Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:03:34 — 72.8MB)
We have all been raised with the heliocentric model of our solar system as fact. We all assume that it represents the way our solar system works. But what if you knew that there are several awkward observations that do not fit this model? What if you found out that there is empirical evidence that falsifies this almost universally accepted model? Would you be prepared to reconsider your lifelong belief in this claim?
If it is the truth you seek your answer to that question should be, yes. Because any good detective must always be open to new evidence that contradicts his current theory. And the TYCHOS model discussed in this week’s Podcast interview with researchers Simon Shack and Patrik Holmqvist, does precisely this. It contradicts and therefore falsifies the current heliocentric model.
Today what passes as ‘science’ is more like a religion – scientism. The astute observer will notice a pattern in which awkward evidence that contradicts and therefore falsifies a current theory is simply ignored for political expediency. Assumptions are clung to in the face of evidence that disproves them. This is so widespread it can sadly be regarded as normal in mainstream “science” – the kind trumpeted by political leaders and informs their policies. For example, the evidence that contradicts the theory of infectious disease is ignored while freedom is destroyed in the name of an alleged pandemic. Evidence of other genuine causes of illness is routinely ignored. Evidence that shows beyond a reasonable doubt that events such as 9/11 and 7/7 could not have happened as claimed by the official narrative is also ignored. The facts of reality are also contradicted by the claims of a “climate emergency”. I could go on.
But if you consider yourself a truth seeker you will appreciate the importance of the genuine scientific method, the real deal, the proper process. If you are a thinker you will understand that first the facts of reality must be observed. Then, and only then, can a theory or hypothesis be offered that fits the observed data. Once a theory appears to fit the empirical evidence attempts must be made to falsify it. It must be examined critically with genuine and honest attempts to pick it apart and find fault with it. If it cannot be falsified it becomes increasingly likely to be true.
It must also be noted that it is one thing to falsify the current model of the solar system and to present another one that accommodates the observational data, but an entirely different thing to be able to explain how the alternative model works. That would rightly constitute the next phase of enquiry in the genuine scientific method. This TYCHOS model is one that accommodates all of the evidence and contradicts none of it. It does not claim to have all the answers. It does not claim to have all the explanations for what we see, it does claim to present a model that accommodates everything we see. The inability to explain how a new model works does not invalidate the falsification of a competing model.
The Tychos model in a nutshell
The Tychos model is a binary system with the Sun and Mars being the primary pair of heavenly bodies. Significantly the Sun revolves around the earth, while all the other planets revolve around the Sun. Meanwhile, the Earth rotates about its axis and revolves around its own smaller orbit with an outward tilt of 23 degrees. This slow orbit (with a speed of 1.6 Kph) takes nearly 26,000 years to complete.
Note that there are about a dozen phenomena that astronomers have grappled with for centuries that cannot be explained by the heliocentric model. In episode 123 of the Podcast, Simon and Patrik only have time to touch on 3 of them. However, the Tychos model accommodates all of these phenomena and accounts for all of the observational data. As rational truth-seekers and detectives, we must therefore recognise it as requiring serious consideration.
To do this requires the investigator (or curious mind) to suspend reasoning based on assumed premises that are derived from the Newtonian model. This means that any reasoning that has evolved on the back of the presumption of the old model must be suspended. For example, theories about the gravitational pull of the sun and it supposedly comprising 99.9% of the mass of the solar system, must be suspended solely for the purpose of grasping the new model. The genuine scientific method would then proceed with enquiry to arrive at new or modified theories that explain all the observed phenomena while presenting no contradictions.
We shall be continuing this conversation over the coming weeks and months since there is far more to reveal than can possibly fit into one podcast. Subscribe to the Lawful Rebel Youtube channel or to the Lawful Rebel Newsletter in the sidebar (to the right) to keep up-to-date with this discussion.
To find out more
To look further into this fascinating and ground-breaking work you can visit Simon Shack’s website tychos.info. Here you can find links to pick up a copy of his book “The TYCHOS – our geoaxial binary system” and also to access the TYCHOSIUM computer model that simulates the TYCHOS model in 3D.
Simon also created the website Septemberclues.info where you can find a huge amount of research revealing the impossibility of the 9/11 event being what is it and happening as it has been claimed in the mainstream narrative.
You can also hear more from Patrik Holmqvist on his own podcast called Radio Cui Bono.
Please feel free to join in this fascinating conversation that is genuinely at the edge of human discovery about our solar system. Join the band of free-thinking sovereign intellectuals who are prepared to think rationally and follow the evidence.
Nigel Howitt, Treehouse Farm
December 9th, 2020
Simon Shack is almost correct. John Roach is more correct. Both posted in 2018.
Can you give us more information John?
I posted on vixra in 2018. Semantic Scholar selected it b4 I removed it from vixra. The second posting remains. I posted in vixra again in 2019 and 2020. I am posting in General Science Journal. I am predicting the Retrograde Episode of the Sun at the solar solstices. I propose that the moon is NOT a natural satellite and that it demonstrates RETROGRADE motion at both the solar and lunar eclipse. Both models propose a revolution of the rotating centralized Earth. Tychos is 1 rev per 26000 years. I propose 4 revs per year while the Sun revs at 2 a year. The observation is the solar year.
Let me endorse the book UNSTOPPABLE GLOBAL WARMING by Dr. S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery 2007 and endorse James Carter:s Gravity. Also, the small comets of Dr. Louis A. Frank deliver the Extra – Terrestial Water Supply demanded by photosynthesis and is the leading candidate for the causal agency for the Dansgaard – Oeschger Events.
I cant discern any particular point here John, in either of the two previous comments???
Ask Simon Shack about Father Fernand Crombette 1880 – 1970 and the precession of the equinox.
It might be because your MENTAL DEFENSE MECHANISMS are fully engaged, Nigel You are emotionally invested into the TYCHOS model. I have slain beautiful theories with many ugly facts .- not just the TYCHOS. I will leave now and l will not return. Nigel, my email address is there when you come to your senses.
This is hilarious John! You havent made one coherent point that has anything to do with the TYCHOS model. Come on. Make a point. Say something relevant to the TYCHOS model. Comment on its contents. I dare you..
Nigel, the TYCHOS is a beautiful theory. It is a variant of the theory of Nilakantha Somayaji and Christen Sorenson as well as Paul Wittich, Helisaeus Roeslin, and Nicolaus Reimers. The TYCHOS plagiarizes from Fr. Fernand Crombette, also. Simon Shack is almost correct. John Roach is more correct. Both posted in 2018.
Ah at last a point! The Tychos is a beautiful theory. Well its a model actually. One that fits with all the observational data. The theory of how this model works remains to be developed..
It seems to me that John wants to steer the discussion away from reasoning about what is geometrically and physically possible regarding the Solar system towards flat earthery, religion and mysticism. The same old same old in other words.
Thank you for that observation Patrik. I agree. Its interesting when you ask some people to make a point and they dont seem able to. It can be a clue that they are only there to muddy the waters of debate.
Indeed, but I always give the benefit of the doubt since so few shows interest in discussing this anyway. The strawmen used are basically two: Flat Earth, and for those able to discern that – Classic geocentrism, meaning that the entire universe is revolving around Earth in 24 hours, which is of course bizarre in light of what we have observed since the invention of the telescope in the 17th century. Robert A. Sungenis is the most well-known pusher of this strawman.
Heraclides of Pontus 387 B.C. – 310 B.C. proposed both rotation and revolution of the spherical Earth. Aryabhata of India 500 A.D. proposed the rotation and might have plagiarized Heraclides and Hipparchus. This Hindu model of Astronomy / Cosmography reached the Medieval Islamic astronomers by 900 A.D. The Jewish astronomers in Moorish Spain agreed with the ROTATING SPHERICAL EARTH MODEL Koher 3:10a in the 14th century.
To endlessly mention other people who have proposed their ideas, some of which may have similarities with the TYCHOS model above, is not to make any constructive point at all. Why dont you at least try to address the FACT that the TYCHOS model accommodates all of the observational data. Comment on the Model. Please dont just offer a history lesson.
Excuse my error. ZOHAR, not KOHER. All of the astronomers agreed with the rotating round Earth except Christian Europe long before Nilakantha Somayaji of India was born. Simon Shack is almost correct. John Roach is more correct. Both posted in 2018.
But what about the TYCHOS model. Have you anything to say about that?
Nigel, the TYCHOS is a beautiful theory. It is a variant of the theory of Nilakantha Somayaji and Christen Sorenson as well as Paul Wittich, Helisaeus Roeslin, and Nicolaus Reimers. The TYCHOS plagiarizes from Fr. Fernand Crombette, also. Simon Shack is almost correct. John Roach is more correct. Both posted in 2018.
Nigel, l am guessing that the TYCHOS uses the Newtonian Celestial Mechanics for the Moon. Newton proposed prograde motion whereas l propose retrograde motion in my model of the ROTATING CENTRALIZED SPHERICAL EARTH. I am guessing that the TYCHOS ignores the strange behavior of the sun on the horizon from solar solstice to solar solstice. The TYCHOS claims to address the variance between Sundial Time and Mechanical Time. Also, the TYCHOS claims to address the solar analemma. My model uses one single causal agency to address all of the above. My email address is on my essays at vixra.com and General Science Journal. Ciao.
The TYCHOS doesn’t USE anything or assume anything. Its a model.
Nigel, Thomas Huxley had a word of advice about a beautiful theory. He said that the TRAGEDY OF SCIENCE is the slaying of a beautiful theory by an ugly fact. Karl Popper had a word of advice about a beautiful theory. He said that any theory can be proven. The test of a theory is the abllity to explain ALL of the astronomical observations. Nilakantha Somayaji proposed a beautiful theory in 1500 A.D.. Does it explain ALL ? Caveat emptor.
The TYCHOS is not a theory. Its a model. One that fits with and contradicts none of the observable data.
Patrik Holmqvist, you attacked me with vicious lies. Take this challenge to Simon Shack – DEBATE ON LAWFUL REBEL ! ! !
No one has attacked anyone here. We await rational constructive points being made. We wait in vain it seems.
The genuine scientific method would proceed with enquiry to arrive at new or modified theories that explain all the observed phenomena while presenting no contradictions. Simon, l will be purchasing your book because l am anticipating that you will accept my challenge to debate. First observed phenomena: the Moon eclipses the Sun from the east to the west while the diurnal rotation of the Earth yields the apparent-only movement of the Sun and Moon across the sky from the east to the west. Will you agree with me that the Moon is demonstrating RETROGRADE MOTION ? ! ?
Hello John,
You wrote: “First observed phenomena: the Moon eclipses the Sun from the east to the west…”
Not so, John: the Moon eclipses the Sun from west to east.
As it is, I witnessed this personally on March 20, 2015. You can also verify this for yourself by perusing this link: https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/solar/2015-march-20
So my answer to your question is: no, the Moon does not demonstrate retrograde motion.
regards
Simon
Hello, Simon The videos reveal the Moon eclipsing the Sun from the right to the left.
Simon, the second observed phenomenon deals with the Moon, also. The current accepted theory is an eccentric/elliptical orbit with the assumptions of Apogee, Perigee, and varying orbital velocity. Does the TYCHOS agree or disagree.?
John, there are no elliptical orbits or varying orbital velocities in the TYCHOS.
However, the TYCHOS naturally accepts the variable distances (apogee/ perigee) between our system’s celestial bodies – since we can clearly observe the Moon (and all other bodies) periodically increasing and decreasing in size. This, because their orbits are eccentric (i.e. “off.center”) to the bodies they revolve around.
Here’s an appendix paper I wrote in December 2018 (i.e. subsequently to the release of my Tychos book in March 2018) which should clarify most issues pertaining to the Moon :
“THE TYCHOS CURES NEWTON’S HEADACHE (the Moon)”
http://septclues.com/TYCHOS%20Appendix%20folder/App07_THE%20TYCHOS%20CURES%20NEWTON'S%20HEADACHE%20-%20THE%20MOON.pdf
Hello, Simon Hipparchus of ancient Greece is the first author with this explanation and l agree . Let me take this moment to retract a position. The Moon IS a natural
satellite.
Patrik Holmqvist, on your post of JAN 06, 2021 at 5;58 p.m., you wrote . . . which is of course bizarre in light of what we have observed since the invention of the telescope in the 17th century. Simon Shack and l hear this refrain from Heliocentrists. Tell me, O Wise One, about Galileo and his famous telescope. It is 12:23 p.m. JAN 12th about 200 miles west of the Mississippi River.
Patrik Holmqvist, on your post of JAN 06, 2021 at 5;58 p.m., you wrote . . . which is of course bizarre in light of what we have observed since the invention of the telescope in the 17th century. Simon Shack and l hear this refrain from Heliocentrists. Tell me, O Wise One, about Galileo and his famous telescope. It is 12:23 p.m. JAN 12th about 200 miles west of the Mississippi River.
My challenge for a debate has been answered. It has been ignored. The TYCHOS is simply a variant of the model from Nilakantha Somayaji of India of 1500 A.D. The TYCHOS has a curious Jesuit addition and the blatant plagiarism of Fr. Crombette. It is a wise choice to refuse to debate me. Ciao.
A necessary prerequisite to debate with someone is that they are rational and have points to make that are a serious contribution to the inquiry.
Hello, Simon Hipparchus of ancient Greece is the first author with this explanation and l agree . Let me take this moment to retract a position. The Moon IS a natural
satellite.
Hello Simon, l might be forced to concede the Solar Eclipse. I will review the appendix. Patrik has a post on his site about the rapid declination of the Sun during the Spring and Autumn equinox and l will review it too. Thank you for responding.
Hello, Simon The videos reveal the Moon eclipsing the Sun from the right to the left.
Hello, Simon, Nigel, Patrik, and a welcome to Anne Nicholson of CFAE and Maxeem Konrardy of Team TYCHOS. While l await the arrival of the book, l will present my next three astronomical observations. The Sun accelerates from the solstice position on the horizons to the equinox position. From the equinox position, the Sun decelerates toward the next solstice position. The fourth observation is the variance of the Sundial length of day. Lastly, the Sidereal Year is 366 nights and the Solar Year is 365 1/4 days. In a four-year span, that is 1464 nights but only 1461 days. The model that can solve these puzzles was called the Egyptian model during the debates in Renaissance Europe.
John, today I removed the paywall from my Tychos website. Thus, you can now freely access all 36 chapters of my Tychos book online: https://www.tychos.info/
With regards to your above questions (Sun’s “accelerations & decelerations” / sidereal versus solar year / the reason for our addition of the “leap day” every 4 years, etc.) you should find plenty of relevant material in the chapters 23, 24 , 25 and 26 of my book.
regards
Simon
Hello, Simon, Team Tychos, and invited guests. Re: Why The Stars Move In Trochoidal Loops, l canmot agree b/c the annual movement of the stars is The Sidereal Year. The Sidereal Year reveals three groups of stars; northern circumpolar, southern circumpolar, and the ecliptic. In my model, the whole cosmos rotate to yield The Sidereal Year. The TYCHOS model ignores half of the stars in the night sky.
I almost forgot. The TYCHOS is predicting a universal STELLAR PARALLAX. but only for half of the stars of the night sky. And the scale of the TYCHOS STELLAR PARALLAX is enormous in proportion to the alleged PVP movement of the Earth.
Hello, Simon, Nigel, Patrik, Anne, and invited guests, Nov 02, 2018 posting on the Great Inequality of Jupiter and Saturn. Conjunctions occur at 20-year intervals, not 60-year intervals. These conjunctions proceed appr. 225 degrees around the celestial sphere. Regards, John
Another point to consider. The hypothetical PVP orbit moves the Earth 0.014 degree per year. In the 60-yr span, that is 0.084 degree. Not enough to create the illusion of perspective.
0.84 degree in 60 years, not 0.084. Not enough. The Pythagorean revolution of the Earth solves the Great Inequality but the Heliocentrists ignore this facet of the feature, This movement yields the eccentric orbit of the Moon too.
Hello Simon, Patrik, Nigel, Maxeem, Team Tychos, Anne, and invited guests. Patrik said-It seems that John wants to steer the discussion away from reasoning about what is geometrically and physically possible . . .Jan 6 12;03 a.m I said.-. . .the strange behavior of the sun on the horizon from solar solstice to solar soltice Jan 9 6;53 p.m. Then I said-The Sun accelerates from the solstice position on the horizons to the equinox position. From the equinox position, the Sun decelerates toward the next solstice position . . . Jan 17 5;50 a.m. Lulu sent a message that my order has shipped and I will search to see if the TYCHOS explains this observation. Regarding the Moon, I concede my careless mistake. That opening gambit opened this debate and elicited the initial entry by Simon Shack. Yet another question for Team Tychos – Is the retrograde motion of the planet Venus GEOMETRICALLY AND PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE by the TYCHOS ? ? ?
John,
I know full well that the Jupiter-Saturn conjunctions occur at 20-year intervals. The 60-year cycle / interval is just the one that brings the two bodies back to roughly the same constellation (star background). http://septclues.com/TYCHOS/Great_Inequ_60yearConjunctions.jpg Also.you don’t seem to have understood how the Tychos explains the (wholly illusory) accelerations / decelerations of Jupiter and Saturn. Please spend some more time assessing this graphic of mine: http://septclues.com/TYCHOS/Great_Inequality_Concept_01.jpg
Greetings Simon, Patrik, Maxeem, Team Tychos, Anne, and invited guests. Congratulations Nigel. At the risk of eating humble pie later, Lawful Rebel is the platform for exciting news. Nilakantha Somayaji revised the 1000-year model of Aryabhata by adding the Tusi Couple. The Tusi Couple is the idea of Nasir al Din al Tusi 1201 A.D. – 1274 A.D. Regarding the Great Inequality of Jupiter and Saturn, the Cosmos has challenged us with another mystery. I am gathering data to address it properly.
Hello, Simon. Thank you for replying and for the reference to your sketch. Until proven otherwise, I am assuming that Jupiter always overtakes and occludes Saturn. I am curious if your sketch alleges to the contrary.
Hello Nigel, Team TYCHOS, and invited guests. I found a subreddit which is the work of Patrik. Team TYCHOS is busy. My Lulu order has not arrived yet. The Reddit posts challenged my acceptance of Hipparchus view that an eccentric centering yields a different perception on the velocity of an object that is orbiting in a perfect circle. I foresee that I might write a book in the future about the TYCHOS. Regards John
Greetings to all The book arrived. Chapter 26 provides the TYCHOS model for the Solar Analemma and the Equation of Time. The perfection of the mechanical clock revealed that Sundial Time rarely agreed with Clock Time. It was discovered that two celestial rhythms produced Sundial Time. These two rhythms were synchronized at the 2;1 ratio. A revised model of Heraclides of Pontus 387 B.C. – 310 B.C. provides these two rhythms which are summed to yield the Equation of Time. The TYCHOS model clearly is absent these celestial motions at the 2:1 ratio.
Greeting to all. The Aristarchus-Pythagorean Revolution of the Earth AROUND the Sun is treated as an ACCEPTED SCIENTIFIC FACT in order for the TYCHOS to propose the fallacy of stellar parallax. The Tychos pistol never clears leather. To those who are curious, the Heraclides – Pythagorean Revolution is BEFORE the Sun. The planetary retrograde is a type of parallax.
.
Greetings to all. In the Foreward, there is a point which I agree. There WAS the Old Copernican Theory but now there IS the New Copernican Theory. I would have written more. In fact, I already have!
Greetings to all. I wrote .- Lastly, the Sidereal Year is 366 nights and the Solar Year is 365 1/4 days. JAN 17@5:50 AM Page 106, the TYCHOS – Why-oh-why is the sidereal day shorter by 4 min. than the solar day whereas the sidereal year is 20.41 min. longer than the solar year ? Does any non-Tychonian have a clue after multiplying 4 minutes by 365 ?
Greetings to all. Tycho Brahe never observed a retrograde of the planet Venus. Noone had. As a result, the planet Venus was assigned an orbit around the Sun. Heraclides made the assignment of Mercury and Venus in ancient Athens, Greece. Aristarchus of Samos maintained the heliocentric orbits of Mercury and Venus. The observation of retrogrades of Venus demands a revision of ALL MODELS up to and including the abandonment of the Copernican model. The TYCHOS does NOT PROVIDE THE CAUSAL AGENGY FOR THE RETROGRADE OF VENUS ! ! ! Also. the sketch on page 36 assumes that the star Regulus is visible in daylight conditions. The Copernican sketches make the same assumption. On JAN 28 @ 3:07 AM, I wrote – Yet another question for Team Tychos – Is the retrograde motion of the planet Venus GEOMETRICALLY AND PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE by the Tychos ? ? ? The answer is provided by the cartoon character Dogbert in the cartoon strip Dilbert by Scott Adams. Yes if you do not ask questions.
John Roach wrote: “The TYCHOS does NOT PROVIDE THE CAUSAL AGENGY FOR THE RETROGRADE OF VENUS ! ! !”
Really?
Well, here it is: https://www.tychos.info/citation/venus/
Greetings to all. On page 23, The Synchronized 2:1 Binary Dance of Sun and Mars. What a wonderful coincidence ! ! ! I proposed a synchronized 2:1 concentric revolutions of Earth and Sun. This would be a 2:1:2 Three – Body System. On page 85, Earth s Polaris-Vega-Polaris Orbit, or the PVP Orbit. The TYCHOS uses two different radial centers. In my revised Heraclidean model, Venus is geocentriic not heliocentric.. Then, all concentric paths are IGF ORBITS ! ! ! Zoroasterism assumed an INVISIBLE GREAT FIRE in the cosmos. It models as a barycenter but without mass or universal gravitation.
The problem seems to be that you put very much weight on who says what and what it is called, as opposed to what has been said.
Your main interest seems to be in making a name for yourself and making that name outshine everyone else. You see Tychos and its author(s) as your biggest competitors, so trying to move some of their “shine” to this and that historical figure and now even random religions is supposed to make you yourself seem more original and impressive in comparison. Simon did nothing new, but look at me, me, me.
Everybody else has shown absolutely zero interest in this pissing contest.
If your model disagrees with his then simply state where and how. Or simply mention where it is available and accessible. Do not pretend to be some cowboy teacher father eccentric professor figure who is here to show everyone else their place. Such behavior reflects badly on everything else you have done. Nobody here is your student. Also, accidental and superficial similarities are not an argument for anything.
Mr Roach. You clearly have nothing positive to offer on this fascinating issue. Please refrain from posting anything else. You reveal yourself in the nonsense you write. Please go away.
Phew! Good riddance. 🙂