In thee last explanation and model you appear to be describing it just as I did. In the first one you said and I will quote;
Thanks Steve for all the data on galaxy rotation, if I remember well according to Sri Yukteswar the sun, rotating around its dual, alternatively travels closer and farther from the grand center, which is a source of spiritual energy. That's the basis of the Yugas theory. Satya Yuga closer to Sagittarius A*, kaly yuga further form Sagittarius A*. Unfortunately, there is still no clue about the Sun's dual. Even the Binary Institute could not find any duals after substantial research.
I don't know how such a dual is escaping the refined astrophysical calculations. Otherwise, Sri Yukteswar might have been deceived in his interpretations by some other thoughts in the causal realm.
He remains a totally inspiring master anyway.
Do you see above where you stated ; “ Satya Yuga closer to Sagittarius A* , Kali Yuga further from Sagittarius A* “
In fact Sagittarius A* has nothing to do with Sri. Yukteswar’s model. In his Holy Science he is only referring to your model of two stars below as you provided (thanks).
for stars of different mass
The model you have provided above is the correct one. The small star is etching out an ecliptic … sometimes closer at other times further away. Similar to the path of Pluto around our Sun.Both those stars (the Sun and it’s dual) are also moving within a whole arm of the Milky Way Galaxy. Around Sagittarius A* which takes approx. 24 million years.
If you open this thread, you will see I included a picture of Pluto’s orbit around the Sun. You will see it gets closer and further away in its orbit. In the same way our Sun does to its dual, which has been assessed to most likely be the star system Pleiades.
Steve, I'm not very erudite on astrophysics, so I consulted Wikipedia, first in the voice: binary star
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_star#Configuration_of_the_systemThe grand center may be another celestial object which emanates spiritual radiations, but I doubt that it is the sun's dual, otherwise SY would have explicitly mentioned it.
The above is exactly the same as your conclusion in the preceding post:
So, if our views are the same, I'm wondering now why your inception was a negative.
Sri Yukteswar’s quote from the Holy Science; “…the
sun with its planets and their moons takes some star for its dual and revolves around it in about 24,000 years of our earth a celestial phenomenon which causes the backward movement of the equinoctial points around our zodiac.” ~Sri Yukteswar
The
Sun in its rotation around its dual comes to its place nearest to this grand center….dharma the mental virtue becomes so developed, that man can easily comprehend all, even the mysteries of spirit.~Sri Yukteswar
The cause of the procession (of the equinoxes) has not been finally established by modern astronomers. Some claiming it is due to a slight change in direction of the earths axis while others believe they have mathematical proof that the phenomenon is caused by the motion of the Sun in space along it’s on orbit, where by all the bodies of our solar system are being brought nearer to a Grand Central Sun around which our own Sun and every Sun or fixed star in the universe ( our sector of the Universe) is revolving.
All ancient nations considered Alcyone, brightest star of the Pleiades, to be this Grand Central Sun. To the Babylonians it was to Temennu, “the foundation stone”. The Arabs had two names for it-Kimah, the immortal Seal or type” and Al Wasat, “the Central One”. It was Amba, “The Mother” of the Hindus, and its present name of Alcyone was derived from a Greek word signifying peace. It is so far distant from us at present as to appear to be a star of only the third magnitude. There is a significant passage in the Bible job 38: 4-31 about the constellation containing Alcyone where the Lord asked Job: “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades?”
~ Tara Mata ( quotations filled by Jitendra)
So, if our views are the same, I'm wondering now why your inception was a negative.
Would Sri Yukteswar see it that way?
I don't know how such a dual is escaping the refined astrophysical calculations. Otherwise, Sri Yukteswar might have been deceived in his interpretations by some other thoughts in the causal realm.
He remains a totally inspiring master anyway.
It was less the 100 years ago that astrophysics discovered Pluto. And only in the last year do we hear scientists not giving such a bad rap to those seeing UFOS. Saying they are weather balloons, stars, satellites and space debris…. Making the rest of us appear to be entertaining fantasies. And only recently that science has questioned the very basis of reality as we know it. There will most likely be many more corrections and ‘discoveries’ in the future.
[attachment deleted by admin]
