May 28, 2023

19 thoughts on “Precession Explained Through Stellar Birkeland Currents

  1. Gravity can’t account for it, only if you assume the separation of 8.6LY is correct (too far apart for any significant attractive force, especially considering other stars are allegedly twice as close).

    The other issue is that if Sirius is 8.6LY away and is in a barycentric rotation with The Sun, then its effective tangential velocity is pretty large, i.e. 8.6xPi/25,000. That’s a thousandth of a LY per year, or roughly, 1 light year per millennium.

    So, somehow, this ‘Birkeland current’ tube is the thing that keeps these two stars from flying apart – because there’s nothing else that can.

    This all sounds like an unscrupulous astrophysicist has been paid to come up with a funky explanation as to how Sirius does not precess, without undermining the received ‘wisdom’ that it’s 8.6LY away.

    And there’s still the mystery of how this Birkeland current does this for a star over 8LY away, whilst stars only 4LY away are just as fixed as all the other fixed stars.

    Occam’s razor combined with a separation of 4-6,000AU at apoastron and 1-2,000AU at periastron, and simple gravitational forces giving rise to a 24,000 year long barycentric orbit, is far more convincing. You just have to accept that the true distance of Sirius has been kept secret for millennia, and 8.6LY established as ‘fact’ over the last couple of centuries.

    And secret, because extinction events happen every 12,000 years – the next one being round about now…

  2. I should add that, despite accepting the distance of 8.6LY, not only do they admit that Sirius does not precess, but they seem to implicitly recognise that Sirius has no invisible, super-massive ‘white-dwarf’ about which it orbits (in a currently counter-precessionary direction). Recognising the absence of Sirius B pretty much involves acknowledging this as a long running deception. So, really, there should be no reluctance to accept that the distance of 8.6LY is also a long running deception (instead of 6kAU).

    Cococting a bizarre ‘Birkeland current’ attractor that operates across a 8.6LY separation to explain a lack of precession (and Sirius B), is pretty desperate stuff, and god knows what kind of folk they are trying to fool.

    1. Whatever, ZOD. It is all some salon game, in a very narrow circle. Just ask some sheeple ‘Why we are speaking about coming age of Aquarius? Because of which process?’.
      They do not know and do not care.
      Talking about your fancy for Sirius, why this would be such a great mystery that cannot be talked about?
      It is a long way from noticing that Sirius is 6000 kAU (your claim) from talking about extinction.
      BTW, if Sirius were so close, we should be detecting much more varied and intense light spectrum (not just white light) from its direction, in comparison to other stars at least. After all, one LY = 63 240 AU. In other words, according to you Sirius is just 0,09 LY away.

      1. JtA, people do notice that Sirius seems to twinkle far more than any other star.

        Anyway, the issue is not the interest of the masses, but the 12,000 year periodicity of cataclysm (ice cores, geological strata, geomagnetic alignment, crustal displacement, etc.), what gives rise to it, how it manifests, and most importantly, the next one.

        It is interesting when those few who discover that Sirius does not precess, and has no companion ‘B’, decide to find some crazy explanation that still supports 8.6LY rather than deduce that Sirius is actually 6kAU away and gravitationally bound with The Sun – as a binary pair.

        This is why the distance of Sirius is misrepresented, because otherwise, a lot more people could quickly deduce the cause of the 12,000 year cataclysm (indirectly due to the barycentric orbit of The Sun & Sirius).

  3. ZOD (does your name stands for zodiac?), I know Sirius is the brightest star. But I meant some scientific work on the volume of light from Sirius etc. Most of the time, space distances are established with the help of spectrometry. I can imagine making 12 LY out of 10 LY, but making 8.6 LY out of 0.09 LY ?! That’s too much.
    Also should be some bodies orbiting in-between, comets etc.

    As for sheeple: they do not even know what happened 12 000 years ago…. they think, million, miliards, billions, whatever years ago. Well, recently I said to someone that there is a correlation between covid numbers and seismic activity in respective areas, waited for ‘bravo!’ but just got ‘So what ?!’, ‘So what ?’. And he wasn’t exactly a sheeple.
    TPTB put a masterstroke instilling in almost everyone the tacit conviction that the real objective has some socio-technic nature etc. Everything became a human conspiracy, from CO2 to NWO. Natural reasons ceased to exist, so to say: a great misdirection.
    I only wonder how many people know. People correlating covid numbers and earthquakes must know. Were they all promised a place in bunkers or what?

    1. Yes, JtA, Zod is short for Zodiac (the key to everything).

      The lie about Sirius is audacious, but then so are many other lies, e.g. Apollo landings, atomic chain reaction, etc.

      Don’t forget that many astronomers/astrophysicists have become aware that something massive is lurking a few thousand AU away, due to gravitational effects upon the solar system, and because it can’t be a star (because the closest are >4LY away) they are hypothesizing that it’s a dim or dark body. Currently known as Planet X or 9 depending on your persuasion.

  4. Anyway, more than about Sirius I would worry about Moon now. It is behaving a bit strange. Almost constant supermoon, day visibility, low on the sky (don’t remember worrying about trees or buildings for Moon observation in the past). Not even speaking about single days of ‘red moon’…
    I gained my astronomical knowledge 20 years ago and remember well that no one was speaking about ‘supermoons’ then. That I do know.
    What if this strange behaviour of Moon has something to do with the changing rate of precession…?

    1. I think that’s a big stretch Julian. You may not remember trees or buildings in the way of your old observations of the moon, but anything just above the horizon has these issues. And the changing rate of precession would be imperceptible during visual observations.

      1. Yes, given a somewhat elliptical barycentric orbit, the rate of precession is the slowest at apoastron (a few decades ago) and periastron (in a dozen millennia), and the greatest midway, i.e. in 6 millennia and in 18 millennia. Hence, if it were constant, the current rate of precession implies a great year of 25.7 millennia.

        The great year is actually close to 24 millennia, with the most rapid rate implying a great year of 22 millennia.

        So, the rate of precession changes VERY slowly.

  5. Yes, Zodiac is a clue to many things. But officialy it now exists only to provide some astrological fun (always wondered whether electromagnetic profiles of signs shape human characters, though). If sheeple took Zodiac seriously, building stonehedges would be a popular past time hobby.

    The main argument for Planet X is from the angular momentum of Solar System: something is lacking here. I am afraid this argumnet does not speak for Sirius. But who knows, maybe we are in a triple system with Sirius…

    The tides have become more pronounced. That would suggest that Moon may be closer to Earth. Nevertheless, according to the official paradigma even tides must be somehow man-made.

    What is your take on chain reaction, ZOD? What is actually taking place in nuclear power plants? What Geiger counters are measuring?

    1. JtA, Sirius is Planet X, 6kAU away, and yes, solves the angular momentum anomaly (and other disturbances, e.g. Oort cloud, etc.). Hardly anyone gets this – because the lie of 8.6LY is so deep seated.

      Nuclear decay/fission is real, but not the chain reaction. Nuclear power plants are dump loads (big electric kettles) that enable conventional power stations to operate more efficiently/economically.

      As for tides and The Moon, it’s not my speciality. However, I have been intrigued by relatively recent super-low tides around the world (a couple of years ago).

      1. Sirius is too big (much larger than Sun) to provide for the lacking angular momentum of Solar System. We need something smaller, a planet, possibly, not a star.

      2. If Sirius is much larger than Sun, as it is, it would make sense that the barycenter would be skewed towards it, and thus Sirius would be relatively fixed from our position, it would not precess. And no need for Sirius ‘B’ then, too.
        Maybe Sirius “B” is a barycenter…?

        But that does not exclude any additional planets bound to Sun.
        Besides the Ooort Cloud, there is the Kuiper Belt which cannot be explained by Syrius alone.

      3. JtA, either Sirius is very big and a long way away (and has a white dwarf companion about which it orbits), or it is a twin of The Sun and a mere 6kAU away.

    1. I would say that the sheer edge of Solar System around 50 AU rather excludes the idea of Sun’s twin at the 6000 AU distance.

    2. JtA, Cruttenden knows the answer, but no, despite suggesting it, he won’t spell it out for you. It is dangerous to contradict the official data concerning Sirius, and the ‘fact’ that The Sun is solitary. That paradigm shift is left as an exercise for the sufficiently perspicacious reader. Once you start tugging at that thread, it all unravels…

  6. Was someone going to leak something big in that solar observatory in NM a couple years back but the FBI used the “childp” card to cover it up, while various other solar observatories stationed across the world also seemed to “lockdown” at around the same time??!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Click to listen highlighted text!