The Precession Paradigm

Dear Mr. Robbins,
I owe you a belated but
still sincere thank you for posting my paper 'The Precession Time
Paradox' on your website. Only a few days ago
I noticed my article to be on the web by using the Infoseek search
engine. As you can tell I am not a good
"Internetbrowser". By the way,
thanks to Mr. Greene of COSMOLOGYREVIEW my paper has also been posted
on his website at
www.cosmolgyreview.com ,
along with some other letters and articles written by my son (see
Reader's Forum Section). In case you are
interested in this issue, I have also enclosed the latest information
on the subject Precession. Thanks for
your time. With best
regards, KarlHeinz
Homann The Precession Paradigm
Experts at the International
Astronomical Union (IAU) are
in an uproar. Worldwide, thousands of
students and teachers have been confronted with the most
controversial astronomical problem in the history of science. In 1955
the IAU substituted the tropical year of 31,556,925.97474 seconds for
the sidereal year as the fundamental unit of time. But in
authoritative textbooks it is asserted that the time interval of the
sidereal year or Earth's complete period of revolution measured with
respect to inertial space is about 31,558,149.5 seconds. The IAU
refuses to confirm this assertion. Experts have recognized the fact
that such a sidereal year does NOT exist in reality. The IAU is
accused of willfully misleading the scientific community.
www.cosmologyreview.com/uhomann_letter.html
Introduction: The following paper examines the simple mathematical
and physical relationship between earth's complete rotation period,
its complete revolution period and precession. It questions the
assumption that the sidereal year is supposedly about 1223 seconds
longer than the tropical year. This time difference is the most
crucial scientific argument in order to prove whether earth's
precession is a physical fact or NOT. The solution to this unique
problem must be based on the laws of logic and mathematics, as well
as on the results of practical observations. Definitions: Tropicalsidereal year: 31,556,925.97474 seconds
Mean sidereal day: 86164.0905382 seconds Mean solar day: 86400 seconds Sidereal day: 86164.09966 seconds Assertions:
Experts claim that:
Conclusion: Conforming to mathematical and physical laws
precession relates to periods of rotation and NOT to periods of
revolution. Assuming that the precession period (the period of time
for the earth's polar axis to describe a complete circle in
space) is approx. 8.142 × 1011 seconds, then the total number of earth's
rotations that could in fact be measured during such a period of time
is: 8.142 × 1011 s ÷ 86164.09054 s
= 9,449,412 rotations (w.r.t. the moving equinox or point x)
8.142 × 1011 s ÷ 86164.09966 s
= 9,449,411 rotations (w.r.t. the inertial space) In order to simplify the problem let us assume that the
earth does NOT revolve around the sun. There are two
possibilities: 1. Precession occurs This means, 0 revolution periods or 0 sidereal years.
However, due to precession a time interval of exactly one tropical
year or about 365 days w.r.t the sun is seemingly created
(shifting of earth's seasons w.r.t the sun). But in reality only a
time difference of exactly one rotation (day) can be measured w.r.t.
the moving point of reference, which has a retrograde angular
velocity of about 0.1368" per day. The assumption that a measurable
time difference equal to a period of one year or more than
365 days occurs, supposedly due to the moving point of
reference retrograding around the sun, is therefore
false.
Note: Since this timediscrepancy does not exist in
reality, a socalled sidereal year of about 31,558,150 s was declared
to be earth's true orbit time, which is about 1223 seconds longer
than the actual tropicalsidereal year of 31,556,925.97474
seconds. 2. Precession does not occur and our entire
solar system revolves around a point x This means, 0 revolutions, 0 sidereal years and also 0
tropical years. However, due to the revolution period of our solar
system around point x, a time difference of exactly one rotation
(day) can be measured w.r.t. to inertial space. Consequently, the
vernal point (and point x) moves with respect to the fixed stars by
about 9.12 ms per day, and NOT by about 3.35 seconds per day or 1223
seconds per year around the sun. If precession were to occur as claimed, not a single fixed
star can be measured that has a mean meridian transition time of
about 86164.09054 s (equal to the vernalequinox transition period).
But the transit periods of Sirius, as described in the paper
www.cosmologyreview.com/beel_dog.html,
prove otherwise. Dr. Myles Standish, an expert on Planetary Ephemerides at
NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, made the following comment on March
3, 2000 after reading my letter
www.cosmologyreview.com/uhomann_standish.html:
"… I believe that your timings (of the
transits of Sirius) are accurate, but I think that you are
misinterpreting what they are measuring. Again, they are being taken
from a precessing earth and are, therefore, subject to
precession."
If the measurement of Sirius is taken from a
precessing earth, can anyone explain why the mean transit time of
Sirius is identical to the mean transit time of the vernal equinox,
considering the indisputable fact that Sirius does not retrograde
around our sun by about 1223 seconds per year? As you will undoubtedly agree, physical relationships
are established or disproved by whether they work in practice and not
by a vote of majority. The assumptions regarding the theory of
earth's precession are inconsistent with practical observations and
mathematical results. Thanks for your time, Uwe Homann Please, send your comments to
[email protected]

Copyright Source: KarlHeinz Homann and Uwe Homann  PoleShift.org This web site is a Jan.Feb. 2018 accessed archive copy of the original version, saved at TYCHOS.info to preserve the web reference. External links may no longer be valid. Source URL: http://www.poleshift.org/from%20HomPrecession.html According to the “Fair Use” clause of International Copyright Law, the authors declare that the use of the photos, videos and information in this academic research are analyzed for purposes of “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research” according to Section 107 of Title 17 of the US Code.  Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use, U.S. Copyright Code. 