Thursday 29 December 2016

From Treasure to Treasury



A socio-psychological analysis (not economic) of demonetization.

Demonetization of Rs500 and Rs1000 banknotes in India to eliminate black money by the Government of India, shall be a watershed notwithstanding its economic impact. The only view I have on the much disputed economics of this move is - I find economic views on demonetization bootless and deemed to be indeterminate. I am not an economist. But by definition economists are  projectionists of statistical past into future & hence will likely fail to provide quality guidance as demonetization is a black swan. The quality of implementation is nothing much to comment as fighting with facts is sheer wastage of time. What interests me are the social, psychological & political outcomes of the process.

Through my book 'Transformers' I had lamented that we Indians have become status-quoists as a consequence of the colonial past hardwired into us. Have to earnestly confess that demonetization, whatsoever be the motivation, is much more than a nudge to the society. The reaction of public at large has been astounding to say the least. Public has maintained composure notwithstanding hassles & almost outright incitation by many of those, who are desiring to milk public distress.

The tricky transfer of personal treasures in the mattresses to the state treasury is interesting, surely out-of-the-box & almost innovative. Through this essay I am trying an analysis rather than weighing in favour or against this action. Following are the underlying psychological outcomes in public that I have observed:

"The Government shall, with authority, take its due, one way or other".
Excellent outcome. It will nudge people to tax compliance and economically better the prospects of India and lay the foundations for future development of the nation. The possible detrimental side of this will be an increment in the distance of people from state. Two hundred years of colonial rule led to the State being equated to colonial authority. Though India is a Republic and democracy thrives - but it does only at a macrosocial level at the microsocial level - an individual still thinks of the Ministers he chooses as rulers rather than representatives. It is easy to deduct this - there are very few Indians (microsocial level) who oppose the powers that be, openly in public; but when thousands or lakhs get together they could do anything, including stripping the greasy of their clothes and beating them to death. By book (constitution) India became a Democratic Republic instantly - at the stroke of midnight hour, but that is not so in the minds and hearts. The caged, colonially-smudged psychology does not let commoners see themselves as an empowered Republic, but as the ruled. Therefore, the sense of ownership of most does not go beyond their fences. Though it is early to give a verdict, yet there is a fear of enhancement in Citizen-State distance.   

"Is this action of the Government, figment of an impulsive rulers' imagination, or is it a forewarning of a trend that is to emerge"?
Yes, I firmly believe that fright and pull-off by the State post-demonetization will do more damage, than gain. Therefore, it is critical that the government follows demonetization with other subsequent measures that makes this action seem a part of a bigger plan. It need not be mentioned that next such neatening action should be better planned and smoothly executed. A sure way to win the infamous title of 'Tuglaq' will be - not to follow demonetization with the next consequential steps for de-cluttering and straightening the socio-economic relationship of citizen & the State. Pull off will make the public feel that their sacrificed energy, efforts and comfort was all in vain - something that the people will not forgive the establishment for, notwithstanding what jargon the ruling party's spin doctors use in their propaganda. Rooting-out black money is not same as rooting-out corruption, former being economic phenomenon, while latter being social. So, the way this Government pounced to rein in the cash hoarders, it shall have to undertake serious efforts to rid Benami properties & bullion hoarding. For altering the social attitude towards corruption & corruption itself in a civilization corrupted by the urge to survive through centuries of exploitative rule of various dynasties and European colonizers is much more complicated & will need years of sustained social campaigns & nudges to change. 
Even if demonetization was a gamble - Government will have to up the stakes further. Increasing stakes sensibly has more chances of victory; withdrawal will increase probability of loss. A gambler's predicament ! Yes, but a coitus interruptus will be more punishing! 

"Great. Please plug leaks in State's income collection & punish the black money generators but then strike on corruption at large & illicit political funding."
I see only positive output from this. Its the socio-political quid-pro. People & media have started demanding from the politicians to set their house in order, as a quid pro for pushing discipline through the gut of public. Yes, the establishment will have to make these changes rather than be seen as a brazen power, making lop-sided decisions & inequitable in its approach.

"This action is an equaliser & it will usher in an era of economic development of those who lacked it."
Fair enough, all the more the process of equalisation has bled the rich class of illicit money, not clean sweat-money. But on the other side the Prime Minister has personally given away this idea of demonetization being a Robin-hoodish equaliser. This is the belief that has been implanted in public at large that demonetization is short-term pain for long-term gain. The memory of public in present, dense info-spatial age, has grown substantially. If the long-term gain in term of more jobs and money in the pocket of the lower strata of society does not actualise, the current equaliser will seem like a fraud. 


"This action will spark sympathy towards the risky rebel"
If the experiment succeeds, there will be a tacit socio-intellectual output according to me. This will clean our society of the calcified conformism. It might lead to a slow and painful but sure acceptance of the new norm, where some innovation & out-of-the-box thinking and action are acceptable to the society and the nation as a whole becomes less riskophobic.

These are the critical socio-psychological outcomes of Demonetization according to me. Extolling numbers, virtues, vices, pain and grief of the poor (which is truth but more often half-truth), anguish of the cribbing class and all other induced economic, quasi-economic, pseudo-economic and sometimes downright comiconomic conclusions are richly available on mass media 24x7.

I believe for sensible economic understanding of this move, we will have to wait as it unfolds.

India is for the first time in its recent nation-state history, treading a path that is dark, risky and untrod. This for me is the most exciting attribute of this move. Shaking a socio-psychologically stagnant, precedent-adoring India into action is worth loosing few points of GDP for two or even three years. We will live through it, if we have lived with sub 4% GDP for 50 years. I assure my readers, this is a short-term pain for long-term gain.

Wednesday 14 December 2016

Banknotes and the future of Currency

Since mankind created units of credit in physical form - currency, its progress can be traced one to one with progress graph of mankind. Money started few thousand years ago as a statement of credit in a dematerialized form and is today come a full circle back to dematerialized form Tran sforming itself from Anatolian obsidian to Roman Moneta, Greek Drachma and the first ever punched metal coins minted in India and China in 7th century BC. Today commonest currency is that which is nothing but dematerialized promissory notes prevailing as credit cards, or mobile & electronic money. Though currency notes technically do not fulfill the conditions laid out for promissory notes under the Negotiable Instruments Act and are governed by a separate Indian Currency Act, yet in traits, banknotes are promissory notes; albeit they come with indefinite maturity period. A currency note is a bearer instrument which means that he who physically possesses it is deemed as the owner, until proven otherwise. Bearer notes were important to free trade which was hardwired to reputation. Bearer money indeed became an indicator of creditworthiness. As humanity progressed economists realized that a part of the money was always at rest, therefore bearer notes represent only a part of the economy.

So my seemingly bizzare question, that forms the foundation of this article is - do we really need bearer notes at all anymore in futute? 
Currencies like all other credit instruments are valued by the creditworthiness of the issuer, since currencies are a promise of the issuer to pay the holder specified amount on a specified date or on demand.

Soon enough there will be nations that will provide for electronic banknotes. Such notes will come with printed electronics which will enable among other things establish, register and log the holder of such banknotes.
Everytime such money exchanges owner, the money will electronically register the transaction in itself. The memory could be one time write-only. The logs could be everynow and then transmitted to a depository whenever there is an automated opportunity and get replenished in its memory.
Once the holder is physically identified by the banknotes, they will cease to be bearer instruments. Indeed, existing technologies are adequate enough to make this happen. Once such notes are made available money shall stop being a mode of bribery, corruption or even hoarding untaxed money. Presence of logs within the cash will make cash completely transparent and traceable.
There will be no need to count such notes, as the quantity will be known by proximity to sensors.

Some might ask if all such banknotes are electronic, how is it different from electronic bit money? Why then have banknotes at all? Anyway states are trying to go cashless using electronic transfers of various kinds. Well the answer is in the use of banknotes as an offline currency. In cases where connectivity is not available temporarily for electronic transfers such electronic banknotes will ensure that the economy keeps on going seamlessly. 
So, be ready for a regime where there just might not be black money the way we perceive it right now. Probably there will be other forms of keeping illegal valuables, but both land and cash might not be those means.
Soon one will be able to keep at home blank currency - pretty much like blank cheques and electronically activate the currency, taking it live. Indeed, such blank notes will replace cheques and demand drafts. Thereby purging the demarcation between currency and cheques or other means of negotiation.
And I hope India could lead the world in large scale implementation of such advanced technologies.

Friday 11 November 2016

Essay - Are you living a Limited Edition of your life?

My good acquaintance Karan Singh Sidhu, who is a great juggler of words posted this thought provoking question - the one that forms the title of this essay. Therefore, this essay is dedicated to him.

Since the query was posted on the facebook wall of Mr. Sidhu, it was interesting to read various very earnest views expressed. Overwhelming majority either responded in affirmation or counter queried, "how do I know whether one is living a limited edition or not?"

Most who responded felt being questioned how positively superlative is the adjective preceding the word life for them. They interpreted it as - "Are you living an exciting or satisfied or healthy or intense or spiritual life etc.?" 
Here is my interpretation of the question:
I thought it important to first understand whether is life a limited edition or not and once this is clear, it will be much easier to answer. Limits are of two kinds outer and inner. Yes there are outer limits to life. But are there inner limits to it? No. There is Zeno's paradox stating that to walk 1 metre one has to cover half and to walk half one has to cover one fourth and so on.... One therefore has to step on the next half, but there is no next half as there are innumerable halves between any half and me. Since the next half does not exist, hence, one cannot move (this predates quantum physics). Similarly, with time there are innumerable moments between any two moments. Adjectives to life are generated by two components one is the power of biases (how much one can fool himself in believing what one wants rather than what it is) and the intactness of memory (power to remember biases). While power of biases keeps us from being mentally bruised; memory consists of events that are stored for future use. The more are such memorable events for a unit time the smaller the units of life. Indeed, human progress itself is nothing but the reduction of units of life. Early man counted life from hunt to next hunt, or harvest to harvest, it all accelerated in last century to being one - from letter to letter and is today from message to message. Presently, events are counted in seconds (say reading Mr. sidhu's query meriting this essay on fb wall). So the more are the events per unit time, the higher the number of memories, the less is the edition of such life limited. The biases (which are scientifically proven to be congenial) then choose which amongst the ever increasing choice of events are to be remembered and how. These biased memories also are increasing with every passing day. Therefore, life is an edition limited only by how many events can one make happen per unit time. They who live intensively are less constrained in life's edition. Life is like a book one writes; whose thickness is pre-determined but thinness of pages is not.

About happy life - there's little to write. Its known that 70% contribution to one's being happy is congenial. I have even known people who are happy being unhappy, congenially.

Mr. Karan Sidhu, I have lived a life with sections that have innumerable, very thin pages and sections that have few thick ones - both occuring at non-statistical intervals.

Authored by: 
Deepak Loomba

Sunday 6 November 2016

An essay - perfect.

"Nobody is perfect......... I think....... perfect is boring....." .... written by my schoolmate Vandana Jindal set aflare in me the desire to understand and write about perfection.

Perfection was first featured in its greek version in Delta volume of Metaphysics by Aristotle and distinguishes three meanings of the term, or rather three shades of one meaning. All three attributes of perfection:

1) which is complete — which contains all the requisite parts;
2) which is so good that nothing of the kind could be better;
3) which has attained its purpose

While many philosophers from various cultures went on to define perfection with some variation, the western concept itself underwent a metamorphosis since the greeks to medieval and then to modern philosophy.

Greek thinkers used the greek version of the word perfect for completeness and entirety. Both Parmenides and Melissos saw perfection in existence. A concept adopted by Plato.

In nutshell Aristotle's perfection was chiselled in the Book of Genesis and hence the creation was deemed perfect but not the creator. The reason thus far being that perfection was completeness which could be fractional, but God was considered absolute, devoid of fractional existence and hence the creator could not be termed perfect. God was perceived as neither matter nor spirit nor idea and exceeded any description or praise; it was incomprehensible and ineffable; it was beyond all that we may imagine — including perfection. 

Through medieval philosophy, perfection remained a fractional, non quantacized conept and hence remained excluded from being considered as a property of God.

It was the 17th century philosophy that started characterizing God as perfect as the meaning of perfect started tranforming from analogue (fractional or that which is divisible) to a digital one (quantum states, fractionless states). Hence, phrases like less perfect ceased to exist. It was started by Rene Descartes and was religiously affirmed by Espinoza and then Immanuel Kant. The history of the concept of perfection underwent evolution — from "Nothing in the world is perfect", to "Everything is perfect"; and from "Perfection is not an attribute of God", to "Perfection is an attribute of God.

The paradox of perfection—that imperfection is perfect happened in last couple of centuries as the new quantum and absolute variant of perfection left no room for progress and improvement. This is the reason of evolution of excellence as being one of the states of perfection. Aesthetic perfection started being defined as the little deviation that disturbs a perfect symmetry. An example is a small mole above side of lips, which disturbed the perfect symmetry of a beautiful face is deemed aesthetic. Compare the mole over or above the left or right end of lips to one in the centre (hence maintaining symmetry). Most appreciate the former that disturbs the symmetry than the one which maintains it. Hence, imperfection became perfect. 

Meanings, colloquial and literary, often reflect different perceptions, the same not being limited to English. While I could not research much data on colloquial understanding of perfection historically, I sum up the one in currency as - 
"A state of delivery that fulfills expectations". It has neither to do anything with completeness or with being fit for purpose or being better comparatively (excelling); it is just a state of complete coupling of expectations with delivery. Not without reason does a boss with aweful linguistic skills call a below average written letter as perfect. The below average letter could probably be the best the boss had seen. 

Literary 'perfection' is more complicated. Flawlessness, which is touted in every dictionary as meaning of perfection makes no sense to me. Good definitions should be objective at least within a sensible frame of time. Flaws are themselves subjective. They are a subset of knowledge. Therefore, a flawless design for an amateur might not even be worth a comment by an expert designer. The state of flawlessness or achievement of it by eliminating known errors is not an objective definition for reasons stated above. In a bid to create a generic and objective definition of perfection I express it as:
"The  state of complete coupling/fulfillment of delivery to most excelling expectations, after knowing the state of the art."
State of the art makes the expectations very objective. Once the best is acknowledged, it is easy to define it as the threshold to excellence. The said definition also satisfies all the three attributes of ontological understanding of perfection as stated in Delta of the Memetaphysics.

Aesthetic is that which is considered beautiful by statistically overwhelming majority. Aesthetic perfection remains aesthetic imperfection -  one that disturbs the symmetry - aesthetically!


Author 
Deepak Loomba

Friday 15 July 2016

Solution to the Thomson Problem

Metro in Russia has free wi-fi. So travelling back from work to hotel, Sanjay posted a riddle called Thomson Problem. With time and net available. This is what wikipedia said about it : 

"The physical system embodied by the Thomson problem is a special case of one of eighteen unsolved mathematics problems proposed by the mathematician Steve Smale — "Distribution of points on the 2-sphere"

Below is my solution to Thomson Problem.

I am not sure because I have not investigated, but I am told in the FB post that its one of the unsolved riddles of this century with no solution which is universal in nature. Though I am loathe to do the mathematics (could be a big deal) but here is the solution to this riddle.

Variant of Thomson Problem:
How to locate 'n' equidistant points on the surface of a sphere?
(Original problem -Find location of equally similarly charged, repelling  'n' particles?)

Physical Solution:
If 'n' equidistant points are to be located, then take 'n' spheres of same radius (identical).
Imagine 'n' threads of same length 'l' each of which connects the centre (or may be even a hook on the surface of the sphere) to a fixed point (we refer to it 'centrum') anywhere (there is no problem in the centrum being anywhere vis-a-vis balls).
Now (in thought experiment) pull all the threads of exactly same length 'l' (connecting centre of each ball to the centrum) towards the centrum at exactly same velocity 'v'. The instant when all 'n' spheres touch each other and the thread cannot be anymore pulled into the centrum (which will be exactly in the centre, while 'n' balls will surround it) is the 'solution-state'.
The imaginary sphere joining the centres of each of these 'n' spheres will be the one which will have the centres of the 'n' spheres (in 'solution state') as equidistant points on its own surface.

Mathematical solution is achieved by solving the equations of motion of each of the spheres, add length of the radius to the 'n' solutions (points of contact of neighbouring spheres) & these will be the 'n' equidistant points on the sphere.

So, if one wants to find '2' points equidistant points. You will pull two balls together, apparently they will strike each other at a point on their surface beyond which the thread cannot be pulled. Draw a sphere using the centres of these spheres - two ends of the dia.
For '3' equidistant points, pull in three identical spheres - you get three points (for ease just hold three identical balls in your hand so that each touches other) on the sphere.
For '4' pull in 4 spheres you 4 points (basically points of contact of a cube that fits in a sphere)
For '5' you get '5' & so on.

There could be other ways to solve it also.

Though, the only other cool thing it achieves (which I never knew how to do in geometry) is that if the neighbouring centres of spheres in the 'solution state' are joined with straight lines; then the resulting planar surfaces make 'n' faced uniform solid. Of course two balls make a line while three make a plane, 
4 balls make a cube, 5, 6 and on are very interesting solutions because they are more difficult for mind to perceive. I find this pretty cool for a riddle-solution.
Regds
DL

Thursday 14 July 2016

20.41 Minutes less than an year precession of earth and discovery of change in the system energy of earth.





Abstract:      Precession cycle (period through which a wobbling/precessing body completes one full wobble of its axis of rotation around the precessional axis) of earth is equal to  5,25,939.59 minutes, which is 20.41minutes less than the length of an year (5,25,960 minutes), versus 25,771.58years which has been known from general planetary physics. The said discovery leads to a major difference in the calculation of Energy of the Earth-Sun planetary system. Faster precession cycle operating with an opposing vector (precession is clockwise, while revolution & rotation are counter-clockwise) results into higher variation of latitude dependent system energy. The impact energy of any catastrophic celestial collisions of artificial or natural bodies with earth will depend on where this collision happens - at equator there will be least change (vis-à-vis current calculations) while at the poles the change will be highest.

Audio-Visual: An audio visual demonstration with a mock-up of the entire theory is available on 
                         youtube for you to view @ https://youtu.be/dT1XPphsmbc

Definitions:
‘D-Precession’ stands for the true length of the precession cycle of earth which is proven in this paper to be to 5’25’939.59 minutes and is less than a year by 20.41minutes.
‘A-Precession’ is defined as the difference between real precession cycle of earth (which is equal to 5’25’939.59 minutes) and the length of the year (5,25,960 minutes). D-Precession is therefore equal to 20.41minutes annually.

Introduction

1.1.   Four different kinds of movements of earth, relative to sun have been reported:
1.1.1.               Revolution around sun;
1.1.2.               rotation of earth around its own axis;
1.1.3.               precession [[i]] of earth (25,771.57534 years [[ii]] ) has been discovered first by Indian Astronomers and later by greek Hipparcus. The precession of the equinoxes is caused by the gravitational forces of the Sun and the Moon, and to a lesser extent other bodies, on the Earth. It was first explained by Sir Isaac Newton [[iii]];
1.1.4.               lastly Nutation. The plane of the Moon's orbit about the Earth rotates with respect to the Ecliptic with a period of 18.6 years. This causes the Earth axis to nod over this time period, a motion that is superimposed on the Precession of the Earth's axis.

2.   Earth Precession, as currently defined in Science

2.1 Precession (1.1.3), is reported to be caused because of the drag that sun’s gravity creates on the bulge of earth at the equator (the bulge itself happening because of rotation of earth around its axis (leading to maximum centrifugal force at the equator). Precession is reported to have a long cycle of ~26000 years (25,771.58 years).

2.2 Further, it has been known in general and in particular in planetary physics that earth’s axis is tilted away from the elliptic by 23.5°C (more precisely – 23.437° [[i]]). Though Earth's obliquity oscillates between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees on a 41,000-year cycle; we only consider the mean value 23°2613.2 (or 23.437°) for our purposes. For our purposes we consider tilt constant relative to the orbital plane [[ii]] as shown in the Figure 1.




Otherwise said, the axis of rotation of earth is at 66.5° to the 2-dimensional orbital plane (or the plane that the earth’s orbit forms as shown in Figure 01). This tilt, as is in common knowledge, varies oscillates between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees on a 41,000-year cycle; the earth's mean obliquity is currently 23°2613.2 (or 23.437°). But for our purpose – which is to study the tilt itself we can maintain average tilt to be constant at 23.5degrees throughout the orbit of earth around sun. The same is exhibited lucidly in Figure 2.



3.   Why does the inclination of earth’s axis maintain orientation vis-à-vis the orbital plane throughout the revolution of earth?


3.1.     Nothing much has been mentioned in existing science literature on which the axis if earth maintains the axis of earth at a constant tilt of 66.5° to orbital plane throughout a year (one complete revolution of earth around sun). Since aforementioned tilt maintenance throughout the revolution of earth around sun is a well-established fact, it was considered as a primordial condition and hence granted the status of an axiom.
3.2.      By Newtonian laws, the position of any point on an object held towards the centre of revolution with a centripetal force in circular motion will, with no other force acting upon it, experience no change in its position relative to the centre of revolution (distance of any point on a revolving object remains constant relative to the centre of revolution). The same is also pertinent from law of conservation of angular momentum which mandates that the product of vector ‘r’ (of radius) and vector ‘mv’ (of momentum) remains constant if not acted upon by external forces.
3.3.    To showcase an analogy to ideal earth-sun movement, take two same size balls one heavier & other lighter & bond them together with an adhesive after which put the bonded balls into an inflated large transparent balloon. Inflate the balloon to considerable size so that the two balls can freely move inside the inflated balloon (see Figure 3).


Tie a knot on the balloon’s neck of the opening & a meter long thread to the neck of the inflated balloon. Now rotate balloon with hand, fingers being the centre of revolution. Watch the balls through the transparent wall of the balloon. The heavier ball will remain at the farthest point from the centre, the lighter ball being next to the heavier but towards the centre of revolution. The heavier ball has more angular momentum vis-à-vis lighter one & hence if there is no change in the state of this revolving balloon system, there will be no change in the distance at which any point on the two balls is located from the centre of revolution. The heavier ball will remain farthest throughout the trajectory of the balloon.
Hence, though the balls are free to move inside the balloon relative to the centre of the revolution, while being subject to centripetal force, no point on or inside the ball changes its position relative to the centre of the revolution if there is no change in the angular momentum. Similarly, suppose the earth is a ball that is revolving around sun, gravitation being the thread, the ball tilted away from the sun forming a 66.5° angle with the orbital plane. In such case, the position of any point of the axis of rotation should be at the same distance from the centre of revolution (sun). So the earth should have been revolving in the way depicted in Figure 3B.


As is evident, from fig 3B and fig 3C (green point, red point and blue point are projections of north pole, earth’s centre and south pole on the orbital plane), angular momentum is conserved as the radius vector of north or south pole are maintaining their constancy.

3.4.        Let’s suppose that there exists a celestial motor which we use to switch the rotation of earth ‘on’. The moment the rotation is switched on, earth will start precessing. Now, let us assume that it is precessing only by a cycle length of 1/25771.50 cycles/year, then in such case there will be little (negligible) impact on the orientation of the earth’s axis vis-à-vis the orbital plane. It will only change by 1/25771 proportion (approx. 0.62km/year calculating the circumference of precessing poles at 23.55degrees to be 15,926.30km). This is negligible vis-à-vis the revolution cycle (940*10^6 km/year). Therefore, even after the earth started spinning with full speed, if one would assume that precession cycle is (as specified currently) 25771 years, the orientation of the axis would have digressed only by 600th trillionth proportion of path of revolution of earth, hence completely ignorable.

3.5.     Thereby, the author crystallizes his pretention that earth is factually not revolving the way it should have been ideally – as in Figure 3A, until and unless there is an additional component of motion of earth that is yet unidentified or unaccounted by purpose or by neglect. Empirically, we know that the axis of earth maintains a constant angle to the orbital plane as in Figure 2. Therefore, it becomes important to discover this component of motion that leads to maintenance of orientation of earths’ axis, instead of behaving in way depicted in Figure 3.

3.6   To better understand this motion component we draw a graph depicting the distance of earth’s north pole from the centre of sun as a function of time (an year), for ease of understanding, let us also presume that the orbit of earth is not elliptical but circular (as we are considered about analysing the tilt not the distance of earth’s centre to that of sun’s). Figure 4B vividly depicts the graph of distance of North Pole from sun through a year.


3.7      As evident from Figure 04B, earth’s north pole undergoes a cyclic motion vis-à-vis sun’s centre. This means, that if for a moment, we presume that earth is not revolving around sun, then it would be undergoing a pendulum-like motion vis-à-vis sun centre.
3.8     If the north, south and centre of earth are projected on a plane that is parallel to the orbital plane and lies just below the south pole of sun. North Pole, South Pole & the Centre of earth would then get projected as three dots Grey (South), Blue (North), Red (Centre) (see figure 5B). They will lie on a line (centre of earth being sand-witched between the North & South Pole owing to the tilt of earth’s axis to the orbital plane.


3.9     As is evident from the Figure 5B, the North Pole (blue dot) would do an eclipse, if the axis of earth is holding the angle to the orbital plane constant as seen on the projected plane from a star north of Sun’s north pole, as is depicted in Figure 5A.
3.10   Hence, I point out a component of earth’s motion that results into a cyclic change in distance of any point on earth (say North Pole) from Sun.
3.11  The observed pendulum-like motion as shown in Figure 04B has to have a pattern that observes laws of physics. Furthermore, it is also apparent that the said pendulum-like motion has to be more complex that just - to & fro pendulum in a plane that is drawn by wiping the radius of earth’s revolution perpendicular to the orbital plane. By Newton’s first law, would earth simply change its tilt vis-à-vis the radius of revolution, there is no force known to stop it from taking to rotation around an axis that is tangential to the path of revolution of earth’s centre. Therefore, the motion is a more complex one; of which this pendulum-like motion is a component.

4.   Precession-the cause of earth’s pendulum-like motion component

4.1.     Through this section the author describes about his discovery that the pendulum-like motion is caused by Precession of earth, which is one year minus 20.41minutes, rather than 25,771.58years as currently stated in literature.

4.2.     Precession: It is movement of earth in a manner that its axis sweeps the surface of a cone as depicted in Figure 06. The centre of earth could lie One such cycle happens in ~25,771.58 years. While in precession the fulcrum of precession (point ‘0’) may lie on the axis within or outside the body, in case of earth the fulcrum lies in the centre of earth.


4.3.     D-Precession: This is the true precession of earth as discovered by the author. It is equal to 5’25’939.59 minutes (20.41minutes less than an year). The observation in 4.3 is explained hereunder through two different sets of analogies:

4.4.     First one is a carousel. Observe the carousel revolve. The figure 07 depicts it vividly. In the given example, kindly ignore gravity, which keeps the cabin’s orientation towards earth, as the purpose of this example is to showcase an analogous motion, not the cause of it.


4.5.    In a carousel the viewer’s cabin (depicted as blue ball) constantly points towards the ground owing to gravity, while the giant wheel rotates around its centre.  In a Carousel, as depicted in Figure 07 and 07A, the most important observation of the author was the interaction of the viewers’ cabin with the giant wheel. The wheel is represented by the grey arrows radiating out of the giant wheel, and fixed in their position relative to the wheel at each point from ‘A’ to ‘H’. On observing the cabin and the grey arrow interaction starting from position ‘A’ to position ‘H’ it is apparent that along with the rtation of the giant wheel from position A to H, the cabin revolves around the arrow that represents the wheel. Figure 07A depicts this vivdly.
4.6.      In an analogy to earth’s movement around sun, had the viewer’s cabin (blue) in a carousel, been earth, and the rod connecting the cabin to the giant wheel been the north-pole, it would constantly point towards one single direction throughout the revolution of the giant wheel – that is away from ground. The cabin is revolving around a centre which lies on the giant wheel (where the cabin is connected with the wheel) & is analogous to earth’s precession. Replace, the giant wheel with earth’s path around sun and the cabin with earth, as shown in Figure 07 and in 07A, one will find earth precessing around its path of revolution around sun (giant wheel).
4.7.    From a motion point-of-view, the cabin constantly points towards earth because, while the wheel is rotating anticlockwise the cabin rotates in opposite direction (clockwise) vis-à-vis the wheel with similar rate of angular displacement. Interaction of the two vectors leads to maintenance of a constant orientation of the cabin to the ground.
4.8.     Similarly: Imagine a smaller wheel mounted on a bigger one as shown in figure 8, both capable of rotating independently. Now imagine that the observer is located on top and viewing the rotating wheels from top (as in figure 8). The rotation of the larger wheel will be akin to revolution of earth while that of the smaller wheel will be akin to precession of earth.

4.9.   Let us first consider that the bigger wheel is rotating anticlockwise, while the smaller wheel is stationery relative to the bigger wheel as has been depicted in Figure 9. The purple triangle represents the earth, while the vertice of this triangle pointing away from centre of big wheel, denotes the north-pole. Had there been no motion of smaller wheel relative to the larger wheel, the triangle would have revolved in a circular orbit as is depicted in Figure 9. The triangle keeps changing its orientation vis-à-vis any observer standing above the Sun’s north pole. But its position is unchanged vis-à-vis the centre of large wheel.

Now, let us observe the phenomena that happens when the small wheel also starts rotating in a direction opposite to that of the large wheel (clockwise) and at the same angular velocity as the large wheel. In such case, as in Figure 10, the triangle (earth – the vertice being the North Pole) constantly points in one direction – that is – its direction is unchanged vis-à-vis an observer (located above the sun’s north-pole), while its direction is constantly varying relative to sun. Pointing towards the sun at ‘B’ & away from Sun at ‘A’.





4.10.   Therefore, the constant orientation of the earth’s inclined axis, towards a distant star throughout the 365.25 day revolution of earth owes its existence to precession of earth that happens with almost the same rate of angular displacement as the revolution of earth around sun but in opposite direction. This precession is represented in Figure 10B by the movement the orientation of projections of north pole, centre and south pole (green, red and blue dots joined by the blue dotted line) vis-à-vis the Newtonian position (represented by the black arrow) that north pole should have had, had we wanted to conserve the radius vector r, thereby conserving angular momentum).
4.11.   Therefore, it implies from 0 and those before it, that Precession of earth is not 25,771.58years but approx. 1 year and in direction opposite to that of earth’s revolution. Since there is a distinction, that needs to be drawn amongst that what is currently referred to as Precession, and what I prove in the present paper, I have for avoidance of doubt, termed this ~1year precession cycle that I discovered as D-Precession.

5.   Exact Precession Cycle of Earth

5.1.    The exact D-precession cycle of earth is 1 year less 20.41minutes. This gap of 20.41minutes every year results into what science today refers to as precession. In case the angular velocity of the small wheel of figure 10 (clockwise) is more than the angular velocity of Large Wheel (anticlockwise), the direction of the triangle will keep on shifting clockwise on completion of the cycle of large wheel. Hence, it will point differently at the same position after one year than it would have, had the angular velocity of both the wheels been exactly same. As demonstrated in figure 11, the north-pole (vertice of the purple triangle) in such case would have completed not one, but 1+d cycles in one year. Analogously, if the cycle of D-Precession is faster than the revolution of earth by 20.41 minutes per annum (this is known from existing science as the length of precession); then on the same day & time, after one year, the earth’s axis will not point in the exact same direction as an year ago but would have drifted slightly ahead by a small angle of 1/25,771.58th part of the year (20.41min). The cumulative drift in any year shall be = ‘n’ x 1/25,771.58th of an year (where ‘n’ is the number of years for which the cumulative drift is sought to be calculated). Therefore, after 25,771.58 years the earth’s axis’ orientation would have drifted for 360degrees cumulatively, and would therefore lie exactly at the same orientation as it was 25,771.58 years ago, after having drifted by 20.41 minutes annually to complete the entire cycle.




5.2.       This difference of 20.41 minutes between D-Precession and Precession (what seems precession as described in science currently) is defined as A-Precession.
5.3.       As is seen in Figure 11 a demonstrative drift of orientation of earth is shown, owing to the difference of the D-Precession and revolution cycles. And this is the cause of science ignoring true precession (D-Precession) in favour of what seemed to be precession, which is actually A-Precession.





5.4.         As is apparent from Figure 13 versus Fig 12, the earth’s north pole owing to faster precession cycle vis-à-vis revolution of earth around sun, actually surpasses the point of reference ‘A’ from where it started exactly one year ago. Figure 12 shows the positions had the precession cycle been equal to the revolution of earth, while figure 13 showcases the actual position – that is precession cycle being faster than revolution of earth (one year).
5.5.       It is pertinent to mention, that would the constantly-oriented axis of earth be taken as a primordial given, the slight change (1/25,771.58th of an year) in the orientation of axis per annum would naturally be treated as precession. While in reality Precession (D-Precession) cycle length is (365.25days x 24hrs x 60) x (25,770/25,771.58) minutes [=5’25’939.59 minutes]. While A-Precession is the difference between D-Precession and an year [=20.41minutes].

6.   Conclusion

6.1.         While axis of earth and the north-pole on it should have pointed away from sun throughout earth’s revolution around it; it does not. It maintains its axis in constant orientation to a distant star. This happens because while the
6.1.1.     earth is revolving anticlockwise (keeping the north-pole pointed away from sun), simultaneously;
6.1.2.     earth precesses in opposite direction (clockwise) that happens almost with rates of angular displacement, similar to those of revolution of earth.
6.1.3.     the resultant of the aforementioned two motions results into maintenance of the orientation of axis - constant, vis-à-vis distant star.
6.2.         D-Precession is
6.2.1.  the true precession discovered by the author that occurs in direction, opposite to revolution (clockwise, when seen from north pole of sun);
6.2.2.   leads to cancellation of impact of revolution of earth (which otherwise could have kept the north-pole pointed away from sun throughout the revolution of earth around sun)
6.2.3.     and is equal to 365.25days x 24hrs x 60 x (25770.58-1) / 25,771.58 minutes [=5’25’939.59 minutes].
6.3.         A-Precession is
6.3.2.     what, to current science, seems as precession (which it is not as is stated in 6.3.1);
6.3.3.     equal to 1/25770.58 of an year [=20.41 minutes].

6.4.    Earth-Sun System Energy Impact: My discovery has a major impact on the calculation of the Energy of the Earth-Sun system. Calculations of catastrophic celestial collisions with earth of artificial or natural objects will undergo a major change. This quantum of change will vary with latitude.

           6.4.1         With vectors of rotation and revolution (both pointing counterclockwise) cumulatively remaining unchanged, the only change now is the annual precession cycle related vector, which is pointed in the clockwise direction (opposite to rotation & revolution). The precession caused velocity vector keeps on reducing as one travels from poles towards equator. Closer to the poles the precession vector’s size is enhanced by 25771.50 times (it is now 1cycle/year instead of 1/25771.50 cycle/year). Discovery of this changed vector of precession leads to an enhanced disparity in calculation of the impact that a celestial collision of a body with earth will undergo if it falls on around the poles vis-à-vis the equator. The impact at equator is minimal whereas towards the poles it is maximum. The velocity at the poles owing to precession is increased by 0.5m/s vis-à-vis earlier data. This disparity has been calculated to be around 0.50m/s. These changes in the vector quantities lead to change in the Earth-Sun System Energy.


1.   References

[[1]] the discovery of precession usually is attributed to Hipparchus (190–120 BC) of Rhodes or Nicaea, a Greek astronomer though the Indians are reported to have discussed it in 750 BC.
[[1]]N. Capitaine et al. 2003, p. 581 expression 39
[[1]] The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed., 2007
[[1]]Astronomical Almanac 2010, p. B52
[[1]] oscillates between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees on a 41,000-year cycle; the earth's mean obliquity is currently 23°2613.2 (or 23.437°)



[[i]]Astronomical Almanac 2010, p. B52
[[ii]] oscillates between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees on a 41,000-year cycle; the earth's mean obliquity is currently 23°2613.2 (or 23.437°)


[[i]] the discovery of precession usually is attributed to Hipparchus (190–120 BC) of Rhodes or Nicaea, a Greek astronomer though the Indians are reported to have discussed it in 750 BC.
[[ii]]N. Capitaine et al. 2003, p. 581 expression 39
[[iii]] The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed., 2007