The Sun's not a "Comet", and the Solar System's not a "Vortex"
About | Information | History | Online | Facts | Discovery
See also: *DjSadhu: BUSTED! "Vortex" Conspiracy Theorist's Deceptions Exposed* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74BDyD9X9xs DjSadhu *really* doesn't want people to see what he originally said about his work! See this link: https://plus.google.com/1183625088454... . This video shows what NASA's IBEX results really tell us about the "Vortex" Solar System, and how DjSahu has misrepresented those results. Links in order of appearance: David Hestenes, "SECRETS OF GENIUS" Review of Imagery in Scientific Thought by Arthur I. Miller. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1986. http://modeling.asu.edu/R&E/SecretsGe... "Sun is like a comet" quote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jHsq... at 0:56 Screenshot of YouTube video of Vortex Solar System http://www.djsadhu.com/the-helical-mo... Phil Plait critique of vortex model: No, Our Solar System is NOT a "Vortex" http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astron... "NASA | IBEX Provides First View Of the Solar System's Tail" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhAzM... DjSadju comments on his own videos, indicating that IBEX results support his "vortex" claims https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4V-o... NASA article, "NASA's IBEX Provides First View Of the Solar System's Tail" http://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-s-ib... Sun's motion communicated to us by astronomers for years (From Kurdistan Planetarium, 2008) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkWyM... DJSadhu's knowing misrepresentation of sources "WAY OFF: The Pioneer Anomaly in the Vortex Solar System", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0LjD... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Also of possible interest: Solar Conjunctions Refute DjSadhu's "Vortex" Solar System https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUE40... Vortex Solar System Refuted by Jupiter Solar Conjunction https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LIlh...
Comments
-
I have blocked EyeAgree for ignoring the following warning. A screen shot is available at https://www.dropbox.com/s/6nw7xjvzzgkyvpv/EyeAgree.bmp?dl=0 to document our exchanges.
The subject of this video is DjSadhu'd misrepresentation of the results of THIS study. That is a matter of documentary evidence. I've provided mine. If you want to debate that subject, then provide your supporting documentary evidence. If you refuse to provide that evidence, or make more sweeping accusations, or if you attempt again to change the subject, then I will block you without further warning. Your comments will be deleted, with screenshots made available via Dropbox to document our exchange. -
NASA main mission since 2009 is to promote Islam as per directions of the POTUS.
That about sums up what ever NASA has to say about anything. -
I have blocked Bob LePecheur and deleted his comments because he ignored the following warning:
"DjSadhu's dishonesty is the subject of this video, and the debate about that issue is a matter of documentary evidence. I've provided mine. If you want to debate that issue, then provide your supporting documentary evidence. If you refuse to provide that evidence, or make more sweeping accusations, or if you attempt again to change the subject by introducing conspiracy theories, then I will block you without further warning. Your comments will be deleted, with screenshots made available via dropbox to document our exchange."
The dropbox link to the screenshot documenting our exchange is https://www.dropbox.com/s/tufkeq5l1uydt6o/Bob%20LePecheur.bmp?dl=0.
As I had also told Mr. LePecheur,
"Whether I believe what NASA's astronomers say is immaterial to the demonstrable fact that DjSadhu misrepresented what NASA said about the Sun being comet-like. Just as he blatantly lied about what's said in the sources he cites about the Pioneer Anomaly" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0LjD9dew74). -
I have watched both models so far and lacking any particular evidence in support, I can only say that the only model that makes visual sense is the standard heliocentric view. It is best explained by the example of a frisbee disc with each planetary/moon orbit represented by concentric rings on a flat plane. This is the only one that would fit within the plane of the ecliptic which has been observed since the earliest records of man thousands of years ago. Even the Sumerian texts in cuneiform describe these observations. The helical model does not allow the planets to follow the plane of the ecliptic and would, from our POV, give the various planets ALL kinds of crazy angular motions that are not present. The closest example I can think of is represented by a piece of playground equipment that I have seen. Essentially it is a heavy steel shallow bowl or lid rotating on a stationary shaft at an angle. To an observer, the occupant appears to ONLY be rotating in a circle on an angle, BUT to the rider the experience is FAR more dramatic. Because the rider's head is at the outer edge, traveling in a circle ON AN ANGLE, the circular motion is ALSO accompanied by a definite rise AND fall relative to the distance from the ground as experienced by the rider. If nothing else, it would definitely be a easy way to determine viability for an aviation career.
-
I want more information about these topics actually
-
Honest questions here, cuz I see your refutation, but I am not sure what mental image to put in place of the visual model in the vortex videos.
If we discard words such as "vortex" and "wake" to describe the motion of the sun and its satellites through the galaxy, and if we discard the blazing line of light behind the sun (which I took for artistic license anyway), does the actual motion model still hold up?
Or to put it another way, what would an accurate model look like of the motion paths of the sun and its satellites as they orbit the galactic center? Is that motion perpendicular to the planetary orbital plane?
The reason I ask is that the visuals made sense to me. The planets go around the sun and the sun moves through the galaxy, so those orbital paths would end up looking like spirals in a three-dimensional dynamic motion model. Now I don't see why the term "vortex" would apply in anything other than a visual sense. Certainly there is nothing about the sun's path that is causing a swirling field of force vectors. But a whole bunch of spiraling motion paths certainly look "vortexy" in a visual sense. And admitting that my gravitational theory is not that developed, would it be true that the sun, in pulling other bodies to it as it moves through space, is causing a "wake"?
Your thoughts are appreciated, cuz I thought the model was awesome, but I prefer honest truth. -
Seems like you're angry. :/
2m 31sLenght
Rating