August 18, 2002

Dear Sir,

I've read, with great interest, your arguments for the non-existence of the precession of the Earth's axis, and although I'm not a scientist, I must say that the apparent contradictions you illustrate pose an interesting problem.

I've read the responses from the experts in the field, and the common theme for most was to attempt to prove that the accecpted model (precession of the Earth's axis) is indeed true, and to ignore your findings. It's obvious to me that the established model, that accepts precession as fact, should be able to back it up with substantial scientific data that can be objectively evaluated and thus be proved or disproved. This apparently did not happen. Curious!

I'd like to make an observation and a suggestion about your methods to try to prove to the establishment that your findings are correct. Your approach was a direct frontal assault on the established way of thinking. Obviously, such a confrontation could only be viewed as a threat or an annoyance (regardless of any scientific accuracy or presentation of the data on your part). Historically, these types of confrontations drag on and on, and perhaps after many years of continual arguments about their respective merits, one view will prevail over the other.

For the moment let's assume that you are correct and that our solar system is orbiting the Sirius system. Surely, over the last 400 years of astronomical observations, there exists enough data to show that the orbit exists (or enough data to extrapolate the orbit). Your calculations, as well as the calculations of others, show a 50.26 annual arc second difference in what would be expected if the axis didn't precess or we didn't orbit something else. The 50.26 arc second difference is not the debate, but obviously the cause is. If you were to present the data that conclusively shows that our solar system is in fact orbiting the Sirius star system, or any other star for that matter, and that the data clearly explains the observed phenomenon of precession, and bears out the mathematical values you have calculated, then the notion of precession of the Earth's axis will simply disappear. (How could they both be true?)

I realize that you probably have already considered this, and have investigated how you could show that the orbit exists, but in reviewing the correspondence on your web site, you seem much more intent on debunking the idea of axis precession rather than proving an orbit about another star.

Please don't misunderstand me. I believe your findings have merit, and they appear to offer another viable explanation for the observed precession, but I also think that additional proof on your part is necessary to drive the idea home. Perhaps a plot of the measured regression/progession of stars over a large enough time frame would indicate that the orbit exists.

Interesting debate nontheless.

T. Dee

********************************

25.08.02

Dear Mr. Dee:

Thank you for your kind words and careful observations. Your letter caught me just before leaving on a short holiday trip, so I apologize for not writing to you sooner. Although I doubt that my direct approach will immediately incite a rebellion among members of the scientific community, I am convinced that it has made people think about this issue in one way or another which otherwise would have not happened at all. Unfortunately, the issue has been superficially examined by the experts in the field and therefore they dismiss it too easily. However, I greatly appreciate your suggestion about astronomical data showing that or sun is in orbit with Sirius. In that respect, I have pasted below for your information a copy of a request I made some time ago in order to obtain astronomical data on the stellar background surrounding Sirius over the last century:

Re: Request for photographic data >Dear Mrs. Griffin, > >It is my understanding that the Spectroscopic Virtual Observatory has a database of digitally scanned photographic plates of astronomical observations that were taken during the first three-quarters of this century, and that this data might be available in the public domain. > >As part of my on-going research, I hope to analyze how the position of Sirius would have changed relative to its background and other stars over the years. Therefore, I am particularly interested in different photographic images of Sirius taken over the last century or so. Do you know if such data is currently available, and whether or not it can be accessed on the internet? > >I really appreciate your attention to and assistance in this matter and look forward to your reply. > >With kind regards, > >Uwe Homann >

Dear Mr. Homann, > >Thank you for your enquiry. I regret, however, that what you require may not >yet available and has not yet been prepared. My own group (as its name >suggests) is trying to raise funds in order to digitise stellar spectra; we >are not digitizing direct images. > >A few small groups are now digitizing various sets of direct images, but that >work is probably only in early stages. Moreover, whether it includes the >region with Sirius is more a matter of luck than priority. Your best bet >would be to contact someone more directly associated with that work; I could >suggest Dr. Peter Kroll, Director of Sonneberg Observatory in Germany, Peter's >e-mail is pk@stw.tu-ilmenau.de . > >Another line of approach would be to make a request to Dr. Alain Fresneau >(fresneau@newb6.u-strasbg.fr), who is leading an effort to scan a selection >of the Carte du Ciel plates; those are the oldest complete set in our >astronomical heritage. > >The Harvard archive is also another potential source of historic information of >the sort you require. It also is trying to raise funds to scan its own >archive. The current situation and likely time-scale could be explained to you >by the plate librarian, Alison Doane (adoane@cfa.harvard.edu). However, unless >the Sirius region has been the target of some previous research, you are going >to have to piece together the astrometric information from a number of >different sources which happen (through some other programme or survey) to >include the region you are after. > >I hope this has been of some use, though I am afraid it is nothing like as >complete as you would have wished! > >Yours sincerely, > >Elizabeth Griffin

Dear Mrs. Griffin, Thank you kindly for your prompt reply. It is really sad to hear that important work like yours lacks the necessary funding. I understand how you must feel. I kind of expected that the astrometric data I am looking for might be difficult to get. Nevertheless, the information you provided is indeed very helpful and valuable to me. Thanks again for your time! I will keep you informed on any progress in my further research. With Best Wishes, Uwe Homann >

Thank you for your reply. Well, you see the problems that astronomical >archives are facing! If you are able to point us in the direciton of someone >or some organization that might help us get started with our fundraising, >that could be extremely valuable help. > >Kind regards, > >Elizabeth Griffin

It appears the main difficulty to obtain such information is not a lack of desire, but a lack of funding. Although repeatable observations of Sirius (determination of its mean transit period over longer time frames) put Sirius undoubtedly in the position of a central sun for our solar system, it seems to be just as difficult to find other researchers, who are willing to confirm the measurement. I am hoping to work more closely with some researchers at the BRI (Binary Research Institute in California), who try to obtain data proving that our sun is orbit with an assumed but still unknown binary companion. No doubt further research is needed. Whether or not NASA will promote such research is uncertain, but in the case of JPL their failure rather than success has stimulated research in the past. In any event, the calculations on the lunar cycles and the Saros period (http://www.siriusresearchgroup.com/saros-cycle.htm) show conclusively that lunisolar precession cannot exist. But you are correct that something more needs to be done in order to "drive the idea home". So I think a friend on mine is right when he said that, "... unfortunately, in this era, changing a scientific paradigm is as much about marketing as it is science." I will keep you posted.

With Best Wishes,

Uwe

*********************************

27.08.02

Mr. Homann,

Thank you for your considerate response. I suspected that you would have investigated possible data sources to further your research and am sorry to hear that the information will be difficult to assemble into something usable. I look forward to reading more of your research on this subject.

Sincerely,

T. Dee