The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: AlexandrKushnirtshuk on February 04, 2021, 09:37:10 AM
-
Formation of continents.
Take a close look at the animation of two huge, diametrically opposed formations on the surface of the earth’s core. They cannot but be directly related to the formation of continents. They are both biased to the same direction (east). Continents are displaced from them to the east. Compare with the official model for the formation of continents. These huge structures are contrary to the official model of the formation of continents.
(https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c1.gif.a4379fb389d2526cbe39f14db9c2076b.gif) (https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c2.gif.901e38c6eed7ce90da264dcbe138c323.gif)
Link to the source article about Earth Blobs: https://eos.org/features/the-unsolved-mystery-of-the-earth-blobs
The Cordillera – the Andes, the Iranian highlands – the Himalayas – are also two huge formations of a similar shape, also diametrically opposed to each other. Both are displaced to the east of two huge formations of the Earth’s core (HFEC). Cordillera – The Andes are displaced further from their HFEC and are more split. Iranian Highlands – The Himalayas are closer to their HFEC, and are strongly displaced to the north.
(https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c3.jpg.815c48167840ab328d6fddca1e093614.jpg)
New model of the Universe.
From the above, we can conclude that before the moment of the so-called “Big Bang” in the Universe there was a certain material sphere with a diameter of about 20 thousand km, the substance in which was in the stage of the limit of density (the state of singularity). Let’s call this sphere ProtoEarth.
(https://i.postimg.cc/WzFWpH9S/c4.jpg)
As a result of certain processes at the Proto-Earth’s poles two PreContinents were gradually formed – PreAmerica (North America, South America and Antarctica) and PreEurasia (Africa, Eurasia and Australia), in the centers of which the Sun and the Moon were gradually formed. Parallel to this, water was formed in a wide strip of the proto-Earth’s equator as a result of certain processes. At a certain moment, a critical mass difference accumulated at the poles, the equilibrium of the system was violated, the separation of the Sun and the Moon began, the proto-Earth’s axis of rotation shifted from conditional zero degrees to the current 23.5 degrees, and the formation of modern continents.
(https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c5.jpg.77be636896a402decdf86ce73f6a4c07.jpg) (https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c6.gif.66f184e08bdebe8296f8b9abd9deb192.gif) (https://i.postimg.cc/52hFDkvb/3a700ec5d45b64e552fdc9afd1107354-full.jpg)
(a huge trail of clearly cosmic origin between South America and Antarctica, animation of the trajectory of a solar eclipse shadow and a schematic drawing)
A few more arguments in favor of this model of the Universe:
- The coincidence of the apparent diameters of the Sun and the Moon in the sky.
- The coincidence of the axial periods of rotation of the Sun and the Moon (27 days).
- Only Mercury and Venus have no satellites.
- Only Mercury and Venus have incommensurably large periods of rotation around their axes 58 and 243 days, respectively (Earth, Mars – 1 day; Jupiter, Saturn – 16, 17 hours; Uranus, Neptune – 9, 10 hours).
- In each lower conjunction (that is, during the closest approach to the Earth) Venus is facing the Earth by the same side.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Y0hVG9S6/ume2.jpg)
(schematic comparison of the official and new model of the Universe; ProtoEarth, Moon, Sun, Venus, Mercury, Mars and common center of masses between Earth and Sun)
Thus, it is very similar to the fact that the Universe looks approximately like on the Tycho Brahe's model of the Universe, only with the correction for the rotation of the Earth and the Sun around the common center of mass. The Oort cloud is the border of the Universe, where all the “stars” and “galaxies” formed from the proto-Earth mantle, with diameters not exceeding several tens of kilometers, are located. The diameter of the universe, presumably, does not exceed one light minute.
(https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c9.png.c34709089a61f123717becff28b74e99.png) (https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/OortCloud.jpg.434d954dd9d8df774e5dc1420c0f9a90.jpg)
In all this, a correct understanding of the rotation of the Earth and the Sun around a common center of mass is very important. The ratio of diameters is approximately the same as in the animation (the Earth is larger, the Sun is smaller).
(https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c11.gif.bd3fb41fea3601564900036f2d853e2a.gif)
Addition.
The rotation of Venus around the Sun is very similar to the rotation of the Moon around the Earth, except for the direction of rotation. That is, Venus is not always facing the Sun with one side, but in each lower conjunction (that is, during the closest approach to the Earth) Venus is facing the Earth by the same side. As you can see from the quote above, in the official model of the solar system there is no explanation for such an orbital phenomenon of Venus, because it can in no way be a coincidence or the result of the tidal interaction of the Earth and Venus (at least with the official parameters of the solar system).
The paradox here most likely lies in the misunderstanding of the reference point (coordinate system). When calculating the orbital rotation period of the planet (in this case, Venus), the immobility of the Sun and the rotation of the Earth around it are taken into account, and therefore the paradox of the mismatch of the orbital and axial rotation periods of Venus (225 and 243 days) and the fact that “in each lower conjunction (that is, during the closest approach to the Earth) Venus faces the Earth with the same side.”
The answer to this paradox, most likely, is that it is not the Earth that revolves around the Sun, but the Earth and the Sun revolve around a common center of mass, and then the officially paradoxical coincidence of the orbital and axial periods of Venus’s rotation becomes quite natural. But since the convergence of the Earth and Venus occurs approximately once every one and a half years, the orbital period of Venus is 584 days (the synodic period of Venus), and the axial period relative to the Earth is 146 days (that is, exactly four times less). This is difficult for a spatial representation (especially considering the massive brainwashing with the official model of the solar system), but when the Earth and the Sun rotate around a common center of mass, this is quite possible, does not contradict visual observations of the movement of the planets and the Sun in the sky, and most importantly, this explains the fact that in each lower conjunction (that is, during the closest approach to the Earth) Venus is facing the Earth by the same side.
(https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c12.gif.828c05d09ce8ac4c6feaee0e7a523bc1.gif) (https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c11.gif.bd3fb41fea3601564900036f2d853e2a.gif)
Two animations for better spatial presentation. On the second – the rotation of the Earth and the Sun around the common center of mass (the Earth is larger, the Sun is smaller).
-
My assumptions according probable distortions in official cosmic calculations.
All celestial, orbital, trigonometrical, mathematical calculations may have (and looks like it is so) one specific feature. They all relatively correct. Look attentively what I mean. Such basic parameters as: distance, size and velocity - they are highly interconnected and directly interdependent. Only one coefficient in calculations directly affects the change in these three parameters, in one direction or another. The mathematical concept may be correct, but the scale of the official model of the Universe is greatly oversized, that is, space velocities, distances and sizes are greatly oversized. But this does not affect the proportions of the orbits in any way. Therefore, even though the scale is greatly oversized, spacecrafts can fly (and they do) in the space of the Solar System. Proportions are correct, scale is wrong, calculations are relatively correct (just because of one incorrect coefficient* in calculations, which directly affects to the calculated cosmic: distances, sizes and velocities).
* that incorrect coefficient may be the gravitational constant.
"The gravitational constant is a physical constant that is difficult to measure with high accuracy." (Wikipedia)
-
What could be the plans for the colonization of Mars, if there is almost no atmosphere to protect from meteorites and the entire surface is strewn with craters from them? Why is there no meteorite hit in any photograph "from Mars"? Because “photographs from Mars” are taken on Earth. The diameter of Mars is about 14 km.
NASA BUSTED CURIOSITY ROVER NOT ON MARS BUT GREENLAND
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEU50wGHOa0
NASA - Mars VS Devon Island
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K315nZhst5o
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESpC_y-XQAAbgoG.jpg)
1) If the diameter of Mars is 6 779 km, then its colonization is meaningless due to the too thin atmosphere, that is, the lack of protection from meteorites.
2) But the diameter of Mars is about 14 km, and its colonization is impossible in principle.
Look closely at the scale of the relief, the number of objects on the surface. Four volcanoes and a huge half-planet canyon with a diameter of 6,779 km.? The four mountains on Mars are the remnants of the outer shell. A huge canyon (Mariner Valley) - a crack in the inner shell. The entire relief is clearly visible in one small photo. The diameter of Mars is about 14 km. Venus ~ 24 km. Mercury ~ 10 km.
(https://i.postimg.cc/FsSW-2wkH/8c67509f4747640554ff243c16a7dc09.png)
Scale comparison of satellite photos of Earth and Mars shows that Mars' scale is greatly oversized.
(https://i.postimg.cc/wM0GGzRf/mars-scale.jpg)
-
Strange correlation between Betelgeuse brightness and solar activity.
Betelgeuse is estimated to be 642.5 light years away. Why is dynamics of brightness of Betelgeuse so closely aligned with the dynamics of solar activity?
(https://www.climate.gov/sites/default/files/sunspot_belgium_1900-2017_620.gif)
Diagram source link: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun-be-cause-global-warming
(https://skyandtelescope.org/wp-content/uploads/Betelguese-AAVSO-1979-to-2019-630x284.jpg)
Diagram source link: https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/fainting-betelgeuse/
Moreover, in addition to the correlation with 10-13 years solar cycles on the Betelgeuse brightness graph, there are clear 1 year cycles of brightness fluctuations also visible. Based on this fact, I assume that Betelgeuse, like all other "stars" and "galaxies", are located in the Oort Cloud and reflect sunlight.
Annual cyclicity of Betelgeuse brightness fluctuations.
The annual cyclical fluctuations in the brightness of Betelgeuse can be explained by the suggestion that in December the Sun is farther from it, and in June - is closer to it (considering the rotation of the Earth and the Sun as in the animation below, the Earth is larger). Betelgeuse is located in the constellation Orion. Sun in Orion (Orion behind Sun) is in June.
(https://i.postimg.cc/bJ60XwLt/022.png) (https://i.postimg.cc/xTjryxNp/btgbrig.jpg) (https://i.postimg.cc/1X3SW-s3X/c11.gif)
-
Great stuff Alexander. Heres a few thoughts.
Betelgeuse - the correlation you found between the suns light flares and betelgeuses flares is great. I also believe betelgeuse is within our steller neighborhood of planets and nebulas.
I think its funny Nasa is on the outer edges of the world conducting star trek experiments, but I don't think there shooting films for public use (id need more evidense), but again, the photos Greenland versus Mars are the same so Id need an explanation.
I also agree that the distance and size of objects in space are greatly exaggerated. I think the Milky Way is a few times larger then earth and it creates dwarf galaxies like earth (which in real size is the same size as we can measure today using cars and aircraft etc..)
I don't really agree that the earth and sun circle another object. I think the earth is at the center of our "galaxy" so to speak and it's surrounded by the oort cloud which produces planets. Only large galaxy's like the milky way make galaxies.
The half-lifes of sound and light particles you mentioned was cool.
So you think the earth is round btw? And spinning? Your ideas fall in the middle of mainstream flat earth beliefs and round earth beliefs, the same as me.
-
I don't really agree that the earth and sun circle another object. I think the earth is at the center of our "galaxy" so to speak and it's surrounded by the oort cloud which produces planets. Only large galaxy's like the milky way make galaxies.
1) Researchers Have Identified 100 Mysteriously Disappeared Stars in The Night Sky
https://www.sciencealert.com/a-look-through-past-star-catalogues-finds-scores-of-stars-that-have-mysteriously-vanished
2) ‘Missing’ supermassive black hole in distant galaxy leaves scientists perplexed
https://theprint.in/scientifix/missing-supermassive-black-hole-in-distant-galaxy-leaves-scientists-perplexed/570365/
Oort Cloud is the border of the Universe, were all "stars" and "galaxies" are located.
Earth is the only planet. Sun is the only star in the Universe.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Cxs7JZms/stgaleng.jpg)
All objects of the Universe were formed from ProtoEarth (its core and mantle) - spherical volume of matter with a diameter of about 20 thousand kilometers compressed to the density limit. This is one of the transformation stages of the Universe during its infinite (in time) existence.
(https://i.postimg.cc/52hFDkvb/3a700ec5d45b64e552fdc9afd1107354-full.jpg)
-
The essence of the Flat Earth Theory is that there is nothing to do in space and there is nothing to colonize there. World space agencies are wasting huge resources of money, effort and time. My model of the Universe proves this reasonably, consistently, factually, logically, with all the necessary evidence - that is, completely scientifically.
-
If the diameter of the Sun is 1.4 million km, then the object that flew into the Sun on October 1, 2011 should be no less than the Moon, but astronomers could not help but notice a new object of this size in the Solar System. My rough estimations: Moon diameter ~ 500-700 km.; Sun diameter ~ 2500-3000 km.
(https://i.postimg.cc/x15Q2KK4/ezgif-3-28fbda2c936f.gif) (https://i.postimg.cc/RVc9Prq9/ezgif-3-dce07cae7a86.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/BvjVVDND/escomp.jpg)
Link to SOHO Lasco C2 and C3 image archive: https://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/data/Theater/
This is Moon's trail on the Earth's surface which shows approximate size of the Moon.
(https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c5.jpg.77be636896a402decdf86ce73f6a4c07.jpg) (https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2020_12/c6.gif.66f184e08bdebe8296f8b9abd9deb192.gif) (https://i.postimg.cc/52hFDkvb/3a700ec5d45b64e552fdc9afd1107354-full.jpg)
(a huge trail of clearly cosmic origin between South America and Antarctica, animation of the trajectory of a solar eclipse shadow and a schematic drawing)
-
Why in the SDO satellite photo, the Moon has a clear (not defocused) outline, given the fact that the camera is clearly focused on the Sun (the surface structure is clearly visible), and the “fact” that the Sun is officially 400 times farther than the Moon? This is also because the Moon has no atmosphere, but with a distance difference of 400 times and a clear focus on the Sun's surface, the Moon's contour cannot be as clear as in that SDO photo.
My rough estimations: distance to the Moon is about 100 000 km.; distance to the Sun is about 300 000 km.
So I think that the Sun is actually about 3 times farther and bigger than the Moon.
(https://i.postimg.cc/D0ZMGM09/Pic3-jpg-fa8717998d86f710504a3527134b4463.jpg)
Link to SDO images archive: https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/
-
I also think the moon and sun are similar in size. In fact, I think the moon was once a sun too. Binary (or two) star systems are very common.
https://physicsworld.com/a/planet-forming-stream-found-in-binary-star-system/
This may lend weight to your arguments of two suns, moons, and common orbits.
-
Traces of the Sun and Moon on the Earth's surface.
(https://i.postimg.cc/4Nb044fW/sunmoon.jpg)
-
Anomalous region of the Sun. Moreover, this happens there when it is spring on Earth (in the northern hemisphere), or so (as now it is almost spring). That is, this process on the surface of the Sun is influenced by the seasonal position of the Earth (Earth's axis + magnetic field) relative to the Sun, which is impossible with the official sizes of the Earth and the Sun.
Link to SDO photo and animation archive:
https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/aiahmi/
(https://i.postimg.cc/j5nNLxGW/ezgif-4-f5ac30273e3d.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/65rrrQTn/sun-orb.jpg)
Link to video with an overview of this anomaly.
Today, Found The Big Sphere Suck The Flames of Our Sun Like Akhenaten With Aten, Egyptian Sun God https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R80-ogrUFpw
-
Official diameter of Mercury is 4.8 thousand km, Moon - 3.5 thousand km.
Look at large craters with long, light streaks.
Stripes from one of such craters on Mercury cover (encircle) it completely. The Moon also has several such craters with long light stripes, but they are much smaller (shorter) relative to the Moon's surface.
Moon's diameter is about 500-700 km. The diameter of Mercury is about 10 km.
(https://i.postimg.cc/HW3ps4J0/moonmercury2.jpg)
-
Official diameter of Mercury is 4.8 thousand km, Moon - 3.5 thousand km.
Look at large craters with long, light streaks.
Stripes from one of such craters on Mercury cover (encircle) it completely. The Moon also has several such craters with long light stripes, but they are much smaller (shorter) relative to the Moon's surface.
Moon's diameter is about 500-700 km. The diameter of Mercury is about 10 km.
(https://i.postimg.cc/HW3ps4J0/moonmercury2.jpg)
What do the craters and stripes have to do with the size of Mercury & the Moon?
-
The animation is large (3.5 MB). Optimized it as far as possible.
(https://i.postimg.cc/qMPSfcG2/ezgif-7-4353fd535c64.gif)
Link to STEREO archive: https://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/images
The stationary object slightly to the right of the center is the Earth (according to NASA). In addition to the Earth, only two dwarf planets Haumea and Makemake are now in that field of view, but they are small and far away - they should not be visible. A black stripe moving from left to right comes from an object that moves above the label STEREO Ahead HI2. In short. Either the object is moving slower than the background stars, and is, roughly speaking, Nibiru, or, more likely, the central stars move faster than the upper and lower ones. This means that “stars” and “galaxies” are located in the spherical Oort Cloud, which is the border of the Universe.
(https://i.postimg.cc/wBHrM6Zv/plt.jpg)
-
Descent of Perseverance to the surface of Mars. Height (allegedly) 9.5 km. The bright spot on the surface is the reflection of the Sun. Can there be such a reflection on the surface of a sphere with a diameter of 6.7 thousand km, or the diameter of Mars is about 15-20 km?
(https://i.ibb.co/2j8fm0y/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4czjS9h4Fpg
-
According to NASA, these are the same video. On the right - in real time, on the left - 30% of real time. In the left video the light source is at 9 o'clock. In the right video, the light source is at 3-5 hours. This can be seen on the ropes (slings), the canopy of the parachute and the light source “in the sky”. This is the official video!
(https://i.ibb.co/rd51kLc/ezgif-3-d21dbd9173a0.gif)
(animation slowed down by 50%)
Animation source title (from YouTube), link is in the previous message of this thread:
Perseverance Rover’s Descent and Touchdown on Mars (Official NASA Video)
P.S.: Footage from 2 different cameras. My carelessness.
-
Huge mystery blob found under the moon's far side.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/massive-blob-discovered-moon-surface
Title of the recent russian article and quote from it:
The largest crater of the moon helped scientists figure out how our satellite was formed
Scientists decided to clarify the process of the formation of the Moon by studying the South Pole-Aitken Basin (SPA). This is the largest, deepest and oldest crater of the Moon, which was formed about 4.3 billion years ago, at the very beginning of the existence of a natural satellite of our planet.
(https://i.ibb.co/HXJMBTG/ems.jpg)
-
Interesting videos, my only question was about perseverences descent speed of a few hundred meters per second, that's crazy, and with a parachute? Maybe there atmosphere is less thick or something.
-
How much of Mars is visible in this animation, judging by the size of the solar reflection on its surface?
Descent of Perseverance to the surface of Mars. Height (allegedly) 9.5 km. The bright spot on the surface is the reflection of the Sun. Can there be such a reflection on the surface of a sphere with a diameter of 6.7 thousand km, or the diameter of Mars is about 15-20 km?
(https://i.ibb.co/2j8fm0y/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif)
(https://i.ibb.co/smM5S6S/ess.jpg)
Animation source title (from YouTube):
Perseverance Rover’s Descent and Touchdown on Mars (Official NASA Video)
-
Don't tell anybody but I also think Mars is probably smaller then we think.
-
Don't tell anybody but I also think Mars is probably smaller then we think.
Why? It's not just that a gazillion people have gone about various methods to measure planets. The question is, what compels you to think it's smaller than what measurements claim it to be? Is there some internal reasoning you have for why you think it's a different size than reported?
-
Well yes, it's more of a reasoning method since I could not measure it. Alexandr is doing a good job providing more scientific measuring observations.
-
Well yes, it's more of a reasoning method since I could not measure it. Alexandr is doing a good job providing more scientific measuring observations.
What scientific measurements might those be? Something about measuring a bright spot that is the reflection of the sun? Perhaps sunlight is glinting off of shiny parts of the surface. There are "bright spots" all over Mars. You can't use one to measure anything and trying to do so doesn't fall into any bucket that would be considered a "good job" at providing a "scientific measurement"?
Is it for some reason you just want Mars to be smaller than reported? What's the advantage of hoping it's smaller?
-
Don't tell anybody but I also think Mars is probably smaller then we think.
Mars has a diameter of 6,779 km. It is 227.9 million km away from Sun. It has a mass of 6.39 × 10^23 kg, an overall density of 3.93 g/cm³, an orbital period of 687 days, and a surface pressure of 0.636 (0.4–0.87) kPa.
What are the measurements of your Mars?
-
What scientific measurements might those be? Something about measuring a bright spot that is the reflection of the sun? Perhaps sunlight is glinting off of shiny parts of the surface. There are "bright spots" all over Mars.
There nothing glinting on the Mars' surface accorting to official surface photos of that area. The more - there are no round shaped "bright spots" on the surface of that area of Mars.
1) https://www.google.com.ua/maps/space/mars/@18.4982121,77.6169751,26455m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=ru
(https://i.ibb.co/pxYCbzZ/gm.jpg)
2) https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/mission/where-is-the-rover/
(https://i.ibb.co/472KMrq/pl.jpg)
-
Once again, there is something very strange about the lighting.
1) Reflection of the “Sun” on the surface of “Mars” as if from a searchlight (too small bright spot). The height of the device at the time of this reflection hitting the frame is 9.5 km.
2) This reflection should be exactly under the Sun, that is, perpendicular to the surface of Mars, that is, point exactly at noon, but judging by the smooth movement of the shadow (on the separating heat shield) in the northeast direction (diagonally at 13:30) there is some kind of crap with lighting. The movement of the shadow over the heat shield indicates the position of the Sun in the southwest direction (19:30 hours) relative to the vehicle. The reflection of the "Sun" on the surface of "Mars" indicates the position of the Sun in an easterly direction (15:00 hours) relative to the vehicle.
Perseverance Rover’s Descent and Touchdown on Mars (Official NASA Video)
(https://i.ibb.co/Jk3GxHx/ezgif-3-cc50997a6900.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif)
(https://i.ibb.co/smM5S6S/ess.jpg)
-
What scientific measurements might those be? Something about measuring a bright spot that is the reflection of the sun? Perhaps sunlight is glinting off of shiny parts of the surface. There are "bright spots" all over Mars.
There nothing glinting on the Mars' surface accorting to official surface photos of that area. The more - there are no round shaped "bright spots" on the surface of that area of Mars.
1) https://www.google.com.ua/maps/space/mars/@18.4982121,77.6169751,26455m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=ru
(https://i.ibb.co/pxYCbzZ/gm.jpg)
2) https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/mission/where-is-the-rover/
(https://i.ibb.co/472KMrq/pl.jpg)
I have no idea what you're referring to or how a "bright spot" could be measured to reveal the size of planet. Why don't you show us the math you used to make your determination.
-
I have no idea what you're referring to or how a "bright spot" could be measured to reveal the size of planet. Why don't you show us the math you used to make your determination.
Here is obvious visual contradiction with the source of light position. What math are you talking about?
This reflection should be exactly under the Sun, that is, perpendicular to the surface of Mars, that is, point exactly at noon, but judging by the smooth movement of the shadow (on the separating heat shield) in the northeast direction (diagonally at 13:30) there is some kind of crap with lighting. The movement of the shadow over the heat shield indicates the position of the Sun in the southwest direction (19:30 hours) relative to the vehicle. The reflection of the "Sun" on the surface of "Mars" indicates the position of the Sun in an easterly direction (15:00 hours) relative to the vehicle.
Perseverance Rover’s Descent and Touchdown on Mars (Official NASA Video)
(https://i.ibb.co/Jk3GxHx/ezgif-3-cc50997a6900.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif)
-
I have no idea what you're referring to or how a "bright spot" could be measured to reveal the size of planet. Why don't you show us the math you used to make your determination.
Here is obvious visual contradiction with the source of light position. What math are you talking about?
This math: "Descent of Perseverance to the surface of Mars. Height (allegedly) 9.5 km. The bright spot on the surface is the reflection of the Sun. Can there be such a reflection on the surface of a sphere with a diameter of 6.7 thousand km, or the diameter of Mars is about 15-20 km?"
How'd you come up with 15-20 km? And what's wrong with a bright spot? What does that have to do with anything.
This reflection should be exactly under the Sun, that is, perpendicular to the surface of Mars, that is, point exactly at noon, but judging by the smooth movement of the shadow (on the separating heat shield) in the northeast direction (diagonally at 13:30) there is some kind of crap with lighting. The movement of the shadow over the heat shield indicates the position of the Sun in the southwest direction (19:30 hours) relative to the vehicle. The reflection of the "Sun" on the surface of "Mars" indicates the position of the Sun in an easterly direction (15:00 hours) relative to the vehicle.
Perseverance Rover’s Descent and Touchdown on Mars (Official NASA Video)
[img = 200]https://i.ibb.co/Jk3GxHx/ezgif-3-cc50997a6900.gif[/img] (https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif)
Why should the reflection be exactly under the sun? Why noon? Noon on Mars?
How do you know the sun is southwest? Southwest in relation to what? How do you know where the sun should be?
-
(https://i.ibb.co/R2qTLpb/hseng.jpg)
-
Link to the answer about location of source of light on the Perseverance landing video:
https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/124460-lighting-questions-on-the-perseverance-landing-video/?tab=comments#comment-1169450
Ghideon from scienceforums.net:
@AlexandrKushnirtshuk you may look a few seconds further into the video you linked to. The heat shield is probably just wobbling after being dropped? That makes the heat shield look oval from the camera's point of view and reflections are moving.
(https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2021_02/image.png.3da5164e77970ccab68a4a9fd6c949fb.png) (https://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_2021_02/image.png.7568c4fd5730e456ada0c13f8c159a29.png)
Question about the size of sun spot reflection.
Sorry for the many images, but they are all necessary.
Is it possible to explain such a small size sun reflection on the surface of Mars? Yellow dot on the image below is the size of Jezero Crater on Mars. Bright spot on the animation below is reflection of the Sun (from Perseverance landing video), which located inside the Jezero Crater and makes up no more than 10% of the area of Jezero Crater. Last (third) image shows how sun reflection spot looks like on Earth's surface.
(https://i.ibb.co/YZXBP6q/jc.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/MP16pND/Ess.jpg)
Location and size of bright spot (Sun reflection), from animation above, inside Jezero Crater. That bright spot is not in the middle of the crater, and there is nothing bright in that area on two photos of that area, which are posted in Reply #25 of this thread.
(https://i.ibb.co/yNN0WXF/jcref.jpg)
-
(https://i.ibb.co/R2qTLpb/hseng.jpg)
You answered none of the questions.
-
Bright spot is an evidence of the sphericity and size of the sphere, respectively. I think there can be no other explanation.
(https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/bXtbwtW/Image.png)
But in that case, the shadow on the animation below should move in the diametrically opposite direction.
(https://i.ibb.co/Jk3GxHx/ezgif-3-cc50997a6900.gif)
-
Bright spot is an evidence of the sphericity and size of the sphere, respectively. I think there can be no other explanation.
(https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/bXtbwtW/Image.png)
But in that case, the shadow on the animation below should move in the diametrically opposite direction.
(https://i.ibb.co/Jk3GxHx/ezgif-3-cc50997a6900.gif)
Seriously? You can determine the size of Mars based upon a "bright spot"? What was your calculation to do so?
-
Bright spot is an evidence of the sphericity and size of the sphere, respectively. I think there can be no other explanation.
(https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/bXtbwtW/Image.png)
There is actually another explanation. You could be seeing a specular highlight, which can be seen on any shape, even a flat plane will produce them.
(https://learnopengl.com/img/lighting/basic_lighting_phong.png)
-
Sun reflection on Earth from 400 km. and Mars from 10 km.
(https://i.ibb.co/NKfbK3x/ezgif-6-119cfe46615c.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif)
ISS animation source: Over Earth - Incredible Space Views from ESA Astronaut Alexander Gerst
-
Artist’s impression of Mars four billion years ago (video title from YouTube)
(https://i.ibb.co/Vt3pq3w/ezgif-4-bb120b98a6cd.gif)
Size of Jezero Crater on Mars, and size of Sun reflection inside that crater, which makes up less than 10% of Jezero Crater area.
(https://i.ibb.co/YZXBP6q/jc.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif)
Same bright spot size on Curiosity landing video.
Complete Mars Curiosity Descent - Full Quality Enhanced HD 1080p Landing + Heat Shield impact (video title from YouTube)
(https://i.ibb.co/cLbnQnR/ezgif-4-15cb0235f967.gif)
-
Artist’s impression of Mars four billion years ago (video title from YouTube)
(https://i.ibb.co/Vt3pq3w/ezgif-4-bb120b98a6cd.gif)
Size of Jezero Crater on Mars, and size of Sun reflection inside that crater, which makes up less than 10% of Jezero Crater area.
(https://i.ibb.co/YZXBP6q/jc.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/4FFkXNV/ezgif-7-5fcc6bebdabf.gif)
Same bright spot size on Curiosity landing video.
Complete Mars Curiosity Descent - Full Quality Enhanced HD 1080p Landing + Heat Shield impact (video title from YouTube)
(https://i.ibb.co/cLbnQnR/ezgif-4-15cb0235f967.gif)
So what's your calculation based upon this "bright spot"? How big is Mars?
-
So what's your calculation based upon this "bright spot"? How big is Mars?
Mars diameter is about 15-20 km., based on my approximate calculations regarding the ratio of the diameters of the Earth, the Sun and the Moon, given at the beginning of this forum topic (thread).
Asked that question on NASA forum: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=53173.0
-
So what's your calculation based upon this "bright spot"? How big is Mars?
Mars diameter is about 15-20 km., based on my approximate calculations regarding the ratio of the diameters of the Earth, the Sun and the Moon, given at the beginning of this forum topic (thread).
Asked that question on NASA forum: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=53173.0
"With a diameter of Mars 6,700 km., and the diameter of the Jezero crater 50 km., the Sun should illuminate the entire crater completely and evenly."
Why is that? What's your calculation for claiming that?
-
"With a diameter of Mars 6,700 km., and the diameter of the Jezero crater 50 km., the Sun should illuminate the entire crater completely and evenly."
Why is that? What's your calculation for claiming that?
Animation source title (from YouTube):
Artist’s impression of Mars four billion years ago
(https://i.ibb.co/Vt3pq3w/ezgif-4-bb120b98a6cd.gif)
-
Same bright spot size on Curiosity landing video.
Complete Mars Curiosity Descent - Full Quality Enhanced HD 1080p Landing + Heat Shield impact (video title from YouTube)
(https://i.ibb.co/cLbnQnR/ezgif-4-15cb0235f967.gif)
Your 'bright spots' are specular highlights.
They depend on the reflectivity and surface texture of the object, they alone can not be used to directly measure the size of an object.
Look again at this image, the highlight shows up on a flat object. You could extend the size of this object and the highlight would not change, thus measuring with it does not work. By adjusting the surface properties you can change the size of your 'bright spot' without changing the size of the object.
(https://learnopengl.com/img/lighting/basic_lighting_phong.png)
(https://learnopengl.com/img/lighting/basic_lighting_specular_shininess.png)
Here is another image showing specular highlighting. Notice the table and the ball both have your 'bright spots'. You can't tell how big the table is based on that bright spot. There is just no way to know if the table ends just out of frame or keeps going along the wall. Is it a short table or a long workbench? The bright spot gives you no information as it will not change if you add or subtract length to the parts of the table you can't see.
(https://www.lovelifedrawing.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Screenshot-2019-07-27-at-12.23.35.jpg)
One simple way to actually measure the size of mars is to use basic trigonometry using it's angular size and known distance. We know the distance because of the round trip time it takes radio and radar signals to go to Mars and back, and a telescope can measure angular size. Using those two values it's easy to calculate it's actual size.
-
Opposition Effect (Seeliger effect) | Aerial video examples
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0MRM8ViXdQ
-
"With a diameter of Mars 6,700 km., and the diameter of the Jezero crater 50 km., the Sun should illuminate the entire crater completely and evenly."
Why is that? What's your calculation for claiming that?
Animation source title (from YouTube):
Artist’s impression of Mars four billion years ago
(https://i.ibb.co/Vt3pq3w/ezgif-4-bb120b98a6cd.gif)
Your calculation is a gif animation of a rotating earth? How does that work?
-
Sun image overlay on the HI1 camera image. I think that with such overlays they cover the real Earth, and in this case, the images of the Sun accidentally got into the template (script) of the necessary overlays.
What are we seeing here on NASA's Satellite H1?
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1147983/pg1
(https://i.ibb.co/5hJhKpN/Image.jpg)
And this is the shutter itself, which on the HI1 camera is not needed for anything else, except for mounting overlays.
(https://i.ibb.co/8jvkjs4/a.jpg)
-
Please look at this attentively, because this is very strong arguments for a new model of the Universe.
Two traces on the surface of the Earth.
1) Ratio of diameters approximately 3 to 1.
2) Both have an eastern direction.
3) Both have an eastern position relative to their PreContinents (PreAmerica and PreEurasia).
4) Both have diametrically opposite locations on the surface of the Earth.
(https://i.ibb.co/8Dw323Z/sunmoon.jpg)
In the image below, the sizes of the traces are almost the same due to the projection of the surface of the sphere onto a rectangular plane.
(https://i.ibb.co/1Z2t7x1/sm.jpg)
-
Please look at this attentively, because this is very strong arguments for a new model of the Universe.
Two traces on the surface of the Earth.
1) Ratio of diameters approximately 3 to 1.
2) Both have an eastern direction.
3) Both have an eastern position relative to their PreContinents (PreAmerica and PreEurasia).
4) Both have diametrically opposite locations on the surface of the Earth.
In the image below, the sizes of the traces are almost the same due to the projection of the surface of the sphere onto a rectangular plane.
What in the world would those undersea features have to do with a "new model of the universe"? Not to mention they are not even close to "diametrically opposite locations on the surface of the Earth":
(https://i.imgur.com/6XUV9CX.png)
Antipode map, check it out - https://www.antipodesmap.com/
-
They write here that around 1350 BC, Mars was in geostationary orbit, and they give good evidence.
Proof – Mars Orbited close to Earth 1350 BC (Updated)
https://cycliccatastrophism.org/2013/06/11/proof-mars-orbited-close-to-earth-1350-bc/
(https://i.ibb.co/tXLfcY0/image.png) (https://i.ibb.co/KwJ7DZS/image.png)
But if about 3350 years ago Mars was in a geostationary orbit, then its diameter cannot be 6.7 thousand km., but just about 15-20 km, as I suppose.
-
Hidden Pyramids? - Mars Mountains Match Pyramids on Earth
https://steemit.com/space/@proteanman/hidden-pyramids-mars-mountains-match-pyramids-on-earth
The Pyramids of Giza, the Belt of Orion and Three Volcanoes on Mars
https://q-mag.org/the-pyramids-of-giza-the-belt-of-orion-and-three-volcanoes-on-mars.html
-
They write here that around 1350 BC, Mars was in geostationary orbit, and they give good evidence.
Proof – Mars Orbited close to Earth 1350 BC (Updated)
https://cycliccatastrophism.org/2013/06/11/proof-mars-orbited-close-to-earth-1350-bc/
(https://i.ibb.co/tXLfcY0/image.png) (https://i.ibb.co/KwJ7DZS/image.png)
But if about 3350 years ago Mars was in a geostationary orbit, then its diameter cannot be 6.7 thousand km., but just about 15-20 km, as I suppose.
Mars is a large planet, and we have sent rovers the size of small cars there equipped with very good cameras. See for yourself. The same Mars reconnaissance satellites that captured your photos of the Martian volcanoes, took this awesome photo of the Rover approaching the surface.
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/143FB/production/_117093928_mro.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4czjS9h4Fpg
-
Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter contradicts planetary science
https://cycliccatastrophism.org/2020/08/20/mars-reconnaissance-orbiter-contradicts-planetary-science/
Jupiter and Venus Papers
https://cycliccatastrophism.org/2020/10/03/jupiter-and-venus-papers/
-
My reading has been satisfied for tonight. A front row seat to the motions of the planets 5000 years ago, wow. Thanks!
-
Granite is found only on Earth. It was not found either in meteorites or on other "planets" of the solar system. Officially it is unknown why. I suppose, it is because the Earth is the largest object in the Universe, with the greatest gravity and pressure in the subsoil.
The role of granites in the structure of the upper shells of the Earth is enormous, but unlike magmatic rocks of the basic composition (gabbro, basalt, anorthosite, norite, troctolite), analogs of which are common on the Moon and terrestrial planets, this rock is found only on our planet and has not yet been established among meteorites or on other planets of the solar system. Among geologists there is an expression "Granite is the calling card of the Earth".
Links to quote source in russian (did not find the same in english):
1) https://beversmarmyr.com.ua/articles/istoriya-formirovaniya-granita
2) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Гранит#Проблема_происхождения_гранитов
-
Paradox of visual and actual positions in space.
Brief description to avoid unnecessary complication.
The distance from the Earth to the Sun is about 8 light minutes, so from the Earth we see the Sun at the point in the sky where it was 8 minutes ago (in 8 minutes the Sun passes through the sky with an angular distance of slightly less than two solar disks) ... It is difficult to both explain and imagine, because most likely it is impossible, that is, cosmic distances are too exaggerated.
(https://i.ibb.co/m9pMJ8b/11eng.jpg)
The distance from the Earth to the Moon is about 1 light second. That is, the apparent and actual position of the moon is almost the same. The shortest distance from Earth to Jupiter is about 32 light minutes. The apparent and actual positions of Jupiter differ 4 times more than in the case of the Sun.
(https://i.ibb.co/2KLTjCv/22eng.jpg)
The question and the most important thing. Why is astronomy not taking into account the actual and visible position of space objects corrected for the speed of light? The motions of the planets are calculated using Kepler's formulas. The calculated positions of the planets (that is, the actual ones) coincide with the visual ones without corrections for the speed of light. I do not question the speed of light, it has been measured and refined for several centuries. The official space distances and the sizes of space objects, respectively, are in great doubt.
-
What is dark matter?
An incomprehensible substance evenly scattered throughout the Universe, or is it the border of the Universe behind the Oort cloud, from where the sunlight is simply not reflected?
Astronomers Use New Data to Create Extraordinary Dark Matter Map
https://scitechdaily.com/astronomers-use-new-data-to-create-extraordinary-dark-matter-map/
(https://scitechdaily.com/images/Astronomers-Create-Unprecedentedly-Wide-and-Sharp-Dark-Matter-Map-777x275.jpg)
The distance to the most distant galaxy is supposedly 13.4 billion light years. This means that the light travels all the distance without hindrance. This is supposedly a straight line, along which there are no objects: stars, galaxies, nebulae, dust, gas - nothing blocking light in a straight line 13.4 billion light years long ... This is hardly possible.
-
My several other thoughts to the important issues directly related to the structure of the Universe.
1) The actual (real) structure of the Universe is the key to a correct understanding of the origin of life, its nature, as well as the essence of paranormal phenomena, UFOs, so called "aliens", and the key to the correct worldview.
2) There are no extraterrestrials (in the sense that they are not from other planets - not EXTRAterrestrials ). I think that the Earth is the only planet in the Universe. The Sun is the only star in the Universe. "Aliens" (all their alliances and races) are, roughly speaking, angels / demons. Entities that somehow, for some time manage to avoid incarnation. Their influence on humanity is insignificant on the physical plane (paranormal or subtle phenomena interact very weakly with matter), but enormous in terms of mental (religion, worldview). Most of all, they affect the mind through fear of death and ignorance. "Aliens" is a psychophysical, subtle, noosphere phenomenon.
3) Is the Universe local?
Yes. Moreover, it is absolutely local. This comes from the name itself. If besides the Universe there is something else, then without this something it is no longer the Universe. Within the framework of the Universe, the existence of something local is impossible, that is, absolutely without any interaction with the rest of the Universe. In short, this supposedly difficult question, in fact, is a priori very unambiguous: the Universe is absolutely local, within the Universe, conditionally (relatively) local phenomena or regions (space) can exist, for example: a soundproof room, an airtight container, water-air, etc. .P. impermeable containers. But it is impossible to create an absolutely impenetrable space within the framework of the Universe itself for absolutely nothing. In short, the Universe is an absolutely local space, within which the existence of any other absolutely local space is impossible.
4) Is it possible to know the future?
No. Knowledge of the future itself influences (changes) this future. Example. You find out that something bad is about to happen, even if you try to do nothing to fix it or avoid it, then at least your behavior and thinking will change. In short, it is impossible to know the future, because knowledge of the future itself affects the future, that is, changes it. There are certain trends and expectations of the future, but nobody knows 100% of it, although it is likely that it can be 100% predetermined.
5) The only infinite parameter (in the full sense) in the Universe is time. Energy and matter, like consciousness and space, are limited, but indestructible ... in short, here you need to understand well the Law of Conservation of Energy and its consequences, because this is essentially one of the fundamental properties of the Universe: Nothing appears from nowhere, and does not disappear into anywhere, but is only redistributed and / or transformed from one state to another.
6) Religious worldviews.
The first and most important thing to understand is that the existence of 100% truth, or 100% lies, is impossible. Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism. . .) - sinners in hell, the righteous in heaven - game over - nonsense. But this does not mean that these religions are completely false.Hinduism and Buddhism, like probably Taoism and Shintoism with the concepts of karma and rebirth, in general, are closer to reality. But this does not mean that these religions are absolutely true.That is, with regard to religion and worldview, it is important to understand to what extent this or that question or phenomenon corresponds to reality, is logical, plausible, and viable.
-
The duration of the total phase of a solar eclipse is 7.5 minutes. The duration of the total phase of the lunar eclipse is 108 minutes. The diameter of the Earth is 12,742 km. Therefore, the diameter of the Moon is 12 742 * (7.5 / 108) = 885 km.
Additional evidence.
(https://i.ibb.co/qMTJmY0/ezgif-4-1d2a6806ddf3.gif)
The Unsolved Mystery of the Earth Blobs
http://eos.org/features/the-unsolved-mystery-of-the-earth-blobs
(https://i.ibb.co/fqyvNW9/sunmoon.jpg)
The coincidence of the angular sizes of the Sun and the Moon indicates that their sizes are proportional to the distances relative to the Earth. In addition, the Sun and the Moon have the same axial rotation periods - 27 days. In the earth's mantle there are two huge diametrically opposite formations (one is larger, the other is smaller), both are displaced to the east. On the surface of the Earth there are two huge diametrically opposite tracks (one larger, the other smaller), both shifted to the east. The ratio of the sizes of the Sun and the Moon is approximately 3 to 1.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/wRV6KvS/moonsize.jpg)
-
In my opinion, the Flat Earth Theory is a distorted counterbalance to the false official astronomy. Officially, space is built on the principle of an inflationary (financial) bubble - too exaggerated. In the Flat Earth model, space is too understated/minimized.
-
An important addition to the worldview.
Knowledge, understanding, awareness - three levels of comprehension of the meaning of something. Dynamic balance of opposites: + - at a specific moment in time, and strictly 50/50 at infinity (in time). A very important criterion for the truth of many things and phenomena, one of the fundamental properties of the Universe, the realization of which is the key to understanding a lot of things - the Law of Conservation of Energy - it's some kind of (like the third) Law of Thermodynamics. In my interpretation, it looks like this: Nothing appears out of nowhere, and does not disappear into anywhere, but only redistributes and / or transforms from one state to another.
A very important consequence of the Law of Conservation of Energy. Destruction, preservation and creation are types of transformation. Something can be "created" only from something, it means not to create in the full sense of the word, but to transform something into something. In short. Nobody created the universe, and there are no creators as such, in principle, there are transformers of different levels, orders, opportunities and responsibilities.
Nobody has ever created anything.
Creation, preservation and destruction are varieties of transformation. In Hinduism, Rama (creator), Vishnu (keeper), Shiva (destroyer) is the personalization of the transformation varieties. The Christian “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” is a complete amen and hallelujah in oil, or just a set of masculine words.
-
Here is a link to a video with a selection of episodes in which astronauts were hanging on ropes, and an animation of one of the episodes.
Hidden ropes on ISS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyL7eB6ALuo
(https://i.ibb.co/bFLPFtw/ezgif-6-f5934343f1b1.gif)
For some reason, astronauts on the ISS are hanging on ropes - this is a fact. The ropes are hidden by video editing, that is, they tried to hide it - this is a fact. Why would they?
My version. I think that there are no people on space stations due to the likelihood of being destroyed by a meteorite or space debris at any time. Such a probability, although negligible, but given the complete absence of any protection against destruction by a meteorite, it makes no sense, both the stay of people in the earth's orbit, and the colonization of space (Moon, Mars ...) in principle.
-
Now show us the wires that control them when they live stream a guided tour through the ISS' multiple components, or live stream a q&a where Hadfield wrings a wet towel out on his hands and the water pools onto and around his hands while hes floating (or suspended by wires).
-
Here is a link to the Canada Arm2 taking damage from an unknown object. There are risks being in space, from man-made junk or meteorites.
You know they do live interviews with astronauts.
https://www.floridatoday.com/story/tech/science/space/2021/06/01/space-debris-damages-canadarm-2-space-station/5288632001/
-
The notion that ISS astronauts are hanging from ropes is the worst conspiracy theory I've ever heard.
Proof positive that there are no strings creating the illusion of zero gravity. If they were truly strung up by strings in an otherwise 1G environment they would look like ridiculous puppets or like Peter Pan stage acts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doN4t5NKW-k
Is there any sense to this thread at all? Or are we just spectating some poor guy's schizophrenic delusions just because they are funny?
Surprised this thread doesn't get locked by Pete considering how it doesn't stand up to an iota of the rigorousness demanded by the moderators.
-
Proof positive that there are no strings creating the illusion of zero gravity. If they were truly strung up by strings in an otherwise 1G environment they would look like ridiculous puppets or like Peter Pan stage acts.
Departing Space Station Commander Provides Tour of Orbital Laboratory
(YouTube video title)
I do not know where and how they are filming it, but the stay of people in space stations in orbit is unreasonably risky, and therefore pointless.
Judging by the video (Departing Space Station Commander Provides Tour of Orbital Laboratory), "on the ISS" is constantly quite noisy:
1) Perhaps the episodes "from the ISS" are filmed on Zero-G planes, and the suspension of the "astronauts" on the ropes is needed for safety reasons.
2) Astronauts supposedly live "on the ISS" for several months, but hardly anyone would have endured the constant noise like in the video (Departing Space Station Commander Provides Tour of Orbital Laboratory) even for several days.
Do you know in what conditions (supposedly) they live on the ISS? What kind of effort is it worth taking a shower or just going to the toilet? Look closely at the photo (500 days in space). The astronaut is neatly shaved, trimmed, and even has a professional manicure. Who's lying about space? Permanent risk of vital equipment breakdown, collision with space debris or meteorite. Permanent risk to life. Life in a small confined space with a whole bunch of everyday inconveniences and other difficulties. At the same time, all astronauts are constantly cheerful and smiling.
https://www.roscosmos.ru/25021/
(https://www.roscosmos.ru/media/img/blog/2018/500.dnei.jpg)
-
Maybe someone will be interested in recalculating the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment with a much smaller Earth orbit, and the speed of the Earth (approximately as in the schematic image below). Perhaps that experiment proved the existence of the aether, but was incorrectly interpreted as wrong due to the false parameters of the earth's orbit and the speed of the Earth in space.
The Experiments on the relative motion of the earth and ether have been completed and the result decidedly negative. The expected deviation of the interference fringes from the zero should have been 0.40 of a fringe – the maximum displacement was 0.02 and the average much less than 0.01 – and then not in the right place. As displacement is proportional to squares of the relative velocities it follows that if the ether does slip past the relative velocity is less than one sixth of the earth’s velocity. (Albert Abraham Michelson, 1887 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment#1881_and_1887_experiments))
(https://i.ibb.co/BK2xRn5/ume.jpg)
-
Proof positive that there are no strings creating the illusion of zero gravity. If they were truly strung up by strings in an otherwise 1G environment they would look like ridiculous puppets or like Peter Pan stage acts.
Departing Space Station Commander Provides Tour of Orbital Laboratory
(YouTube video title)
I do not know where and how they are filming it, but the stay of people in space stations in orbit is unreasonably risky, and therefore pointless.
Climbing Mount Everest is unnecessarily risky and many people have died attempting it. Perhaps that endeavor is pointless as well depending upon your perspective. But people still do it. So, based upon your logic, has no one ever really climbed Mt. Everest?
Judging by the video (Departing Space Station Commander Provides Tour of Orbital Laboratory), "on the ISS" is constantly quite noisy:
1) Perhaps the episodes "from the ISS" are filmed on Zero-G planes, and the suspension of the "astronauts" on the ropes is needed for safety reasons.
Zero-G planes (Vomit Comets) give you max 30 seconds of weightlessness. So the plethora of unedited hour-long tours and such through the ISS aren't vomit comet simulations. As for ropes and cables and specifically the gif you posted, the vertical line seen at the "tug" is actually a line as part of a graphic on the hatch behind them, if that's what you think the "cable" is:
(https://i.imgur.com/7edKRB8.jpg)
And I'm not sure how to pull off a cable trick with something like this:
(https://i.imgur.com/O6bYVih.gif)
As for a cgi argument, (and/or vomit comet argument and/or cable argument), there's skylab footage of weightlessness that goes beyond the 30 second max and obviously predates CGI tech that looks seamless today and again, I'm not sure how you would pull this off with a cable gimmick:
(https://i.imgur.com/7TlayXr.gif)
2) Astronauts supposedly live "on the ISS" for several months, but hardly anyone would have endured the constant noise like in the video (Departing Space Station Commander Provides Tour of Orbital Laboratory) even for several days.
Ummm, there's some noise in some parts of the station and then in other parts there isn't, if you watch the video all the way through. Your argument is that there is noise sometimes and that means it's fake because humans couldn't stand it? Seriously?
Do you know in what conditions (supposedly) they live on the ISS? What kind of effort is it worth taking a shower or just going to the toilet?
Yes:
https://youtu.be/tDbbJWKKQu0
https://youtu.be/C-65mBQ7s_Q
Look closely at the photo (500 days in space). The astronaut is neatly shaved, trimmed, and even has a professional manicure.
I'm not sure how you determined a professional manicure, but here's how one shaves on the ISS:
https://youtu.be/4gITcOMBXAg
Who's lying about space? Permanent risk of vital equipment breakdown, collision with space debris or meteorite. Permanent risk to life. Life in a small confined space with a whole bunch of everyday inconveniences and other difficulties. At the same time, all astronauts are constantly cheerful and smiling.
Navy sailors live on subs in close quarters undersea for weeks, months on end. So what? That's what they are trained to do. Just because the living environment is not optimal to your standards, it can't be real? The risk of danger, life threatening means it can't be real. Does no one risk such things in other aspects of life? That is hardly an argument against anything. People risk their lives all the time for endeavors that you or I would choose not to be a part of. Again, so what?
-
Who iss Lying? - Astronauts: Stars In Space - Contradictions! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_fLkL_kS9U)
Are the crew members of 1986 Space Shuttle Challenger still alive? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TJVhdPtEkE)
-
Who iss Lying? - Astronauts: Stars In Space - Contradictions! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_fLkL_kS9U)
Are the crew members of 1986 Space Shuttle Challenger still alive? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TJVhdPtEkE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUALwYsXSm8
To suggest that the seven who died in the Challenger disaster faked their deaths for no reason, traumatizing their families and loved ones as they all watched them die in real time, for ..... no reason - is the most disrespectful thing I ever heard.
-
There's a secret project. A space shuttle is going to leave for Mars in two weeks. Are you into it?
-
The Michelson-Morley experiment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment) is extremely complicated and multifactorial. As far as I understand, it does not take into account one significant factor in the official model of the Universe - the speed and direction of the Sun as part of the galaxy (that is, the speed and direction of movement of our galaxy in space).
But on the basis of my model of the Universe (https://forums.space.com/threads/new-model-of-the-universe.37494/), I assume the absence of the above-mentioned factor in reality, and different parameters of other significant factors. I do not have sufficient mathematical knowledge, so I suggest to those who are interested - to recalculate the results of the Michelson-Morley experiment, taking into account the much smaller Earth's orbit and the speed of the Earth along it. Considering the movement of the Earth and the Sun around the common center of mass as in the animation below (Earth is larger), as well as the assumption that the Oort Cloud is the boundary of the Universe with a diameter of about one light minute. The value of the experiment is enormous. Data on it should be publicly available.
(https://i.ibb.co/BK2xRn5/ume.jpg) (https://i.ibb.co/CmNjBrX/c11-gif-bd3fb41fea3601564900036f2d853e2a.gif)
-
The Michelscon experiment (or the Michaelson-Morley experiment) is a complex multifactorial experiment to prove the existence of the ether, which was carried out many times from 1880 to 2015.
The bottom line is brief. Deflection of light (electromagnetic and radio waves) during the movement of the Earth. The main factor is the speed of the Earth's flight in space. This factor was used to calculate the expected result of the experiment, which turned out to be significantly less (expected). The result was attributed to errors. The existence of the aether is allegedly not proven.
But if we take a much smaller length of the Earth's orbit according to my model of the Universe, then the speed of the Earth's flight in such an orbit will be much lower. The experiment has been carried out several times. The data is there. It remains only to recount them correctly. This will prove: 1) the existence of a medium for the propagation of light (electromagnetic and radio waves) - aether; 2) my model of the universe.
After the publication of this information, I was banned immediately and almost simultaneously MORE on two scientific English-language sites (space.com and thenakedscientists.com). At the same time, they removed all my topics and arguments on the new model of the Universe, which had been there for about six months.
-
Michelson–Morley experiment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment) is a complex and extremely important experiment that has been refined and repeated since 1881. Its task is to prove the existence of a medium for the propagation of light and radio waves - ether. The main factor of this experience is the speed of the Earth's movement in space (the length of the Earth's orbit). The received data turns out to be much less than expected. In my model of the Universe, the length of the Earth's orbit and the speed of the Earth's movement are much less than the official ones ... It has already been experimentally proven: 1) the existence of ether; 2) my model of the Universe.
Ordinary waves have a medium - water.
Sound waves have a medium - a gas (atmosphere).
Do light and radio waves have a medium? The ether has not yet been officeally proven.
The aquatic environment is inhabited.
The gaseous environment (atmosphere) is inhabited.
Is the ether inhabited? Where do UFOs come from? Where do the “aliens” (angels / demons) live?
-
To suggest that the seven who died in the Challenger disaster faked their deaths for no reason, traumatizing their families and loved ones as they all watched them die in real time, for ..... no reason - is the most disrespectful thing I ever heard.
Challenger ... 1986 ... 35 years ago. At what point is it ok by you to discuss things that may have lead to people's deaths? Can we discuss Vietnam? WW2? Would you be upset if someone suggested Julius Caesar faked his own death?
Thanks for dropping by with your faux outrage. Always goes down a storm here at tfes. ::)
-
To suggest that the seven who died in the Challenger disaster faked their deaths for no reason, traumatizing their families and loved ones as they all watched them die in real time, for ..... no reason - is the most disrespectful thing I ever heard.
Challenger ... 1986 ... 35 years ago. At what point is it ok by you to discuss things that may have lead to people's deaths? Can we discuss Vietnam? WW2? Would you be upset if someone suggested Julius Caesar faked his own death?
Thanks for dropping by with your faux outrage. Always goes down a storm here at tfes. ::)
It's not just "discussing" Challenger like one might "discuss" Vietnam or WWII. It's akin to discussing whether anyone really died in the Vietnam war or WWII or not. Or saying that the little kids killed in Sandy Hook here in the States were actually actors and are still alive or that no one really died in the planes on 9/11. Yeah, I would say besides being insanity, it's disrespectful.
-
It's not just "discussing" Challenger like one might "discuss" Vietnam or WWII. It's akin to discussing whether anyone really died in the Vietnam war or WWII or not.
So what? I mean, its not like no one has ever questioned the scale of the holocaust?
Or saying that the little kids killed in Sandy Hook here in the States were actually actors and are still alive
children ... nice strawman
or that no one really died in the planes on 9/11.
You don't think people should question if their government might have staged a false flag against the country? You think everyone should just accept whatever your god-forsaken administration tells you? Jesus Christ, no. Don't ever ever stop asking those psychopaths questions. They won't leave a creature to draw breath or a blade of grass unscorched.
Yeah, I would say besides being insanity, it's disrespectful.
I couldn't help notice you dodged my Julius Caesar analogy. This suggests there is a time frame in your mind.
So ... 1997 - Diana dies in a tunnel ... I'm guessing you think is too soon to wonder if the Queen had her popped orf?
You don't like WW2. What about WW1?
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the Napoleonic wars is fair game to you.
Fee Fi Fo Fum,
I smell the blood of an Englishman
Be he alive, or be he dead
I'll grind his bones to make my bread.
^Every English child knows this. Now, at first glace, it's a silly poem in a child's story about a giant and a big beanstalk. But its not. The reason that bit is the poem bit, is that's the bit to remember. It's a reference to the Napoleonic wars and a cautionary tale to every child not to join the British Army.
The blood of English men ... the dead from the battle of waterloo
Alive or dead ... they didn't even bother with the wounded. They just put many of them out of their misery after the battle.
Grinding bones to make bread? What the fuck is that about? <--- This is the dark part.
They took the bodies of those young men (8 million gallons of them), and rather than bury them, they ground them up and turned them into fertiliser. They then sold that fertiliser back to the British farmers. They literally sold them their sons to fertilise the fields ... hence grinding bones to make bread ... to grow the wheat.
https://www.growlikegrandad.co.uk/allotment/soil-nutrients/bone-meal-gruesome-fairy-tale-fertiliser.html
^ Can we discuss whether this happened or not? Is it too soon?
-
It's not just "discussing" Challenger like one might "discuss" Vietnam or WWII. It's akin to discussing whether anyone really died in the Vietnam war or WWII or not.
So what? I mean, its not like no one has ever questioned the scale of the holocaust?
I didn't say anything about "scale". The equivalence would be to say that the holocaust didn't happen at all and no one was killed.
Or saying that the little kids killed in Sandy Hook here in the States were actually actors and are still alive
children ... nice strawman
How is it a strawman? It's an equivalent example, regardless of the age of the individuals involved. We have people running around this country saying that no one died and that they were actors. A) Insane, B) Disrespectful.
or that no one really died in the planes on 9/11.
You don't think people should question if their government might have staged a false flag against the country? You think everyone should just accept whatever your god-forsaken administration tells you? Jesus Christ, no. Don't ever ever stop asking those psychopaths questions. They won't leave a creature to draw breath or a blade of grass unscorched.
Nope, I never said people couldn't question. But seriously, Challenger a false flag? What would be the motive? What was to be gained by faking the explosion and faking the deaths? It makes no logical sense. Crackpots literally hound the living people that that they think are the astronauts. There's a video on YT of some random guy walking up some Professor's driveway, the Professor that these people think is STS-51 Pilot Michael Smith. and asking him a whole bunch of questions about how he is actually the astronaut. It's insane.
Yeah, I would say besides being insanity, it's disrespectful.
I couldn't help notice you dodged my Julius Caesar analogy. This suggests there is a time frame in your mind.
So ... 1997 - Diana dies in a tunnel ... I'm guessing you think is too soon to wonder if the Queen had her popped orf?
I didn't dodge the question, I just ignored it because the analogy is stupid and irrelevant. Caesar doesn't have any relatives or friends still around that were devastated by his death. And there aren't crackpots running around saying some farmer in Kansas is actually the living Julius Caesar and hounding him.
As for Diana, the equivalence would be that she didn't really die and is alive and well secretly living her life in Monaco. Not that the Queen gave the kill order.
You don't like WW2. What about WW1?
No, I don't like WWII or I. Do you?
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the Napoleonic wars is fair game to you.
Are you saying no one died in the Napoleonic wars and it was faked, a false flag?
Fee Fi Fo Fum,
I smell the blood of an Englishman
Be he alive, or be he dead
I'll grind his bones to make my bread.
^Every English child knows this. Now, at first glace, it's a silly poem in a child's story about a giant and a big beanstalk. But its not. The reason that bit is the poem bit, is that's the bit to remember. It's a reference to the Napoleonic wars and a cautionary tale to every child not to join the British Army.
The blood of English men ... the dead from the battle of waterloo
Alive or dead ... they didn't even bother with the wounded. They just put many of them out of their misery after the battle.
Grinding bones to make bread? What the fuck is that about? <--- This is the dark part.
They took the bodies of those young men (8 million gallons of them), and rather than bury them, they ground them up and turned them into fertiliser. They then sold that fertiliser back to the British farmers. They literally sold them their sons to fertilise the fields ... hence grinding bones to make bread ... to grow the wheat.
https://www.growlikegrandad.co.uk/allotment/soil-nutrients/bone-meal-gruesome-fairy-tale-fertiliser.html
^ Can we discuss whether this happened or not? Is it too soon?
I have no idea what all this has to with anything. But it is interesting. The Brothers Grimm fairytales are really dark when you think about them too.
-
Nope, I never said people couldn't question. But seriously, Challenger a false flag? What would be the motive? What was to be gained by faking the explosion and faking the deaths? It makes no logical sense.
Makes plenty of sense. By 1986 the American public had become very bored with the space program. Viewing figures were down and it was getting more and more difficult to justify spending $billion tax payer dollars on a rocket program. Stick a few civilians in there and blow it up and suddenly space is exciting again. Its dangerous. The astronauts are brave and the missions nerve racking.
Caesar doesn't have any relatives or friends still around that were devastated by his death.
What do you suppose the probability of Challenger relatives (many of who are now dead or very elderly) coming to tfes.org to read this thread?
As for Diana, the equivalence would be that she didn't really die and is alive and well secretly living her life in Monaco. Not that the Queen gave the kill order.
Oh, the conspiracy theory has to be the exact same. Fine, then Challenger astronauts are all dead, but they were killed because they were civilians who could never have been trusted to maintain the space hoax. Better?
Are you saying no one died in the Napoleonic wars and it was faked, a false flag?
I'm asking WHEN can we talk about Challenger? How long before you are suddenly not overcome with outrage?
I have no idea what all this has to with anything. But it is interesting. The Brothers Grimm fairytales are really dark when you think about them too.
Not a lot. It's there because it is interesting.
-
Nope, I never said people couldn't question. But seriously, Challenger a false flag? What would be the motive? What was to be gained by faking the explosion and faking the deaths? It makes no logical sense.
Makes plenty of sense. By 1986 the American public had become very bored with the space program. Viewing figures were down and it was getting more and more difficult to justify spending $billion tax payer dollars on a rocket program. Stick a few civilians in there and blow it up and suddenly space is exciting again. Its dangerous. The astronauts are brave and the missions nerve racking.
So the conspiracy now is not that the Challenger astronauts are still alive it's that we blew them up to get TV ratings? If anything, NASA's lax engineering and hubris led to a darkening of their reputation and calls from the people and legislature to defund NASA rather than bolster it. If it was a conspiracy to destroy 100's of million dollars of gear and kill 7 people, the opposite of the effect you mention occurred.
Caesar doesn't have any relatives or friends still around that were devastated by his death.
What do you suppose the probability of Challenger relatives (many of who are now dead or very elderly) coming to tfes.org to read this thread?
No, I don't expect them to come here. And your argument about dead relatives is just plain stupid & ill-informed.
- The one “civilian”, McAuliffe, the teacher, had a husband and 2 kids age 6 & 9
- Challenger commander Francis “Dick” Scobee had a wife and two kids.
- Challenger pilot Michael Smith had a wife and daughter
- Astronaut, engineer Ellison Onizuka had a brother, two sisters, a wife and 2 daughters
- Astronaut and physicist Ronald McNair had two brothers, a wife and 2 kids
- Astronaut and payload specialist, Gregory Jarvis had a wife & 2 brothers
- Astronaut Judith Resnik had a sister & husband
As for Diana, the equivalence would be that she didn't really die and is alive and well secretly living her life in Monaco. Not that the Queen gave the kill order.
Oh, the conspiracy theory has to be the exact same. Fine, then Challenger astronauts are all dead, but they were killed because they were civilians who could never have been trusted to maintain the space hoax. Better?
Yes, the conspiracy has to be at least relatively the same. Why would you think otherwise? That's weird.
I guess it depends on how you define civilian. There was only one "civilian" on board, the teacher. And yeah, great conspiracy theory you just made up out of thin air. What's your source?
Are you saying no one died in the Napoleonic wars and it was faked, a false flag?
I'm asking WHEN can we talk about Challenger? How long before you are suddenly not overcome with outrage?
Outrage? Hardly. Just pointing out poor taste all to manufacture some conspiracy without evidence. And like I mentioned, because of the silly "The Challenger Astronauts are still Alive" bullshit, these doppelgängers get literally stalked and hounded by nutjobs. So yeah, that's not ok.
I have no idea what all this has to with anything. But it is interesting. The Brothers Grimm fairytales are really dark when you think about them too.
Not a lot. It's there because it is interesting.
I can now see why you guys aren't so fond of the French.
-
I don't think "your argument is tasteless" holds any water. Its like squealing racist or homophobe to shut down an opposing opinion. If the argument is "Challenger astronauts are actually all still alive" ... saying 'that's a disgusting assertion' isn't a rebuttal. Its just a cheap way to not have to engage it.
And yeah, the French are the most revolting people on earth. There is no nation of people so lowly, from their foul stinking garlic and onion breath to their BO stained unwashed bodies and hairy women. Absolutely vile from start to finish.
-
I don't think "your argument is tasteless" holds any water. Its like squealing racist or homophobe to shut down an opposing opinion. If the argument is "Challenger astronauts are actually all still alive" ... saying 'that's a disgusting assertion' isn't a rebuttal. Its just a cheap way to not have to engage it.
And yeah, the French are the most revolting people on earth. There is no nation of people so lowly, from their foul stinking garlic and onion breath to their BO stained unwashed bodies and hairy women. Absolutely vile from start to finish.
The argument against the conspiracy garbage is not that it's tasteless. The argument is that it's a stupid and outrageous conspiracy theory without evidence. And as a result the silly conspiracy is tasteless , disrespectful and has caused normal humans to be stalked by nutjob conspiracy theorists. Two separate things.
If you really want to engage in the actually Challenger conspiracy go here to see the debunking of it:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=86036.msg2257620#msg2257620
And those French have a different word for everything.
-
The STEREO spacecraft have two cameras. One is directed to the Sun (frontal), the other - to the space nearby (lateral). On November 16, 2016, the following “anomaly” appeared on the animation of the STEREO A image.
NASA STEREO B (behind) HI2 2007 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBSH8X2SiWI)
(https://i.ibb.co/KwR2PB6/ezgif-7-dbe4199b147a.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/F4pJjRv/ezgif-7-b1139ac92a37.gif)
This is an overlay of the Sun image from the front camera to the side camera. This is the official NASA explanation. Such an overlap could not happen by accident by itself. It is very likely that there is an algorithm for overlaying images, in which programmers mistakenly specified the wrong files. What can be covered next to the Sun in space? Earth, if the ratio of the diameters of the Earth and the Sun is ~ 3-4 to 1.
(https://i.ibb.co/qRW4JZ1/7.jpg)
This is not a UFO, but a shutter on the STEREO side camera. The same as on the frontal one (which covers the Sun due to its strong brightness), but 3-4 times larger in diameter ... Why is there a shutter on the side camera, in the shooting area, where the sun does not get?
(https://i.ibb.co/K0zHjRK/20070426-121020-s4h2-B.jpg)
-
The Moon is attracted to the Sun 2.2 times stronger than to the Earth.
Here are the data for the calculation:
Rls / Rls = 390, (Rls / Rls) ^ 2 = 152000 distance ratio
Ms / Ms = 332000 mass ratio
Now the transformations and the actual calculation:
Fls = Ml * Ms / R ^ 2ls
Fls = Ml * Ms / R ^ 2ls
Fls : Fls = (Ms / Ms) : (Rls / Rls) ^ 2 = 332000 : 152000 = 2.2
The sphere of gravity of the Earth, inside which the gravity of the Earth exceeds the gravity of the Sun, has a radius of 0.260 million km. (counting from the center of the Earth). The Moon, according to official figures, is located far beyond this sphere.
-
The Bible is an ambiguous, not very scientific and many times rewritten source.
There is one interesting point in the Bible - the appearance of the rainbow after the flood.
Before the flood, giants, dinosaurs lived on Earth, people supposedly lived for several hundred years, and, most interestingly, there was no rainbow. That is, before the flood, the conditions of life on Earth were very different from the current (post-Flood) ones. This is indicated, among other things, by the absence of a rainbow before the flood, which clearly emerges from the quote below.
I lay My rainbow in the cloud, so that it would be a sign of the covenant between Me and between the earth ... When I bring the cloud to the earth, then a rainbow in the cloud will appear ... and I will remember the eternal covenant between God and between every living soul ... This is the sign of the covenant that I have established between me and between all flesh that is on the earth. (Genesis 9: 13-17)
Strongly different antediluvian conditions on Earth ... There are quite a few weighty arguments in favor of the fact that before the flood the Earth (and the Universe) looked something like this schematic diagram:
(https://i.ibb.co/mBC868g/Protoearth2.jpg)
The sun was probably colder, the moon hotter. When the Sun and the Moon separated from Proto-Earth, the smaller Moon quickly cooled down, and on the larger Sun, nuclear processes were activated, which, by the way, are now systematically declining. Solar activity has been declining for the fifth consecutive cycle (50 years). The duration of the solar cycle is about 10 years.
(https://i.ibb.co/7Jmf6qy/SIDC-Daily-Sunspot-Number-Since1977.gif)
And this is the forecast for the 25th solar cycle, which is being confirmed more and more every day.
(https://i.ibb.co/qyBk3TR/solar-end.jpg)
The fall in solar activity for 5 consecutive cycles, this is a regularity - a tendency indicating the extinction of the Sun. The graphs of solar activity before 1950-1960 (before the beginning of the space age) cannot be reliable - this is something like a forecast into the past.
Another small but very interesting fact that indirectly confirms my model of the Universe. On the American continents, there are armadillos in the wild, but no hedgehogs. In Africa and Eurasia, hedgehogs are found, but there are no armadillos.
Arial of armadillos and Arial of hedgehogs.
(https://i.ibb.co/CBD904D/image.jpg) (https://i.ibb.co/Br6ycDF/image2.jpg)
-
Another small but very interesting fact that indirectly confirms my model of the Universe. On the American continents, there are armadillos in the wild, but no hedgehogs. In Africa and Eurasia, hedgehogs are found, but there are no armadillos.
I gotta ask, how does this fun fact indirectly confirm your model of the universe?
-
Google translate from russian (have no time to edit).
And suddenly, after the sorrow of those days, the sun will darken, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. (Gospel of Matthew 24:29)
Each next of the last five solar cycles is weaker than the previous one (one solar cycle lasts about 10 years). The fall in solar activity for 5 consecutive cycles, this is a regularity - a trend indicating the extinction of the Sun. The graphs of solar activity before 1950-1960 (before the beginning of the space era) cannot be reliable (the accuracy of observations was incomparably lower) - this is something like a forecast into the past.
(https://i.ibb.co/8bvyMd5/solarcycles.jpg)
The coronavirus pandemic is caused by solar activity. In 2009, there was a solar minimum and there was an epidemic (on the verge of a pandemic) of swine flu. In 2019, the solar minimum and the coronavirus pandemic began. At the same time, the ecology has significantly deteriorated over 10 years. And the current solar minimum is probably more extreme than the previous one.
I think over the course of several years the Universe will collapse to the limit of matter density into a sphere of a certain diameter ~ 20 thousand km. (all space objects will fly to the center of mass common between the Earth and the Sun along a spiral trajectory). The solar wind creates pressure from within the universe. The sun is dying out. When a certain critical minimum level of solar activity is reached, the process of folding the Universe into a "biblical scroll" will begin.
The stars in the sky will decay, and the sky will roll up like a scroll; the entire host of stars will fall like withered leaves from a vine, like dried fruit from a fig. (Isaiah 34: 4)
And suddenly, after the sorrow of those days, the sun will darken, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. (Gospel of Matthew 24:29)
-
The NASA satellite has recorded an unprecedented cluster of pulsating red giant stars. (https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2021/nasa-s-tess-tunes-into-an-all-sky-symphony-of-red-giant-stars) "NASA's Transiting Exoplanet Research Satellite (TESS) has photographed about 75% of the sky during its two-year main mission."
(https://i.ibb.co/YpyRGR7/B8fbaa114635e9aab340c46e137ddd89c06b3dc5.jpg)
1) Have an unprecedented number of stars suddenly turned into red giants? (2 years by cosmic standards is sudden)
2) Two years ago, the solar minimum began and the objects of the Oort Cloud reflecting sunlight (the official "stars") dimmed due to a decrease in solar activity.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/qMTJmY0/ezgif-4-1d2a6806ddf3.gif)(https://i.ibb.co/M2Mxgs2/C3-jpg-4c83f1ebdd151127c5b9d85ea40082c1.jpg)
The Unsolved Mystery of the Earth Blobs (https://eos.org/features/the-unsolved-mystery-of-the-earth-blobs)
There are even traces of the Sun and Moon on the surface of the Earth. Both are eastbound, both eastward from Pro-Ameria and Pra-Eurasia, both eastward from Earth Blobs, which are also eastbound, and chunks of the two PraContinents (the current 6 continents, clearly grouped by 3) are also eastbound from Earth Blobs.
(https://i.ibb.co/GdtwJc1/Image.png)
There was a spiral displacement of the Proto-Earth axis of rotation from conditional 0 degrees to the current 23.5 degrees, with the simultaneous separation of the Sun and the Moon from the poles of Proto-Earth, splitting and displacement of two Pra-Continents.
Judging by the tracks, the diameter of the Sun is 2,500 - 3,000 km.
The official diameter of the Sun is 1,392,700 km.
The official diameter of Mars is 6,779 km.
Actual diameter of Mars:
1) 2,500 / 1,400,000 * 6,800 = 12 km.
2) 3,000 / 1,400,000 * 6,800 = 14 km.
+- errors and unaccounted for factors, approximately, but much closer to reality than the official one, the diameter of Mars is 15 - 20 km.
Cordillera - Andes, Iranian highlands - Himalayas - the highest and largest mountain formations, identical in shape, diametrically opposite location on the surface of the Earth. The lesser Pro-America split further and moved further away from its Earth Blobs under the Pacific Ocean. Greater PraEurasia split less, shifted not so far from its Earth Blobs under Africa, but turned more northward.
(https://i.ibb.co/CzywRwd/Past-poles.jpg)
-
(https://i.ibb.co/GcZZwrF/suneng.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/YdJMzy6/img2.jpg) (https://i.ibb.co/vXVX2Mf/img.jpg)
-
Oblivion is inevitable, otherwise we would reliably know the entire history (the origin of life) "from beginning to end." The point is that there is no beginning or end. The end of one is the beginning of another. Time is the only infinite parameter in the full sense of the word. Time may slow down or speed up, but it never stops. Time is a characteristic of the intensity of spatial changes.
Matter, energy, consciousness - all this is divisible, limited and indestructible (“immortal”). Nothing appears out of nowhere and disappears into nowhere, but only redistributes and / or transforms from one state to another (the Law of Conservation of Energy is one of the fundamental properties of the Universe).
How does reincarnation (reincarnation) take place?
Most likely instantly. Posthumous existence is the consciousness of the embryo of a biological organism. Moreover, the rebirth takes place in a biological organism that best corresponds to the level of consciousness. The low consciousness of a person can be reborn into an animal, the high consciousness of an animal can be embodied in a person. Throughout life, the level of consciousness fluctuates under the influence of many external and internal factors.
Sleep is a short death, death is a long sleep.
For a long time I could not understand what would happen to the consciousness of biological organisms, when “the Universe is curled up with a biblical scroll”, that is, Armageddon (the End of the World) comes, that is, when there are no biological organisms, there will be no one to reincarnate. The answer is based on the principle of exact analogy with the cycle of existence (life and reincarnation) of a biological organism. The Universe will die and instantly be reborn - it will go into the state of an embryo - the embryo of a new Universe. Posthumous existence is the consciousness of the embryo of a biological organism (reincarnation occurs instantly).
Additional conclusions on the fundamental aspects of the Universe.
1) https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17702.msg239335#msg239335
2) https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17702.msg240771#msg240771
-
Fundamental aspects of the Universe (complete and final version).
1) The structure of the Universe is the key to understanding the origin of life, its nature, as well as the essence of paranormal phenomena, the nature of UFOs, aliens, and the key to the correct worldview.
2) Aliens do not exist (in the sense that they are not from other planets - not alien planets). Earth is the only planet in the universe. The sun is the only star in the universe. “Aliens” (all their alliances and races) are, roughly speaking, angels / demons. Entities that somehow manage to avoid incarnation for some time. Their influence on humanity is scanty on the physical plane (paranormal or subtle phenomena interact very weakly with matter), but colossal in the mental plane (religion, worldview). Most of all, they affect the mind through the fear of death and ignorance. “Aliens” are a psychophysical, subtle, noospheric phenomenon.
3) Is the Universe local?
Yes. Moreover, it is absolutely local. This comes out of the name itself. If besides the Universe there is something else, then without this something it is no longer the Universe. Within the framework of the Universe, the existence of something local is impossible, that is, absolutely without any interaction with the rest of the Universe. In short, this supposedly difficult question is actually a priori very unambiguous: the Universe is absolutely local, within the Universe, conditionally (relatively) local phenomena or regions (space) can exist, for example: a soundproof room, a sealed container, water-air, etc. .NS. impermeable containers. But absolutely nothing impenetrable space within the framework of the Universe itself cannot be created. In short, the Universe is an absolutely local space, within which the existence of any other absolutely local space is impossible.
4) Is it possible to know the future?
No. Knowledge of the future itself influences (changes) this future. Example. You find out that something bad is about to happen, even if you try to do nothing to fix it or avoid it, then at least your behavior and thinking will change. ... ... In short, it is impossible to know the future, because knowledge of the future itself affects the future, that is, changes it. ... ... There are certain trends and expectations of the future, but nobody knows 100% of it, although it is likely that it can be 100% predetermined.
5) The only infinite parameter in the Universe is time. Energy and matter, like consciousness and space, are limited, but indestructible. ... ... In short, here you need to understand well the Law of Conservation of Energy and its consequences, because this is essentially one of the fundamental properties of the Universe: Nothing appears from nowhere, and does not disappear into anywhere, but only redistributes and / or transforms from one state to another.
6) Religious worldviews.
The first and most important thing to understand is that the existence of 100% truth, or 100% falsehood is impossible.
Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism...) - sinners in hell, righteous in heaven - game over - stupidity, the impossibility of which has already been explained in detail somewhere. But this does not mean that these religions are completely false.
Hinduism and Buddhism, like Taoism and Shintoism with the concepts of karma and rebirth, in general, are closer to reality. But this does not mean that these religions are absolutely true.
That is, with regard to religion and worldview, it is important to understand how this or that issue or phenomenon corresponds to reality, logical, plausible, viable.
An important addition to the worldview.
Knowledge, understanding, awareness - three levels of comprehension of the meaning of something. Dynamic balance of opposites: + - at a specific moment in time, and strictly 50/50 at infinity (in time). A very important criterion for the truth of many things and phenomena, one of the fundamental properties of the Universe, the realization of which is the key to understanding a lot of things - the Law of Conservation of Energy - it's some kind of (like the third) Law of Thermodynamics. In my interpretation it looks like this: Nothing appears out of nowhere, and does not disappear into anywhere, but only redistributes and / or transforms from one state to another.
A very important consequence of the Law of Conservation of Energy. Destruction, preservation and creation are types of transformation. Something can be “created” only from something, it means not to create in the full sense of the word, but to transform something into something. Briefly speaking. Nobody created the universe, and there are no creators as such, in principle, there are transformers of different levels, orders, opportunities and responsibilities.
Nobody has ever created anything.
Creation, preservation and destruction are varieties of transformation. In Hinduism, Rama (creator), Vishnu (keeper), Shiva (destroyer) is the personalization of the transformation varieties. The Christian “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” is simply a collection of masculine words, a slogan of the patriarchal era. You can add meaning and weight to anything by attracting attention. Energy rushes after attention (Huna, Hawaiian wisdom).
Cyclicity of the Universe. Infinity of time. Immortality of consciousness.
Oblivion is inevitable, otherwise we would reliably know the entire history (the origin of life) "from beginning to end." The point is that there is no beginning or end. The end of one is the beginning of another. Time is the only infinite parameter in the full sense of the word. Time may slow down or speed up, but it never stops. Time is a characteristic of the intensity of spatial changes.
Matter, energy, consciousness - all this is divisible, limited and indestructible (“immortal”). Nothing appears out of nowhere and disappears into nowhere, but only redistributes and / or transforms from one state to another (the Law of Conservation of Energy is one of the fundamental properties of the Universe).
How does reincarnation (reincarnation) take place?
Most likely instantly. Posthumous existence is the consciousness of the embryo of a biological organism. Moreover, the rebirth takes place in a biological organism that best corresponds to the level of consciousness. The low consciousness of a person can be reborn into an animal, the high consciousness of an animal can be embodied in a person. Throughout life, the level of consciousness fluctuates under the influence of many external and internal factors.
Sleep is a short death, death is a long sleep.
For a long time I could not understand what would happen to the consciousness of biological organisms, when “the Universe is curled up with a biblical scroll”, that is, Armageddon (the End of the World) comes, that is, when there are no biological organisms, there will be no one to reincarnate. The answer is based on the principle of exact analogy with the cycle of existence (life and reincarnation) of a biological organism. The Universe will die and instantly be reborn - it will go into the state of an embryo - the embryo of a new Universe. Posthumous existence is the consciousness of the embryo of a biological organism (reincarnation occurs instantly).
Addition.
Ordinary waves have a medium - water.
Sound waves have a medium - a gas (atmosphere).
Do light and radio waves have a medium? The ether has not yet been allegedly proven.
The aquatic environment is inhabited.
The gaseous environment (atmosphere) is inhabited.
Is the ether inhabited? Where do UFOs come from? Where do the “aliens” (angels / demons) live?
Fortune telling, roulette, excitement, random. ... ... Fate or freedom of choice?
Everyone has only one choice - the best option available in his opinion (based on his experience). Nobody will choose another option. Crazy people act unconsciously - that is, in essence, randomly (unpredictably), that is, they do not make a choice as such.
Over time, a good decision (choice) can turn out to be bad, both under the influence of independent factors and because of the mistakes of the one who made this decision (made the choice).
1) The universe is the totality of everything that is. This is a limited collection (not an infinite number). Only time is infinite. Consequence of the Law of Conservation of Energy. I will not detail.
2) Everything in the Universe is interconnected and interdependent. A huge variety of external and internal factors affect you. At the same time, it is difficult to define who you yourself are. Your body, your mind, your thoughts ... and who are you?
With this in mind, are we choosing something, or just thinking we are choosing. Is there a choice as such, or is it just an illusion?
The point is, it doesn't matter (doesn't matter). See why.
Because it is impossible to know the future 100%.
Knowing the future would affect the result (would change the future), and it would not be the future that you supposedly knew about. It's like geometry. Proof from the opposite, or “we have come to a contradiction - the theorem (assumption) is proved”.
To calculate with 100% accuracy the mutual influence of all factors (particles, atoms) in the Universe, another Universe is needed, and more and more powerful. But the Universe is one - this emerges from the very name “all that is”. Let quantum physicists use fantasies about the Multiverse.
Conclusion?
It is very likely that we are not making any choice.
Our decisions and choices are an illusion of a complex, multifactorial, 100% unpredictable Universe.
Why is it important that it is impossible to predict, to predict an event exactly 100%? Because in any other case, there is a minimum, but still non-zero probability of unpredictability, which can work (be realized) at any time and reduce the reliability of the forecast from 99% to 1% (spoil the forecast to a certain extent).
Congratulations to everyone who understood something of this.
Everything is completely (100%) interdependent (interconnected and interdependent). But knowing the future reliably (100%) is impossible in principle.
Contradiction.
1) “Aliens” (all their alliances and races) are, roughly speaking, angels / demons. Entities that somehow manage to avoid incarnation for some time.
2) Posthumous existence is the consciousness of the embryo of a biological organism (reincarnation occurs instantly).
Clarification.
The specificity of the ether as a habitat (along with water and gas (atmosphere)) is that the souls / consciousness of biological organisms are “registered” in the ether. UFOs, “aliens”, angels / demons and other paranormal phenomena are such elusive phenomena that there is still not a single factual proof of their existence. But some processes are taking place in the ether (instant reincarnation), which we most likely perceive as UFOs, "aliens", angels / demons and other paranormalism. So most likely the first statement is false, and the second is true.
2) Posthumous existence is the consciousness of the embryo of a biological organism (reincarnation occurs instantly).
-
They look like lightning, they are registered as flashes - very unusual, they fly not perpendicular to the surface, but in parallel, and for some reason mainly in the southern direction. As if along the lines of magnetic field strength.
(https://i.ibb.co/19wc4rC/Sun.jpg)
Green filter - August 8, 9. Red Filter - August 12th. Bronze Filter - August 13th.
(https://i.ibb.co/5GTrVR2/ezgif-7-628bf085f1ec.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/ChzbKx5/ezgif-7-8c7944397bcd.gif)
(https://i.ibb.co/P46jdxC/ezgif-7-c69840eaad74.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/gz4VjZC/Flares.png)
From a spot in front of the Earth, lightning strikes parallel to the surface of the Sun. Solar flares come from a spot on the opposite side of the Sun. The Earth's magnetosphere suppresses (presses) the activity of the sunspots closest to it.
https://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/beacon/beacon_secchi.shtml
(https://i.ibb.co/T41fvGY/ezgif-3-bdb5abec2993.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/0Qpj580/ezgif-7-699b0753e0ed.gif)
-
The third flare from the opposite side of the Sun.
(https://i.ibb.co/VV275XQ/ahead-cor2-latest.jpg)
Okay, so I found one powerful solar flare in the direction of the Earth (October 28, 2003, SOHO Lasco C3). Which may well be just an exception to the rule.
(https://i.ibb.co/dJ0KXXR/ezgif-2-078f77f97b9f.gif)
But here another question arises. Where is the SOHO spacecraft located? The flare started around 09:00. Coronary matter reached the SOHO spacecraft at about 12:00 - these are white ripples in photographs (animations). If the coronal matter of a solar flare reaches the Earth in 2-3 days, then why did it reach the SOHO spacecraft in just 3 hours?
The solar wind is a stream of ionized particles (mainly helium-hydrogen plasma) flowing out of the solar corona at a speed of 300-1200 km/s into the surrounding space.
I think this is because the SOHO spacecraft is located at the point of the common center of mass between the Earth and the Sun (1/3-1/4 of the distance from the Earth to the Sun). At the same time, the speed of the coronal matter decreases strongly (slows down exponentially) as the distance is covered (distance from the Sun - the source of the flare).
(https://i.ibb.co/BK2xRn5/ume.jpg)
-
Another small, but very interesting fact indirectly confirms my model of the Universe. On the American continents, there are armadillos in the wild, but no hedgehogs. In Africa and Eurasia, there are hedgehogs in the wild, but no armadillos.
Arial of armadillos and Arial of hedgehogs.
Hedgehogs and the Sun have thorns.
The armadillos and the Moon have no thorns.
1) Self-organization (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization)
2) Fundamental aspects of the Universe. (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17702.msg245135#msg245135)
(https://i.ibb.co/mBC868g/Protoearth2.jpg) (https://i.ibb.co/Wzp422b/hasm2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/61xvD0d/Hasm.jpg)
-
What do you mean when you say that the sun has thorns?
And how do the armadillos and the hedgehogs confirm your model of the universe?
What is so significant about these two animals in particular?
-
Of all the objects in the celestial sphere, all "stars" and "planets" for some reason are one to one + - brightness. Only the Sun and the Moon stand out with the same angular dimensions (the sizes are proportional to the distances to the Earth) and the same axial rotation periods - 27 days.
It would be very difficult to hide such a global deception. A lot of people are engaged in this ... both professionals and amateurs ... Long ago the truth would come out ... And there is no big sense in such a deception. Something doesn't add up ...
1) Levels of access (secrecy).
2) There are several dozen spacecraft (not counting earth satellites). Several hundred well-paid people are engaged in non-dusty and not difficult direct service.
3) Lunar scam. 50 years ago, people allegedly flew to the Moon, and after 50 years of progress, both technologies are lost, and the spacesuits are not the same (NASA is postponing the flight to the Moon until 2025 due to problems with the development of spacesuits and ... lack of funding).
4) This is all richly seasoned with a 300-year history of theoretical astronomy with its black holes and distant, distant galaxies. Plus erroneous interpretations of astronomical observations. Of all the objects in the celestial sphere, all "stars" and "planets" for some reason are one to one + - brightness. Only the Sun and the Moon stand out with the same angular dimensions (the sizes are proportional to the distances to the Earth) and the same axial rotation periods - 27 days.
The official model of the universe is not true. The official model of the Universe is a global deception, conspiracy, distortion. The actual structure of the Universe is the key to understanding very many important things (aspects of the Universe). Distortion of an important aspect of the Universe leads to a distortion of the Worldview.
HERE IS THE REAL STRUCTURE OF THE UNIVERSE, BASED ON VERY HUGE FACTS AND PROVEN AS A THEOREM. THIS IS NOT A HYPOTHESIS, AND EVEN NOT A THEORY - THIS IS A FACTUAL MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE, CORRESPONDING TO REALITY.
Space exploration is useless and pointless. 90% of the global space industry budget is focused on space exploration. This is probably equal to the sum of all other spheres of human criminal activity. Money laundering requires the appearance of a socially beneficial activity. A striking example is money laundering through charitable (humanitarian) organizations.
Assumptions about distortions of official space calculations.
All celestial, orbital, trigonometric, mathematical calculations can have (and it seems to be so) one feature. They are all relatively correct. Take a close look at what I mean. Basic parameters such as distance, size and speed are highly interdependent and directly interdependent. Only one coefficient in the calculations directly affects the change in these three parameters in one direction or another. The mathematical concept may be correct, but the scale of the official model of the Universe is greatly overestimated, that is, cosmic velocities, distances and sizes are greatly overestimated. But this does not affect the proportions of the orbits. Hence, even though the scale is significantly overestimated, spaceships can (and they do) fly in the space of the solar system. The proportions are correct, the scale is incorrect, the calculations are relatively correct (only because of one incorrect coefficient * in the calculations, which directly affects the main cosmic parameters: distances, sizes and speeds).
* this incorrect coefficient may be the gravitational constant.
"The gravitational constant is a physical constant that is difficult to measure with high precision." (Wikipedia)
-
New model of the Universe. (https://alexandr-k3.livejournal.com/697.html)
(link to LiveJournal article)
-
Nice post... Any thoughts on the "thickness" of space? I've considered lately that Space is a like a thick liquid which limits Radiation exposure to people in space but also slows some space travel to a stand still, which gives people the false impression of distance covered, speed, and object size.
-
Powerful flares come only from sunspots on the far side of the Sun. Which is another confirmation of my model of the Universe, and a new pattern for predicting solar activity. The Earth's magnetosphere suppresses (reduces) the activity of the nearest sunspots (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=dfij75rk32paft5d1i2a21ra96&topic=17702.msg245193#msg245193), which is impossible in the official model of the Universe.
https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/aiahmi/
https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/lasco-coronagraph
https://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/beacon/beacon_secchi.shtml
(https://i.ibb.co/hctfDF8/ezgif-2-7586c597d829.gif)
(https://i.ibb.co/JKNqCSV/sf.jpg)
-
Three spatial dimensions: height, length, width. Three media of wave oscillations: gas (atmosphere), water, ether. Three types of transformation: creation, preservation and destruction. And their personalization in Hinduism is Rama (creator), Vishnu (keeper), Shiva (destroyer). I will write about the Christian trinity below.
Sacred Trinities . . .
1) Earth, 2) Sun, 3) Moon.
New model of the universe.
https://alexandr-k3.livejournal.com/697.html
(https://i.ibb.co/ZfBDkFb/protoearth.jpg)
(ProtoEarth, Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars; common center of mass between Earth and Sun; distance to the Moon is about 100 000 km., distance to the Sun is about 300 000 km.; Oort Cloud is the border of the Universe where all the "stars" and "galaxies" located (with diameters about tens of kilometers, formed from ProtoEarth's mantle, reflecting sunlight); the diameter of the Universe is about one light minute)
Christian Trinity.
“Father, Son, Holy Spirit” is a distortion for the sake of the patriarchal era (all three words are masculine). The feminine principle cannot be completely ignored and / or excluded, therefore, in Christianity there is an image of the “Blessed Virgin Mary” - in fact, it is an exemplary incubator completely obeying the masculine principle. This is in all Abrahamic religions, and the worst distortion is in Islam. But this is a formal convention that does not change the essence of the equality of the sexes as two equal opposites of one whole.
There was once a matriarchy, the echoes of which can be found both in official history and in Vedic culture: “Mother Earth”, “Mother Nature” . . . "Mother, Daughter, Holy Soul." The patriarchal era is "revenge" or the balancing opposite of matriarchy.
The main difference is in authority (power) and responsibility.
Under patriarchy, men have more authority (power) and responsibility.
Under matriarchy, women have more authority (power) and responsibility.
But these formalities do not change the essence of the equivalence of masculine and feminine principles.
An important addition to the worldview.
Knowledge, understanding, awareness - three levels of comprehension of the meaning of something. Dynamic balance of opposites: + - at a specific moment in time, and strictly 50/50 at infinity (in time). A very important criterion for the truth of many things and phenomena, one of the fundamental properties of the Universe, the realization of which is the key to understanding a lot of things - the Law of Conservation of Energy - it's some kind of (like the third) Law of Thermodynamics. In my interpretation, it looks like this: Nothing appears out of nowhere, and does not disappear into anywhere, but only redistributes and / or transforms from one state to another.
A very important consequence of the Law of Conservation of Energy. Destruction, preservation and creation are varieties of transformation. Something can be "created" only from something, it means not to create in the full sense of the word, but to transform something into something. Briefly speaking. Nobody created the universe, and there are no creators as such, in principle, there are transformers of different levels, orders, opportunities and responsibilities.
Nobody has ever created anything.
Creation, preservation and destruction are varieties of transformation. In Hinduism, Rama (creator), Vishnu (keeper), Shiva (destroyer) is the personalization of the transformation varieties. The Christian “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” is simply a collection of masculine words, the slogan of the patriarchal era. You can add meaning and weight to anything by attracting attention. Energy rushes after attention (Energy follows the attention) (Huna, Hawaiian wisdom).
-
(https://i.ibb.co/g40Ptnw/c1-gif-f4f71516fc54ad8ebe63093877b924b3.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/M2Mxgs2/C3-jpg-4c83f1ebdd151127c5b9d85ea40082c1.jpg)
The Unsolved Mystery of the Earth Blobs (https://eos.org/features/the-unsolved-mystery-of-the-earth-blobs)
PreAmerica split into 3 modern continents.
(https://i.ibb.co/q7gCNYb/preamerica.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/gd8Dt2B/Oileng.jpg)
Habitat of armadillos and habitat of hedgehogs.
(https://i.ibb.co/Wzp422b/hasm2.jpg)
Traces from the Sun and Moon on the Earth's surface.
- Ratio of diameters approximately 3 to 1.
- Both have an eastern direction.
- Both have an eastern position relative to their PreContinents (PreAmerica and PreEurasia).
- Both have diametrically opposite locations on the surface of the Earth.
(https://i.ibb.co/Jmkjpqk/Sunmoon.jpg)
Real (actual) model of the Universe.
(https://i.ibb.co/ZfBDkFb/protoearth.jpg)
(ProtoEarth, Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars; common center of mass between Earth and Sun; distance to the Moon is about 100 000 km., distance to the Sun is about 300 000 km.; Oort Cloud is the border of the Universe where all the "stars" and "galaxies" located, made from ProtoEarth's mantle, with diameters about tens of kilometers and reflecting sunlight; the diameter of the Universe does not exceed one light minute)
(https://i.ibb.co/Rz9Bxtd/Stgaleng.jpg)
-
The name of the country “Mexico” and the city of Mexico City are believed to be derived from the words metztli (“Moon”) and xictli (“navel, middle”), thus meaning “middle of the Moon”.
1) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Мецтли
2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metztli
3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Mexico
(https://i.ibb.co/g40Ptnw/c1-gif-f4f71516fc54ad8ebe63093877b924b3.gif)(https://i.ibb.co/M2Mxgs2/C3-jpg-4c83f1ebdd151127c5b9d85ea40082c1.jpg)
The Unsolved Mystery of the Earth Blobs (https://eos.org/features/the-unsolved-mystery-of-the-earth-blobs)
(https://i.ibb.co/t4T7ZZX/Pc22eng.jpg)
(https://cont.ws/uploads/pic/2021/8/Moon.jpg)(https://cont.ws/uploads/pic/2021/8/ezgif-4-ab5c2a714284.gif)(https://i.ibb.co/mBC868g/Protoearth2.jpg)
(a huge trail of clearly cosmic origin between South America and Antarctica, animation of the trajectory of a solar eclipse shadow and a schematic drawing)
-
I recently learned that there's a huge magnetic void around South America (see https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/when-north-goes-south-is-earths-magnetic-field-flipping?fbclid=IwAR355ZL2_HRrECEMm3-GyYo-cXcGCAZUPnn-V8JGH8Kdb3KxL08u-9LOHZg towards the bottom).
The "South Atlantic Anomaly". Some think that the moon hit the Earth in the early days of formation and left a big chunk beneath the Earth surface which blocks convection currents of Lava which causes a lack of electricity generation and a weak spot in the Earth's magnetic field. Maybe this is why Mexico is named after "Moon".
-
I recently learned that there's a huge magnetic void around South America (see https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/when-north-goes-south-is-earths-magnetic-field-flipping?fbclid=IwAR355ZL2_HRrECEMm3-GyYo-cXcGCAZUPnn-V8JGH8Kdb3KxL08u-9LOHZg towards the bottom).
The "South Atlantic Anomaly". Some think that the moon hit the Earth in the early days of formation and left a big chunk beneath the Earth surface which blocks convection currents of Lava which causes a lack of electricity generation and a weak spot in the Earth's magnetic field. Maybe this is why Mexico is named after "Moon".
Well Mexico is in North America nowhere near this anomaly so this is not very likely.
Also your link does not support the theory that the moon hit the Earth in the early days of formation. It rather supports the "mainstream" view on how the Moon was created.
Finally, this must have happened billions of years ago. So how could such an event have affected the people that first named Mexico?
-
The Anomaly isn't that far from Mexico. Maybe a little continental drift occured. I'm not really investigating the merits of the claim, it's just an interesting coincidence.
-
The last proof. A similar process in the Sun. During the formation of the Moon and the Sun at the poles of Proto-Earth, there were no more objects in space.
(https://i.ibb.co/qCXS5gs/ezgif-2-4c1506b6120a.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/Wv78SW7/ezgif-2-0b2d60cf6de4.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/XzDYXcy/ezgif-2-196e4ee92e11.gif)
(https://i.ibb.co/znqhn1v/sunmoon.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/C6dJ4fh/spa.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/mGw9QM2/sun-p2a.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/7CrQ3HJ/sun-pa.jpg)
-
Universe, duality and the sacred trinity.
Three spatial dimensions: height, length, width. Three media of wave oscillations: gas (atmosphere), water, ether. Three types of transformation: creation, preservation and destruction. And their personalization in Hinduism is Rama (creator), Vishnu (keeper), Shiva (destroyer). I will write about the Christian trinity below.
Sacred Trinities . . .
1) Earth, 2) Sun, 3) Moon.
New model of the Universe. (https://alexandr-k3.livejournal.com/697.html)
(https://i.ibb.co/BK2xRn5/ume.jpg)
(ProtoEarth, Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars; common center of mass between Earth and Sun; distance to the Moon is about 100 000 km., distance to the Sun is about 300 000 km.; Moon diameter - 800-1000 km., Sun diameter 2500-3000 km.; Oort Cloud is the border of the Universe where all the "stars" and "galaxies" located - spherical objects from ProtoEarth's mantle with diameters about tens of kilometers; the diameter of the Universe does not exceed one light minute)
Christian Trinity.
“Father, Son, Holy Spirit” is a distortion for the sake of the patriarchal era (all three words are masculine, in russian the word “spirit” is masculine, the word “soul” is feminine). The feminine principle cannot be completely ignored and / or excluded, therefore in Christianity there is an image of the “Most Holy Theotokos” - in fact, it is an exemplary incubator completely obeying the masculine principle. This is in all Abrahamic religions, and the worst distortion is in Islam. But this is a formal convention that does not change the essence of the equality of the sexes as two equal opposites of one whole.
There was once a matriarchy, the echoes of which can be found both in official history and in Vedic culture: “Mother Earth”, “Mother Nature” ... "Mother, Daughter, Holy Soul (feminine in russian)." The patriarchal era is "revenge" or the balancing opposite of matriarchy.
The main difference is in authority (power) and responsibility.
Under patriarchy, men have more authority (power) and responsibility.
Under matriarchy, women have more authority (power) and responsibility.
But these formalities do not change the essence of the equivalence of masculine and feminine principles.
An important addition to the worldview.
Knowledge, understanding, awareness - three levels of comprehension of the meaning of something. Dynamic balance of opposites: + - at a specific moment in time, and strictly 50/50 at infinity (in time). A very important criterion for the truth of many things and phenomena, one of the fundamental properties of the Universe, the realization of which is the key to understanding a lot of things - the Law of Conservation of Energy - it's some kind of (like the third) Law of Thermodynamics. In my interpretation it looks like this: Nothing appears out of nowhere, and does not disappear into anywhere, but only redistributes and/or transforms from one state to another.
A very important consequence of the Law of Conservation of Energy. Destruction, preservation and creation are varieties of transformation. Something can be "created" only from something, it means not to create in the full sense of the word, but to transform something into something. Briefly speaking. Nobody created the universe, and there are no creators as such, in principle, there are transformers of different levels, orders, opportunities and responsibilities.
Nobody has ever created anything.
Creation, preservation and destruction are varieties of transformation. In Hinduism, Rama (creator), Vishnu (keeper), Shiva (destroyer) is the personalization of the transformation varieties. The Christian “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (masculine in russian)” is simply a collection of masculine words, a slogan of the patriarchal era. You can add meaning and weight to anything by attracting attention. Energy rushes after attention. (Energy follows the attention.) (Huna, Hawaiian wisdom).
-
Many do not believe in world conspiracies, because it is almost impossible to hide information. It's not just a cover-up. The point is in distortion of facts. This is a game on ignorance and other human vices, shortcomings and weaknesses. Two global scams (frauds): 1) pandemic and 2) space.
1) The current coronavirus pandemic is an exacerbation of seasonal Acute Respiratory Infections due to a decrease in solar activity.
In 2009 there was a swine flu epidemic (on the verge of a pandemic) and there was a sunny minimum. In 2019, the solar minimum and the coronavirus pandemic began. For 10 years, the ecology has worsened significantly + the current solar minimum is probably weaker (more extreme) than the previous one. The current coronavirus pandemic is an exacerbation of seasonal Acute Respiratory Infections due to a decrease in solar activity.
The death rate from coronavirus is less than 10% - this is probably comparable to the death rate from influenza. In addition, the coronavirus can be a type (mutation) of influenza or some kind of ARVI (acute respiratory viral infection). Over time, human organisms would adapt (adapt) to this virus and the mortality rate would go down. No vaccination is needed. It is rather a worldwide fraud under the guise of vaccination. It is also possible that vaccination will be more harmful than beneficial. A mortality rate of less than 10% is like a slightly increased temperature in the body, which is not recommended to be brought down with additional means (medications, drugs), because this can cause more harm.
2) Why, over 70 years of space exploration (development) by the efforts of all mankind, this space is still not being mastered (developed) in any way? Of all the objects in the celestial sphere, all "stars" and "planets" for some reason are one to one + - brightness. Only the Sun and the Moon stand out with the same angular dimensions (the dimensions are proportional to the distances to the Earth) and the same axial rotation periods - 27 days.
New model of the Universe. (https://alexandr-k3.livejournal.com/697.html)
-
Japan - the land of the rising Sun.
The name of the country “Mexico” and the city of Mexico City are believed to be derived from the words metztli (“Moon”) and xictli (“navel, middle”), thus meaning “middle of the Moon”.
(https://i.ibb.co/r0zpGcr/Jmsm.jpg)
New model of the Universe.
https://alexandr-k3.livejournal.com/697.html
Traces from the Sun and Moon on the Earth's surface.
1) Ratio of diameters ~ 3 to 1.
2) Both have an east direction.
3) Both have an eastern position relative to their Pra-Continents (Pra-America and Pra-Eurasia).
4) Both have diametrically opposite locations on the surface of the Earth.
(https://i.ibb.co/8Dw323Z/sunmoon.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/hLFmFVP/Moon.jpg) (https://i.ibb.co/ZS0TBkY/ezgif-4-ab5c2a714284.gif) (https://i.ibb.co/mBC868g/Protoearth2.jpg)
(huge trail of clearly cosmic origin between South America and Antarctica, animation of the trajectory of a solar eclipse shadow and a schematic drawing)
-
What else, if not the Sun and Moon, could have formed tectonic plates in these places?
(https://i.ibb.co/tqRQmyn/Tp.jpg)
-
What else, if not the Sun and Moon, could have formed tectonic plates in these places?
(https://i.ibb.co/tqRQmyn/Tp.jpg)
I think that you need to explain this a bit as at first glance it really does not seem to make any sense.
-
Tectonic plates are formed under the pressure of a large mass, therefore they are also called continental plates. The Pacific plate is formed under the pressure of a homogeneous mass of water over a large area. The tectonic plates outlined in red rectangles (PHILIPPINE PLATE, COCOS PLATE, CARRIBEAN PLATE and SCOTIA PLATE) in the image below were formed under the pressure of large masses that were once there, but now they are not there - under the pressure of the Sun and the Moon. In addition, the tectonic plates outlined in red rectangles in the image below completely repeat the outlines of traces on the Earth's surface.
(https://i.ibb.co/BZXRhH6/tp3.jpg)
The Sun is heavier than the Moon, so it flew farther from the Earth and left only one trace on the surface (PHILIPPINE PLATE). The Moon is lighter than the Sun, and therefore it hooked the Earth several times while entering its current orbit along an elliptical trajectory - it left three tracks on the Earth's surface: COCOS PLATE, CARRIBEAN PLATE and SCOTIA PLATE.
Japan - the land of the rising sun.
The name of the country “Mexico” and the city of Mexico City are believed to be derived from the words metztli (“Moon”) and xictli (“navel, middle”), thus meaning “middle of the Moon”.
(https://i.ibb.co/Q8dpYG9/tp2.jpg)
Why, over 70 years of space exploration (development) by the efforts of all mankind, this space is still not being mastered (developed) in any way? Of all the objects in the celestial sphere, all "stars" and "planets" for some reason are one to one + - brightness. Only the Sun and the Moon stand out with the same angular dimensions (the dimensions are proportional to the distances to the Earth) and the same axial rotation periods - 27 days.
-
Why do you single out these three plates and do not consider other plates of similar sizes such as the Arabian and the Indian ones?
-
(https://i.ibb.co/jJJQP9S/Smt.jpg)
-
OK if this is how these plates were formed then how were the other small ones created?
-
OK if this is how these plates were formed then how were the other small ones created?
Traces on the surface completely repeat the outlines of these four tectonic plates. Three Moon tracks (COCOS PLATE, CARRIBEAN PLATE and SCOTIA PLATE) have the same size (width). The trail from the Sun (PHILIPPINE PLATE) is about 3 times thicker than the lunar one (Sun is about 3 times bigger and 3 times farther than the Moon).
Tectonic plates are formed under the pressure of a large mass, therefore they are also called continental plates. The Pacific plate is formed under the pressure of a homogeneous mass of water over a large area. The tectonic plates outlined in red rectangles (PHILIPPINE PLATE, COCOS PLATE, CARRIBEAN PLATE and SCOTIA PLATE) in the image below were formed under the pressure of large masses that were once there, but now they are not there - under the pressure of the Sun and the Moon. In addition, the tectonic plates outlined in red rectangles in the image below completely repeat the outlines of traces on the Earth's surface.
The Sun is heavier than the Moon, so it flew farther from the Earth and left only one trace on the surface (PHILIPPINE PLATE). The Moon is lighter than the Sun, and therefore it hooked the Earth several times while entering its current orbit along an elliptical trajectory - it left three tracks on the Earth's surface: COCOS PLATE, CARRIBEAN PLATE and SCOTIA PLATE.
-
(Sun is about 3 times bigger and 3 times farther than the Moon).
How'd you come up with this?
-
Следы Солнца и Луны на поверхности Земли. Sun and Moon traces on the Earth's surface. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWfgAAuFUMo)
Details in video description.
-
Two huge diametrically opposite formations on the surface of the Earth's core (Earth Blobs). Both are displaced eastward. The larger Earth Blob (under Africa) corresponds to the continents of Praeurasia (Africa, Eurasia, Australia), which are displaced from it to the east. The smaller Earth Blob (under the Pacific Ocean) corresponds to the continents of PreAmerica (North America, South America, Antarctica), which are displaced from it to the east. To the east (near) of Eurasia there is a huge trace from the Sun (shifted to the east) on the surface, and the tectonic plate completely repeats the outline of this trace (PHILIPPINE PLATE). Near the Americas, there are huge traces of the Moon (displaced to the east) on the surface, and tectonic plates completely repeating the outlines of these tracks (COCOS PLATE, CARRIBEAN PLATE and SCOTIA PLATE).
(https://i.ibb.co/g40Ptnw/c1-gif-f4f71516fc54ad8ebe63093877b924b3.gif)(https://i.ibb.co/M2Mxgs2/C3-jpg-4c83f1ebdd151127c5b9d85ea40082c1.jpg)
The Unsolved Mystery of the Earth Blobs (https://eos.org/features/the-unsolved-mystery-of-the-earth-blobs)
(https://i.ibb.co/jJJQP9S/Smt.jpg)
All these facts cannot be coincidences. These are patterns that testify to this.
(https://i.ibb.co/BK2xRn5/ume.jpg)
(ProtoEarth, Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars; common center of mass between Earth and Sun; distance to the Moon is about 100 000 km., distance to the Sun is about 300 000 km.; Moon diameter is about 800-1000 kilometers, Sun diameter is about 2500-3000 kilometers; Oort Cloud is the border of the Universe where all the "stars" and "galaxies" located - formed from the ProtoEarth's mantle (core) with diameters about tens of kilometers; the diameter of the Universe does not exceed one light minute)
-
Now the new model of the Universe is known in 1) Singapore and 2) Thailand.
1) https://aseannow.com/topic/1233448-real-structure-of-the-universe/
2) https://aseannow.com/topic/1233446-new-model-of-the-universe/
-
Now the new model of the Universe is known in Russian Police.
https://police-russia.com/showthread.php?t=110296
-
your links aren't working...
-
your links aren't working...
I know. My topics were removed from all that sites.
Here is another empty link: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=54882.0
Screenshot compilation as a proof:
(https://i.ibb.co/rpX9trz/nasa.jpg)
-
your links aren't working...
I know. My topics were removed from all that sites.
Why was it removed?
-
your links aren't working...
I know. My topics were removed from all that sites.
Why was it removed?
The budget of the global space industry is enormous resources. About 80% of these resources are focused on space exploration. My model of the Universe is irrefutable proof of the futility (uselessness and pointlessness) of space exploration.
Why, over 70 years of space exploration (development) by the efforts of all mankind, this space is still not being mastered (developed) in any way? Of all the objects in the celestial sphere, all "stars" and "planets" for some reason are one to one + - brightness. Only the Sun and the Moon stand out with the same angular dimensions (the dimensions are proportional to the distances to the Earth) and the same axial rotation periods - 27 days.
-
your links aren't working...
I know. My topics were removed from all that sites.
Why was it removed?
The budget of the global space industry is enormous resources. About 80% of these resources are focused on space exploration. My model of the Universe is irrefutable proof of the futility (uselessness and pointlessness) of space exploration.
What makes it irrefutable?
Why, over 70 years of space exploration (development) by the efforts of all mankind, this space is still not being mastered (developed) in any way? Of all the objects in the celestial sphere, all "stars" and "planets" for some reason are one to one + - brightness. Only the Sun and the Moon stand out with the same angular dimensions (the dimensions are proportional to the distances to the Earth) and the same axial rotation periods - 27 days.
Which part of the sun's axial rotation are you referring to?
(https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/by9L5CgJcafx6sNc4i9EBD-970-80.jpg)
-
Why, over 70 years of space exploration (development) by the efforts of all mankind, this space is still not being mastered (developed) in any way? Of all the objects in the celestial sphere, all "stars" and "planets" for some reason are one to one + - brightness. Only the Sun and the Moon stand out with the same angular dimensions (the dimensions are proportional to the distances to the Earth) and the same axial rotation periods - 27 days.
Which part of the sun's axial rotation are you referring to?
(https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/by9L5CgJcafx6sNc4i9EBD-970-80.jpg)
Average, mean value of solar axial period! The Sun rotates on its axis once in about 27 days.
The Moon orbits the Earth once every 27.322 days. No way its coincidence. It is a pattern, regularity.
-
Why, over 70 years of space exploration (development) by the efforts of all mankind, this space is still not being mastered (developed) in any way? Of all the objects in the celestial sphere, all "stars" and "planets" for some reason are one to one + - brightness. Only the Sun and the Moon stand out with the same angular dimensions (the dimensions are proportional to the distances to the Earth) and the same axial rotation periods - 27 days.
Which part of the sun's axial rotation are you referring to?
(https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/by9L5CgJcafx6sNc4i9EBD-970-80.jpg)
Average, mean value of solar axial period! The Sun rotates on its axis once in about 27 days.
The Moon orbits the Earth once every 27.322 days. No way its coincidence. It is a pattern, regularity.
Who said it was a coincidence?
So what makes your theory irrefutable?
-
Your Theory about the Sun and Moon 27 day Rotation and Orbit sounds similar to "Mutual Tidal Locking" we see with Pluto and its moon Charon:
"At half the size of Pluto, Charon is the largest of Pluto's moons and the largest known satellite relative to its parent body. Pluto-Charon is our solar system's only known double planetary system. The same surfaces of Charon and Pluto always face each other, a phenomenon called mutual tidal locking. Charon orbits Pluto every 6.4 Earth days."
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/moons/pluto-moons/charon/in-depth/
-
Formation of continents.
Look closely at the animation of two huge, diametrically opposed formations on the surface of the Earth’s core (Earth Blobs). They cannot but be directly related to the formation of continents. They are both displaced in the same direction (east). From them to the east displaced continents. Compare with the official model of continent formation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangaea). These huge structures contradict the official model of continent formation.
(https://iili.io/527eig.gif)(https://iili.io/527OWF.gif)
Animation source link: The Unsolved Mystery of the Earth Blobs (https://eos.org/features/the-unsolved-mystery-of-the-earth-blobs)
The Cordillera — the Andes, the Iranian highlands — the Himalayas — are also two huge formations of a similar shape, also diametrically opposed to each other. Each of them are displaced east of their Earth Blobs. Cordillera — The Andes are displaced further from their Earth Blobs and are more split. Iranian Highlands — The Himalayas are closer to their Earth Blobs, and are displaced northward.
(https://iili.io/527Nx1.jpg)
New model of the Universe.
From the above, we can conclude that before the moment of the so-called “Big Bang” in the Universe there was a certain material sphere with a diameter of about 20 thousand km, the substance in which was in the stage of the limit of density (the state of singularity). Let’s call this sphere ProtoEarth.
(https://miro.medium.com/max/700/0*eyOgibyFDO3TCEbI.jpg)
As a result of certain processes at the Proto-Earth’s poles two PreContinents were gradually formed — PreAmerica (North America, South America and Antarctica) and PreEurasia (Africa, Eurasia and Australia), in the centers of which the Sun and the Moon were gradually formed. Parallel to this, water was formed in a wide strip of the proto-Earth’s equator as a result of certain processes. At a certain moment, a critical mass difference accumulated at the poles, the equilibrium of the system was violated, the separation of the Sun and the Moon began, the proto-Earth’s axis of rotation shifted from conditional zero degrees to the current 23.5 degrees, and the formation of modern continents.
(https://miro.medium.com/max/229/0*AxWR0OlWjs5bV2sH.jpg)(https://miro.medium.com/max/204/0*-bGksHyiq5saY2NU.gif)(https://miro.medium.com/max/130/0*iYUbvS-m5TgXo1kE.jpg)
(a huge trail of clearly cosmic origin between South America and Antarctica, animation of the trajectory of a solar eclipse shadow and a schematic drawing)
A few more arguments in favor of this model of the Universe:
- The coincidence of the apparent diameters of the Sun and the Moon in the sky.
- The coincidence of the axial periods of rotation of the Sun and the Moon (27 days).
- Only Mercury and Venus have no satellites.
- Only Mercury and Venus have incommensurably large periods of rotation around their axes 58 and 243 days, respectively (Earth, Mars — 1 day; Jupiter, Saturn — 16, 17 hours; Uranus, Neptune — 9, 10 hours).
- In each lower conjunction (that is, during the closest approach to the Earth) Venus is facing the Earth by the same side.
(https://miro.medium.com/max/700/0*eQA_8-NVqvtF0Ovy.jpg)
(schematic comparison of the official and new model of the Universe; ProtoEarth, Moon, Sun, Venus, Mercury, Mars and common center of masses between Earth and Sun)
Thus, it is very similar to the fact that the Universe looks approximately like on the Tycho Brahe’s model of the Universe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tychonic_system), only with the correction for the rotation of the Earth and the Sun around the common center of mass. The Oort cloud is the border of the Universe, where all the “stars” and “galaxies” formed from the proto-Earth mantle, with diameters not exceeding several tens of kilometers, are located. The diameter of the universe, presumably, does not exceed one light minute.
(https://miro.medium.com/max/562/0*B0wbkYY4xzQWuw58.jpg)
In all this, a correct understanding of the rotation of the Earth and the Sun around a common center of mass is very important. The ratio of diameters is approximately the same as in the animation (the Earth is larger, the Sun is smaller).
(https://miro.medium.com/max/200/0*Y5UaBbQwWLf6CEfb.gif)
The nature of light and the size of the Universe.
A photon has energy and momentum (weight) but no mass. It is obvious that light is vibrations of some medium (ether). This environment cannot but have resistance, damping or absorbing light vibrations with time and distance. I will describe the essence in simple words so as not to complicate and not drag out the explanation.
1) Water waves.
They spread longer (in time) than sound, but at a shorter distance (at a lower speed). Distribution medium: water.
2) Sound waves.
The lifetime of sound waves is shorter than that of water waves, but the speed (and distance) is greater. Distribution medium: atmosphere (gas).
3) Light waves.
By analogy, the lifetime of light waves should be much shorter than the lifetime of sound waves, but since the speed of light is about 300,000 km/s — the propagation distance is greater. Distribution medium: ether.
(https://miro.medium.com/max/234/0*wt1FMmCYoDWiUn8X.jpg)
(a schematic representation of a photon — a conventional unit of oscillation (wave) of the ether) Image text translation: The movement of one light wave (photon) from the source to complete attenuation and / or absorption by the medium (ether).
At the beginning of the 20th century, scientists rejected the completely plausible hypothesis of the Tired Light (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tired_light), began to carry out fortune-telling by redshifts of the spectrum (like on coffee grounds, only by the emission spectra), and billions of light years, black holes, dark energies, and distant, distant galaxies rushed.
Light years?
A photon cannot exist not only for years, but even for minutes. Example. Standing in the lake. You throw a stone. First you hear the sound, later the waves come. Waves on water, sound waves in a gaseous medium and light waves in ether are phenomena of the same nature, but of different orders due to the environment. If waves on water “live” for minutes, and sound waves in a gaseous medium “live” for seconds, then light waves in their medium (ether) “live” for a fraction of a second. All this depends on the power of the source of wave oscillations, so it can be assumed that light waves from the Sun can exist for several seconds, but not more (not minutes, and even less years).
Even if in the space environment (vacuum) there is no resistance, there is no heat exchange, then the distance is overcome (volume expansion with distance), which cannot occur absolutely without energy consumption. In addition, the space of the cosmic vacuum cannot be absolutely empty. There cannot but be certain, albeit minimal, resistance and heat transfer. Light years and 8 light minutes from Sun to Earth are physically impossible.
Again. Attentively. This is very important to understand. Overcoming distance in any environment, that is, regardless of the environment, cannot occur without energy consumption (or with zero energy consumption). Since a photon has a very low energy charge, and a very high speed of movement, and no medium (including space) can have absolutely zero resistance, then, accordingly, the lifetime (life) of one photon (wave oscillation of the medium — ether) is very short, not exceeding at least one minute.
Definition. The lifetime of a unit of wave oscillations (one wave) is inversely proportional to the speed of their propagation (or directly proportional to the inertia of the medium) and is directly proportional to the power of their source.
Since the ether is not scientifically recognized, it turns out that a photon is a conventional unit of wave oscillations of an incomprehensible medium? A photon has weight (energy and momentum), but no mass — it is obvious that this is an oscillation (wave) of some medium (ether).
Ordinary waves have a medium — water.
Sound waves have a medium — a gas (atmosphere).
Do light and radio waves have a medium? The ether has not yet been allegedly proven.
The aquatic environment is inhabited.
The gaseous environment (atmosphere) is inhabited.
Is the ether inhabited? Where do UFOs come from? Where do the “aliens” (angels / demons) live?
Sun and Moon traces on the Earth's surface.
Tectonic plates are formed under the pressure of a large mass, therefore they are also called continental plates. The Pacific plate is formed under the pressure of a homogeneous mass of water over a large area. The tectonic plates outlined in red rectangles (PHILIPPINE PLATE, COCOS PLATE, CARRIBEAN PLATE and SCOTIA PLATE) in the image below were formed under the pressure of large masses that were once there, but now they are not there - under the pressure of the Sun and the Moon. In addition, the tectonic plates outlined in red rectangles in the image below completely repeat the outlines of traces on the Earth's surface.
The Sun flew farther from the Earth and left only one trace on the surface (PHILIPPINE PLATE). The Moon hooked the Earth several times while entering its current orbit along an elliptical trajectory - it left three tracks on the Earth's surface: COCOS PLATE, CARRIBEAN PLATE and SCOTIA PLATE.
(https://iili.io/5272cv.jpg)
Japan - the land of the rising sun.
The name of the country “Mexico” and the city of Mexico City are believed to be derived from the words metztli (“Moon”) and xictli (“navel, middle”), thus meaning “middle of the Moon”.
(https://iili.io/527dKJ.jpg)
Why, over 70 years of space exploration (development) by the efforts of all mankind, this space is still not being mastered (developed) in any way? Of all the objects in the celestial sphere, all "stars" and "planets" for some reason are one to one + - brightness. Only the Sun and the Moon stand out with the same angular dimensions (the dimensions are proportional to the distances to the Earth) and the same axial rotation periods - 27 days.
Real structure of the Universe.
(https://miro.medium.com/max/676/0*ZSav5o1wsWKI0Dsv.jpg)
(ProtoEarth, Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars; common center of mass between Earth and Sun; distance to the Moon is about 100 000 km., distance to the Sun is about 300 000 km.; Oort Cloud is the border of the Universe where all the “stars” and “galaxies” located; the diameter of the Universe does not exceed one light minute)
The rotation of the Earth and the Sun around a common center of mass (the Earth is larger).
(https://miro.medium.com/max/200/0*ynYawA3qOJVLCQH2.gif)
Another small, but very interesting fact indirectly confirms my model of the Universe. On the American continents, there are armadillos in the wild, but no hedgehogs. In Africa and Eurasia, there are hedgehogs in the wild, but no armadillos.
Armadillos habitat and hedgehogs habitat.
Hedgehogs and the Sun have thorns.
The armadillos and the Moon have no thorns.
1) Self-organization (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization)
2) Fundamental aspects of the Universe. (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=dfij75rk32paft5d1i2a21ra96&topic=17702.msg245135#msg245135)
(https://miro.medium.com/max/617/0*dvPhKUX60-l3IJNs.jpg)
(https://miro.medium.com/max/503/0*XfcHtFYN0ZT_yV_4.jpg)
Moon size calculation.
The trail from the Moon on the surface of the Earth.
(https://miro.medium.com/max/700/0*-tWorVS7nEF8KYMU.jpg)
The duration of an eclipse is directly proportional to the size of the object, all other things being equal (distance and speed). The duration of the total phase of a solar eclipse is 7.5 minutes (the Moon completely covers the Sun for 7.5 minutes). The duration of the total phase of the lunar eclipse is 108 minutes (the Earth completely covers the Sun for 108 minutes). With the same distance between the Moon and the Earth. At the same speed of the Moon (the orbit of the Moon moves with the speed of the Earth). The diameter of the Earth is 12,742 km. Therefore, the diameter of the Moon can be calculated using the following formula: 12 742 * (7.5 / 108) = 885 km. The official diameter of the Moon is 3,474 km. Moreover, the result of calculating the diameter of the Moon quite accurately coincides with the size of the track between South America and Antarctica (875 km. + — 25 km.), which confirms the calculation and minimizes probability of a simple coincidence.
Factual (scientific) confirmation of the biblical Armageddon (End of the World).
And suddenly, after the sorrow of those days, the sun will darken, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. (Gospel of Matthew 24:29)
Each next of the last five solar cycles is weaker than the previous one (one solar cycle lasts about 10 years). The fall in solar activity for 5 consecutive cycles, this is a regularity - a trend indicating the extinction of the Sun. The graphs of solar activity before 1950-1960 (before the beginning of the space era) cannot be reliable (the accuracy of observations was incomparably lower) - this is something like a forecast into the past.
(https://iili.io/5KgJF1.jpg)
The coronavirus pandemic is caused by solar activity. In 2009, there was a solar minimum and there was an epidemic (on the verge of a pandemic) of swine flu. In 2019, the solar minimum and the coronavirus pandemic began. At the same time, the ecology has significantly deteriorated over 10 years. And the current solar minimum is probably more extreme than the previous one.
I think over the course of several years the Universe will collapse to the limit of matter density into a sphere of a certain diameter ~ 20 thousand km. (all space objects will fly to the center of mass common between the Earth and the Sun along a spiral trajectory). The solar wind creates pressure from within the universe. The sun is dying out. When a certain critical minimum level of solar activity is reached, the process of folding the Universe into a "biblical scroll" will begin.
(https://iili.io/5Kg96P.jpg)
The stars in the sky will decay, and the sky will roll up like a scroll; the entire host of stars will fall like withered leaves from a vine, like dried fruit from a fig. (Isaiah 34: 4)
And suddenly, after the sorrow of those days, the sun will darken, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of heaven will be shaken. (Gospel of Matthew 24:29)
-
Illusion. Dialectics. Truth.
Only recently (at the age of 36) I learned that dialectics is a branch of philosophy, not linguistics. Not knowing this concept, I came to the same conclusions. Brief essence of dialectics: "unity and struggle of opposites." Brief essence of my conclusions: “dynamic balance of opposites, + - at a specific moment / period of time, and strictly 50/50 at infinity in time”. This is the very essence, basis, foundation of the Universe, Nirvana, Nothingness, Non-existence. Absolute balance, when all opposites are strictly 50/50 balanced. When 10 units of good and 10 units of bad at the same time are neither good nor bad, this is nothing.
At first glance, it is paradoxical, but this Nothing is the basis of the Universe. All other religions and Worldviews are shells (superstructures) of this foundation. In Nirvana (in Absolute Nothing) there is no Buddha, there is no one and nothing at all, it is impossible to be there - this is an ideal concept (concept) - completely (100%) corresponding to reality. Other worldviews (religions) appear and collapse on the foundation of dialectics - these are illusory temporary and necessary shells. The better they are balanced (closer to reality 50/50) - the more bland and tasteless they are, the less attractive. The more attractive a religion or worldview is - the more unstable it is - the less it corresponds to reality, and the more disappointment it will bring to its followers after the epiphany or collapse of this worldview.
The percentage of reality of the three world religions according to my rough estimate (100% - full compliance with reality). Buddhism - 90%, Christianity - 50%, Islam - 20%.
The less the correspondence to reality, the more problems and contradictions are generated by religion or worldview. It is also interesting that Buddhism arose 2500 years ago, Christianity 2000 years ago, Islam 1500 years ago. A clear tendency to distort (damage) religions over time, distancing them from the foundation (basis) of reality.
Suffering purifies - goes to the asset of karma. The pleasures spoil - they go into the passive of karma. The price of pleasure (joy) is suffering (sadness) equivalent to the pleasure received. In this case, one must take into account the intensity and non-simultaneity (the scattering of suffering and pleasures over time). It is also important to understand that suffering (sorrow) and pleasure (joy) are physical and mental (mental), they are interconnected and interdependent - interdependent. It would probably be nice to have a visual actual balance of karma like a bank account, but most likely this is impossible, and you have to feel this balance intuitively, due to external circumstances and internal factors.
-
Is the Sun alive? Does It have consciousness?
Physically, the Sun is a material hot object, the diameter of which (according to my estimate) is about 2500-3000 km. The Sun and the Moon were formed from Proto-Earth, were at its poles in the centers of Pra-America (Moon) and Pra-Eurasia (Sun).
Is the Sun alive? Is It conscious? See for yourself. Two animations of the SDO (Solar Dynamics Observatory) satellite photos, which I named "The sun is yawning" (2016.07.13-20) and "The sun is sleeping" (2016.11.20-28). This happened on the Sun at the end of the 24th solar cycle, before the beginning of the solar minimum. And at first the Sun yawned, and then fell asleep.
(https://c.radikal.ru/c10/2111/6c/a914011c6303.gif) (https://a.radikal.ru/a03/2111/f3/77bd1a9db708.gif)
The 25th solar cycle began and the Sun woke up (2021.11.06).
The face is contented, probably got enough sleep.
(https://a.radikal.ru/a19/2111/a6/8a129bfc5b2f.gif)
Complete irradiation of the Earth by solar flares. A clear cross.
On October 28, a powerful short-time flare occurred in the southern (lower) region of the Sun. On November 2, a powerful bright long-time flare occurred in the northern (upper) region of the Sun. The outbreak on October 28 occurred at about 6 pm. The outbreak on November 2 occurred at about 6 am. Both flares occurred exactly vertically opposite the Earth. Both (lower and upper) were at the same distance from the center of the sun. Periodicity of flares - 12 hours - precise irradiation of the western and eastern hemispheres of the Earth. Thus, these two flares irradiated four hemispheres: northern, southern, western and eastern - they irradiated the Earth in a cross.
(https://a.radikal.ru/a12/2111/08/8b62a5387fa5.gif) (https://a.radikal.ru/a38/2111/49/46d0957e474f.gif)
(https://a.radikal.ru/a43/2111/fc/3ba73fa4566e.jpg)
-
With thanks to Alexandr Kushnirtshuk, I don't think I've ever seen a forum thread—on any subject, in any
forum—contain so much absolutely absurd, misinformed, fantastical pseudoscience! Accompanied as it is
by numerous silly diagrams and images repeated endlessly in some sort of attempt to illustrate or explain
what exactly? Who knows? Who can know?
I do however thank you Alexsndr for the obvious time and effort you've put into entertaining us with your
apparently endless talent for hokum and hogwash. I have to apologise though, as I didn't have the time
or the inclination required to read every little tidbit of your creativity. Still, 10/10 for effort.