Chapter 32: Epilogue - may reason prevail

In light of the evidence presented in this book, I will venture to say that the TYCHOS model is more than just another, "alternative" cosmological theory. I am satisfied that it represents the most solid interpretation of the vast body of astronomical observations (old and new) available to mankind today. These observations, gathered tirelessly over the centuries by admirably diligent and hard-working individuals, constitute the very foundation around which the TYCHOS model has woven its logical conclusions. All I have done is to assemble the seemingly disjointed pieces of a scattered puzzle which were already there for everyone to see. My infinite respect and gratitude goes to all these patient souls who have dedicated their lives to the noble cause of understanding our surrounding cosmos. To name them all would be unrealistic, so let me just symbolically tip my hat to Tycho Brahe whose widely snubbed yet formidably accurate observational opus is now well and truly resurrected.

It is a most unfortunate fact that Tycho Brahe’s and Pathani Samanta’s magnificent contributions to astronomy have been virtually obliterated from history in spite of their substantial accuracy and verifiable validity. The Tychos model emphatically revives their lifetime efforts - along with those of other industrious scientists whose work was either misunderstood, overlooked or merely ignored. The time has come to do them justice and to reassess the configuration of our Solar System with a fresh and earnest outlook - free from heliocentric, relativistic or Newtonian preconceptions. Needless to say, vigorous resistance to the paradigm-shifting TYCHOS model is to be fully expected - primarily from academic circles, notoriously impervious to (and dismissive of) new ideas that may imperil the oxymoronic "Laws of Science" edicted by a handful of untouchable luminaries who decided that Earth revolves around the Sun - and not vice versa (as virtually all of their predecessors had concluded). However, I dare say that the "ball" (i.e. the burden of proof) now lies squarely in the heliocentrists' court - as far as the true configuration of our Solar System is concerned.

One may say that the Copernican model’s upside-down heliocentric view has mesmerized humanity for the last four centuries or so, if not just as an opposition to geocentrism. The refutation of one inadequate theory for another ignited along its way the Mother of all circular debates among the sharpest minds of this planet. Those debates were, essentially, destined to fail so long as the sacrosanct, universally-worshipped science priesthood remained unchallenged about their unshakeable convictions. In today's academic circles, to question the likes of Kepler, Galileo, Newton or Einstein is tantamount to heresy; this stagnant and dogmatic state of affairs, you may agree, is not conducive to a sane and desirable advancement of human knowledge. By thwarting and silencing any 'dissident' researchers who dare challenge the long-consolidated heliocentric edifice, the attitude of our modern 'scientific establishment' echoes the same sort of censorious sanctions upheld by the medieval Church, such as when they burned Giordano Bruno at the stake. Incidentally, Bruno's "crime" (punished by death) was to conjecture that there were possibly innumerable other Solar Systems in the Universe similar to ours - much like my TYCHOS model contends. I also live near Rome - not too far from where they barbecued the poor Giordano Bruno. Wish me luck!

Only a few centuries ago, scientists and astronomers all over the world were engaging in vivid, bitter and passionate battles in the quest for the most plausible “cosmo-logical” configuration of our solar system. What most people tend to forget is precisely what, at the time, was at stake. Mind you, it was likely a largely unspoken truism even back then, but what was imperilled was no less than the very survival of the (already widely-embraced) Copernican / Keplerian model - and its status as the “end-all” of all cosmic models; heliocentrism had begun to crackle - and something had to be done to delay its inevitable collapse.

Countless experiments were being feverishly carried out, one more intricate than the other - most of them sharing the same objective: to scientifically verify and establish beyond reasonable doubt that Earth was hurtling around space (and around the Sun) at the staggering speed of 107226 km/h (or "Mach 90") - as contended by the heliocentric theory. It was a most extraordinary claim that required extraordinary evidence. Failure was not an option for its illustrious proponents - for this would precipitate an 'academic armageddon' upon this world's entrenched scientific community. Yet, to this day, no extraordinary or irrefutable evidence has been produced in support of this claimed hypersonic motion of planet Earth.

"Some motions in the heavens are so slow that one generation may be forced to leave certain questions for later generations to answer." "The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy" - by James Evans

The fantastical, currently-claimed hypersonic speeds of the Earth ("107226 km/h") and of our entire Solar System ("800000 km/h") simply do not stand up to scrutiny; as we contemplate our Universe from our earthly perspective, nothing suggests to our minds, intuitions and common senses anything of the sort. On the contrary, the most striking feature of our surrounding cosmos is just how slowly it appears to evolve - what with even our nearmost star systems moving by infinitesimal amounts (and in every imaginable "x-y-z" directions) over the centuries. Yet, we are told that the stars in our Milky Way are all revolving "in unison" with our Solar System (at "800000 km/h" - in relation to what?) around the centre of our galaxy! As for the distant, spiralling galaxies that we can see in our telescopes, how unreasonable would it be to imagine that they may just be particularly large and densely-populated binary systems? After all, they all exhibit spiralling obital trails - much like those traced in the Tychosium simulator.

In fact, the most famous studies designed to detect the Earth's translational velocity (e.g. the Michelson-Morley interferometer experiments) are billed as the “most failed scientific experiments of all time”. Mind you, they really don’t deserve to be singled out for having fallen short of proving Copernicus right; it is a matter of historical record that ALL other similar experiments utterly and completely fell short of proving Earth’s purported, hypersonic motion. Despite designs to prove heliocentrism, experimental data continued to tell us what we (or rather, the scientific establishment) refused to hear. However, as expounded in Chapter 24, the far more numerous and consistent interferometer experiments performed by Dayton Miller would actually appear to support the 1.6km/h translational speed of the Earth - as posited by the TYCHOS model.

Another intense series of experiments were those attempting to determine stellar parallax. Of course, this was also a crucial test for the Copernican model: if no stellar parallax whatsoever could be detected, then the Copernican theory had to be categorically discarded. Instead, after decades of painstaking efforts by eminent astronomers around the world, some minute/microscopic stellar parallax was finally detected. Incredibly (and here’s where one must question the intellectual integrity of this planet's scientific community), those infinitesimal star displacements were deemed sufficient to "prove beyond doubt" that Earth moves at hypersonic speeds around space - completing an almost 1-billion-km-long (and 300 Mkm-wide) orbit every year!

Of course, the official explanation offered by apologists for this near-negligible stellar parallax was that “the stars are far, far more distant than anyone had ever imagined!” Amazingly, it has never occurred to anyone that, since some stars are claimed to be “only” 4 or 5 light years away — while other stars (visually adjacent to those closer stars) are claimed to be several thousands of light years away - we should most definitely be able to detect some quite substantial parallax between our closer and farther stars (that is, if Earth were revolving around the Sun along a 300 Mkm-wide orbit). The TYCHOS model, with its 1mph-earthly-motion, provides a plain and logical solution to this age-old riddle: The observed stellar parallaxes are so very small (and so hard to detect) simply because our tranquil Mother Earth moves very little each year - and slower than the pace of an evening walk around the village.

Still today, no one really knows how distant the stars are - with any degree of precision. Just consider this quite recent (2012) science journal’s announcement: “A scientific astronomy study has determined that Polaris, our North Star, is approximately 1/3 closer to Earth than previously thought.” So much for the much-vaunted “pinpoint accuracy” of astronomical data! You may agree that such a radical revision of this fundamental stellar distance is almost comical: if our modern astronomers cannot even agree on the Earth->Polaris distance (which is used as a cosmological yardstick to measure all other star distances), what credibility can any officially-claimed stellar distances possibly retain?

"The North Star has been a guiding light for countless generations of navigators. But a new study reveals that its distance to Earth may have been grossly overestimated. In fact, the North Star — also called Polaris — is 30 percent closer to our solar system than previously thought, at about 323 light-years away, according to an international team who studied the star's light output.(...) The star is also a type of cosmological yardstick used by researchers to measure great cosmic distances out to billions of light-years." "North Star closer than thought!" - National Geographic

Perhaps the most tragicomical instance of cosmic science-quackery is Arthur Eddington’s solar eclipse experiment in 1919. At the time, the fundamental tenets of both the Copernican and the Newtonian theories were perilously at stake, since the observed orbital behaviour of Mercury “refused” to comply with Newton’s Laws. So the Royal Society dispatched Sir Eddington to Africa - and another team to South America - to photograph an upcoming solar eclipse. Arthur’s expedition almost ended in dire disaster, as the skies were cloudy most of the time, yet his team somehow managed to snap a couple of (blurry) shots of the eclipse. The South American team did slightly better and brought home a few half-decent shots of the 1919 solar eclipse. Now, the whole point of the exercise was to confirm the validity of a young upstart scientist’s thesis, namely the “theory of relativity”. The then little-known Albert Einstein had “come to the rescue” of both Newton’s and Copernicus’ endangered theories, basically stating that, “the light emitted by a celestial body will bend / warp - in the vicinity of a large mass such as the Sun.” In other words, “you can’t trust what you see with your own eyes; Mercury may seem to be where you see it but in reality it is elsewhere!” To make a long story short, even though the photographic plates snapped by the two Royal Society teams presented utterly inconclusive data, Sir Eddington somehow managed to pass them off as “definitive and irrefutable proof of Einstein’s relativity theory”! After which Einstein became, almost overnight, the universally-acclaimed celebrity that he still is today.

Another droll and dreadfully contrived effort aimed at confirming the Copernican model was that of Sir James Bradley, the man who invented “Stellar Aberration”. Bradley had been observing the motions of star Draconis for several months with a telescope mounted in his home’s chimney near London. As we have seen, his observations of Draconis’ seasonal motions turned out to be wholly conflicting with the principles of the Copernican model. So, instead of bringing into question the core tenets of heliocentrism (and returning to the drawing board - as any earnest scientist would have done), Bradley dreamed up the most contorted astronomical theory of them all, namely his “Stellar Aberration” fantasy. Amazingly, in spite of several subsequent disprovals of the same, Bradley’s illusory mental concoction is still held by academia as another “conclusive proof of Earth's motion around the Sun”.

All in all, it can be said that the Copernican theory has benefited, over the last centuries, from a steady flow of confirmation bias and custom-made ad hoc "solutions" (i.e. precisely the opposite of what the sound scientific method should be about). And yet, here we are today; the heliocentric dogma is safely shielded in its unassailable ivory tower - unquestioned by almost everyone - whilst the long string of embarrassing failures to confirm its core tenets have been swept under the rug, by either misguided or deliberate efforts.

As it is, I'm often asked by readers of the 1st Edition of this book whether perhaps "someone, somewhere" is fully aware of our Solar System's binary configuration (and thus withholding this knowledge, for whatever reason, from the general public) - a hypothesis that may sound to most people like some extravagant, conspiratorial nonsense. However, when Sir Francis Bacon famously stated that 'knowledge is power'(“scientia potestas est”), he wasn't just referring to some self-empowerment that we may all attain through diligent study... In his 2001 essay "Knowledge is Power: Francis Bacon to Michel Foucault", J.M.R. García noted that "(according to Francis Bacon), power and knowledge are most clearly seen in the creation and self-reproduction of a professional class of experts in science and communication whose main interest is to keep control over official institutions of learning". In light of recent world events (and the mainstream media's blackout of all alternative science), it would certainly appear that the so-called 'powers-that-be' are deeply invested in maintaining their control and hegemony over virtually all domains of human knowledge. In any event, I personally do find it more likely that "someone, somewhere" is perfectly aware of our Geoaxial Binary System - rather than that yours truly would be the first person in human history to have arrived at the plain and logical conclusions presented in this book.

At the end of the day, dear reader, it is up to you to decide which option seems more cogent and sensible:

OPTION 1 - (the Copernican model): the Sun is the only single star in our visible cosmos which completes one of its orbits in as many as 240 million years. The Earth follows the Sun's 800000-km/h motion around the galaxy - while revolving around the Sun at 90 times the speed of sound.

OPTION 2 - (The Tychos model): the Sun and Mars constitute a binary system, just like all the star systems in our visible cosmos. The Earth revolves in the middle of our system at the tranquil, "snail-paced" motion of 1.6 km/h - while rotating around its axis at the gentle rate of 0.000694 rpm.

OPTION 3 - (insert alternative option of your choice - but make sure to back it up with robust and testable empirical evidence).

May coming generations thrive in the blissful serenity enjoyed by our planet as it slowly sails around space, embraced by the Sun-Mars binary system, cruising at the safe and comfortable speed of 1 mph. I will just be hoping that tomorrow's free-thinkers will realize and ultimately reject the insufferable dogmatic attitude pervading our current epoch's academic circles. As a final, heartfelt aspiration, may the Tychos model soon be carefully appraised and reviewed (by earnest scholars and thoughtful laymen alike), so as to start a collective and constructive debate among the inquisitive and intellectually-unshackled sons and daughters of Mother Earth.

May reason prevail.