# Dr. Bhat & The Helical Model

By: MisterPerfect, 3:26 PM GMT on May 08, 2013

"If only one can pause for a while and think retrospectively, the formidable scientific empire erected through centuries is crumbling down".

Dr. Pallathadka Keshava Bhat (3 Jan 1940 - 25 Jul 2010)

The helical model - our solar system is a vortex

The Vortex Solar System proved by Dr. Keshava Bhat. This means the end of the academic, helio-centric "clock work face" orbit theory, invented by nicolas copernicus and later cherished by newton, brahe, kepler, galileo, einstein, hawking, sagan and the rest of their academic ilk.

The helical model - our Galaxy is a vortex

Excerpts from Dr. Keshava Bhat's Book

Helical Helix:

Solar System a Dynamic Process PDF

"Ruthless negation of other paradigms as superstition permitted the modern science and technology to project itself as the sole representative of Science as true knowledge. This is why in every school program the contents are copied from the mainstream paradigm".

Newton's first law supposes or assumes that a body remains at rest. Today no celestial body is at rest. Therefore, this assumption is not substantiated.... or if in motion it remains in uniform motion with constant speed in a straight line unless it is acted on by an unbalanced external force.

A straight line on a globe is only theoretical and practically it becomes a curve. Again a rotating Earth or any other celestial body going its orbit is bound to encounter with external forces at every instant and can never be expected to maintain a straight line.

If acceleration is to be considered, there is no possibility of starting with zero at any time or at any place. Therefore, the first law becomes obsolete.

The second law - when all bodies are in motion an acceleration produced by an unbalanced force acting on a body is proportional to the magnitude of the net force and invariably proportional to the mass of the body.

F=ma P=mg (weight=mass x gravity)

This also becomes obsolete because on a moving object where we are located and form part of the system, how to determine its mass or net force?

The situation is much clear in Heisenberg's (1.927) uncertainty principle. It is impossible to measure accurately both the positional and momentum of a particle simultaneously.

The third law of Newton states that when ever one body exerts a force upon a second body, the second body exerts a force upon the first body. These forces are equal in magnitude and oppositely directed.

This statement assumes that both bodies are initially at rest. Also assumes that one body moves faster than the other. The statement assumes that the bodies move in straight lines. Each body moves in n - dimension and the movement is continuous. This being the case such assumptions become historic but obsolete.

The time of action of one body is totally different from the time of any reaction.

Both the curvature of the space- time unit on one hand which flows eternally as well as the impossibility of time flowing backward in the reverse direction on the other are sufficient reasons to logically discard the stated assumptions.

------------------------------------------------- ---

Daily observations are to be marked on a sheet of paper at a definite

time (local/ standard/ universal). Noon 12m is the best in the tropics;

especially in the Northern hemisphere.

A period of one year is the minimum time required for this study.

On cloudy / rainy days the observation may be difficult or impossible.

But observations adjacent to these days should be sufficient to bridge

the gaps.

For the observation of the lunar motion monthly readings are

necessary. In this case the phases of the moon and visibility at the

time of observation are factors to be taken into account.

By tracing the incident light on the paper a design is obtained

corresponding to the Ana lemma.

This proves that the planet always remains on one side of the Sun

throughout the year. If the planet were to go around the Sun six

months a year this observation is not possible.

------------------------------------------------- ---

The plane of displacement of our planet being equatorial the

planetary axis is parallel to the solar axis. This is true for all the

planets of the system.

------------------------------------------------- ---

Seen from the Northern hemisphere at any time of the year the Polaris

is observed in almost the same position probably because the star is

moving in the same direction. Our Sun follows a helical orbit around

the orbit of Polaris and one 360 year corresponds to 225.000

terrestrial years according to astronomical data. This permits the

relative position of other stars in the zodiac or in the sky, their

apparent disposition to explain equinoctial precession phenomenon.

The polar shift of the axis leads to the directional change of the

photosphere and this in turn explains the process.

Astronomical calculations made by the XVI, XVII and XVIII century

astronomers never imagined that this happened. They assumed that

Sun is stationary. No wonder all the calculations are made with such

assumptions and perhaps they have to be calculated once again.

It is also possible that the heliocentric orbits described for all the

planets are again assumptions with no confirmation by direct

measurement or observations.

suggested a heliocentric orbit for planets and the credit goes to

Nicolas Copernicus (1514, 1.543) [Mikolaj Kopernik Polish

churchman] for confirming such hypothesis. Based on these ideas

or assumptions Tycho Brahe, Kepler and Newton arrived at

mathematical models to describe the same phenomenon.

All the planets known at that time are supposed to move along

heliocentric orbits along the equatorial plane with particular degrees

of axial inclinations for each one. The individual orbits are

considered to be elliptic.

------------------------------------------------- ---

In a dynamic system the Earth should accelerate to go beyond the

Sun during six months but decelerate to return to the area behind

the Sun. The Sun is estimated to maintain about 20km/s revolution

on its orbit. Fresh calculations may be necessary to describe this

type of motion.

The constellations at the background are sufficient evidence to deny

the heliocentric orbits for planets.

The Sun at 500 light seconds

distance, when visible within a cone of 30 deg. maintaining a background

of one constellation, say for example Aries, (Hamel at 68ly) the

Earth maintains in the opposite constellation at midnight, namely

Libra. After six months to maintain heliocentric orbit, the mid day

of today should become midnight and the midnight should become

midday. This has not taken place!

------------------------------------------------- ---

Remember the Polaris located just above the North Pole at a distance

of 430ly. The helical orbit of the Sun follows the helical orbit of the

Polaris and therefore, Polaris is visible from the Northern hemisphere

always in the same place.

Other planets also follow identical helical orbits. The solid angle

at the source of light and the distances to each planet are

maintained uniformly. Planets Mercury and Venus are closer to the

Sun and are called the inner planets whereas Mars, Jupiter, Saturn,

Uranus, Neptune and Pluto are considered as outer ones. Fresh

calculations and models will have to be made to describe the

respective orbits. A comprehensive three- dimensional model of the

solar system is possible only after that.

When observed after about 56.000 years, 90 deg. solar displacement

along its orbit, the Polaris is bound to be visible at another place

and that has to be explained in this way. It is not the Earth, but the

Sun that has moved along its orbit. Since Earth follows the Sun, the

optical illusion explains a helical orbit for each celestial body, orbit

of our star served as reference for another body but dependent on

this one (for helical orbits see under Earth orbit).

------------------------------------------------- ---

30 deg. arc in the direction of equatorial plane orbital displacement where

the ram force is maximum (20km/s speed) for the exposed surface

can explain the whole model. If planets were to go round the Sun on

heliocentric orbits, there should be some reference to this

phenomenon in the literature. But as it is, nothing is available.

------------------------------------------------- ---

The heat produced due to friction and infrared rays is more at the

tropical area compared to the rest of the planetary surface. But the

cold front at one Pole and the warmer hemisphere on the other

maintains the extreme conditions during six months each. This

permits the illusion that the visible Sunlight has light and heat in it.

Further it is possible that the atmospheric mantle moves just behind

the hydrosphere and lithosphere following the orbit and obviously

the heat transferred to the gaseous atmosphere moves in respective

directions.

------------------------------------------------- ---

The

orientation of the crescent indicates the relative position of the planet

on its orbit as seen from the earth's surface. The images of these

crescents through one full orbit should be sufficient to demonstrate

the helical nature of the orbit. The waxing and waning moon also

exhibits the crescent shape when the moon is located in between

the earth and the sun, but on one side. It is note worthy that the

lunar/solar eclipses do not occur every month. This is the clue to the

fact that orbit of the moon is not around the earth. Images of other

planets like Mars, Jupiter and Saturn (visible with unaided eye)

reflect light from a disc 30 deg. arc., again visibility only 30 deg. conical

constitute a complex system. All calculations will have to be

considered once again.

------------------------------------------------- ---

The natural satellites like

the Moon maintain their own orbits twining around the helical

orbit of the associated planet. The orbits of the natural satellites

(Moons) closely follow behind the planets encircling the respective

planetary orbit. When there are several of these satellites each

one maintains individual orbits but all follow the respective planet.

------------------------------------------------- ---

The illumination coming from photosphere of the Sun, rotating on

its own axis (average 27 days) and maintaining a helical orbit

(equatorial plane) naturally should spread all over. But the receiving

surface of the planet is located at a constant distance (149597893

Km =AU) and the solar axis and that of the Earth are parallel to one

another. Owing to an inclination of 23ï¿½27ï¿½30ï¿½ï¿½ (=46ï¿½55ï¿½ï¿½ solid angle)

at the apex of a cone the Earth is illuminated at this angle. However,

the orbit of the Earth completes the base of this cone maintaining

the angle and the relative distance as a constant. With this design,

the observation of 12 constellations in sequence at the background

can easily be explained maintaining the day/night relation uniformly.

The interpretation of this phenomenon constitutes a new approach

to explain observed facts in nature.

This observation definitely shows that the planet Earth never

maintains a heliocentric orbit at all. Similar situation is observed

with all the planets in the solar system. This statement is totally

contradicting the existing views of Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Kepler,

Galileo, Newton and others including the modern astronomers that

all the planets in the solar system follow heliocentric orbit. In order

to explain the seasonal variations it was necessary to assume the

planetary axis inclination of 23ï¿½27ï¿½30ï¿½ in relation to the solar axis,

consequently the heliocentric orbit had to be extended as an ecliptic.

This assumption has caused all the misconceptions in the name of

Science around the world.

Even after the observation that Sun is not stationary but has its own

orbital displacement in addition to the rotation as a celestial body,

no more calculations and revisions relative to the planetary orbits

are reported. As a matter of fact all celestial bodies are in motion.

Their relative distances remain doubtful. It is time to think in terms

of a dynamic model.

------------------------------------------------- ---

Updated: 3:14 AM GMT on October 27, 2013

The views of the author are his/her own and do not necessarily represent the position of The Weather Company or its parent, IBM.