Addressing the Misconception of the Solar System Part 1 -- SEE VIDEO DESCRIPTION...

[bigkraig1]

Then how is it we view other planets that are illuminated by the suns light as they pass behind? Trick photography,,,Mirrors ?

[TheRealVerbz]

@bigkraig1 Tell me When the planets EVER pass behind the Sun?

We can view the outer planets ALL YEAR!

If planets Ever went behind the sun... we wouldn't see them for months at a time. Why? Because they'd be on the other side 180 degrees from our perspective.

But that never happens.

We can Plainly see the planets all year round.

There are only 3 weeks out of the year where we can't see Mercury or Venus because they aren't directly in the Sun's beam of light. (30 degree cone of illumination)

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz Please see my more recent video showing diagrams, pictures and evidence in context.

This video was just a crude example to show the concept. Please take a look at the information in the description link too.

Look into Giordano Bruno, Dr. Pallathadka Keshava Bhat, Dewey B Larson, Walter Russell and the Electric Universe Model. (E.U.M.)

Here is a MUCH better video I put together.

Twin Opposing Vortexes and Misconceptions of Space:

watch?v=v_PQnsxW56Q

[bigkraig1]

@TheRealVerbz So when were watching the Sun from the SoHo cameras and watch the planets pass behind or above, below from that perspective thats not what were truely watching?, Im not refuting but trying to grasp what youre saying, also how do you explain earths alternating seasons? summer and winter?

[TheRealVerbz]

@bigkraig1 Any satellites we send from Earth have the same Relative Spin as the Earth.

Nothing is stationary in Space. All things are already moving in a vortex motion. (Phi Spiral)

But our illusion of observation from an Earth-bound perspective. tells us we are stationary in space.

The Sun is constantly running away while the planets And satellites follow in the Helical Wake.

The Sun is spinning in place AS it runs away from us, giving the illusion that we are orbiting around it.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz The Seasons are a little harder to describe in this small comment. We spiral behind the Sun as it travels forward. On the upswing in the vortex, it gets hotter. On the downswing, it gets colder.

I'd have to show you a couple diagrams in context from Dr. Pallathadka Keshava Bhat to do the information justice.

Try w w w,feandft,com/vortex_basics.ht­m

[TheRealVerbz]

@bigkraig1 Thank You for your questions!!!

I need all the questions and insight I can get.

Space is black.

Imagine there was Nothing around you except a basketball.

When the basketball spins in place, you THINK you are orbiting around it.

But you are just watching it spin.

Imagine you're on a freeway and there's only 1 car in front of you.

Now take away the ground, take away the sky and all frames of reference.

The person in the car in front of you is spinning the ball on their finger.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz You can put as many SoHo cameras on your car as you want. You are still following behind the car in front of you and seeing the ball spin in place.

We Never see the frontside of the car in front of us. (Even though we see the ball spin in place)

Our orientation to the ball never changes.

[phillipgaley]

@TheRealVerbz What ever our rotation is, say we sent out a camera in the opposite direction; in about 6 mo., would that camera view the dark side of the sun?

[TheRealVerbz]

@phillipgaley No, the camera would still be following behind the Sun.

Click the first link in the video description for a pic of Dr. Bhat's model.

Here is another visual example:

/watch?v=gektDUKFjMM

Also watch the video I put together called Twin Opposing Vortexes and Misconceptions of Space.

Much better than this crude visual model.

/watch?v=v_PQnsxW56Q

[bigkraig1]

@TheRealVerbz So then youre saying that were both spinning not orbiting? But wouldnt we have to consider the Zodiac a fixed position(I guess it could be spinning as well) and how would we account for our alternating seasons? the Moon would have to be Orbiting?

[TheRealVerbz]

@bigkraig1 Objects in space only travel in Spirals.

All direction is curved and all motion is spiral.

From a side view, all things are traveling in a sine-wave type fashion through the Galaxy. Like a carousel.

Dr. Keshava Bhat had some technical explanations about the zodiac and precession of the equinox.

Feandft,com/Dr.%20Bhat.htm

The moon is chasing the Earth, and Earth is chasing the Sun.

Moons travel 90 degrees to planets. Planets travel 90 degrees to Stars. But those rings of axis wobble.

[SlackerSlayer]

I will spend some time going to your other data, but the actual observations shows a different solar cycle. Ignoring the other objects that orbit the star is not valid here.

[blackberries69]

are you saying there is a "black" part of the sun where its in a complete shadow? or just saying that we only see 1 side of the sun like our moon?

[TheRealVerbz]

@blackberries69 According to the information, we only see 1 side of the Sun just like we only see 1 side of the moon.

The front side of the Sun is exponentially darker because all the heat and light is being projected back.

The inertia of the Sun moving forward blows all the heat back.

The ancients believed that the light of the Sun is a stationary constant and stars don't twinkle, but rather we are viewing the fluctuations of Space in between the light already present.

Space IS dark matter.

[sumstuff46]

Since the Physics Model is wrong now, most theories we were taught is BS including history, so what's next ?

I believe anything is possible now, can't trust scientists anymore, they probably don't know anything but redundant/orphaned BS now, they are paid to Lie, now that physics and astronomy is all wrong where do we go from here, cause now everyone knows it's bull now :)

[TheRealVerbz]

@sumstuff46 There is a difference between Science (Nature's Laws) and Psyence (Man's misinterpretations, made up rules and illusions of observation) Psyence is a sense-based and corporate backed indoctrination system.

Science is intuitive, methodical, philosophical, experimental, Spiritual, etc.

The history of suppression goes back thousands of years.

Where we go now is UP!

But we can only get there by researching the information in context.

This crude video doesn't do the REAL info justice.

[sumstuff46]

@TheRealVerbz Don't stop my good man, love the links and info, it's all new to me and VERY interesting

TYVM ;)

[TheRealVerbz]

@sumstuff46 Thank YOU for having an open mind and giving the information a chance.

There's A LOT more to it.

Take a look through some of the information in the description link for some truly revolutionary material and controversial Science you won't find in any school or library.

:o)

--Jason

[AvatarRoku1]

crack is bad for you man!!

[TheRealVerbz]

@AvatarRoku1 Did you even check the information in the description?

Get the fluoride out of your system and do some research chump.

[AvatarRoku1]

@TheRealVerbz I assure you I am fluoride free. I'm just worried about the guy who thinks that half of the sun is black and that it moves at the speed of light... *facepalm*

[TheRealVerbz]

@AvatarRoku1 You have to look at the totality of information of WHY I think that way.

I didn't just wake up one day and say... hey... you know what... the Front Side of the Sun is Black!!

No... I listened to people like Walter Russell, Dewey B Larson, Dr. Keshava Bhat, Pier Luigi Ighina, Ancient descriptions from Alchemy and laws of nature that are not recognized by lamestream psyence.

In reality... there is NO speed of light.

Light doesn't travel at all.

Only Matter travels.

Light is Rest.

[TheRealVerbz]

@AvatarRoku1 I'd like to ask you... How familiar are you with the work of Walter Russell, Ed Leedskalnin, Pier Ighina and Dewey B Larson?

If you've never heard those names before.. you should take some serious consideration into their brilliant work.

Einstein never heard of Walter Russell.

Nikola Tesla told Russell to lock away many of his ideas for the next 1000 years until Humanity was ready.

This crude video does not do the totality of information justice.

You have to care enough to research.

[limpingdwarf]

There's one born every minute. You are the greatest of them.

[TheRealVerbz]

@limpingdwarf Did you bother to look at the totality of information in the description link?

It helps to see the information in context rather than try to follow my crude example here.

Look into Walter Russell, Dewey B Larson, Dr. Keshava Bhat and Ed Leedskalnin.

Here is a much better video I put together to show what the heck I'm talking about in context.

watch?v=v_PQnsxW56Q

Thank you for your opinion.

[TheRealVerbz]

Please see my newest video I put together to do this information a bit more justice than my crude attempt in this one.

Twin Opposing Vortexes and Misconceptions of The Solar System

/watch?v=ia-R0Ot1Aeg

[tenkosami]

The sun is not traveling at the speed of light. Only light can do that.

Also - if the Earth is moving at all, and this theory says that anything that moves cannot be orbited, then how can the moon orbit the Earth?

And the observed positions of the planets seems to confirm that the Earth is orbiting the sun.

I see a lot of problems with this theory.

[TheRealVerbz]

@tenkosami I'm sorry but that's not accurate. Light doesn't travel at all. Only particles WITHIN light travel. Light IS rest.

The moon follows in the helical trajectory of earth 90 degrees to the helical trajectory Earth follows behind the Sun.

Look into all the information in the description link.

We are not orbiting the Sun, but rather following behind in a helical trajectory. What we consider the North pole of the sun is the equator. The North pole is the anode traveling away from us.

[TheKaos90]

@TheRealVerbz I personally never believed that the light speed is terminal : the Earth spins around the Su8n , and the Sun around the center of the galaxy. The know the radius of the orbits , we know the period that takes to make a full circle , and if you do the math , you get pretty big numbers that make the light speed seem too small to think about in space travel

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheKaos90 Remember that EVERYTHING is moving through space. NOTHING EVER traces a complete circle in space.

If everything were stationary, things would orbit in a circle. But since things are moving forward while they trace a circle...it follows a Phi Spiral instead.

Trace a circle with your finger while walking forward. Your finger never touches the same point in space twice.

Man's Math says we do but Nature says we don't.

We NEVER make a full circle, but rather follow in a helical trajectory.

[TheRealVerbz]

@tenkosami It's not a theory. It's the 3D helical reality of the universe as proven by Dr. Keshava Bhat, Ed Leedskalnin, DB Larson and the ancients themselves.

watch?v=gektDUKFjMM

:o)

[Coreydamata]

Good wurk! Stay in school!

[TheRealVerbz]

@Coreydamata Skool iz fer fools. (Psyence and Indoctrination) but Nature and Walter Russell is for everyone. (Science and Education)

:o)

h t t p://trufax,org/general/indoc,h­tml

[ressurectionman]

Im trying to get my head around this, can you tell me how the planets in our solar system fit inn with your scheme of things. Make me believe your theory

[TheRealVerbz]

@ressurectionman First off, I'm not here to "make you believe" anything. I'm offering factual information which you can realize for yourself if you see the validity and it resonates with you.

Trying to convince you means I'm trying to make you believe.

I want you to Know the reality of the Helical Solar System or what the ancients called "The Galactic Serpent", not "believe."

The best source of information is Walter Russell, Dr. Keshava Bhat and DB Larson.

See the information in the description.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz And this isn't "my" theory. It's the reality of the solar system proved correct by Keshava Bhat, Russellian Science, Ed Leedskalnin's telescope and tracing the path of the Sun, DB Larson explaining the reality of electric stars verses the nuclear misconceptions and the raw data that you can collect yourself if experimenting at the equator.

[zekeavila]

You're an idiot!

If you wanna know the truth about our solar system don't look to the stars, look to the molecules and atoms that make up our world!

Peace!

[TheRealVerbz]

@zekeavila If I'm an idiot, then why was I invited to speak at the next Tesla Technology Conference?

Care to debate on camera?

If you want to know the truth about the solar system, look into Walter Russell.

Have you ever heard of Dr. Keshava Bhat or DB Larson?

You don't even know how "atoms" work son.

Please look into the information in the description link before embarrassing yourself again.

You say Peace, yet you insult people?

What a hypocrite...

[tacv666]

you should check out my video called the uniplanetary evolution theory it supports what your saying the planets come from the sun.

[TheRealVerbz]

@tacv666 Excellent!! I'll watch it right now.

I'd like to say though that these aren't my theories. It is factual information taken from the brilliant work of Walter Russell, Dr. Keshava Bhat, DB Larson, Viktor Schauberger, and many more.

Check out the links in the description.

:oD

[TheRealVerbz]

Please look through the information in the description. ^^^

[canuck7777777]

I think you're right! Thanks for this paradigm shift in thinking! I just have one question. If Earth is following the sun and the Moon is following the Earth, how does this explain solar eclipses? In the case of a solar eclipse the Moon gets ahead of the Earth. Or does it?

[TheRealVerbz]

@canuck7777777 The Moon passes between Earth and Sun sometimes to create the eclipses.

watch?v=gektDUKFjMM

Check through some of the links in the description regarding Dr. Kesheva Bhat!

:o)

[Simcore999]

+Also if the sun would be hitting the particles like it's mentioned in one of the videos( that causes the heat behind it) wouldn't the light-speed constant slow down all the time?

[TheRealVerbz]

@Simcore999 I follow Walter Russell's work. There are major fundamental differences in the interpretation of light between mainstream and Russellian Science.

Russell said that light doesn't travel at all and that absolute rest IS light. Only things within light travel. The rate of deterioration will determine how much light is projected because the things making up matter are returning to a state of rest. As they do so, they emit light. The composition determines color. Light can be cold or hot.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz Even Tesla came out from the start saying Einstein's equations were misinterpreted. E = mc^2 was only talking about a specific rate of deterioration in the time frame of a man made second relative to Earth.

The speed of light depends of the permeability and permittivity of space. But that can also be altered by isolated magnetic fields.

As a "photon" enters different pressure zones in space, it's rate of deterioration will speed up or slow down, exposing that c is Not a constant.

[Simcore999]

@TheRealVerbz :-)I will have a look, at what Walter Russell says and it makes for some very interesting possibilities

[ParapaDrifter]

@TheRealVerbz so... how about your thoughts on photosynthesis?

[TheRealVerbz]

@ParapaDrifter Excellent question!

Plants don't need light... they need VIBRATION!

Light is absolute rest, not some particle traveling 186,000 miles a sec. All those particles (magnets) absorbed by plants are vibrating WITHIN the still magnetic light. Look into a guy named Thomas G. Hieronymous.

Remember playing telephone as a kid using 2 paper cups and a string? The vibration would carry through the string and you can hear the message regardless of distance. Hieronymous applied that to plants.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz He put a thin copper plate on his roof like a solar panel, just to collect heat in the sun. He ran wires from that plate down the side of his house into his pitch black basement. In his basement were a bunch of pots with dirt. Like an Earth Battery, Hieronymous put a zinc and copper rod in one of the pots. He connected the wires from the roof to the rods.

He put seeds in all the pots. The seeds with the rods and wires grew as if they were in the Sun. Plants need the vibration.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz Scientists are only looking at 1 half of photosynthesis. They don't see the other half of the cone. The vibrating particle WITHIN light is condensed, heats up and charges as it travels into the leaf and down the tiny CONES. The particle discharges and cools after it reaches the "zero point" where the 2 points of the cones converge 180 degrees from each other.

Science is only looking at the downward charging approach of the vibrating particle, not the discharging half of the cycle.

[ParapaDrifter]

@TheRealVerbz im freakin cryin here man... so... I gotta follow up:

can AC be used? and Do you think it would be more efficient than CFL lighting? I'm going to check it out non the less.

T4LK A80UT C0V3RT GR0 0P3RAT10N5

--

I will say this, Hieronymus is a name that means member of the occult.(hidden)

Jesuit Józef Hieronim Retinger advised Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands to begin the Bilderberg group.

Just an FYI.

[TheRealVerbz]

@ParapaDrifter I'm not sure how AC would be used since it's a direct connection from the copper plate to the rods. You would have to have some sort of circuit and modulator to convert to AC.

But all things in nature are pulsed (breaths) and cones (vortexes).

CFL lighting isn't that great to begin with, but I'm not sure about that aspect.

Hieronymous grew everything in darkness and there was no light.

[evolucianyo]

is a star traveling towards us a black hole then? and most stars traveling away? maybe our system was the centre once!

[TheRealVerbz]

@evolucianyo There's a couple things that science interprets as a black hole. The center of the milky way and all other galaxies is void of matter. The center is the point of collision of 2 extremely large comets. When they hit.. it's one hell of a "big bang." That collision vaporizes a lot of mass and the rest of the asteroids smash together forming a ring that expands outward.

There's no "well in the fabric of space time" sucking things in the center of the galaxy. Everything is expanding out.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz You can also interpret a black hole as a star coming straight at you at the same rate you travel away from it.

It will look like a stationary black dot sucking things up in it's "gravity." But in reality, it's a comet running into things in its path. The illusion is that it's stationary. Like a car following you on the freeway going the same speed. But in space, there's no frame of reference to see any ground or sky so it would look like the car is stationary.

[Simcore999]

@TheRealVerbz :-)I wonder how we would see the stars, behind us then and from the side we should see most stars as comets maybe

[TheRealVerbz]

@Simcore999 All the fake computer models of the Galaxy are from NASA. Their so called proof and video evidence of the galaxy is just cartoons! If we view a galaxy from the side looking at the accretion disk, we would see all the stars (comets) traveling relative to each other.

It would be difficult to discern the stars as comets from that far away because every star in the galaxy is following in the wake of the stars in front of it. NASA has never sent a satellite out of the Galaxy to film.

[Simcore999]

+I might have found a flaw in the part where you said they could not send satellites ahead of the sun because how would they return from the moon( or soil samples from other planets) if it is trailing behind the earth and can not come back ahead towards the sun's direction ( or maybe the moon landing with the planet samples were a hoax?

[TheRealVerbz]

@Simcore999 We follow behind the sun spiraling along the Y axis, not orbiting Around the Sun on the X axis.

The same rules apply and NASA can calculate all the same things within our tiny frame of reference in the solar system. (Comet system). They are only viewing the solar system from a bottom up view. (2D)

From the side view, you would see the Sun as a comet with all the planets following in the wake.

Same rules and calculations apply but there is another dimension they aren't accounting for.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz The moon landing was real, although they hoaxed some footage too!

NASA was originally called NACA and was started by Hitler and funded by Walt Disney. It only became NASA after the US inherited the program from the Nazis, who still funded it.

I personally believe that the feather and hammer drop was Faked. If the hammer fell in slow motion, it would also bounce in slow motion. From what Dr. Greer personally told me, they hoaxed footage to make "their" faulty physics look right.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz Boyd Bushman proved Galileo wrong when he went to the Tower of Pisa and dropped a bowling ball and 2 super electro-magnets that were forced together wanting to repel. (Not sure if it was negative ends or positive ends. I assume Negative)

The bowling ball fell considerably faster every time. What would Galileo say about that?

[Simcore999]

@TheRealVerbz :-)Yes I understand that part my question is, how do we come back from the moon if it follows a similar trajectory to the earth as the earth has to the sun and send a soil sample from mars to earth( referring to your comment that they could not send a satellite ahead of the sun)

[TheRealVerbz]

@Simcore999 That's part of the issue about the moon landing. How did they get off the moon because the "gravity" isn't what they claim. They send satellites and come back from the moon though by waiting for the correct alignments. That way they run into the moon instead of chasing it. They calculate the inverse on the way back to run into Earth's path as not to have to chase it to catch up.

They calculate the same helical trajectory for mars. Going there is easier than coming back with rockets.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz And what's hilarious to me is that the very scientists that claim the absurd notion that objects travel in a straight line in space... are the same scientists that use spherical coordinate systems and helical trajectories for their satellites in space!

They continue with the fallacious notion that things travel in straight lines, yet they can't use linear mechanics in space because all direction is curved and all motion is spiral.

Their own work contradicts their so called Laws!

[TheRealVerbz]

w w w,feandft,com/vortex_basics.ht­m

[TraxTheAlien]

I would try to explain how wrong you are but judging by what you believe that would be like trying to explain to the Flat Earth Society that the world is round. A waste of time.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TraxTheAlien You obviously are a pseudo skeptic and don't care about actual facts. Look into the available information in the description. Look into Walter Russell who gave Nikola Tesla many of his ideas.

If you haven't heard of Walter Russell, than YOU are the waste of time.

w w w,feandft,com

[TraxTheAlien]

@TheRealVerbz

In your example you refer to the speed of light.

Walter Russell states specifically "Light does not travel. The light and heat which appear to come from the star or the sun has never left the star or the sun. That which man sees as light and feels as heat is the reproduced counterpart of the light and of the heat which is its cause."

However wrong it contradicts your theory.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TraxTheAlien No big guy... The accepted speed of light is only unique to the speed at which our sun is traveling through the void. I have to use fallacious phrases like that for lay people like yourself.

Light Doesn't travel... and if you would ACTUALLY look into the information rather than looking for semantics to whine about... you would understand a bit more.

c is not a constant.

There is no speed of light.

Light is rest.

What science considers the speed of light is the speed of our Sun.

[TraxTheAlien]

@TheRealVerbz

Again in order to reflect light has to change directions. If light isn't moving than it can't reflect. That would indicate that everything in your vision is producing its own light and that you are moving towards that light. Simple facts

[TheRealVerbz]

@TraxTheAlien Please stop embarrassing yourself man!! You keep coming back within minutes after I present you with link after link, book after book and video after video.

You cannot have thoroughly looked into anything because you're too heated right now, you have waay too much bias and attachment to lamestream quackademia, and you feel like this is your fight to win or lose.

It's not brother.

You're wrong, just as I was when I grew up with all the crap you hold so dear.

Research Walter Russell

[09205479428]

...From Electric UniverseTheory by Thornhill Wallace, the sun's corona is 2,000,000K while at its surface is way down at 6,000K. This is an indication of "air/atmospheric friction" not a nuclear furnace. Also the sun should have white intense hot spots not black ones as you have mentioned. I have one question though, how does this Helical wake explain the solar cycle , why is it periodic ( avg ) ? Are we not moving into a higher or perhaps different etheric density ?

[TheRealVerbz]

@09205479428 I'm not sure about the Aetheric Density!

Walter Russell gave the periodicity of all characteristics in Nature in his many books. Try The Universal One, A New Concept of the Universe and The Secret of Light.

Also look into DB Larson's "The Case Against the Nuclear Atom."

(All of which are on w w w,feandft,com)

We've got a lot of researching to do on Dr. Pallathadka Keshava Bhat's models and the work of Walter Russell.

The Sun itself Oblates and Prolates (pulsates) Solar cycle.

:o)

[09205479428]

Nice as always..looking forward for the next part series.

[Anothercoilgun]

Damn, now that I think about it, this makes sense. For the sun to not be rotating along with us is another wool over the masses head.

[phonograduate]

If all stars are comets wouldn't you see tails on some of them?

[TheRealVerbz]

@phonograduate We Do! The arms of the Galaxy is the light and particles trailing behind from all the comets moving in a uniform spiral.

Everything is deteriorating as it travels forward. Tiny pieces are flying off and reflect light themselves.

We can see evidence of the path of everything because of the swirling motion of the milky way which is the collective trail of comets.

Expanding out in a ring, rotating counterclockwise, And rolling back on itself like a smoke ring traveling forward.

[tetekofa]

Explain "Lunar" and "Solar" eclipses please.

[TheRealVerbz]

@tetekofa Look into Dr. Pallathadka Keshava Bhat's models.

Get his free book called Helical Helix at w w w,feandft.com

watch?v=kDNmwCiqBxc

:o)

[TheRealVerbz]

@escape4x4123 Much Love brother!! Some people can realize it from seeing bubbles rise, while other people need to compare years worth of research and visual models before de-programming from the indoctrination we were all brought up with.

Russellian Science Will be heard.

Walter Russell as the man.

If people respect Nikola Tesla so much.... then why not also respect the man who helped give him many of his ideas for his inventions.

They were good friends.

People don't know about Walter Russell

[ssnickelfritz]

ok....will do.

[ssnickelfritz]

sorry man....im not buying it.. no offense.

[TheRealVerbz]

@ssnickelfritz You already DID buy it. It's called mainstream indoctrination! Better known as quackademics.

Have you read Walter Russell or Dr. Pallathadka Keshava Bhat?

Try this one by Nassim Haramein then:

watch?v=zBlAGGzup48&playnext=1­&list=PLCE38ACF7153B8480

If you don't see it, it's all good.

MUCH more to come.

Look into the links in the description link. Spend some time on it. Longer than a week. It takes a while to sort through the information let alone absorb it and compare it.

[Anothercoilgun]

@ssnickelfritz

Its not for sale Tom Tom.

[TheRealVerbz]

Compare to this 20 second fluid Mechanics video.

Imagine the ball as the Sun traveling left.

All the things spiral behind in the helical wake.

watch?v=vQHXIHpvcvU&feature=pl­ayer_embedded

[ssnickelfritz]

do you believe there are moons around the other planets in our solar system?

[TheRealVerbz]

@ssnickelfritz Of course there are moons around the other planets! But they don't orbit. They follow in the helical wake of those planets, because those planets themselves are traveling forward following the Sun.

[ssnickelfritz]

What are other galaxies then?

[TheRealVerbz]

@ssnickelfritz Did you go through the description link?

All galaxies are rings of compression from 2 asteroids colliding head on.

When 2 anodes collide it creates a positive ring of compression.

The asteroids colliding are the Y axis while the ring of compression expands radially outward on the X axis.

Negative is dark and cold. Positive is heat and light. On every magnet you will see black on top And bottom with a ring of light around it. Get a magnetic viewing film. Galaxies are the same.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz The Big Bang was only for Our Galaxy. Each galaxy has it's own Big Bang.

2 asteroids hitting straight on of that size is one big bang!

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz Imagine 2 asteroids like this:

watch?v=XJk8ijAUCiI

The ring outward would be a galaxy.

[ssnickelfritz]

granted the moon is not orbiting a perfect circle around us but it is going around us. how come you can't believe that the earth is doing the same thing around the sun? s

[TheRealVerbz]

@ssnickelfritz I don't believe it because it's not true. We don't "orbit" the Sun! We follow the comet called the Sun in it's Helical Wake. Traveling down a slinky is not orbiting. Look at a slinky head on and it will LOOK like a circle.

Is the slinky a circle? No, it's a corkscrew.

There is no orbit on a slinky. It looks like orbit because of our relative perception.

Dr. Pallathadka Keshava Bhat, Walter Russell, Viktor Schauberger, Ed Leedskalnin, Nassim Harramein and many more proved it.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz Orbit is just going round and round whether it be eliptical or circular. Which already proves Kepler's 3rd so called Law of Planetary motion wrong. If you move forward in space as you go round and round... it's not an orbit. You're going down a vortex. Phi spiraling 3D space.

The Earth is not flat, and neither is the solar system. Things are IN space traveling to equalize their pressure potential like bubbles rising or rocks sinking. Not sitting ON space on a non existent "fabric".

[ssnickelfritz]

okay explain the stars to me then. I'm trying to wrap my head around what you're saying. why are you saying what you're saying when you can see that the moon does this around our planet? you just said earlier in order for something to orbit something has to be stationary.... that's not true with our planet and the moon.

[TheRealVerbz]

@ssnickelfritz In order for the moon to "orbit" around Earth... Earth would need to be stationary. An orbit means you trace a perfect circle in space on the same axis and return to the same point you started around a stationary fulcrum.

Everything is moving forward through space in a helical trajectory. Nothing is stationary therefore there is no such thing as "orbit." Only bodies following in the helical wake of other bodies.

What you observe isn't always true because of relative perception.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz Look into the information in the description link. Go through all the information.

Look into w w w,feandft,com

Also look into Dr. Pallathadka Keshava Bhat and his book called Helical Helix.

Ed Leedskalnin also proved this true by tracing the actual path of the Sun under his rock telescope at Coral Castle in Homestead Florida. You can only measure the true path from the equator.

/watch?v=3ZDJ9sOQm8E&feature=r­elated

It's hard to describe without visual aids.

[TheRealVerbz]

@ssnickelfritz All stars are comets traveling away from us. You can only see the stars if they are traveling away from you. If they are coming straight at you... you can call those stars "black holes" because all the light and heat are trailing behind. We only view the cathode side of stars (comets).

The galaxy is expanding outward radially in a ring while rolling back in on itself like a smoke ring traveling forward. The ring of compression called the galaxy also rotates as it expands.

[ssnickelfritz]

if the moon can orbit the earth so can the earth and all the other planets orbit the sun. scientists use these calculations to get satellites to all the planets in our solar system. have you not seen footage of the sun that really shows that it rotates?

[TheRealVerbz]

@ssnickelfritz There is no such thing as orbit. Check the information in the description.

In order for something to orbit another body, Something has to be stationary and act as a fulcrum.

Have you ever seen a rock orbit another sinking rock? Or have you ever seen a bubble orbit another rising bubble? Nope. The same fluid mechanics apply in space but on a much more massive scale.

The sun ROTATES, but it's still traveling away from us like a baseball on fire after someone hit a homerun.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz We can watch the sun rotate in front of us all we want.... we are still only viewing the Cathode side of the Sun. Think of a gyroscope moving away from you. You can watch the ball In the gyroscope rotate while the entire gyroscope still travels away from you. You never see the other side of it.

Nassim Harramein's model of the solar system is almost correct but it needs to show a helical trajectory and the affect from inertia blowing the heat back as the sun travels forward.

[Simcore999]

+I do admit I had a 'shock' when I learned that they only placed them in stereo, not opposite from the earth and I will have to think about the rest!

[tetekofa]

 ... and the Moon?

[TheRealVerbz]

@tetekofa The moon is also following in the helical wake of the Sun. I'm not sure if the moon and Earth broke off from the Sun at the same time or whether it got caught up in the wake of the passing Sun from another system long ago.

Jupiter is not a gas giant that will eventually become a planet. It Used to be a planet and is now expanding into a gas giant. All planets born from the sun cool and expand as they get further away like bubbles rising.

Look into Pallathadka Keshava Bhat

feandft,com

[ssnickelfritz]

First you say we broke off from the sun then you say were following it. How come all the other planets are not flaring up?

[TheRealVerbz]

@ssnickelfritz The Sun is a giant Comet. Earth is but a pebble that broke off from the comet we call the Sun.

The sheer diameter of the Sun experiences drag in space from "Aetheric Friction." Space isn't empty.

The Sun is traveling in front of the other planets and all other bodies are following in the helical wake.

The other planets don't flare up because their density and speed isn't enough to cause friction.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz Something traveling underwater will have to go real fast to burn up. Much faster than the shuttle re-entry, or at least with much more force.

The shuttle experiences heat because of friction with the atmosphere.

There is an atmosphere in space too but just soo thin that science doesn't recognize it. The ancients called it Aether. Even Einstein said there was Aether.

The Sun is also blocking the force in front of the other planets like a racecar traveling close behind another car.

[ParapaDrifter]

@TheRealVerbz Lots a questions. You must be passionate enough to respond to it all.. quite a topic, gots the grey matter charged...

"the planets dont flare up cause their density and speed isn't enough to cause friction." ~so does that mean they are moving slower than the sun? it's counter-intuitive to think were following it but moving slower. unless relativity applies.

you say 2 huginormous colliding asteroids cause galaxies, think these big guys can be detected, before their bang?

[TheRealVerbz]

@ParapaDrifter I'm VERY passionate about Walter Russell's work, Ed Leedskalnin, John Searl, Dr. Keshava Bhat, John Keely, Viktor Schauberger, Grebbenikov, Dan Winter and many more. I try to talk to everyone I can. As long as people are willing to take a look at the information they haven't encountered before. A lot of people are just the internet's peanut gallery regurgitating the same lamestream theories over and over about how this and that is "impossible."

Thank you for your open mind!

[TheRealVerbz]

@ParapaDrifter We are moving relative to the Sun at the same speed. If the Sun and Earth were traveling side by side at the same speed, the Sun would flare up and experience friction, but the Earth wouldn't because of the difference in diameter.

Bigger diameter = more surface area to experience drag and create friction.

The Earth would have to travel much faster to experience the same amount of friction to flare up like the Sun, or exponentially increase the diameter at a slower speed.

[TheRealVerbz]

@ParapaDrifter And yes, I would think 2 bodies in space that gigantic could be detected before they smashed together and created a galaxy.

But... something that big would be frozen in time on our scale, so good luck detecting them.

We can only see so big and so small from our frame of reference (dimension).

We would have to travel far away from the galaxy to see things in "real time" on that scale. But on that scale Earth's clock would tick exponentially faster per second relative to your clock.

[ParapaDrifter]

@TheRealVerbz "But... something that big would be frozen in time on our scale, so good luck detecting them."

maybe look at young galaxies for evidence of these super masses...

"but on that scale Earth's clock would tick exponentially faster per second relative to your clock."

ergo, no one would be alive to peer review your results, lol.

[TheRealVerbz]

@Parapa Science only measures the point After creation. Unless they directly witness a collision they'll never know how galaxies form. They only rely on observation to reach conclusions.

U cant observe the true nature of the solar system using rockets.

Being able to observe it all at once means a big time difference. If you leave and witness it even for an hour, u would return hundreds if not thousands of years in the future. Some UFOs could be Ancient civilizations returning after a short trip.

[ssnickelfritz]

If the sun is a comet, what's causing the comet to heat up. Haley's comet doesn't heat up and flair till it gets close to our sun. How is nasa able to send satellites off to distant planets using orbital patterns? I'm trying to wrap my head around 2 what you're saying... I don't get it?

[TheRealVerbz]

What goes up must come down... very good Newton..

But what comes down must also go back up. (Decomposition)

If Newton had bothered to sit with the apple that fell on his head for another 3 weeks, he would have seen it decompose and rise particle by particle as a low potential gas seeking a Like potential state in the sky.

The universe isn't a one way street like Newton believed. It's a balanced rhythmic interchange with constant degradation until equalization is achieved. (Rest / Light)

[FromDimmuLand]

A very Interestin Idea indeed. Funny thing, I can actually picture it in my head..

[TheRealVerbz]

People are going to have A LOT of questions regarding this.

I'll answer everything I can.

Be nice or I won't post your comment.

The Sun is a comet. There is no such thing as a "black Hole" that's just a comet coming straight at you while you run away from it at the same rate. Everything is traveling in a helical trajectory. The rate of arc in space is so great when you first start off, you THINK it's a straight line. No part of a Phi spiral is straight.

It's like Plato's Allegory of the Cave.

[TheRealVerbz]

@TheRealVerbz The Big Bang was only unique to OUR Galaxy. Each Galaxy had it's own Big Bang. Scientists call the Center of the Milky Way Galaxy some non existent black hole too. But that is the point of collision from 2 asteroids hitting head on (Y Axis)

2 anodes colliding creates a positive ring of compression outward on the x axis.

That ring of compression expands radially outward and as it does so, it rolls back on itself like a smoke ring traveling forward. The center is void of matter.