Simon Shack's   The Tychos   and
Patrik Lundqvist's   Tychosium  Program

Scandinavian Science Resurgence?

Raeto West   25 December & 30 December 2023

---

1 Invitation with Simon Shack to talk online with Martin and Patrik, of Radio Cui Bono
2 Online Talk with Cui Bono and Simon Shack
3 Review of the Tychonic 32-chapter book and Tychonic computer program (Long!)
4 Conclusions

---

Invitation with Simon Shack to talk online with Martin and Patrik, of Radio Cui Bono in Sweden

In November 2023, I received an email from Martin Emander, who invited me to talk on a Swedish truthseekerpodcast with Patrik Holmqvist. Their show is on https://www.spreaker.com/show/foereningen-cui-bonos-show and has run since July 2017, with 118 episodes uploaded. Most of their episodes are in Swedish, but they've had some English speakers—including Monica Schaefer, Lady Michelle Renouf, Fakeologist, and John Friend. Later, I was unimpressed by their talk with Daniel Roytas, and wondered if they might be 'controlled opposition'.
      Martin invited me to appear in a podcast as a guest to talk about my work and what is happening and has happened historically in our world.
      The other guest was to be Simon Shack, of whom I'd heard in September Clues on 9/11 exposés, though as far as I was aware he'd moved from that topic. I didn't know that Simon Shack and Patrik Holmqvist worked together for years on their geocentric model of the solar system, Patrick doing computer programming and Simon the astronomy research work.
      Simon Shack's video on 9/11 September Clues is copied on this site (about 90 minutes). It seems to date from 2008, and is therefore not new. Possibly from the same school as another video, Loose Change, which evaded the implications of 9/11. My provisional conclusion was (and is) that Simon Shack is not a deep researcher into important political issues. This turned out to be more of a disappointment than I'd hoped; the history of astronomy, and the Scandinavians who were part of it, and other parts of Europe such as Prague, researchers such as Tycho Brahe, Roehmer and Kepler, and even Jesuits talking to the Japanese, involved Jews, but they who were mentioned briefly but not investigated.

I emailed Martin on the day before the talk, wanting to avoid the empty vagueness of many online talks.
      I roughly suggested (1) Hope that Sweden and other countries, including India, China, Japan, would have their own revisionist sites for world-wide coverage; (2) Short account of do-it-yourself hypertext websites; (3) Long section on my findings with big-lies, its major parts being nukes, Jews, and reviews; (4) Final speculations on secret societies—Jewish concealment, top-down approach of 'Abrahamic' religions, invention of Jewish-controlled organisations topped by Kings, Archbishops, Presidents, United Nations organisations, and what have you, the need to develop new vocabularies and analyses to understand Talmudic stuff. But their incredible longevity and long-term infiltration suggested no quick solution.

Talk with Cui Bono and Simon Shack

Here's the talk, Cui Bono truthseekers and Simon Shack and Rae West. Stereo mp3 file. About 2¼ hours. Recorded 11 Dec 2023.

And here are my very detailed comments on the talk—this HTML page doesn't belong here, because this is my review of the Tychonic solar system model of Simon Shack & Patrik Holmqvist.

Talking with Simon Shack: he's half-Norwegian and half-Swedish, and lives in Rome within site of the cupola of the Vatican. I think he said he can read five languages. His work on 9/11 led him to some conclusions on Jews: all 8 supposed inventors of the nuclear bombs were Jews (2 had close Jewish relations). Most of the were awarded Nobel prizes. These of course are supposedly Swedish awards. He doesn't seem to have concluded that Nobel awards are a Jewish fraud, like Pulitzer prizes and Hollywood awards.
      He's part of the immense army of rather marginal figures in acting, music, script and other writing, dance, management, and (he said) in audio recording in Italy. In fact 'Shack' is a sort of stage-name, based on his Scandinavian surname.

Review of the Tychonic book and Tychonic Program (Long!)

Here's the online software at ts.tychos.space, as shown in the image above, right. Hint: Click the empty box at run and watch. Very many parameters can be changed.

And here's my movie screen shot (35 seconds to show you how it works: the yellow ball is the sun). Both these movies open in new tabs, to be sure this page remains.

The computer has been programmed by Patrik to assume orbits are circular. The program does not calculate gravity, with its assumptions about masses and distances. Planets are assumed to have circular orbits. In Newton's system, 'moving bodies continue in straight lines', not circles. Straight lines are not as simple as they seem; the phrase's origin is 'stretched linen' and over huge distances takes the shape of local conditions. So the circle assumption is not Newtonian.

So, a big problem with the circular assumption is that it ignores gravity. The movie shows 'bodies' moving at varying distances from each other. But this means their gravitational pulls change. Now, the big advantage of the sun-centred model is that all the planets have fairly well-defined orbits, all the planets being far enough apart to not collide. The map (right) of the eastern seaboard of north America in its silent way shows what can happen in the earlier days of the solar system: from about Panama, and then north to Hudson's Bay, shows evidence of impacts, presumably dating more-or-less from the same time, with objects large enough to leave permanent records.
      Saturn's rings and the asteroids show something similar: in order for orbits to be stable enough to keep separate in the long term, they presumably have to go in similar directions for most of the time. So Patrik's program cannot to be assumed to be stable. If the program is left to run forever, it has been programmed to run in circles. There is no gravitational check on its stability.
      In addition, elongated orbits are inconsistent with circular motion, and have given SS problems with comets (Halley's, for example) and meteor orbits.

      Simon Shack's book: The Tychos—Our Geoaxial Binary System

I refer here to the freely-downloadable online edition. A new edition is available from December 8th 2023, but I haven't download it, wanting to avoid possible legal entanglements with the downloading site. But I'm assured it's similar in argument, but with more examples. Simon told me his work has largely been picking up attractive pebbles—as Isaac Newton wrote.
      I had intended to work through each chapter, and identify problems that I found. But I think a better approach is to examine the (fewer) points being claimed.

Anyway, here are the chapter headings:
Chapter 1 — A brief history of geo-heliocentrism
Chapter 2 — About binary / double star systems
Chapter 3 — About our Sun-Mars binary system
Chapter 4 — Introducing the TYCHOS model
Chapter 5 — Mars, the“key” that Kepler never found
Chapter 6 — Is Sirius the twin of our Solar System?
Chapter 7 — The Copernican model: a geometric impossibility
Chapter 8 — About the Sun’s two moons: Mercury & Venus
Chapter 9 — Tilts, obliquities and oscillations
Chapter 10 — Requiem for the “Lunisolar Wobble” theory
Chapter 11 — Earth’s PVP orbit (Polaris-Vega-Polaris)
Chapter 12 — The relative motions of the Sun and Earth
Chapter 13 — Our system’s ‘central driveshaft’: the Moon
Chapter 14 — The Moon: curing Newton’s headache

Chapter 15 — Our Asteroid belts and Meteor showers
Chapter 16 — Our Cosmic Clockwork and the “16 factor”
Chapter 17 — “The Great Inequality” - solved by the TYCHOS
Chapter 18 — Uranus, Neptune & Pluto prove the PVP orbit
Chapter 19 — Understanding the TYCHOS’ Great Year
Chapter 20 — The 811000-year Mega Cycle
Chapter 21 — A Man’s Yearly Path - and the Analemma
Chapter 22 — Deconstructing Bradley and Einstein
Chapter 23 — Are the stars much closer than believed?
Chapter 24 — Dayton Miller - and the speed of Earth
Chapter 25 — The ‘Negative’ Stellar Parallax demystified
Chapter 26 — Probing Kapteyn, Hubble and Esclangon
Chapter 27 — The MOMENTOUS incongruity
Chapter 28 — The Barnard’s star confirms the TYCHOS
Chapter 29 — EROS and TYCHOS: love at first sight
Chapter 30 — Halley’s comet: the Great Deceiver
Chapter 31 — List of puzzles solved by the TYCHOS
Chapter 32 — Epilogue: may reason prevail

Appendix I — Table of Acronyms, Terms and Constants
Appendix II — Miscellaneous data for bodies in the TYCHOS system
Appendix III — Bibliography

---

      The Tychos—Our Geoaxial Binary System

The first thing to say is that SS (as I'll call him) is two-faced in his attitude to official astronomers. If he dislikes their views of the solar system, he is scornful and sceptical. But if he likes their views, notably of measurements, he's shocked at any criticism of such eminent people.

SS doesn't like some aspects of the sun-centred solar system, for example the claim that the earth's orbit is twice the distance of the sun to the earth, something like 200M miles. And the speed of the earth in orbit, taking about 365 days to cover c. 580M miles. It seems accurate to say this is only possible if the earth moves through something close to a vacuum, protected only by air, amounting to the equivalent of thirty feet of water.

Clearly, double stars play an important role in his book. He starts with Herschel in Bath, who was a Jew from Germany and must be suspected of accepting Jewish practices, including lying. I leave it to my readers to re-enter the world of 18th-century telescopy on this subject. But the received view is that stars are so remote (light typically believed to take millions of years to arrive here). And the remote distances are inferred from the tiny parallaxes observed.
      I have to refer to hardware problems and fraud here. An article on 'Wikipedia' describes 'adaptive optics' as techniques to improve a faint blurred image. Some readers may recall the Hubble telescope allegedly needed its imaging improved, owing to a regrettable error in its optics. That's if the thing ever existed. Most of it supposed images are watercolours. I didn't find out whether SS has a view on this sort of thing.

Top: image representing 'adaptive optics'. Note that with imaging on chips, as opposed to the older images on negative film, there's endless scope for image processing. As with electron microscopy, expansive equipment is very difficult to check. Amateur astronomers don't have huge observatories. Right: another image used by SS. An interesting simulating of intersecting orbits—here, two stars in exactly the same plane and exactly the same size. Or perhaps different sizes. Ellipses can be drawn with a loop of string around two 'foci', but even this seems too sophisticated for most online people.

Double stars are discussed online on such sites as google and reddit, and are largely uninformed junk, and suggest a typical Jewish promotion campaign.
      But as far as I can see they aren't necessarily important to the Tychosium view of the solar system, since two stars orbiting with 'intersecting orbits' don't seem suitable for life to exist, even if the were stable, since the temperature on a planet in orbit round either would occasionally be too large.

The SS version of a double star doesn't apply to the sun, positing another sun in the vicinity. Instead he makes Mars a brown dwarf (it's a red planet—surely this can't be a coincidence??).
      (Note that our moon, diameter nearly 1/4 of the earths, and mass therefore presumably something like 1/64 of the gravity, has influence enough to enlarge sea tides, and apparently had some effects on many life forms).
      SS notes that Mercury and Venus have long been known to orbit the sun, or at least to be near it: hence the morning and evening star, and Lucifer the bringer of light. But the other planets—Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn—which make up the tradition 7 wandering stars in the sky—are believed to orbit outside the earth, and don't appear near the sun, as they might do from (say) Pluto.
      Mars is the first such anomalous planet and receives SS's majority attention. The asteroids (not discovered until some time after the invention of telescopes, like Saturn's rings) are another anomaly for SS.
      I haven't worked out if SS thinks Mars, as a brown dwarf star, has a high density; but if Mars has the same gravitational pull as earth, it's hard to see how it could be a twin of our sun.
      SS seems to think it's absurd to think Mars could have a density of hundreds of thousands times greater than earth. But in fact this idea dates back to about the 1920s, when gold foil was irradiated and occasionally the rays emerged at an unexpected angle, from which it was inferred that atoms have a tiny nucleus around which electron moved in shells or clouds. If nuclei could be squashed together, the result would be a substance dense enough to drop through the earth. If it could be touched it would feel odd, though I couldn't say how. So the idea took shape that a table looked solid, but was mostly empty space. Simple enough idea, and emphasizes that human senses evolved on earth and may have earthly limitations.
      Another example of the limits of our senses is the oddity of suspended bodies, such as the sun, moon, and planets. What holds them up? Well, nothing—they just move with their circumstances. I notice that SS assumes the north pole is 'top'.
      Light (and electricity) are even more puzzling to normal senses. How can light fill enormous spaces apparently instantaneously? I think 'superfluid helium' casts some light on this (pun unintended). It is presumably the finest powder in the universe, appearing to be liquid. Maybe light and electricity are even finer, and have properties inaccessible to our normal senses. SS looks at the two-slit experiment without solving it.

Right: Parallax illustration included by Simon Shack. Typical worrying diagram apparently taken seriously, with a nearby star only averaging about twice the distance from us as our sun.       Star Trek showed 3-D stars, as their unsophisticated crew cruised though TV studios.       The usual opinion, based on innumerable charts and photos of stars, is that they are very far away, and parallax is very difficult to determine, if at all.

There's some fascinating numerology, quoting figures with a fantastic precision. Usually SS gives apparent linear dimensions, though squares or cubes might be equally useful, if you're considering surface areas or total masses. And these can be important.
      For example, the apparent sizes of the sun and moon as shown by eclipses of the sun by the moon, are almost exactly the same. Probably there's a good reason for this, but, if it's based on enormous stretches of time, probably isn't obvious to human senses, any more than geological activity usually is.
      Another example is the Saros cycle of eclipses, known to the Greeks and no doubt earlier. SS has industriously assembles many figures, but they have the drawback of not discriminating between sun- and earth-centred models of the solar system. But the Tychosium computer model has no simulation for eclipses.

Conclusions

• My first conclusion is: if you're trying to introduce a new paradigm, description, or overview—then make a convincing case!
• I recommend for people in the mood for some physics revisionism to look at How Much Modern Physics is a Fraud? which includes a relativity derivation, a look at 'superfluid helium', speculations on artefacts in atom smashers.
• On the senses and interpreting difficult images, read up on such problems as dim electron microscopy images (where full dark adapted vision may be needed), problems with light microscopes using for instance deep violet filters, the reasons Catholics disliked Galileo's telescope, and the indistinct blurry images with thermal distortion of even close planets.
• Be aware of the possibilities of errors being introduced by mental models, such as electrons shown as little marching balls. Or light with waves. SS mentioned the famous 'double slit' experiment with light, without I think being aware that light viewed through a pinhole, or on an edge, has odd effects. Ordinary words may not work with things inaccessible to our evolved senses.
        A point of debate with them is whether rockets can work in a vacuum. I favour the reaction-against-mass-shot-out model, but the problem is that it's an empirical, try-it-out, question. I don't know that a large vacuum chamber with a firework rocket has ever been tried, but if it has, that would give some evidence. Because of the money in teaching, there's a continual process of inflating claims of teachers, and (for example) events which are found to work are promoted into 'science'. Nobody knows what electricity is, but generators work, and it's pretended that electricity generation is all science. Nobody knows how brains work, but psychology is called a 'science'.
• Try to filter out coincidences. Thus the ancient Egyptians thought scarab beetles had something to do with the moon—they rolled balls around, and their offspring emerged after about thirty days—surely this couldn't be a coincidence?
        A friend of mine assured me that the sun was really an X-Ray beams, and that stars were points of light made by X-ray crystallography.
• Watch for sequences, if some discoveries depend on earlier discoveries. The history of medicine had discoveries of vitamins, I think starting with vitamin C against scurvy. But mineral deficiencies, for example of calcium and iron, took time to be disentangled from vitamins. But some illnesses were genetically determined, and could only be identified from family histories, often unwillingly. Bacteria and viruses—if they exist—had to be disentangled, and may not have been.
• Watch for fakes, which historically have been mostly connected with Jews. NASA of course is the obvious example. Nuclear fakes are slowly being unearthed. My book reviews include Couper and Henbest, a UK couple, and Patrick Moore's autobiography, 80 Not Out
• Look for historical, national, religious, racial links and bias and parallels. For example Texas has a long record of frauds, dishonesties, war crimes which ought (in my view) to be faced. When I was talking to Simon Shack, I'd have liked to ask about Jews and propaganda against a small Italian village—a parallel with many countries during WW2, but I doubt if he was interested.

© Rae West   big-lies.org   14, 25, & 30 December 2023

Top of Page