Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Big K&R LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #1
It doesn't make sense - it's pretty pictures, which are wrong muriel_volestrangler Jul 2013 #2
yep - corkscrew motion totally debunked - nice find Baclava Jul 2013 #4
not just wrong and not just superficially; it’s deeply wrong, based on a very wrong premise leftyohiolib Jul 2013 #6
For those who don't want to read the article: LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #8
not quite - 26,000 years is the earth's precession cycle, 240 million to go around the galaxy Baclava Jul 2013 #9
That's what he said; I just misquoted him. Thanks for the correction. LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #14
There is more to this than just these two opinions. A Simple Game Jul 2013 #15
The video and Bhat's theory are utter junk. Disproved, debunked, demolished. Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2013 #16
I don't doubt that the theory presented by Sadhu's videos are wrong. And yes I do consider A Simple Game Jul 2013 #19
Sure, start with a hypothesis. Their hypothesis has been shot down, disproved, destroyed, demolished Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2013 #24
Now you have me confused even more. A Simple Game Jul 2013 #28
For that sense, "travels behind" = "becomes occluded" Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2013 #29
Not what I was looking for but you knew that didn't you. Thanks anyway. n/t A Simple Game Jul 2013 #30
Even dictionaries can be wrong when they give an uneducated definition of a scientific term. Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2013 #31
Perhaps hypothesis would be a better word for the beginning of what I am describing. A Simple Game Jul 2013 #32
No, the problem was the viedo maker misused the word 'vortex' the first time round muriel_volestrangler Jul 2013 #17
My point is that if it is indeed a decaying orbit then it is in all actuality a vortex. A Simple Game Jul 2013 #18
'ahead' as in 'ahead of the motion of the sun round the galactic centre' muriel_volestrangler Jul 2013 #20
I have no doubts that Sadhu's theory is wrong. I just find it interesting. A Simple Game Jul 2013 #21
But there are things like the 2nd video's invocation of 'precession', which is totally wrong muriel_volestrangler Jul 2013 #22
I am sorry I don't have a lot of faith in astronomers calculations. A Simple Game Jul 2013 #23
I have no faith in your understanding of scientific facts and the scientific method. Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2013 #26
An open mind does not mean crediting empty-headed "theories". Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2013 #27
"Decaying orbit" has nothing to do with a "vortex" other than shape. Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2013 #25
Thanks for the link. And one more counter-argument: DetlefK Jul 2013 #10
What I find "neat" is the Sun warps gravity around it. roamer65 Jul 2013 #3
All stars do that TransitJohn Jul 2013 #7
I read the best place to park a telescope telclaven Jul 2013 #13
Actually, the distortion of space and time by gravity MineralMan Jul 2013 #12
my life is a vortex KG Jul 2013 #5
Pretty, but pretty badly incorrect. MineralMan Jul 2013 #11
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The helical model - our s...»Reply #30