The Helical Model – vortex solar system animation
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.
[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:
Consequences
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 marry-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).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotation_around_a_fixed_axis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex
http://www.halfpasthuman.com/models.html
http://www.halfpasthuman.com/noodles.html
http://www.halfpasthuman.com/nailstochew.html
http://www.gravitycontrol.org/forum/index.php?topic=471.msg4473#msg4473
Tuesday, 18. December 2012 16:04
Thank you for that explanation. Really great work.
Tuesday, 18. December 2012 22:48
Wow. Just Wow. Love the tune with our traveling Sun!
Wednesday, 19. December 2012 0:15
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!
Joe
Wednesday, 19. December 2012 11:48
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.
Saturday, 22. December 2012 16:24
umm, what’s up with Jupiter after saturn?
Saturday, 22. December 2012 16:45
Yeah I know, someone pointed that out already. Must have been so distracted with other details that I switched orbits without noticing.
Saturday, 22. December 2012 17:33
That’s amazing
Really good work !
Saturday, 22. December 2012 19:05
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
Saturday, 22. December 2012 20:48
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.
Sunday, 23. December 2012 1:10
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.
Sunday, 23. December 2012 2:42
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!!
Sunday, 23. December 2012 2:53
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.
Sunday, 23. December 2012 16:01
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
… please make a video simulating this, its extraordinary. Thank You
Monday, 24. December 2012 3:55
I agree with someguy, posting #8, vortex within a vortex within a vortex, etc.
Monday, 24. December 2012 6:32
What did you use to create that animation? It is hypnotic and beautiful, and I can’t stop watching it.
Monday, 24. December 2012 18:54
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.”
Monday, 24. December 2012 20:14
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.
etc…
I think you need notions of galilean relativity, then Einstein relativity !
Monday, 24. December 2012 20:16
But video is very beautiful … !
Monday, 24. December 2012 21:21
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’!
Wednesday, 26. December 2012 20:45
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
Thursday, 27. December 2012 0:15
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!
Friday, 28. December 2012 21:16
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).
Saturday, 29. December 2012 8:37
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.
Saturday, 29. December 2012 18:25
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.
Monday, 7. January 2013 4:03
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…
Tuesday, 8. January 2013 1:46
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.
Tuesday, 8. January 2013 7:54
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.
Sunday, 13. January 2013 17:43
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.
Sunday, 13. January 2013 18:58
This animation is not to scale, obviously.
Thursday, 17. January 2013 7:56
One glaring error that one friend pointer out is that the solar flares are far too static.
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…
Tuesday, 22. January 2013 4:34
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.”
Saturday, 26. January 2013 23:21
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?
Sunday, 27. January 2013 17:45
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.
Sunday, 27. January 2013 21:35
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?
Lyle,
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.)
Friday, 15. February 2013 10:55
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.
Friday, 15. February 2013 17:10
Please watch part 2, it might have your answer
Sunday, 17. February 2013 16:18
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
Sunday, 17. February 2013 23:21
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!
DjSadhu
Wednesday, 27. February 2013 7:30
do you know paul?
http://www.paulgeiger.org/
Friday, 1. March 2013 3:07
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
http://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/360blog/
Friday, 1. March 2013 8:57
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
Friday, 1. March 2013 17:30
“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.
Friday, 1. March 2013 19:21
@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.
Friday, 1. March 2013 21:21
djsadhu, I suggest you download something like celestia
and look at how the orbits work.
http://www.shatters.net/celestia/
Friday, 1. March 2013 21:26
That is based on the very model I’m disputing here
Friday, 1. March 2013 21:51
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
Friday, 1. March 2013 22:42
@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
Friday, 1. March 2013 22:46
Yes, and it shows that the current model is consistent with the observed locations of the planets in the sky.
Saturday, 2. March 2013 23:34
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.
Sunday, 3. March 2013 0:28
Isn’t each galaxy also a vortex?
Monday, 4. March 2013 1:25
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
Monday, 4. March 2013 5:56
Just astonishing! You broke my brain.
Monday, 4. March 2013 22:15
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.
Monday, 4. March 2013 22:28
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.
Tuesday, 5. March 2013 0:40
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.
Tuesday, 5. March 2013 8:49
I came across a good criticism of these ideas and explanation of the solar system’s observed behaviors here:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/03/04/vortex_motion_viral_video_showing_sun_s_motion_through_galaxy_is_wrong.html
Tuesday, 5. March 2013 11:42
I’ve read it, and here’s my response: http://www.djsadhu.com/research/im-a-dj-not-a-scientist-damnit/
Wednesday, 6. March 2013 16:01
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…
Wednesday, 6. March 2013 16:07
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.
Wednesday, 6. March 2013 16:22
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.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/03/04/vortex_motion_viral_video_showing_sun_s_motion_through_galaxy_is_wrong.html
Wednesday, 6. March 2013 16:31
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
Wednesday, 6. March 2013 16:52
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…
Wednesday, 6. March 2013 20:35
Thank you so much for your videos, I love learning about astronomy but yours seems to be the simplest to understand..Thank you!!!
Sunday, 10. March 2013 23:56
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.
Monday, 11. March 2013 19:08
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.
Wednesday, 20. March 2013 18:40
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!
Tuesday, 26. March 2013 18:29
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.
Saturday, 6. April 2013 14:40
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
http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/space.html
Thursday, 16. May 2013 15:59
we did no use these calculations to send probes to planets and into outer space
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/03/04/vortex_motion_viral_video_showing_sun_s_motion_through_galaxy_is_wrong.html