LDLN - No 081

Magazine Overview

This issue of "LUMIÈRES DANS LA NUIT" (Lights in the Night), volume 9, number 81, dated March-April 1966, is a supplementary issue dedicated to exploring cosmic and human problems, astronomy, hygiene, rational nutrition, natural treatments, and respect for the laws of life and spirituality. The magazine's founder is R. Veillith. The issue's cover headline is "LUMIÈRES DANS LA NUIT," with a subtitle listing various topics covered.

LE DEPLACEMENT SOLAIRE VERS VEGA DE LA LYRE (The Solar Displacement Towards Vega of the Lyre)

This extensive article, by V. Zamboni, is the continuation and conclusion of a series started in issue number 79. The author critically examines the traditional astronomical approach, particularly the reliance on "appearance" (l'apparence) rather than "reality" (la réalité). Zamboni questions why astronomy continues to explain phenomena like sidereal and tropical years based on the Sun's apparent movement around the Earth, when it is actually the Earth that orbits the Sun, as demonstrated by Kepler's laws and Bradley's observations.

He highlights that even established astronomical texts, like those from Larousse and Charles Delaunay, continue to frame explanations in terms of apparent motion. Zamboni argues that this adherence to appearance, while perhaps convenient for sensory perception, obscures the underlying reality. He criticizes the continued use of the Ptolemaic system's framework, even after the acceptance of the Copernican system.

The article delves into the concept of the "Solar Circuit" (Le Circuit Solaire), referencing contributions from correspondents like Messrs. Salmon and Genay. Salmon suggests that our Sun is part of a larger stellar mass (the Milky Way) and that it moves in a circular path around the center of a "Local Group" of stars. Zamboni scrutinizes Salmon's claims, pointing out a lack of direct evidence and what he perceives as syllogistic reasoning that doesn't fully align with his precise questions.

Zamboni also discusses the historical context of astronomy, mentioning the rehabilitation of Galileo's memory and the commemoration of his birth. He laments that despite these events, the scientific community has not fully embraced the Copernican system in its practical application, continuing to rely on the "Astronomy of Appearance."

The Solar Circuit and Stellar Movements

The author dedicates a significant portion to analyzing the movement of the Sun and stars. He references Charles Delaunay's work, which describes the Sun's path across the celestial sphere. Zamboni emphasizes that the Earth's movement around the Sun is the fundamental reality, and questions why this is not consistently explained as such. He notes that while astronomers acknowledge the Earth's motion, they often revert to describing the Sun's apparent path.

A key point of contention for Zamboni is the idea of the Sun's movement towards Vega or Hercules. He cites various astronomical sources and discussions, including those from the "Annuaire Scientifique Flammarion" and works by J. Gauzit, to illustrate how different speeds and directions are attributed to the Sun's movement. He finds these attributions contradictory and indicative of a flawed understanding.

Zamboni critically examines the concept of "proper motion" of stars, particularly those closest to us. He argues that the observed movements, when attributed to individual stars moving towards their "personal apex," lead to a complex and potentially contradictory picture, especially when contrasted with the idea of universal gravitation.

The Shift to Astrophysics and Relativity

The article explores the transition from "old astronomy" to "new astrophysics." Zamboni notes that astrophysics, while aiming to provide a more profound understanding, often relies on the same observational data and sometimes perpetuates the "astronomy of appearance." He highlights the limitations of geometric and trigonometric methods for measuring stellar distances, which are effective only up to about 400 light-years.

He discusses how astrophysics uses methods like spectroscopy (Doppler effect) to study celestial bodies. However, he questions the precision and interpretation of these methods, particularly for distant objects. Zamboni points out that spectroscopy is less precise than trigonometric measurements for nearby stars, and that it doesn't definitively distinguish between the source moving away or the observer moving towards it.

Zamboni expresses concern that astrophysics, in its pursuit of new explanations, might be replacing human logic and intuition with machines and abstract theories, leading to a form of "reversed" or "abstract" science. He criticizes the relativistic view, which he feels negates universal gravitation and leads to a universe where everything is relative.

The Precession of the Equinoxes

A significant section is dedicated to explaining the precession of the equinoxes. Zamboni breaks down the phenomenon into its core components: the Earth, the Sun, and the stars. He emphasizes that the equinoxes are precise moments defined by the Earth's position relative to the Sun and the ecliptic. He argues that the Earth's axis, while maintaining its inclination, moves in a way that causes the equinoxes to shift gradually.

He challenges the traditional explanation of precession as a wobble of the Earth's axis, suggesting instead that it is a consequence of the Earth-Sun system's movement relative to the stars. Zamboni proposes that the Earth-Sun system moves in a direction opposite to the Earth's annual orbit, causing the equinoxes to "precede" their previous positions.

The Sun's Role and the Nature of Science

Throughout the article, Zamboni consistently returns to the central role of the Sun. He argues that the Sun's influence and movement are fundamental to understanding celestial mechanics and that any scientific theory that sidelines the Sun's importance is flawed.

He concludes by reflecting on the true role of science, stating that it should guide humanity towards reality and truth, helping to overcome illusion and error. He expresses concern that modern scientific approaches, particularly astrophysics and relativity, may be leading away from this fundamental purpose, replacing objective observation with abstract theories and a reliance on machines.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the distinction between appearance and reality in astronomy, the critique of traditional astronomical models, the exploration of celestial movements (particularly the Sun's), and the debate surrounding the validity and direction of modern astrophysics and relativity. The editorial stance is critical of approaches that prioritize abstract theories or sensory appearances over observable reality and logical deduction. The magazine advocates for a science that seeks truth and guides humanity towards a deeper understanding of the universe and its laws.

This issue of "Lumières dans la Nuit" (Lights in the Night), issue number 79, published in the first trimester of 1966, features a critical examination of the theories proposed by Monsieur Zamboni concerning the precession of equinoxes and the stability of our planet. The publication is attributed to R. Veillith, with a special contribution of six pages from Monsieur Zamboni himself, and the issue is printed in France.

Main Cover Headline

The cover prominently displays "Brèves mises au point à l'attention de monsieur ZAMBONI au sujet de la précession des équinoxes" (Brief clarifications for Mr. Zamboni regarding the precession of equinoxes).

Article 1: Conclusions SUR LE PRIX ZAMBONI...

Authored by F. Dupuy-Pacherand, a member of the Société Astronomique de France, this article presents a strong critique of Monsieur Zamboni's extensive writings. Dupuy-Pacherand observes that Zamboni's arguments are often lost in a sea of citations from 18th and 19th-century authors like Bailly and Arago, failing to engage directly with contemporary scientific understanding or to substantively defend his own claims. The author expresses frustration that Zamboni does not adequately respond to specific points raised, such as the implications of the solar system's uniform movement on planetary stability or the challenges in determining the direction of solar system movement, as highlighted by Assistant-Astronomer J.-P. Rohart.

Dupuy-Pacherand questions Zamboni's assertion that the solar system's movement towards Véga could jeopardize Earth's stability, noting Zamboni's silence on this point. He also challenges Zamboni's reliance on the apparent fixity of the Zodiac to define the ecliptic, arguing that the ecliptic is fundamentally defined by Earth's orbit around the Sun. The article suggests that Zamboni's critique of "Astronomy of Appearance" is inconsistent when he himself seems to rely on it.

The author highlights a specific, complex statement by Zamboni regarding the solar system's potential movement towards the star Véga and its implications for Earth's axis and its retrograde motion. Dupuy-Pacherand finds this statement obscure and demanding of demonstration, questioning if any reader truly understands it. He concludes that Zamboni, despite his extensive writing, has not yet clearly explained the basis of his convictions, leading to an "inconsistency of argumentation."

Article 2: Brèves mises au point à l'attention de monsieur ZAMBONI au sujet de la précession des équinoxes

This section, likely written by G. Genay, directly addresses Monsieur Zamboni's views on the precession of equinoxes. It begins by quoting Bruno H. Burgel on the non-fixed nature of Earth's rotation axis and its influence on climate changes over millions of years. The article posits that the Earth's axis is not perfectly vertical relative to its orbital path, and this imbalance, likely internal, is responsible for phenomena like the seasons.

Genay refutes Zamboni's claim that the Earth "chavire" (capsizes) every 26,000 years. Instead, it explains that the 26,000-year cycle refers to the slow shift in the direction of Earth's vertical axis, which necessitates changing the celestial pole star over time. This movement is described as a consequence of the Earth's particular behavior, leading to the phenomenon of the precession of equinoxes.

The article clarifies that the precession of equinoxes is an *effect*, not a cause, and is due to the Earth's axial tilt and its relative position to the Sun, not the precession itself. It dismisses Zamboni's introduction of Zodiacal questions as having no practical interest. Genay concludes that Zamboni has misunderstood the problem and is reasoning from false premises.

Article 3: (Continuation of Article 2 - Page 2)

This part of the article delves deeper into astronomical concepts, starting with the Earth's axial tilt of 23° 27' and its orientation towards the Sun's center from aphelion to perihelion. It suggests that this axis's movement can be used as a precise reference for locating the Earth-Sun binary system in space relative to stars. The text explains that differences in observed positions year-to-year are attributable to the binary's movement relative to stars.

It introduces the concept of the Earth's axis defining successive points in the sky over millennia, forming circles around the ecliptic poles, which the axis traverses in approximately 26,000 years. This explains the shift in the vernal equinox from the constellation Aries (in Hipparchus's time) to Pisces today. The article confirms this shift vertically by the identical advance of the Earth's axis direction, prolonged infinitely, along two circles around the ecliptic poles.

Essentially, the Earth-Sun system is positioned at the apex of horizontal lines converging on the Earth, extending along the ecliptic, and vertical lines converging on the Earth's center, extending along the two circles around the ecliptic poles. This forms a triple parallax. The progressive advance, attributed to the precession of equinoxes, is estimated at 52" or 50.2" per year, equivalent to about 18 minutes of time.

Consequently, the Sun and its planets advance at a speed of 52" per year on the ecliptic plane, forming a circle around the ideal center of the ecliptic. This movement is the basis for Zamboni's astronomical rule, patented on March 16, 1956.

Conclusions from the analysis:

1. Gravitation: Newton's law of gravitation remains valid and is the undeniable proof of the functioning of our solar system.
2. Rejection of theories negating universal attraction: All theories based on the negation of universal attraction, including the elliptical orbits of artificial satellites, are considered null and void. The article criticizes the idea that these satellites could alter their orbits without propulsion, citing their circular paths.
3. Zodiacal Signs: The signs of the Zodiac, representing 30-degree arcs of the ecliptic, allow for important adjustments in our understanding of astronomical reality, leading to a "new astronomy."

The article further discusses the apparent movement of stars and the Earth's rotation. It notes that while the Earth's day is approximately 24 hours, a precise solar day is slightly longer. It mentions Soviet measurements suggesting a slight lengthening of the day. The author clarifies that a sidereal day (Earth's rotation relative to stars) is about 23 hours and 56 minutes, while a solar day (relative to the Sun) is 24 hours. The article also touches upon the solar system's movement around the galactic center over 26,000 years.

Article 4: (Continuation of Article 2 - Page 3)

This section continues the critique of Zamboni's work, focusing on the Earth's axis and the precession of equinoxes. It reiterates that the Earth's axis is not fixed and has undergone significant changes over geological time, influencing climates. The article acknowledges that the Earth's axis is not perpendicular to its orbital plane, a fact likely due to internal mass imbalances.

It disputes Zamboni's assertion that the Earth "chavire" (capsizes) every 26,000 years. Instead, it explains that the 26,000-year cycle is the period for the *direction* of the Earth's vertical axis to complete a full circle, necessitating changes in the pole star. This phenomenon is linked to the precession of equinoxes.

The article strongly emphasizes that the precession of equinoxes is an *effect*, not a cause, and that the changing constellations visible throughout the year are due to the Earth's axial tilt and its relative position to the Sun, not the precession itself. It dismisses Zamboni's references to Zodiacal questions as irrelevant.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the precession of equinoxes, the Earth's axial tilt, the movement of the solar system, and the reinterpretation of astronomical concepts like the Zodiac and the ecliptic. The editorial stance, as presented by F. Dupuy-Pacherand and G. Genay, is critical of Monsieur Zamboni's methodology and conclusions. They accuse him of relying on outdated citations, failing to engage in direct debate, and misunderstanding fundamental astronomical principles. The articles advocate for a scientific approach grounded in established laws like Newton's gravitation and emphasize the need for clear, demonstrable arguments over obscure pronouncements.