what’s up with Jupiter after saturn?

  6. 6

    Yeah I know, someone pointed that out already. Must have been so distracted with other details that I switched orbits without noticing.

  7. 7

    That’s amazing :)
    Really good work !

  8. 8

    Actually, the heliocentric model is still correct, everything is just a matter of your point of view. If you take the solar system as a frame of reference, it works perfectly fine. Now if you watch from outside, you see the sun moving with the planets behind, like you animated it. And if you go one step further, you see how the sun orbits the center of the milky way galaxy, which in itself races through space in the Virgo Supercluster, su you would have a vortex within a vortex within a vortex and so on. Very nice work on the animation though ;)

  9. 9

    I agree with Joe’s comment about the star patterns. Yes, they wouldn’t change after a couple of years (like you said), but the same star patterns have been around for not just a “couple” years, it’s been literally thousands.

  10. 10

    Well, It seems to be all right. But…
    It would require the Sun to be accelerating all the time. Because it is like the explanation of gravity using lift. When the lift falls down with you inside, you feel weightlessness. If you would spin yo-yo around you, it would be orbiting around you and everybody watching you would be seeing the yo-yo orbiting and not fluttering behind, like in this animation.
    But if planets and sun would be leaving some sort of dust behind, it would create this vortex.

  11. 11

    The heliocentric model isn’t ‘wrong’ as such, it is just the model as seen from a difference reference frame. The sun doesn’t ‘drag’ the planets along, they are moving with the same tangential velocity around the galactic centre as the sun, and the sun accelerates them inwards towards itself. This is basic Newtonian physics..

    This model really isn’t any breakthrough, just a view of the solar system from a non-stationary point from our reference frame, or what could be called a stationary point in the galaxy.

    Regardless of the small bits and pieces of misleading information (our speed through space for example, is dependent entirely on the viewers reference frame), thank you for an interesting animation!!

  12. 12

    I imagina it like this: if the planets are stuck in movement around the sun trough gravitational forces then the sun is also stuck in a even bigger movement inside the galaxy. Everything is locked in its perfectly balanced system until the balance is in some way broken, then patterns change and fall back into new and stable patterns, and so it goes on forever.

  13. 13

    Hi, can I suggest something missing, and that will make this subject even more interesting? Picture this, most stars are binary, meaning two solar systems turning around each other, an extraordinary representation of the double helix DNA :D … please make a video simulating this, its extraordinary. Thank You

  14. 14

    I agree with someguy, posting #8, vortex within a vortex within a vortex, etc.

  15. 15

    What did you use to create that animation? It is hypnotic and beautiful, and I can’t stop watching it.

  16. 16

    This more dynamic rendering of our movement thru space is actually quite important. When scientists speak of 12-dimensional space we needn’t think of this as abstract. We are used to thinking of “dimensions” as linear. In fact, each is spiral. What looks like a straight line when we draw it on paper is actually a curve on the curved earth. Then the earth itself spins. Then, as we see the earth takes a spiral trajectory thru space. The solar system as well takes a spiral trajectory. If we think in terms of length, width, and depth at each astral level, it doesn’t take long to get to 12 dimensions. So great to begin to see this in moving animation. I refer all to a series of fabulous books exploring exactly this subject of the spiral universe, authored by Vladimir Ginzburg, He coined the term “helicola.”

  17. 17

    Do you really think astronoms don’t know the real movement of the solar system ?! ( relatif aux autres composants of universe )
    If so, i invite you to interest to astronomy, you will be astonished

    I notice you too, neglect movements ! :

    The solar system does’nt goes straight forward, it turns around center of the galaxy.
    The galaxy itself is not immobil
    Our galactic group is not immobil.
    I think you need notions of galilean relativity, then Einstein relativity !

  18. 18

    But video is very beautiful … !

  19. 19

    Marshall Brain on HowStuffWorks dot com claims that the solar system speed is 4,383,610 KPH
    or 2,724,666 MPH
    How can our Sun be traveling at a snail’s pace of 70K kph if this is true? Somebody’s math is off.
    Either way, vortex is totally believable. we’re blazin’!

  20. 20

    Being part of such an amazing planetary time, means we as humankind can dump all the old paradigm…it’s time to stand in our power, our truth, as ‘spirit beings…
    White Elk Medicine Woman

  21. 21

    The sun and planets, do in fact leave a vapor trail as the gases blow off of them and it’s confirmed by interstellar vehicles slingshoting behind the sun.

    When a fly inside a car is buzzing forward, his tracking above the road is accelerating, so he is exceeding the forward momentum of the car. When he flies the opposite way his speed drops relatively, and in that direction decelerates. His constant flight speed when examined, is relative to the viewpoint.

    It will be interesting to find what Voyager discovers in the Heliopause as to a perspective of what that fly in my car experiences. >)
    Thanks, everybody for riding in our car!

  22. 22

    Let’s see… the movement of the Solar system around the galaxy is known since over a century. It may have not happened in your case, but I was taught about it while in school, which may explain why you consider it new.
    The helical model is… different, yes, but does it really add anything to the current Solar system model? Well, let’s start talking about the current Solar system model, which you mistake with something already discarded centuries ago. The current model puts every body orbiting around the Sun in what amounts to an ellipse. This is known at least since the 18th century, as is known that the orbital planes of the different planets aren’t exactly the same. So the planets actually speed up and slow down without any need of taking what happens outside the heliosphere into account, and they do in different ways because they are at different distances from the sun and at sligtly different angles. Beware: a “sligtly different angle” can translate into quite a distance when you multiply by the distance between the Sun and the planets. So you can have more than a year between transits behind the sun, the same way Venus’ transits across the Sun aren’t regular either.
    Let’s bring all this to more manageable terms. You worry about the planetary velocities changing when you look at the Solar system from outside. Why does that surprise you at all? The satellites around the planets do the exact same thing, and you don’t seem to think about it being surprising. Why is it surprising that the Sun’s satellites (namely, the planets) speed up and slow down when using the galaxy as a reference system? Why aren’t you surprised by the fact that each planet’s orbit is affected by the other planets (the reason we have an asteroid belt is Jupiter’s gravity breaking up any attempt for a planet to grow up in that orbit)?
    Of course, once you notice that the movement of the Solar system around the galaxy is basically irrelevant at our scale, your comments about the Mayan calendar fall into the grave they should never have risen from. You don’t need Mayan calendars to better yourself, you don’t need an helical Solar system model. You need to have curiosity, and the will to fulfill it with up to date knowledge. The “flat Solar system” model is outdated, the movement around the galaxy center is known since a long time, and the helical model is as useful for in-system calculations as the movement of the planets is for intra-atmospheric calculations (i.e., not useful at all).

  23. 23

    Honestly, there is little that’s truly new here – it’s just another way of looking at the heliocentric model. It’s a different perspective for the layperson, yes, but it’s nothing unusual or unheard of for the body of science.

    For those who have asked why the stars seem the same, you’re just looking at them with the wrong perspective. The thousands of years of human history are not enough time for the stars to have moved noticeably, given the vast distances and speeds involved in stellar motion. Add in the fact that most of the stars that are visible to the naked eye are also moving in roughly similar orbits around the galatic core to our own, and it’s easy to see why they haven’t changed visibly very much.

  24. 24

    Those of you who believe that this Helical movement is a matter of perspective from the vantage point of an observer haven’t got a clue. Your “belief” in Newtonian science is what is distorting your understanding in knowing what exactly is happening here. The gravity based universe that you base your thinking on is incomplete and incorrect and because of this your perception of the model of our solar systems motion is some fixed orbit of planets that circle a large body because of your belief in GRAVITY being a FORCE upon itself. You are understanding an EFFECT to be a CAUSE. Gravity is NOT a force upon itself, nor is it a CAUSE, but an effect of twin opposing vortex will dual aspects generated by electricity, the only true force that exists. Electricity is effect of strain, tension and resistance which is one aspect of the dual aspects. The other aspect of the single force is Magnetism which is the straining, elastic reaction to the motion of electricity. Twin opposing aspects of the same force each becoming the other. This universe is not a one way universe it is a two way motion universe. Nassim Haramein is a fraud and is plagiarizing Walter Russell and Viktor Schauberger. In fact he is trying to using Quantum Quackery to explain Walter Russell and Viktor Schauberger’s work which does not even make sense. Russellian Science is based on Sacred Geometry and doesn’t rely on academic agenda based on false teachings of the illusion of effect, recording effects of motion, in turn memorizing guesses which create false academic theories like, gravity being a force on itself, the Nuclear Atom, Quantum Quackery, strong force, weak force, dark matter. The deliberate omission of the natural cyclical motions of the natural universe by social engineers serving the energy barons in hopes to continue to enslave the minds of humankind in order that we may serve them. Anyone wishing to free their minds from the corporate controlled machine and their priesthood that have replaced, science with psyence should start reading DB Larson, Walter Russell, and the works of Viktor Schauberger. Someone by the name of 77GSlinger introduced me to Russellian Science. Godspeed.

  25. 25

    Since the Earth is turning on itself, it acts like a gyroscope which points in the same direction however you turn it around.

    Since the Sun goes around the galaxy in 250 millions years, the Earth has to move for 125 million years in the general direction of the North Pole and 125 million years in the general direction of the South pole.

    It would be great if you could do you animation again, but make it do one complete circle around the galaxy. I’d like to understand how the plane of rotation of the Earth behaves relative to the direction of the Sun as the Sun reaches the furthest it will go in direction of the Polar star and starts moving away from it.

    Thank you

    P.S. I knew that the Sun moved around the Galaxy, but this knowledge was only in my head. Your animation made me feel it in my heart. I’m very grateful for that…

  26. 26

    You haven’t accounted for the fact that the solar plane is angled at sixty degrees when compared to the galactic plane, rather than the ninety you portray.

  27. 27

    There is no galaxy in this video. It just shows the relationship between the Sun and the planets, not between the solar system and our Milky Way. The camera angles are arbitrary.

  28. 28

    It’s a nice visualization.

    It’s technically incorrect in many ways — it’s showing the planets much too large compared to the sun, and in order to visually represent the “dragging” effect it has distorted the positions of the orbits.

    And calling this view of things “completely different” is completely wrong. Among other things, the claimed “drag” neglects the fact that the planets have momentum in the direction that the system is going, as well as orbital momentum. While it is true that the sun’s pull would be helping to maintain that against the tiny bit of resistance we get from the interstellar medium, that really is not a meaningfully significant part of the equation. (Thought experiment: Think about it as the Solar system being stationary with the interstellar medium moving past us. Mathematically equivalent.)

    Good observation! But incorrect conclusions drawn. Sorry. Try again, and next time do some basic sanity-check of your theory before publishing; there are lots of folks on the web who have the expertise to do so, and believe it or not they would welcome a new model if it was useful. This one, alas, isn’t.

  29. 29

    This animation is not to scale, obviously.

  30. 30

    One glaring error that one friend pointer out is that the solar flares are far too static.

  31. Jiivan VitaLys BlaisMathieu
    Saturday, 19. January 2013 23:24

    ~*~ Also the sun does NOT travel in a staight line , rather in in a wave shaped tragectory or likely even a spiraled one one or vortexed one…
    That is what i understand , and looking foward to be better educated or informed on the subject…

  32. 32

    From ANTIPHONY: “This feeling of looking at the center of the solar system makes him think of all the movements he is undergoing even as he is standing here perfectly still—the earth rotating him away from the sun, the earth revolving him around the sun, the sun and all its planets and belts of icy rock coursing through the Local Interstellar Cloud and the Local Bubble, remnants of a relatively recent supernova, only a few hundred million years old. Through the Orion arm of the galaxy and around the center of the galaxy, which would be above him, beyond him, if he were to look up here again later tonight. He can feel the earth and the sun spinning through space, spiraling around each other in a giant helix as they hurtle along in their relative paths, all these movements spinning, spinning him up and out of himself until there is nothing left but himself, his eyes closed again for a moment, his mind empty and numb, nothing left but this tiny patch of awareness at the center of all these spiraling motions.”

  33. 33

    I’ve been very impressed by this model, but am curious about 2 possible flies in the ointment.

    1. Our moon (and other moons ) seem to have planar orbits…and

    2. Comets seem to orbit (behind) the sun.

    Am I missing something?

  34. 34

    Big Thanks for your work DJ!
    Feelin’ Ya!
    This calendar, focusing on the lunar element, is a pocket sized view of my perception of “time” as movement through space. Inspired by the 13 moon Calendar, The Argüelles interpretation of the Mayan which was what I had had some exposure to in 2007 at the time of its download/creation.
    Conveying as well the 13 tones of Creation ~ “energies of affirmation that support our evolution:
    Purpose, Challenge, Service, Form, Radiance, Equality, Attunement, Integrity, Intention, Manifestation, Liberation, Cooperation, Presence.”
    Sweet to find you and your creative gifts.

  35. 35

    Joe K, you stated “pull” and posited a thought experiment imagining a stationary solar system, so I ask, are you defending a gravity based universe?


    Ask yourself if NASA has ever produced a complete 360 degree imagery of the sun? As for the moon, orbits cannot exist in a PHI spiral universe period. Ed Leedskalnin, drew out the correct motion of our solar system.

    Go to 2:48 of this video. (I have no interest in this video but only to show you an immediate example of my point.)

  36. 36

    But it is moving up or down (taking up or down from north/south Earth point of view)? Because I think it could be an important philosophical question.

  37. 37

    Please watch part 2, it might have your answer

  38. 38

    Dear Djsadhu,

    Thank you for your great work!
    We are an Japanese ecovillage and use heliocentric calender. We are impressed of your work.

    We translated the script into Japanese.
    Would you be interested in having captions in Japanese?

    Please let us know.

    Konohana family

  39. 39

    Dear Konohana family,

    It would honored to have Japanese version of both videos. If you would be so kind to send me the translations, I will upload both videos in Japanese.
    Please include the titles and captions. Once uploaded, I will notify you so you can check for errors. Thank you very much for your help!


  40. 40

    do you know paul?

  41. 41

    Rob (#35)

    Yes NASA has produced 360 views of the sun, both by observing the sun over it’s ~25 day rotation, and by using a pair of satellites placed into heliocentric orbits that, in 2011, put them on opposite sides of the sun

  42. 42

    I’d like to see the motion of the sun and planets within the galaxy as well as the motion of the galaxy.
    GReat Animation, I love this, I can show my son not only the heliocentric orbit but the movement of the solar system and the planets

  43. 43

    “Secondly, most planets are visible throughout the entire year. In a “flat” model, every single planet would hide behind the Sun at least once a year. They don’t.”

    This seems like kind of sloppy thinking, doesn’t it? Imagine two planets with identical year lengths on a flat model: they would always be able to see each other. Slow one slightly, and they would be slightly out of phase, so they would almost always be visible to each other, certainly for longer than a year.

  44. 44

    @spinn: here’s the data:

    Mercury 88.0 days
    Venus 224.7 days
    Earth 365.2 days
    Mars 687.0 days
    Jupiter 4332 days
    Saturn 10760 days
    Uranus 30700 days
    Neptune 60200 days
    Pluto 90600 days

    I was talking about the solar system, since I mentioned the Sun. In our system the orbits are all different by a factor 2 or more, not just slightly.
    With a factor two, they should hide behind the Sun at least TWICE a year. They don’t.

  45. 45

    djsadhu, I suggest you download something like celestia
    and look at how the orbits work.

  46. 46

    That is based on the very model I’m disputing here ;-)

  47. 47

    I would like permission for my son to use this video in his grade 3 science project. Is there anyway I could download it?
    Thank you

  48. 48

    @Ian: in my YouTube there is a download button, where you can choose the format you want to download the video in. Can you check this?
    Sure, go ahead and use it for his project. If you left my www address in the frame I would even be more thankful ;-)

  49. 49

    Yes, and it shows that the current model is consistent with the observed locations of the planets in the sky.

  50. 50

    I agree with the helical model, but what you have stated is still incomplete. The moon orbits the earth, the earth orbits the sun, the sun orbits the Milky Way Galaxy, (as shown). But the Milky Way Galaxy also orbits (I believe it’s called) the Hercules Super Galaxy, which orbits, … which orbits, … which orbits, … … Sorry, beyond that, things so huge just boggle my small mind.

  51. 51

    Isn’t each galaxy also a vortex?

  52. 52

    Thank you SO MUCH for creating this. I had never seen a visual for this perspective of movement in celestial bodies and it was a total delight to finally have something! =D

  53. 53

    Just astonishing! You broke my brain.

  54. 54

    Nice videos. Bad science. The solar system is heliocentric, with the plane of the planets’ orbits tilted about 60% to the plane of the Milky Way.

    That whole spinning ensemble is then moving around the Milky Way as a tilted unit. The orientation of the tilted plane does not change relative to the Milky Way (think gyroscope and conservation of angular momentum). That means that sometimes the planets are in “front” of the Sun as it revolves around the Milky Way – other times behind it. The motion of the planets and the Sun in relation to the system revolving around the Milky Way does trace a set of coiled spirals, but not the vortex depicted with the Sun allegedly dragging the planets along.

    The same concept can be applied to the Moon, Earth and the Sun. The Moon revolves around the Earth as the Earth in turn revolves around the Sun. If you were to plot the position of the Moon and Earth as the unit revolves around the Sun, the Moon would trace a spiraling path forward around the Earth’s orbit – sometimes in front of the Earth, sometimes behind. That spiral pattern does not then negate the fact that the Earth/Moon configuration is clearly one in which the Moon revolves around the Earth.

    Its just a matter of projective geometry as to the patterns created once you plot all of the various movements involved.

    But the video and the vortex model is not correct.

  55. 55

    Just saw your post above about the planets allegedly hiding behind the Sun “twice each year.” That is wrong.

    The correct concept is that the planets each at some point are opposite the Earth and occluded (or an occultation – that is the astronomy term, but weird) by the Sun. That occurs more than once a year in the case of Mercury and Venus, but less than once a year for the outer planets. For the inner planets, they manage to race completely around and set up another alignment before a year is complete due to their speedier orbits. For the outer planets, after one year when the Earth returns to its original location, the outer planets have all moved forward a small amount, and the Earth must move forward a little further to line up with the Sun in between.

  56. 56

    I’m sorry, but there is nothing here that comes close to disproving current accepted astronomical motion models. There are so many errors in the videos and explanations that any disproof never gets started. I think that vast majority of respondents, here, as well DJ would do well to take an actual astronomy course. These videos should absolutely not be used to educate anyone.

  57. 57

    I came across a good criticism of these ideas and explanation of the solar system’s observed behaviors here:

  58. 58

    I’ve read it, and here’s my response:

  59. 59

    Helical model??
    Oh. My. God. That’s so wrong. I’m an amateur astronomer and I can tell you are wrong just by looking at the sky every night. Aren’t you ashamed of scamming people, disseminating false information, just to sell books? Or do you really believe that you are right about that? ‘Cause if you do.. man.. I’m in the wrong bussinnes…

  60. 60

    Nope, I don’t sell anything. I research stuff, and if I find something that is of interest, I share it with people. If you don’t agree or see it differently, more power to you. You are welcome to post your own animations on YouTube.

  61. 61

    Clearly you are a highly talented artist and illustrator, however as an astronomer you are not so good. Here is a short popular article that debunks a good deal of your ideas.

  62. 62

    Yeah I read the article. Part factual error correction, part emotional hype. What does David Icke have to do with this? My response is on this site, called “I’m a Dj, not a scientist, damnit!”
    Thanks though ;-)

  63. 63

    So do your research better, and stop saying lies you’ve heard somewhere. If you are a DJ, stick with it. Don’t try to teach wrong things to people. Share whatever you want, but please, don’t make an effort to make people believe in the same things you do. This is wrong in so many ways…

  64. 64

    Thank you so much for your videos, I love learning about astronomy but yours seems to be the simplest to understand..Thank you!!!

  65. 65

    Dude, get a GRIP! “When the Earth is also traveling to the left (for half a year) it must go faster than the Sun. Then in the second half of the year, it travels in a “relative opposite direction” so it must go slower than the Sun.” This is nonsense! Does the Moon care about going faster or slower than the Earth in its path around the Sun? Not much; it Primary Force is the Earth’s gravity, and it ORBITS the Earth, just as our System’s Planets Orbit the Sun, with Little Regard for the Galaxy.

  66. 66

    I am not sure on the exact science, but I really enjoy the progression model! The fact that we are in fact moving through the Universe and not back to the same place over and over again is exciting. It reminds me of the Social Values model, the Spiral Dynamics Double Helix Model from the work of Clare Graves.

  67. 67

    I am a bit of a science buff, and this is awesome! I love the videos showing the sun traveling through space! It makes sense to me, but I am not a physicist by any means. I see a lot of comments trying to poke holes in your theory, just be thankful we live in a time when the worst others can do is post negative comments, not have you burned at the stake! Thanks!

  68. 68

    djsadhu, thank you for your awesome video; it helps me visualize how the universe works not like some people published papers full with extremely complicated formulas and charts that only few people understand. Many scientists, in my opinion, have even more ridiculous theories; but since they have PhD so everyone accepted without hurtful comments. Please keep up your good work, without people like you, we, the lay people, will be blinded and stupefied by fancy research papers.

  69. 69

    You may be interested in my essay: The Misconception of Cosmic Space As Appears In the Ideas of Modern Astronomy – and as contained in the understandably limited thinking embodied in the conceptions of the nature of parallax and redshift

  70. 70

    we did no use these calculations to send probes to planets and into outer space

  71. 71

    The universe doesn’t care how you feel about how it works. One could easily make a case for why having a predictable orbit is a better “feeling” way of thinking of the world.

  72. Daniel (born Istvan) Berenyi
    Sunday, 30. June 2013 1:20

    Your videos are amazing. AND TRUE. You are correct about Copernicus. However Newton and Descartes has discussed “vortices in space” or vortexes -by the moving mass of the planets “as tree leaves in some whirlpools of creeks” as Newton wrote. I became so excited about your VISUAL TALENT. Let me ask you: do you know what the “gyroscope effect” is? (A rotating object with the axis of rotation free of forces will keep the ABSOLUTE DIRECTION OF ROTATION IN SPACE.) You used the Galactic Orbit. Can you “see” that on the OPPOSITE SIDES of our Galactic Orbit our Earth MUST BE UPSIDE DOWN -relative to our Sun? That is the Global Gyroscope Effect. (GGE) Today “scientists” talk about Ice Ages. That is very wrong. Ice has never covered our planet fully at the same time. As Earth travels inside the Solar System the POLES are slowly wobbling and continuously moving about. Think Magnetic Reversals that are noted but unexplained. Right now the Magnetic North Pole is ACCELERATING. Few years ago it moved around 10 miles each year -wobbling North. Airlines and oceanic shipping must update their maps because of that. Now it moves around 50 miles each year. We are WITNESSING the end of the next magnetic reversal coming to an end. The Magnetic North will move into Siberia “soon.” There are tropical flora and fauna fossils under 2 miles of ICE on Antarctica! WHY? Because Antarctica was not always at the Southern Magnetic pole/rotational pole. The Equator was once crossing that continent. They say the dinosaurs were wiped out by an Ice Age 60 Million years ago. But they also say CROCODILES lived on our planet at least for 200 Million years. This cannot be true -since the eggs of the crocodiles is hatched by the Sun… Crocodiles would have died out too if ice would have covered Earth fully at once. I am almost sure you can “see” why was our planet “upside down” 150 times. This is what the BEST ESTIMATE says about how many times the Poles magnetically changed. The “problem” with that as follows: In one Galactic Orbit there were TWO Magnetic Reversals. 150 magnetic changes means 75 Galactic Orbits in Earth’s past. Multiply 75 times 200+ Million years! 15 Billion years -not 4.5 Billion years for Earth’s age! 15 Billion years would make our planet the same age as the Universe is believed to be. (around 16 Billion years estimated) I wonder: What do you think? Can you “see” the above? I believe YOU CAN. Best regards!
    Daniel a.k.a. Istvan

  73. 73

    [...] this is very cool to. Right or wrong, it’s thought provoking. Share this:TwitterFacebookGoogle +1Like this:Like Loading… Leave a [...]

  74. 74

    [...] traditional understanding of the planet dynamic is changing and directs us to a website to show us the vortex.  WOW!  And I’ll say it again WOW!  I would also like to hear what you have to say, what your [...]

  75. 75

    If this were true we’d never see the superior planets (the ones farther from the Sun than us: Mars, Jupiter, and so on) going on the far side of the Sun. Yet we do, all the time.

  76. 76

    [...] 銀河系を旅する太陽系の軌道【魂のルフラン】 動画投稿日:2013年09月19日 23:41:05太陽系が銀河を移動する軌道をシミュレーションした動画がすごすぎて魂のルフラン。—————太陽系は銀河系を時速約7万キロで移動していルフラン。太陽系は約2億2600万年で銀河系を1周していルフラン。こうして見ると太陽系もまるで巨大なひとつの生き物みたいですね。(ネタ元)再生数:261コメント数:41マイリス数:8宇宙太陽系軌道魂のルフラン宇宙ヤバイ科学 カテゴリー: 未分類 | 投稿日: 2013年9月21日 | 投稿者: [...]

  77. 77

    DJ Sadhu, I totally love the superb quality of your graphics, the music for your videos, your responses and the page “i am a dj, not a scientist”. i agree with your viewpoints on the page 100%. several things are peddled to us as science, when it is in fact a religion (requires huge faith, cannot be proven in the court of law due to insufficient evidence etc) after reading most of the idiotic criticism about your video, i also struggled to find the ‘right’ video. none of your critics could point to a correct video of the solar system model.

  78. 78

    Recently there was news of our galaxy moving thru space, perpendicular to the axis of spin. i am sure if YOU had posted it first, it would have attracted lot of mindless criticism. but if some astronomer or scientist or mathematician says it, most of us simply accept it as the ultimate truth. its like no one must question them. i don’t have to be a plumber or a doctor to know when they goofed up or are taking me for a ride. science is based on questioning. even science should be questioned. i love ancient aliens series and “100 reasons why evolution is stupid” for the same reason. they are considering an alternate explanation. could be right or wrong, but lot of it makes sense to me.

  79. 79

    When people, including Slate mag, criticized your vortex depiction, why do they not protest against vortex depiction in the above case, shown in most science museums ? Hypocrites !

    Checkout Piccardi’s helicoidal earth model of 1958 :

  80. 80

    Nice one, did not know these!

  81. 81

    [...] Yet I’m not so sure the viral gif does show the Sun leading the planets. Having read through the author’s website, I can’t find any evidence that he suggests this. In fact, some of other videos on his website [...]

  82. 82

    Love this guys work. Unbelievable!

  83. 83

    [...] الى أن الفيديو هو من إنتاج شخص يدعى “دج صادهو” DJ Sadhu، وتم تعريبه وربطه [...]

  84. 84

    [...] الى أن الفيديو هو من إنتاج شخص يدعى “دج صادهو” DJ Sadhu، وتم تعريبه وربطه [...]

  85. 85

    [...] Fonte DjSadhu [...]

  86. 86

    I understood this in 1999. I call it now “Hypothese Ain Al Rami” or, in english language “Ain Al Rami Hypothesis” or HAAR
    Later, as you, I discover that Wilhelm Reich and Giorgio Piccardi understood the non-heliocentrism BEFORE YOU AND ME.
    But, I refuse aether and I agree with Isaac Newton’s absolute space, absolute time,

    I could be ally with partisan of (wrong) aether of Huygens. But the real struggle is NEONEWTONIST. We must understand the universe with the basis of Newton’s theory.
    Go and read De Gravitatione (written at 23 by Isaac Newton) and the Scholies.
    I was writing a text about the biology, the living, contraction , dilatation, acceleration etc…. when Google gave me you link because of Piccardi
    You can read my last text here on my blog RevActu

  87. 87

    Everything is most likely right but its not gravity its electrical. Magnetic/Electrical the attraction and repelling is the only force strong enough to keep the massive universe in check. See The Electric Universe. The Thunderbolts guys got it going on.

  88. 88

    Thank you so much for your great animation and soundtrack.
    I was thinking about Earth’s, or better our Orbit directions so long.
    Well, I would assume: It started in the center of the Milkyway. We a now between the 6 and 7th Spiral Arm of it and passed many other Evolutions that mostly overcome Humans deadly game of Elite and War.
    Now only combine your animations and the vortex (spiral) direction and we see the endless way we should take orbiting through open space.

  89. 89

    [...] [...]

  90. 90

    8 years ago I on the site published the article “My Ideas of a Material World”. This article was written in 1968 and where screw movement of planets round the Sun is described and are dismissed http://xn--80aaacgejhn5euj.xn--p1ai/Mir4.html

  91. 91

    Dear cosmic bro is fantastic… thanks 4 your intuition and manifestation… we are musician and singers and we working witn natural tuning 432Hz in total harmony with nature and sacred geometry. Do U know? This is a link of our music:

    Is a present for U! :-)

  92. 92

    […] Information & research will be updated here:… […]

  93. 93

    […] Information & research will be updated here:… […]

  94. 94

    […] Information & research will be updated here:… […]

  95. 95

    […]  Reposted from: […]

  96. 96

    Very revolutionary and I can not wait what we will discover next in the new cycle.
    Also you could make some video about 13 Month
    28 days Calendar

  97. 97

    I am not a scientist. I was just trying to imagine the moment of planets and sun. When I start thinking about it, I was losing myself! Your video is amazing, you made me to understand the moment of sun and planets. I am grateful to you.

  98. 98

    Please clarify: if we were to “freeze-frame” the solar system, to look at it in one instant of time, would we see a flat plane or disk of planets surrounding the sun, or would we see a cone of planets trailing behind the sun?

    Thank you kindly.

  99. 99

    Please clarify: if we were to freeze the solar system in an instant minute, we would see a flat disk of planets about the sun? or a cone of planets behind/beneath the sun? If a cone, what (approximately) is the angle — a shallow, flattish cone or a steeper cone more like an ice-cream cone?

    Thank you.

  100. 100

    Try these thought experiments:

    1) With regard to the earth having to “slow down” and “catch up” if the solar system were moving parallel to its orbital plane:

    - A man is standing on the back of a flatbed truck that is traveling at a constant speed, spinning a yo-yo in a horizontal circle around him. Does this work?

    (Gravity is the yo-yo’s string, and the earth is the yo-yo.)

    2) With regard to the “vortex motion” of the planets:

    - A record player is playing on an elevator that is in motion at a constant speed. Is the record’s playing affected by the motion of the elevator?

    (The record is the rough orbital plane of the solar system, and the motion of the elevator represents the motion of our star.)

  101. 101

    Yes, as you sit watching it you are not really stationary. You are tracing out a very complicated path through the universe. So what? This point of view is of no interest to scientists, although it fascinates pig-ignorant laymen.

  102. 102

    And which of those two groups do you belong to?

  103. 103

    […] is here:… Information & research will be updated here:… UPDATE: NASA Download the instrumental sound track:… […]

  104. 104

    DJ Sadhu, I have put together a small bunch of stuff which you might want to have a look on :

  105. 105

    Thought provoking it is, nice page!

  106. 106

    This is a really pretty animation – but there are scientific inaccuracies in DJSadhu’s theory that are worth noting in this article in Universe Today:

    The article borrows from astrophysicist, Rhys Taylor to present facts behind the animation. I’m not adding my two-penneth worth to be an annoying person slamming the case presented by DJ Sadhu — I know very little about astronomy. But when you come out with a theory that is going to possibly go viral, it’s worth getting it as factually correct as possible. (From what I’ve read the term vortex is not correct but another science journalist thinks you mean instead the term helix. And our planets all travel together, we’re not being dragged by the Sun – sometimes they’re in front, sometimes behind.)

  107. 107

    Sarah, please have a look at this page :

    Slate’s sensational headline is very misleading, and panders to the ignorant masses. Slate is basically supporting what dj sadhu has shown, though with some modifications, like a squashed spring, instead of a regular one etc.

    The big question is why is the world seeing a depiction like this from a DJ and not the science heavy-weights ? Why were they silent on this aspect and showing elliptical orbits for decades, when that was clearly not the case ?

  108. 108


    Sometimes even scientific people and magazines can be guilty of bad reporting. This happened just a week ago. Imagine the ‘scientific’ reporting of things that happened long ago or things we didn’t witness.

  109. 109

    If you are interested, I published a peer-reviewed monograph that describes precisely the phenomena shown in your recent video ref; angularity and the vortical nature of planetary movement. It’s called “Y-Bias and Angularity: The Dynamics of Self-Organizing Criticality from the Zero Point to Infinity.” I will supply a copy if you’d like. D. Yurth

  110. 110

    I found your video inspiring … Have a look at my articles and tell me what you think : it could be interesting!

  111. 111

    The animation seems to show Sol traveling in a straight line. Wouldn’t the track be a vortex as well, perhaps around our galaxy?

  112. 112

    That’s in part 2

  113. 113

    and the sun is going ‘straight’ like in the thingy? relative to its planets only i assume.

    70,000 kph ….relative to what? lol.

    which would indicate on the macro all atoms and groups of combined atoms held by bonds as is all molecules are moving the same’s kind of amusing.

  114. 114

  115. 115

    Try merry go round, not marry go round….

    Love this whole thing!

  116. 116

    Ah cool, thanks for the correction… I’m Dutch.

  117. 117

    ok dj. i really didn’t require a laser speed gun number.the whole solar system can be dragged into traffic a point of reference that the whole shebang is relative.i enjoyed the video immensely.

  118. 118

    This is not a true representation. It assumes that the planets are resisting the sun’s gravitational pull, et being draw in its trajectory as it travels. Essentially, the solar system is like a disc that acts as a whole. The sun does not move independently though space, but is, with the solar system, stuck in the the disc of the Milky Way and rotating with the other stars in our galaxy. It takes roughly 230 million years to complete one galactic year. There is also movement within our local group, our galactic cluster and the supercluster. But the vortex effect that is being shown is not real in the sense that it is being described anymore than the outer parts of the spokes of a bicycle wheel travel in a vortex in relation to the hub.

  119. 119

    Hi Don Austen, please post a link which shows visually, the correct representation of planetary orbits and solar system. Magazines like Slate & Universe Today were quick to find faults with DJ Sadhu’s depiction but failed to show the correct depiction. I could not find it anywhere on the internet. I wonder why the helical orbits of planets seems to be the best kept secret.

  120. 120

    The both videos are different in the sense that the first one (solar system) has a single point to make (why only show the “stationary” diagram?) and the second Galaxy video is full of technical stuff that can be confirmed or debunked. I have made a “corrected version” of the first solar system video, and it looks ridiculously similar – leaving the question why we only get to see the flat stationary diagrams. Maybe I’ll upload it some day.

  121. 121

    This is wrong. Not based on any science. Junk!

  122. 122

    DJ Sadhu, this might inspire you. Announcement of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2014 :

    One of the 3 winners,Stefan Hell admits in the telephonic interview at 22nd min that he was on the verge of almost giving up 2 yrs earlier because the scientific community wasn’t very receptive to the idea of overcoming the diffraction barrier (of light, which he successfully did).

    In simple language, despite proving his theory scientifically and being able to repeat it, the
    elite scientific community refuted it and blindly believed in a phyics law discovered in 1873 !
    If he had not recieved a Nobel Prize, he would have been labelled as a pseudo-scientist and forgotten. Also, at 22:24 the panel expert says most people who are up against a physical limit do not survive professionally. Very significant words indeed.

    And we thought scientists are open-minded people, in pursuit of the truth ! If the ‘scientific’ community is so close-minded and skeptical, then you can imagine the condition of the non-scientific community, who I suspect are your biggest critics.

    This same post of mine was later moderated out of a facebook ‘science-is-great’ type of page that posted an article on ‘How Did We Become a Society Suspicious of Science’. I suspect they could not digest the ‘elite scientific club’ being shown in negative light. Is it possible that most of the scientific breakthroughs happen due to rebel scientists and not the ones who say ‘yes boss’ for a smooth career progression ?

    I am glad your videos elicited a criticism from Slate & Universe today, both indirectly confirming the helical orbits of planets. This point needs to be mentioned in your future corrected video. Most people would have missed this point, jumped to conclusions based on their misleading headlines, without actually reading it fully.

  123. 123

    On a different note, here are some articles I recently edited / finished. You might find some points relevant to what you are up against.

    Thought Provoking (helical orbits & evolution) –

    Why ‘millions of years’ for evolution ? –

    Questioning ‘survival of the fittest’ –

  124. 124

    وَالشَّمْسُ تَجْرِي لِمُسْتَقَرٍّ لَهَا sun runs… :

  125. 125

    Thank you very much.

  126. 126

    This is really quite brilliant. But if this premise is correct, which I’m immensely unqualified to dispute, then the possibility of time travel drops to infinitely impossible. Not only would you have to have a precise point in time to travel to; but your point of origin, and your target destination, physically speaking, could be thousands, if not millions, of miles apart. You’d have to be able to target the precise location, within the cosmos, relative to your current position, which could be nearly impossible to do.

    Not only would the whole “time is linear” thing have to be overcome, but the traveler would have to figure out a way to transport his/her matter not just across time, but the immense difference in physical distance as well.

    Sorry if this seems like rambling. But after watching the video, and trying to understand some of the science, my crazy brain jumped right to time travel.


  127. 127

    Ps. the track in the video is awesome. I went on a quest to find it; thanks for posting it.

  128. 128

    Thank you for doing this. Since 1990 when I first published my poster titled “Motion”, which The National Teachers association has been selling since then, I have been trying to make the astronomers and astrophysics aware of the earth’s helical motion. The poster depicts the motion of all three, the sun, earth, and moon, for three periods, a 29 day, a one month, and a one year. I use the poster in my video “Alan’s Discovery” on youtube . The discovery I have made is that the earth is not tipped 23.5 degrees. The direct overhead of the sun goes above and below the equator because of two angles. The new angle is what I call The Zale Angle. It occurs because the earth moves ahead of the sun and behind the sun, as do all of the other planets. When the earth is ahead of the sun the direct overhead goes below the equator and above the equator when the earth goes behind the sun. A good measurement for The Zale Angle is 2.22 degrees therefore the earth is only tipped 21.28 degrees. On page 2 of my website are some papers that might help to understand my perspective and my conclusions. I do have Phd’s that agree with what I have concluded. Including my paper on .

  129. 129

    […] “Fact of the matter is that if the helical model is correct and our Solar System is a traveling vortex, it will change how we feel about our journey. For me personally the heliocentric model feels like a useless merry-go-round: after one year we are back to square one. The helical model feels much more like progress, growth, a journey through space in which we never ever come back to our starting point. We are NOT in a big merry-go-round. A circle is a spiral with the progress taken out. … We are on a journey.”   – ( […]

  130. 130

    […] This is a non-conventional view of our solar system that is different from the standard 'flat' diagrams. ​Information & research will be updated here:… […]

  131. 131

    Over the years I’ve learned that the helical perspective is quite difficult for persons who have been thinking in a geocentric perspective all their lives. But it has many benefits. It enabled me to see that the earth is not tipped 23.5 degrees because the earth’s motion going ahead and behind the sun also moves the direct-overhead above and below the equator. That amount is 2.22 degrees so the tip is only 21.28 degrees. The two angles then lead to my being able to explain why nutation and precession occur. For an explanation of this understanding go to and on page 2 and read “Why The Earth Wobbles” paper. Most things in space are moving in a helical pattern, including photons. I hope this helps those interested in learning about the helical perspective. Email me your postal mail address at and I will send you a copy of my Motion Poster.

  132. 132

    This isn’t anything new or remarkable. All you are doing is changing the frame of reference. You can choose any frame of reference to view the motion. If you are using something fixed to the sun, orbits are ellipses. If you are fixed to the galaxy, you’ll see the motion of the sun relative to the galaxy – but that doesn’t change anything, just your observation. This isn’t revolutionary; it is basic choice of reference frame.

    There is no “fixed” point in space – all observations must be made from a frame of reference we construct (mathematically). How you choose that reference frame determines how your measurements work out. The simplest observations of the solar system are made with the heliocentric model because it simplifies the math. If you are doing orbital calculations around the earth, it is convenient to use a reference frame of the earth. It isn’t more or less correct – it is just easier.

    You could try to sound just as revolutionary if you presented the mathematical calculations that NASA make for spaceships and satellites – and then say “wow – the earth actually goes around the sun so a geo-centric orbit is wrong – you should use a heliocentric model”. Yes, it is true that NASA could calculate orbits around the earth using a helix model as the earth goes around the sun, but it would be a lot harder and have no greater utility or accuracy; that’s why they calculate earth orbits relative to the earth. You can use any model you like; it just gets more complicated as you get further away from what you are calculating.

    And I suggest you don’t use “vortex” – a vortex is a rotation in a fluid – there is no fluid in space, unless you are bring back the theory of “ether”. Use the word “helix” to be more precise; it’s a path.

  133. 133

    The shift in frame of reference was kind of the point.

  134. 134

    (1) I have never come across anybody describing 2 birds as revolving around each, with talons locked. It is always described as spiralling down. Intelligent observations always take into account the motion along Z axis too. If you change the frame of reference, the birds are indeed revolving around each other in a circular orbit. But nobody reports it like that, do they ?

    (2) Just forget frame of reference for a minute. If planets left a trail of smoke behind them like planes in airshows, you will see helical paths, not elliptical or circular. Why not describe what is really happening, instead of taking creative liberty with frames of reference ?

    (3) If everything boils down to frames of reference, then why are we teaching that planets go around the sun ? Why not teach that everything goes around the earth ? Earth is the strongest point of reference and that is exactly what an earthling would observe with their eyes also ! Yet we are taught that this ancient idea is wrong.

    (4) Though David’s point is correct, he seems to mistakenly believe that helical orbits is common knowledge. It is not. If that were the case, DJ Sadhu’s videos would not attract the attention they are getting. Concept of helical orbits was never even mentioned in any of the science books i grew up with, in school and college, including todays books. Internet information is also suspiciously silent on this aspect.

    So, let us not simply dismiss it as a frame of reference or a simplified description. Fact is, the wrong concept is being taught. Earth does not return to same point after 365 days, as the elliptical orbit idea stupidly suggests. Thats the whole point of DJ Sadhu’s videos.

  135. 135

    It would be great if you could make your animation even more accurate by using the information from this website:

  136. 136

    […] // 一般的には教科書などで教わってきたこともあり、地球などの惑星が、太陽を中心にその周りを回っている平面のモデルのイメージを持っています。 しかし今回ご紹介する映像は、太陽自体も高速で移動していることを表した「螺旋形の太陽系モデル」の3Dアニメーションになります。この結論が正しければ、地球などの惑星が太陽の周りを公転する太陽系のモデルにを覆すことになります。 この映像では、太陽が時速7万キロで移動する、彗星のような星であると結論付けます。宇宙全体で見ると、太陽も銀河系の中心を軸に公転しているということ。 こういった既存の考え方を覆す、視野の広い視点はユニークで面白いです。 さらなる詳細を詳しく知りたい方は、こちらの解説記事をご覧下さい(英語)。 → The Helical Model – vortex solar system animation […]

  137. 137

    […] // 教科書などで教わってきたこともあり、地球などの惑星が、太陽を中心にその周りを回っている平面のモデルのイメージが一般的。 しかし今回ご紹介する映像は、太陽自体も高速で移動していることを表した「螺旋形の太陽系モデル」の3Dアニメーションになります。この結論が正しければ、地球などの惑星が太陽の周りを公転する太陽系のモデルを覆すことになります。 この映像では、太陽が時速7万キロで移動する、彗星のような星であると結論付けます。宇宙全体で見ると、太陽も銀河系の中心を軸に公転している惑星の一部であるということですね。 こういった既存の考え方を覆す、視野の広い視点はユニークで面白いです。 さらなる詳細を詳しく知りたい方は、こちらの解説記事をご覧下さい(英語)。 → The Helical Model – vortex solar system animation […]

  138. 138

    I came here to point out that the “flat” model of the solar system is not wrong, it just chooses the sun as its frame of reference. I see now that many others have said similar things. I notice that many commenters (like Rob) don’t seem to know what they’re talking about but there are some who do so I won’t repeat them. My only question now is, you mention that the solar system is moving at 70000 kph but with respect to what? Frame of reference is everything when dealing with motion, particular in space. Despite what Vinny said, one cannot simply “forget” the frame of reference. Motion cannot be discussed without it.

  139. 139

    Oh, and I should mention that the video is beautiful and the beat has a really nice groove. I love to see things from new perspectives.

  140. 140

    Sure, change in frame of reference was kind of the whole point!
    The 70000km/h motion is relative to the galaxy.

  141. 141

    Yeah, I understood the point. And it was well executed! I only mention it because the video says at the beginning that the flat model is “boring” and “wrong.”

  142. 142

    Sure. The terms “boring” and “wrong” are my emotional expression of how much the old model lacks. It just gives the wrong impression. The Frisbee Diagrams kind of take away the adventure of it all. I was amazed by the number of people who did not even know that our solar system is not stationary.

  143. 143

    Ah, I see. The perspective you shared in your video was definitely more interesting. Even knowing that the solar system isn’t stationary it was still cool to see it illustrated like that. Thanks for creating it!

  144. 144

    You all might enjoy learning more about what the helical perspective can teach you. If so go to
    Also the earth does not wobble like atop. For more information on that go to and read the paper on Why the earth wobbles. You might find some of the other papers quite interesting also. The National Science Teachers Association has been selling my “MOTION’ poster for 20 years.

  145. 145

    If you use the above to access my youtube you have to click additionally . To go directly use
    Sorry about this mistake.

  146. 146

    @Alan Word docs? Thanks but no thanks. The video was interesting though. It seems to me that people keep wanting to say this or that model is wrong or the Earth moves at one speed and not another but all of that is relative. One isn’t right and the other wrong. One is relative to one thing and another to another. You said in the video that the Earth, at different times, moves faster and then slower than the sun. But that’s only relative to the galaxy. Relative to the sun, the speed of the Earth does not change. So it really depends on how we define it; how large we draw our system. If we take the entirety of Nature as our system then the Earth, and indeed all matter, is actually moving at the speed of light. The largest component vector of this velocity (by far) is in 4th dimension–time. This is why time slows down the faster one moves through the three physical dimensions. Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity covers all of this:

    The same can be said about the Earth’s tilt. You say that the Earth is not tilted at 23.4 degrees and you’re right–relative to itself. But the Earth’s rotational axis is indeed tilted at 23.4 degrees relative to its orbital plane. It’s tilted at a different angle relative to the plane of the galaxy and a still different angle relative to some other galaxy.

    So my point is that you’re not wrong but neither are they. It’s all a matter of perspective. :)

  147. 147

    Just found this and thought it was interesting:

    Apparently Bhat got most of his ideas wrong.

  148. 148

    From the sun’s perspective if you construct a plane through the center of the sun and perpendicular to the direction the sun is moving, I call it the reference plane, the earth passes thorough that plane twice a year, April 4th and Oct. 6th. It is that motion above and below the reference plane that contributes 2.22degrees to the movement of the direct-overheads above and below the earth’s equator. This is how we now know that earth’s rotating axis is only tipped 21.28degrees.

  149. 149

    So you’re saying that they’ve made a mistake in calculating the angle of the earth’s axis to its orbital plane? I suppose that’s possible. I understand the concepts involved with these things but I have to trust others to actually do the math. I fail to see what the direction of the sun’s motion relative to the galaxy has to do with the angle of the earth’s axis relative to its orbital plane though. The sun does not move relative to the earth.

  150. 150

    I do not use the earth’s orbiting plane in any of my analysis because to me the earth does not orbit in a plane it orbits in a helical pattern. The sun orbits the center of a galaxy and I use its motion to establish a frame of reference. As I was told by a Prof at MIT the sun pulls the planets through the galaxy. So when it gets behind the sun pulls it in the direction the sun is moving and as I said before on Oct.6th it starts to go ahead of the sun, at this point in its cycle the earth is at its maximum velocity in the direction the sun is traveling,and now it is starting to be slowed down by the sun. These velocities of the earth of which I am speaking are all in the direction the is traveling, not its orbiting velocity. Jan. 5th is when it is furthest ahead and the earth’s velocity is the same as the sun’s. It’s slowest velocity is on April 4th and it gets back to the sun’s velocity on July 5th. I know this is quite difficult for persons who have spent years thinking from a geocentric perspective only.

  151. 151

    Respectfully, this is not correct. What we’re talking about is a heliocentric perspective, not a geocentric one, and it’s the only perspective that’s relevant when discussing the earth’s axial tilt. From a geocentric perspective the earth has no tilt, no wobble, no velocity–it does not move. From a heliocentric perspective the earth is tilted at some angle (they say 23.4 degrees), moves with a constant angular velocity and orbits the sun in a 2D plane. From a galaxy-centric perspective the sun orbits the galactic core in a sine-wave pattern (Not a helix as the sun only moves up and down relative to the plane of the galaxy. It does not move closer to and then farther away from the core just as the earth does not move closer to and farther away from the sun and for the same reason.) The professor at MIT that told you the sun pulls the planets through the through the galaxy is correct and the planets do trace a helical pattern through the galaxy as they go but this is exactly because they are orbiting the sun in 2D planes as the sun moves through the galaxy. The motion of the sun through the galaxy has no bearing on the motion of the earth around the sun.

    So when discussing the earth’s axial tilt we do not have to consider the sun’s motion. If what you say were true then your analysis would still be incorrect because if the sun’s motion through the galaxy is relevant then the galaxy’s motion through the universe would also be relevant and you have not taken that into account.

Submit comment

Current ye@r *