The helical model - our solar system is a vortex

This is very cool. Tangent idea: it seems like the way we describe Earth's movement in space (rotation + orbit + precesion) is akin to the image of the hand that draws itself; where instead of describing the whole trajectory, we instead describe it in terms of "circular components" (rotation, orbit and precesion, yes I'm aware the orbit is not perfectly circular). The closest visualization of Earth's "full trajectory" in space, that I've been able to find, is a video on YouTube ( [VIDEO] ), which unfortunately is a bit exaggerated and not very accurate. Has anyone seen something better than the above?

To zoom into a reflection on a lens or a water droplet? From "Hear the sounds of Earth's magnetic field from 41,000 years ago" (2024) [LINK] : > [ Redshift, Doppler effect, ] > to recall Earth's magnetic field from 41,000 years ago with such a method would presumably require a reflection (41,000/2 = 20,500) light years away To see Earth in a reflection, though Age of the Earth: [LINK] : > 4.54 × 10^9 years ± 1% "J1721+8842: The first Einstein zig-zag lens" (2024) [LINK] What is the distance to the centroid of the (possibly vortical ?) lens effect from Earth in light years? /? J1721+8842 distance from Earth in light years - [LINK] : > The first lens is relatively close to the source, with a distance estimated at 10.2 billion light-years. What happens is that the quasar’s light is magnified and multiplied by this massive galaxy. Two of the images are deflected in the opposite direction as they reach the second lens, another massive galaxy. The path of the light is a zig-zag between the quasar, the first lens, and then the second one, which is just 2.3 billion light-years away So, given a simplistic model with no relative motion between earth and the presumed constant location lens: Earth formation: 4.54b years ago 2.3b * 2 = 4.6b years ago 10.2b * 2 = 20.4b years ago Does it matter that our models of the solar systems typically omit that the sun is traveling through the universe (with the planets swirling now coplanarly and trailing behind), and would the relative motion of a b

Could Voyager have reduced velocity, glanced off Neptune, waited for the return path on a narrow elliptical orbit, and then boosted to effectively make the 90° turn to Pluto at that time? Was that impossible given its Neptune approach trajectory, or would glancing off and waiting have been more fuel? And, why didn't this vortical model that includes the forward velocity of the sun make a difference for Voyager's orbital trajectory and current position relative to earth? [LINK] : > "The helical model - our solar system is a vortex" [VIDEO]

Is it that there is not enough mass beyond the 30k-50k Kelvin wall at the edge of the solar system to attract away things with mass that can carry thermal energy; that thermal mass clumps in the well around the edges and only wisps away, or is that a sidewall boundary of a black hole? Where is Planet X in relation to said wall of energy density? Said wall is only sampled by the Voyager probes with a few exit trajectories? Does said thermal wall extend all the way around the solar system, or is it mostly on one side of the sun; is it a directional coronal wake? Is there symmetry in said thermal wall around the trajectory of the sun? Is this better explained with SQR Superfluid Quantum Relativity? Are there other phases of matter at those temperatures? From the article: > "As the heliosphere plows through interstellar space, a bow shock forms, similar to what forms as a ship plowing through the ocean So fluidic space wind and fluidic nonlinear bow shock wakes. Are there additional heat walls beyond (and probably also before) the first, as there are with more laminar boat wakes? Is there a gravitational wave "bow shock", too? "The Heliosphere" [LINK] From "Two galaxies aligned in a way where their gravity acts as a compound lens" [LINK] : > "The helical model - our solar system is a vortex" [VIDEO] Where are planet X and the heat wall (and/or side wall) in this vortical model of the solar system?

"North" is better correlated with the direction of travel that our planet/solar system is moving within[0] Given the context in our movement compared to the milky way, maybe it's better to have East/West for top/bottom, with the poles on each edge of the map ;) [1] Or better yet, let's make the top of the map Galactic North, instead of Celestial North :P [0] [VIDEO] [1] [LINK]

In fact the planets aren't orbiting the sun. They're orbiting the galactic center, and the sun just happens to disturb their orbits a bit: [VIDEO]