Celestial motion and the tilt of the earth’s axis … The precession of the equinoxes or of the earth’s axis may be part of a much larger cosmic context than we have so far believed. Here is a video that, based on the electric view of universe, explains this.
It is my view that celestial motion is subject to two distinct forces. They are gravity for ‘near’ interactions and Birkeland currents on the cosmic scale.
This video provides a wider background for the following short article I wrote a while ago, where I explain that gravity is a phenomenon of somewhat limited reach. The video shows that there is another, stronger force that acts on a cosmic scale …
Gravity and Orbits
Gravity could be described as “falling towards something similar”
The cause of gravity is a subtle twist, a torsion so to say, in the rigid fabric of space. Torsion of space opens a preferred path of motion towards other, similarly affected regions.
When tangential motion is absent or insufficiently strong, two such gravitating objects will simply approach each other and collide. We see that when we look at asteroids approaching the moon or one of the planets. They will convert their accumulated kinetic energy and wreak more or less serious destruction upon impact.
Gravity propagates in all directions in space and is of immense reach, although very much attenuated by distance. Thus all gravitating objects in this universe are in connection with other gravitating objects. Distance and the strength of their gravitational ’twist’ modify and limit the connection. Two gravitating objects form a preferred, if relatively weak, path of motion towards each other.
Orbits
An Orbit is a velocity of direction, a vector of tangential motion, that allows gravitating objects to avoid falling into each other. They circle around the centre of gravity of the system they are part of, but here is an important point, not generally recognised at this time…
Not only do the gravitating objects move in relation to each other, the center of gravity also moves, depending on the momentary position of all connected objects. This problem has been somewhat irksome for mathematicians. They call it the n-body problem or the problem of accurately predicting the motions of all the gravitating objects in a system.
So the center of gravity of any orbiting system is in constant motion, always remaining at a point defined moment by moment by the position of all the gravitationally linked objects.
Circular orbits
As a result, all gravitational orbits are really circular. This means circular not with regard to each other, but circular with regard to the ever moving center of gravity of the system. An “eccentric orbit” is merely a situation where the difference in gravitational potential of two orbiting bodies is such as to greatly move the whole system’s center of gravity.
We see circular orbits around the moving center of gravity of ‘the system’. In our solar system, the center of gravity moves slightly inside the body of the sun, depending on where the planets are at any given moment in time.
Image credit: worldatlas.com
Comets
Comets are a special case. They do have highly elliptical orbits. They only come around the inner solar system once in a blue moon. Their orbit may take them out into space for years or sometimes even centuries. This is, I believe, due to their great velocity, which allows them to link two different “centers of gravity”. They come around to visit, they swing around the sun, and then go on their way out into space where they encounter a second center of gravity.
Neither of those two “centers” are strong enough to capture the comet because of its great velocity. Only the combination of two systems, distant from each other as they may be, is capable of trapping the comet.
The orbital principle is still the same as a comet orbits an imaginary line that links our sun to some distant orbital companion. This recalls the classical description of an elliptic orbit, where we are told there are two “focal points” of an ellipse that determine the orbit. One of those foci would be the solar system, the other a distant point of attraction.
Precession
Precession is a change of orientation. We see that in the ‘wobble’ of the earth’s axis. It could also be a change in an ‘elliptic’ orbit, where it is caused by a re-orientation in space of the back-and forth path of the common center of gravity.
As we have seen, gravity is not the only game in town. On a larger, cosmic scale, a different mechanism is in action. Those are strong electric currents called Birkeland currents that link star systems and galaxies, as described in the video “The Truth About Precession” linked at the beginning of this article.
I know I am somewhat ‘going out on a limb’ with these musings, but so be it!
Sepp Hasslberger Terceira island, October 2024 – slightly revised on 11 November
Two videos that accompany the one linked at the beginning:
Part one of the ‘precession series’
Part three of the ‘precession series’
Other recent articles on my blog on the subject of gravity
“Constantly regard the universe as one living being, having one substance and one soul; and observe how all things have reference to one perception, the perception of this one living being.” – Marcus Aurelius
“My family is Humanity, my tribe Galactic, my origin: The Universe” I wrote that in my Facebook Intro.
I have not had the inspiration to write one of these papers for a while now, so there is a lot in my head that has matured in the past decade or so and to some degree is still maturing. This might seem a bit “all over the place” but then, that’s how I see things, from multiple perspectives. Universe is a pretty big thing to start with and there are several different strands of thought to bring together into a coherent picture. At least, I hope it won’t be boring.
Universe
So Marcus Aurelius apparently said that the universe is conscious, and I agree with him about that. Let’s try and imagine this living being and its expression from our (necessarily limited) point of view of 3D reality.
Physics, in its current state is not much help here. It is a jumble of theories and assumptions that frankly do not make a lot of sense. They say it all started from nothing, a singularity, and there might be some truth to that. But then they say it exploded and has kept expanding ever since, randomly creating billions of galaxies, star systems, planets and indeed life, without any sort of plan. That seems extremely unlikely to me. It is not how creation happens.
The question is “what came first, the Universe or Life?” A chicken and egg problem, to be sure, but easily resolved. Since Universe could not have developed *at random*, without some plan and intelligent direction, we must assume that Life came first. We might say that Universe IS Life. It follows, of course, that Life is not an inherently 3D phenomenon. Humans and all other life forms are imbued with an energy that ultimately originates with Universe.
Perhaps, at this point, we should say something about dimensions. There is a certain hierarchy of dimensions, with ours being the most dense, the lowest rung of the ladder. I see dimensions as distinct “spaces” of frequency that are arranged from the dense physical to ever more rarefied realms of higher and higher frequencies. Life permeates them all. From our 3D point of view, the higher realms share our space. The thing that distinguishes one realm from the other is frequency, not location. (See “Dimensions” in links section)
There is a problem of perception, where those living in a certain frequency cannot perceive, much less influence, what is going on in the frequency spaces above their own. So most of us humans know little or nothing about those non-physical realms of spirit. Religion and spirituality are the fields that deal with those things but it appears none of them have the solution to the puzzle. Personally, I believe we CAN break through the perceptional barrier or ‘the veil’ as it has also been called. We will not go into how to do that as it is not the subject of this writing.
Universe also has extension, it is almost unimaginable in its vastness. There are billions if not trillions of galaxies, each one of those being host to billions if not trillions of star systems of which our Solar system is but one. The idea that humans are the only intelligent species in this vast Universe is really nothing but preposterous. There are plenty of inhabited planets, there are spacefaring civilisations and even whole empires throughout our own galaxy, the Milky Way, not to speak of other galaxies.
Big Bang theory, in an effort to explain everything in terms of matter only, has led to the idea of space continually expanding. Light from distant galaxies shifts its frequency towards the red end of the spectrum. This was interpreted as confirmation that the Universe must be expanding, that stars are moving away from each other. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is plenty of opportunity for light waves to be slowed down on their travel through space. Cosmologists are now scrambling to re-think things. As new telescopes discover ever more ‘distant’ galaxies, Big Bang cosmology is in crisis.
So what *is* Universe and how does it look if we zoom out sufficiently. My view is that Universe is an enormous toroid, a vortex folded in upon itself. It has internal motion and is “steady state”. It does not expand as we are told, in the aftermath of an explosion. All of the motion in Universe is ultimately self contained.
By the way, that same toroidal shape of Universe itself is present in all of creation. We find it all the way down from galaxies to star systems, to planets.
Here on earth, we see toroids or vortex patterns pretty much everywhere in observable Nature, even down to atoms and sub atomic particles. Creation of matter seems to always involve toroids. Spin or vortex action gives rise to particles of matter.
Frequencies create patterns. They say that “In the beginning was the word” … which means patterns of particular frequencies, that will group particles of matter together in intricate ways. Combine it all, and you have the basic structure of Universe.
The matrix of Space
Space has real physical, electrical properties, called permittivity and permeability. We know this because the speed of light is determined by them. What gives properties to space must have a certain structure. There has been speculation about an aether, modelled as a fluid that fills all space and gives rise to physical manifestation.
Physics is divided about the aether question and has been hostile to even looking at it since Einstein said that an aether was not necessary to explain things, that everything was happening in “fields” and that all motion is relative to something else. He took the easy way out, avoiding the raging aether controversy of his time. By Einstein’s refusal to look at the aether problem or the structure of space, physics has been led into a blind alley. It has been set back for at least a century.
Light from distant stars is visible here, so those waves must be travelling through some sort of a medium to reach us. It turns out that the more rigid a medium is, the faster waves travel through it. So clearly, an aether seen as a fluid doesn’t fit the bill, there would be no rigidity at all. We are left with the need for a structure, a rigid one.
Think of a screen, anything like computer, TV, billboards, whatever. What do you have? A rigid structure. Yet in or on that structure comes to life a moving picture. There is no motion in the structure itself, the screen does not move. All that moves is the energy that makes pixels appear active or inactive, lights them up in this colour or that. What moves are *patterns of energy*!
The same thing is true for physical space and the matter in it. We are seeing a ‘three dimensional’ and apparently very solid picture. What’s the screen we are beholding? After much thought I have come to the conclusion that it is a matrix, very fine grained all the way down to sub atomic levels. The geometric structure of this matrix is all-space filling and it allows subtle energies to play in it and thus bring matter into existence.
Buckminster Fuller called this the “isotropic vector matrix”, the basic structure underlying space in this universe. What is the substance of Fuller’s isotropic vector matrix that fills the known Universe. (See Buckminster fuller in the links section)
Particles
Each adjacent position in the matrix of Universe is occupied by a *virtual particle*, specifically those are virtual protons. You add energy in the form of an electron and you get “real” matter. This is how hydrogen is created, one proton and one electron.
From there on you build up by adding more energy. The first building block is the neutron, a fusion of the energy of the electron with that of the proton, our third sub atomic particle. Now we can get an atomic nucleus of protons and neutrons. A ‘cloud’ of orbiting electrons adds space to the nucleus, creating the atom. Combining those three particles, protons neutrons and electrons, we eventually get the more complicated atoms, the whole table of elements.
Physicists are not content with just three fundamental particles. In their overwhelming desire to understand things by smashing them to bits and pieces, they have created a veritable “particle zoo”. It seems to me that those particles the physicists have “found” in their huge and costly particle accelerators and that today make up a good part of “particle physics” are nothing but fragments that consistently appear when you beat up particles in a high energy setting to shatter them. They add complexity where really none is needed.
Energy
In the deepest sense, Universe is constructed out of life energy arranged in certain patterns which take on physical form. There is the potential energy in the form of a space matrix made up of virtual protons. Electrons add energy and the interplay of protons and electrons creates matter. Electrons are pure energy in the form of spin and of course spin is how the energy of life expresses itself in the physical. The potential of the matrix and the life energy, together they form matter. The first step is hydrogen, where the ‘virtual’ proton becomes an ‘actual’ proton, orbited by the energy ‘cloud’ of the electron.
As a quick aside, should we talk about energy scarcity? For more than a century numerous inventors, Nikola Tesla is only one of them, have succeeded in extracting useful electric energy from the matrix of space. Tesla famously said “Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point of the universe.”
Unfortunately all of those inventors were beaten down and their inventions either destroyed or hidden away. They would have upset current monopolies that rely on heat from various fuels, to produce motion and to drive generators. Economic “realities” have stifled progress here in a serious way.
Galaxies, stars and planets are formed by strong expressions of life energy. Remember, life energy manifests as spin. So we have spinning galaxies, spinning star systems and spinning planets. The spin, when consistently maintained, forms a vortex in space. It creates a fast spinning plasma ‘ball’ of hydrogen, the most prevalent form of matter in space. Plasma has been called a fourth state of matter, and a spinning ball of plasma, also called a plasmoid, is at the center of each and every one of our celestial bodies. The plasmoid emits heat, it creates matter by fusion of elements as well as magnetic *and* gravational fields (more about that later).
Waves
Light is a form of energy, a shock wave, that travels through the matrix of space. Its speed is determined by the dielectric properties of space. When that wave of energy arrives at its destination and hits an obstacle, an atmosphere lets say or something more solid, it converts or rather folds in on itself to create new particles. They call those particles photons and they say that light has a dual nature, sometimes being a wave and sometimes a particle. That is true, but there is still much confusion about it in physics, some say that there are *only* particles and others argue that everything is just waves. The “collapse of the wave function” is the moment of creation of a particle.
Motion
Matter is created by energy, the energy of Life. Frequency forms intricate and persistent patterns of energy. Those patterns express as matter. Matter as such does not move “through space”. It is continually created un-created and re-created at the next point of its trajectory of motion by the energy patterns. It so happens that only the energy patterns change location in space. Think of your phone or computer screen and the energy that creates the image you see.
Thus matter in motion is continually and fluidly re-created at a new point in space as the energy pattern moves. This is how the idea of a fluid aether came about. The motion of matter *appears* to be fluid.
And by the way, this also suggests the possibility of teleportation, matter disappearing from one point in space and instantly reappearing at another. The pattern is transferred over some distance, rather than smoothly moving from one location to the other.
“The Matrix”
As an aside, here on earth we have been living, for several millennia now, in an *inverted matrix space*. An energetic barrier that does not allow free movement in and out of the space surrounding earth has us spiritually bottled up here, endlessly repeating cycles of death and birth and sometimes very interesting but always short lives. We are forced to lead our lives of “three score and ten” years in a rigged game space, divided into “good” and “evil” players. By the time we figure out what is going on, we are usually ready to die again and start all over.
Wars, violence, destruction and desperation seem to be our lot here. They are played out by us, the trapped and forcedly unconscious players. Heaven and hell are both part of the play. There are plenty of songs and movies that describe the scenery. Once you’re in, it seems exceedingly difficult to get out. So much for this little side note, which is not about how universe at large works. It does seem relevant however to humanity’s place in the larger picture.
Time
Time as a linear sequence of events is real only in the dense 3D environment. It is an artifact, a consequence of the motion of matter and energy, seemingly “through” space. All matter in motion requires a certain interval of time to get from one place to another. There is no such time limitation in the higher dimensions. And for the physicists among us, time is not another dimension as modelled in Minkowski and Einstein’s concept of space-time. Space-time may be a useful mathematical representation, but without the background it is just an abstraction.
Spatial dimensions
I am using the term 3D since it is commonly used to denote our material density environment, although in reality there are not three dimensions of space. I have shown in a previous article ( Tetra Space Coordinates http://history.hasslberger.com/phy/phy_6.htm) that, by changing geometry from cubic to tetrahedral orientation, space could easily be seen as having four dimensions, denoted by the four vectors inherent in the tetrahedron. Although different from the “square space” mathematical convention expressed in three vector space, even four vectors would be a limitation. In reality, space is just that. it is omnidirectional.
As we see space from a tetrahedral perspective, other interesting possibilities become apparent. If, for instance, we were to invert those four outgoing vectors and go inwards towards the “zero point”, and if we were to “push through” the zero point into the negative space, we might well find ourselves in the world of spirit. This is beautifully expressed in the Merkaba, represented as two interpenetrating tetrahedra. Imagine the Merkaba at the centre of your being and start to rotate it. At a certain point you may find yourself in “another world” …
Magnetism
Electricity and magnetism are closely related. Like magnetic poles repel, opposite poles attract. That is how we get the compass. A lodestone was an ancient tool of navigation. Now we have this in the magnetic needle found in any compass. The South Pole of the needle is attracted by the North Pole of the earth’s magnetic field, and I guess vice versa on the southern half of our planet.
Although iron and other magnetizable metals can *hold* the form of the magnetic flow field, they are not the originators of it. All permanent magnets are “initiated” by a strong external magnetic field created by means of spin and electricity. Electricity is primary and the magnetic material is secondary. It is somewhat ironic that the current picture of the earth somehow creating its magnetic field in a pool molten iron filling its core is so far off reality. There is an electric plasma creating the earth’s magnetic field. .
I would think that magnetism is a ‘state of space’ where rotational energy is so prevalent that it creates a form of memory, a beaten path, that can then be transferred or rather imprinted on magnetizable elements forming ‘permanent magnets’.
Gravity
Gravity is a close cousin of magnetism. One expresses as energy, the other has effects on matter. One of the big mysteries and themes of discussion in current earth science is the origin of gravity. Newton, who observed and deduced how gravity works, he famously said about the origins of gravity that he flat out refuses to speculate. He said “hypotheses non fingo”.
Here is a quote that gives in some more detail what he said about it.
While the laws of gravity work just fine to model what we need in sufficient detail, there is still confusion of what causes the observed phenomenon of attraction between masses. We have the proponents of “pushing gravity” who say it’s the fluid aether pushing things together. Then there are those who look for an elusive particle – the hypothetical graviton – thought to mediate gravity. And in more recent times, we have been treated to observations of “gravity waves”. Those waves are apparently being detected and are a consequence of highly energetic events in the cosmos such as a fusion, a collapsing together of orbiting “black holes”, but certainly no consensus has been found as to how gravity originates. No one had the gumption, after Newton and his monumental work, to advance a consistent hypothesis.
So how does gravity come about?
Vortex
Close as I can tell, gravity originates with spin as in a vortex. Viktor Schauberger, the Water Wizard as they also called him, was very clear about the distinction between rotation, as in the wheel, which leads to centrifugal forces and vortex action, which is centripetal in expression, meaning it is an attractive, a concentrating force. Schauberger observed this through his work with water, where vortex action can be directly observed.
A vortex folded back in upon itself, or perhaps better a pair of counter rotating vortices closely linked and intertwined, are what forms a stable plasmoid.
In the context of cosmology, this translates into the form we see is present in all of creation, from the extreme macro to the tiniest micro.
Now what is the action of a plasmoid on the matrix of space? It imparts its inherent impulse of spin on the matrix of space, leading to a strong (think galaxy) or a very weak (think atom) “twist” in the matrix. Another name for this twisting action is “torsion”, a term coined by Russian researchers some decades ago. There is apparently a whole subject, little known in the West, called torsion physics.
Since we have the same kind of action from the macro to the micro, we are looking here at the structure of universe, as far as its physical (material) expression is concerned. Gravitation in its final analysis is nothing but affinity, the property of similar regions of space being attracted to each other.
There are *two kinds* of gravity, two ways the same force can be created. There is the action of a plasmoid as the driving force of a star, a galaxy or a planet. But different from that, there is the same thing happening in each and every particle of matter. So we have what we might call macroscopic gravity and microscopic gravity, both contributing to the total. Put a lot of particles together, such as in the mantle or rather the “shell” of most planets, and you have attraction to that mass of gravity.
What physicists have neglected to account for is the macroscopic aspect of gravity and this has led to a cosmological paradox. There is not enough matter in galaxies to account for their motion. So what did the physicists do? They hypothesized two ad hoc mechanisms, “dark matter” and “dark energy” to explain the missing mass. They still haven’t had success in trying to find evidence for these elusive concepts by the way.
Gravity is thus a property of the entire space matrix. It is unconcerned with any speed-of-light limitation. We feel gravity instantly at any distance. All those sources of gravity, be they macroscopic or microscopic, create what I would call a gravitational environment. That environment is infinitely complex and ever changing, with those sources of gravity in a continual dance around one another. This is why I said earlier that with Newton’s formulas we can calculate orbital mechanics to *good enough* approximation but we can never account for *all* the interactions.
Black holes
Maybe I should say a word or two about what has been termed “black holes”. According to NASA, “Black holes are among the most mysterious cosmic objects, much studied but not fully understood. These objects aren’t really holes. They’re huge concentrations of matter packed into very tiny spaces. A black hole is so dense that gravity just beneath its surface, the event horizon, is strong enough that nothing – not even light – can escape. The event horizon isn’t a surface like Earth’s or even the Sun’s. It’s a boundary that contains all the matter that makes up the black hole.”
That is not quite correct. It is not matter (as in microscopic matter) that creates a black hole through gravitational compaction alone. A black hole is an extremely powerful, fast rotating plasmoid. The rotation is so fast that that at a certain distance light is intercepted and cannot escape. This means that in an equatorial view, we see only black. But it also means (and this is a prediction) that seen from a polar perspective, we should still be able to see the light that is emitted.
As a matter of fact, black holes are often depicted with extremely strong and far reaching polar “jets”. What may appear to us as a jet though is an extremely powerful and thus far reaching polar vortex or rather a pair of such *incoming vortices*, at each one of the poles of a “black hole”. Intermittent bursts of light emitted by the powerful plasmoid that drives it all, give the appearance of a “jet” as those pulses of light move outwards through the incoming particles in the vortex. It’s not the particles that move outwards but the pulses of light giving the misleading appearance of a “jet”.
A pulsar, a star that rapidly pulsates, is very probably a “black hole” as seen from an exact polar perspective.
A universe-wide electric network
There are strong electric currents in space linking up planets to their central star, linking up stars amongst each other and even linking galaxies into strings. Essentially there is a whole network spanning the Universe. Those currents are named after their discoverer, Kristian Olaf Bernhard Birkeland, a Norwegian space physicist, inventor, and professor of physics at the Royal Fredriks University in Oslo. On planet earth, those currents are said to be the cause of the auroras. In space, they may provide a network of “highways” for faster-than-light travel between stars and galaxies. Perhaps the “Stargate” series isn’t too far from the truth here.
End notes
This writing is intuitive although based on physical facts as we know them. I make no claim for completeness and have avoided mathematics altogether. Others are much better at that than I currently am, having grown up without any formal education in the subject.
There are no predictions, except for two in the section on “black holes”. Oh yes, I *do* make another prediction: Sooner or later, physics and cosmology will become comfortable with one or more of the things I have said here. Watch out for that. It may take a while …
A word on copyrights
I have decided and have previously stated that my writings are in the “public domain”. This means they are free to use for anyone. Little of what you read here is originally mine. I have merely intuitively combined what I learned about the work of our ancestors and some current research. I make no claim for completeness. You may copy, quote and translate as you wish.
Why “public domain”? It is morally impossible for me to profit from a feature of current laws on “intellectual property” that have shown to be retarding progress all over the place. So unless otherwise specified, treat my writings as a gift. If you do happen to make money with these ideas though, you can always send some of it my way …
Physics, as practiced in this 21st century, suffers from a fatal defect. It refuses to consider the non material aspects of existence to be relevant for our understanding of universe …
