What Causes Precession and Pole Shifts?
A catastrophic POLE SHIFT happens every 12-13,000 years – the evidence for that is overwhelming. But what is the cause? And is it harmonically linked to the precession of the Earth’s axis, which takes twice as long?
Our ancient ancestors blamed civilization-ending catastrophes on the gods, and ancient stories often depicted “gods” slaying animals representing zodiac constellations as the spring equinox precessed out of the constellation – for example, Mithras slaying the bull, as the spring equinox left (or ended the age of) Taurus.
Note the dog, snake, and scorpion – representing other constellations enjoying a special but temporary position on the galactic equator while the spring equinox was in Taurus.
Of course in modern times we don’t blame or give credit to the “gods” for precession or the disasters that occur in a cycle which may be related… Charles Hapgood, Hugh Auchinloss Brown, and even Albert Einstein suggested the mass imbalances of off-center ice caps would eventually grow large enough to tug the crust of the Earth out of it’s seemingly stable position. Walter Cruttenden suggests that our sun has a binary companion and that both stars orbit a center of mass about every 24,000 years – causing a pole shift when Earth gets close enough to our sun’s companion (Sirius?) to be affected by its magnetic field.
Dr. Robert Schoch suggests that the sun has phases of increased activity and that solar outbursts could cause a pole shift on Earth. Dr. Paul LaViolette suggests that the galactic center has phases of activity with outbursts of matter and energy he calls “galactic superwaves” which spread out from the center of our galaxy every 12-13,000 years and may have caused the Earth’s cycle of precession – the almost 26,000 year cycle of the precession of axial rotation – to fall in line with the galactic cycle.
The accepted cause of precession is that the gravitational pull of the sun and moon cause the Earth’s axis to wobble like a top or gyroscope. This is called the lunisolar theory. But the binary companion group raises some legitimate doubts, including comments on the lack of precession through the year of solar system objects like regular meteor showers:
“Lunisolar precession theory says the Earth does not go around the Sun 360 degrees every equinox. It says it comes up 50 arc seconds short of 360 degrees every tropical year and this is why we see the fixed stars precess by 50 arc seconds per average tropical year. But if the Earth does not go around the sun 360 degrees then the Perseid meteor shower should reflect precession and slip through the calendar 1 day in every 72 years, meaning it should have moved almost six days exactly since the Gregorian Calendar Reform in 1582. We know the fixed stars “outside the solar system” have indeed appeared to move by this much in that time period due to precession but why hasn’t the Perseid reference point?” – Cruttenden, p 10 of http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/bri/research/papers/ComparisonPaper.pdf
Cruttenden suggests that only the approximately 24,000 year rotation of our sun around its binary companion explains the precession cycle. That precession of the Earth’s axis is not due to a terrestrial cause (which would presumably make the timing of comet based meteor showers precess at the same rate as stars) but that precession is a solar-system wide phenomenon, and that everything in the solar system would not be affected because it is the entire solar system’s rotation with a binary companion that causes what we observe as precession.
But one apparent problem with both the Sirius/binary theory AND the galactic superwave/LaViolette theory is that not every planet in our system has the same 24-26,000 year cycle: The precession cycle on Mars is 93,000 Martian orbits (175,000 Earth years) – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timekeeping_on_Mars
“The axis of rotational precession for is over a period of ~175,000 years” [~173,000, Kieffer et al , 1992]. …The axis of rotation for Earth precesses over a period of ~25,800 years – http://www.alpo-astronomy.org/jbeish/opposition_cycle.htm
“As on Earth, the effect of precession causes the north and south celestial poles to move in a very large circle, but on Mars the cycle is 175,000 Earth years rather than 26,000 years as on Earth.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomy_on_Mars#cite_note-24 – Alex S. Konopliv; Charles F. Yoder; E. Myles Standish; Dah-Ning Yuan; William L. Sjogren (2006). “A global solution for the Mars static and seasonal gravity, Mars orientation, Phobos and Deimos masses, and Mars ephemeris”. Icarus. 182 (1): 23–50.
I would think that an extrasolar cause of precession (a binary companion or a galactic center outburst) would make all planets precess at the same rate. Therefore either the measurements for Mars are wrong, or the cause of planetary axial precession does not stem from a source outside the solar system.
This brings me back to the solar outburst theory of Dr. Schoch and also another theory I discovered more recently, (though it is actually several decades old and I only learned of it more recently) from Douglas Vogt of the Diehold Foundation. His research concludes that our entire universe is an illusion, a matrix, a solidified hologram from a computer program designed by God. Vogt concludes that this program has a clock cycle of 12,068 years and we are due for the next reboot in October 2046 – when the sun will have a micronova that will burn up entire continents, boil away the surface of an ocean, and cause a civilization-ending POLE SHIFT.
If a blast from the sun is the cause, then all planets should suffer at the same time… My working theory has involved a harmonic resonance of two pole shifts per precession cycle… Which could involve a variety of triggers at each “end” (as if a circle has an end) of the precession cycle. A solar outburst, a galactic outburst, or even crossing a crucial line or plane in the orbit with a distant binary companion…
If that is the case, why would Mars have approximately a 15:1 ratio between precession and such events? 1:1 or 2:1 makes much more sense to me and leaves me thinking that the approximate equivalence of precession and pole shift disasters may just be a misleading coincidence. (The only official explanation I have found for Mars’ precession of the equinoxes is that “the precession rate[. The rate] is governed by the moment of inertia of the planet, a function of the distribution of mass within the planet.” This largely deals with changes in density at different distances from the planetary center. The larger the dense core, the more the angular momentum of the planet resists precessional changes caused by varying gravitational nudges from other planets. If this is true of Earth as well, then Earth’s precession cycle is sped up considerably by our relatively large moon. But it rules out a galactic superwave or a solar outburst as the direct cause of the precession cycle. If such things cause the pole shift cycle, then the approximate 2:1 ratio with precession is coincidental.
Back to Cruttenden’s concern over the Perseid meteor shower, and why its date does not change/precess over the centuries – it seems to be a problem of faulty logic. The date does not precess, only the position in the sky from which the Perseids appear to originate. The average zodiac constellation takes up one twelfth of 360 degrees, or 30 degrees of sky along the ecliptic. The Perseus constellation is centered 45 degrees above the ecliptic, halfway to the celestial pole. The imaginary lines representing degrees of celestial longitude are closer together than at the ecliptic; so one degree of precession covers less sky. The vague and almost unmeasurable average apparent starting point for Perseid meteors may move almost 7 degrees of celestial longitude in 500 years, but at that celestial latitude the angular distance looks closer to 3-4 degrees across the sky – still well within the boundaries of the constellation. Cruttenden’s example is faulty and does not support his binary theory or its alleged causation of precession of the equinoxes.
I am learning – apparently each planet has unique dynamics leading to different rates of axial precession, and although the sun may cause periodic pole shift cataclysms there seems to be no direct relationship to the rate of precession of the equinoxes.
Isaiah 13:13 “I will make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken from its place.”
Isaiah 24:1 “Behold, the LORD maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down…”
Isaiah 30:26 “…the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days, in the day that the LORD bindeth up the breach of his people.”
5 thoughts on “What Causes Precession and Pole Shifts?”
I have corrected you before on this: “causing a pole shift when Earth gets close enough to our sun’s companion (Sirius?) to be affected by its magnetic field.”
You are close to implying this is Cruttenden’s suggestion, when you are the only one suggesting it. I don’t think Cruttenden even uses the term pole shift.
Sirius doesn’t get closer than around 1,500AU. Depending upon its mass and eccentricity of orbit it’s currently somewhere between 4,000AU and 6,000AU away.
Any magnetic field of Sirius is thus less than a thousandth the strength of the Sun’s, so can be discounted as having anything to do with a magnetically induced pole shift. All that happens when Sirius is at its closest (1,500AU in 12,000 years time) is that it’s a far brighter star than it is now.
However, given The Sun moves thousands of AU in the course of its orbit with Sirius, above and below the galactic plane, it is possible that a consequence of this oscillation is that The Sun (and Earth) passes in and out of oppositely polarised parts of a galactic magnetic field. Thus, with an orbital period of 24,000 years, it would encounter a polarity transition twice during that time, i.e. every 12,000 years.
My apologies if I have misunderstood Cruttenden. I agree Sirius would have to be a very different type of star than our sun in order to have a strong enough magnetic field to affect Earth even from 1500AU away. Realistically that idea is unlikely.
As for the galactic plane: although I think I’ve pointed this out in discussions with you before, our sun’s oscillations above and below the galactic plane take tens of millions of years – 26-35 million depending on the source, but more recent estimates tend towards the high side around 33 million years – and we just passed through three million years ago. Any problems resulting from that (and there do appear to be mass extinctions linked with that cycle as well) have nothing to do with much shorter cycles on the scale of 24,000 years.
At some point you’re going to have to start suspecting the validity of anything that cannot be corroborated, and to a large degree simply discounting it.
1) If Sirius does not precess, the Sun is in orbit about it.
1b) Mankind’s culture corroborates Sirius as being special.
2) If The Sun & Sirius orbit each other, they would do so with a period corresponding to the rate of precession, but allowing for eccentricity could well be significantly less, i.e. 24,000 years rather than 25-26,000.
2b) The Vesica Piscis corroborates a Sun/Sirius barycentric orbit (and the Zodiac its period).
3) An orbital period of a great year requires Sirius to be around 2-6,000AU away.
4) The plane of the Sirius/Sun orbit is around 70° to the galactic plane.
5) The orbit is likely to be centred on the galactic plane.
6) The Sun crosses the galactic plane every 12,000 years.
Alternatively, Sirius is 8.6LY away and we cross the galactic plane every 33 million years (33 being a Masonic indicator), the idea of pole shift is preposterous, glaciations are global, there have been no civilisations prior to 10,000BC, and the Great Pyramid was built 5,000 years ago with bronze chisels. Oh, and we’ve set foot on the Moon, and currently have robots exploring the surface of Mars…
It’s a simple dichotomy.
As I mentioned before, the fact is, Sirius does not precess, ipso facto it is The Sun’s binary twin (and the cause of precession).
Given how difficult it would be to measure the precession of Mars using optical telescopes, any paper proposing a 175,000 year period (as opposed to a 24-26,000 year period) should be taken with a pinch of salt – just as any paper pretending to obtain greater accuracy for the distance of Sirius at around 8.6LY.
Of course, TPTB are going to scatter academic chaff to ensure maximum doubt of anyone gainsaying scientific consensus.
Sirius does precess, just at a slower rate than most stars. The precession rate on Mars was determined after we landed probes there. Venus would probably have a unique precession rate as well but our equipment melts too fast in Venus’ 800 degree heat for such long-term observations.