shape of the Earth (T-handle effect):
Once you have observed the zero-gee experiment it should be
seen that this effect would be decreasing the time it takes
for the Axial Precession. And, that this process would also
be widening the angle of the axis. But some reports claim
the rate of Axial Precession is increasing. This would mean
that it may have recently passed the reversal phase, and that
it is in the process of centering the axis vertically; before
widening and flipping the Earth over on its axis again. Is
there evidence for the poles having flipped?
This idea can also explain why Venus has a retrograde rotation,
and why Uranus is on its side. However, the rings of Uranus
are aligned with its rotation, and I cannot see how a planet's
rings can be effected by movement of the axis via the T-handle
The other problem with this idea is that the rate of Axial
Precession is clearly proportional to the imbalance in the
shape of the planet. Now on Mars, the mountain of Olympus
Mons is 3x higher than Everest, and Mars
is only 1/9th of Earth's mass. So Mars should
have a faster Axial Precession than Earth; crudely:
27x faster. But Mars' Axial Precession rate is 7x
slower than Earth. So although this must play some role, the
prima facie logic is out by a factor of about 200
gravity of Jupiter:
The problem here is that Mars is closer to Jupiter than Earth
is, and with a very similar axial tilt, and lesser mass, it
would be expected that Mars's Axial Precession should be much
faster than Earth. So Jupiter is not the primary cause.
We have to rule this out because the moon is the largest in
the solar system in comparison to the planet it orbits. Venus
and Mercury have no moon at all, so they should have almost
no Axial Precession if it was caused by the moon. The NASA
data does give lesser amounts for Venus and Mercury, but note
that those amounts are calculated from the difference between
the sidereal and tropical year. And those values are rounded
off in such a way that there is only a single digit as a factor.
So the lesser Axial Precession given for Venus and Mercury
are most likely just rounding errors.
We need to realize that Mars is much less regular than Earth
and has less mass, so the Sun would have a greater effect
on Mars than it does on Earth for Axial Precession. A perfect
sphere would have its axis of rotation unaffected by the gravity
of the Sun, because there is no overall difference in a smooth
planet's rotation due to how gravity effects different parts
of a perfect sphere. So Mars should have the fastest Axial
Precession from the Sun, but it does not - it is the least!
In fact it sticks out as being quite strange compared to the
But the only clear correlation in planetary Axial
Precession I can see is that the Axial Precession itself has
an axis of its own. That being almost exactly aligned to Solar
North. So the Sun seems to be playing an important role in
this. There is however, no data on just how upright this secondary
axis is, and if it varies. There is also no data on whether
the Sun's axis is wobbling. If the Sun's axis also has a 26000
year cycle (as I intuit that it does), then the cause could
hardly be the Sun itself!?
inner structure of the Earth:
The Earth's liquid magma is also a suspect. But the problem
here is that Jupiter is less solid than the Earth. So if the
liquid state of the Earth was a primary cause then Jupiter
should have greater Axial Precession than the Earth. Saturn
has the least density so should have the most extreme value.
But most of the Axial Precessions are so similar to one another
when the inner structures are quite variable. Only Mars is
problematic but it is far more similar to Venus and Mercury
in terms of inner structure, so this idea is not consistent
with the given values.
Is Mars electromagnetically different from the other planets?
No. Earth is vastly more electromagnetic than Venus, and so
there is just no correlation here at all.
My hypothesis is that the Universe has the shape of a 3d
hyper-surface of 4d hyper-sphere, and this
shape is rotating. Details on this structural theory are here:
So we need to understand how Foucault's pendulum operates
in 4 dimensions of space.
I am quite far from achieving this. But if Cosmic Coriolus
is the primary cause of Axial Precession, then I would expect
all the planets to have the same rate of Axial Precession
which would be a simple linear reflection of the the time
the Universe takes to rotate.
After all, it does not matter (almost) where you are on the
Earth , Foucault's pendulum still reflects a 24
hour frequency. So it should not matter where in the Universe
you are, the frequency of the effect would be identical to
the rotation of the Universe. Foucault's Pendulum does not
quite work on the equator and the poles, but that only means
that we could determine where the Universes' 4d
equator and poles both are, if we could eventually measure
Axial Rotation anywhere in the Universe.
Of course, the given rate of Axial Precession of Mars may
be in error. I have not seen anyone else give a proper account
of Newtonian Perihelion Precession, and that is a
much simpler algorithm, than Axial Precession. As far as I
can tell, mine is the only genuine 3d n-body
gravity algorithm. Proper understanding of orbital dynamics
are full of inaccurate observational theory. And I struggle
to see how an accurate measurement of orbits is possible without
a solid n-body-gravity algorithm, so it would not surprise
me if Mars' Axial Precession has been miscalculated.
The Earth's Axial Precession reveals a difference of a full
day every 70 years. Going back to the original
Vedic and Greek accounts would expose the Axial Precession's
effect on the length of a year by months, so this must be
considered a fairly accurate observation as regards the Earth.