"Es gibt nichts Praktischeres als eine gute Theorie."
                                                                                                         Kurt Levin
It’s commonly known that the current Copernican theory is mainly based on three of his erroneous scientific postulates:

а) Earth's axis seasonably moves parallel to itself;
в) the sun is located in the center of the orbit of the Earth and all planets (heliocentrism);
с) the moon moves around the Earth.
The first postulate is visually disproved by the geometric images of visible astronomical phenomenon of star rotation in the celestial sphere (Fig. 1). In the figure №1 (left) the observer will overhead see a heavenly body α at the zenith in one of the midnight parallel in the twilight after sunset. The reverse body β will be located below the horizon line. In 12 hours after Earth rotation for 180 0 in the morning hours before the sunrise the observer will overhead see the heavenly body β, and the reverse body α will shine over the horizon.
And in 12 hours of the next Earth rotation α body will complete a full rotation in the sky and will return to its original position and again will stay over the observer’s head, while the β heavenly body will take its former position below the horizon line. The similar movement of heavenly bodies will be repeated daily and annually.
Diurnal and annual rotation of the sky will happen the same way, because the celestial sphere rotates as a whole one. However, in this case the idea of ??heliocentrism is almost turned into Ptolemy’s geocentrism, according to which the motionless Earth (Geo, Lat.) is in the center of the celestial sphere instead of Copernican Sun (Helios, Lat.).
In the figure №1 (right) during the parallel movement of the Earth's axis on the Earth orbit and during permanent angle the observer might theoretically see different heavenly bodies «q - l» instead of «α - β» that would not correspond to reality. The reasons for this discrepancy between the Copernican theory and practical observations of the celestial sphere are explained further.
Fig. A. In the figure (left) it’s shown the diurnal parallel rotation of 2 reverse heavenly bodies «a - b», when the Earth rotates over its axis (the theory of Copernicus). In the right figure during the parallel motion of the Earth's axis on the Earth orbit the observer would see «q - l»instead of «aandb»in half a year, but generally speaking it shouldn’t have happened.
 That’s why now it’s clear why science can’t explain annual rotations on the diagram (Fig. 1, right) along with diurnal rotations if the Earth orbit takes place in the Copernican theory. Justly in textbooks on astronomy the celestial coordinates’ generation is made after the diurnal rotation of bodies, but the annual rotation of starry sky is not even mentioned. Therefore, sometimes the Sun motion is unreasonably used for the annual orbiting of heavenly bodies instead of their diurnal rotation. In the evenings the Sun comes in different constellations of the zodiac belt.
Although the Copernican heliocentrism was reinstated (Fig. 1, right), but it still doesn’t respond to the Ptolemy’s geocentric principles, which are almost enshrined in the celestial coordinates system. During the celestial coordinate generation the observer or his/her line of sight is always in the center of an imaginary sphere, described by arbitrary radius. If they assume that many observers take place along the closed annulus of the earth's surface, the Earth would be logically in the center of the celestial sphere and coordinates as in the Ptolemaic system of the world. Although while comparing scientific coordinates with Ptolemy’s model, I believe, it’s unsurprising that in both cases the Earth is always in the center of the observable sky. The Earth will be perceived as a tennis ball due to its small radius compared to the radius of the boundless sky. In theory the Earth will be considered as a central point of the celestial coordinates, where a line of sight of any observer starts.
By the way, according to the Drozdov’s kinematic model based on the principle Vesisa Piszis - Bubble Fish (literal translation) of the ancient Egyptian civilization, the Earth is constantly in the center of the celestial sphere (see the Earth model). This means that the celestial coordinates will become easier.
The earth's axis and the equator are parallelly located towards celestial poles and celestial equator in the adopted coordinates. According to V. Drozdov, they will simply match together with the Earth’s axis and its equator in the so-called conical coordinates. It’s obvious that during mathematical construction of conical coordinates all lines and points of the astral sphere will not change at all. The celestial pole’s height will not alter either.
It means that horizontal, equatorial and galactic coordinates remain the same. It will only simplify their mathematical construction and they will become more understandable to students. The basic principle of astronomy holds that during diurnal and annual observations of Earth movements the sky rotation won’t adverse to the adopted system of celestial coordinates. In order to comply with this principle, let’s turn to the figure №2:

Fig. 2 а, b. Even versus Aristotle’s paradox it can be graphically seen that only conical rotation of the Earth's axis (Fig. 2b) allows the Earth to have an orbit in the motionless celestial sphere and allows every observer to measure any angular distance of 2 neighboring heavenly bodies or opposite located «hand e»
Let’s guess: In the presence of the Earth's orbit during annual rotation of the celestial sphere the researcher observes 2 opposite located circumpolar bodies in the «h» Wagon constellation and «e» Cassiopeia constellation. During diurnal and annual sky rotation all heavenly bodies move across the same way or they move as a whole one. In the figure 2b, the identical Fig.2a, we will draw bisectors R(P)R’ for both formed angles ηР’ε in different seasons that will correspond to diurnal and annual rotation of the Earth axis on the Earth orbit, because all opposite situated bodies are equispaced from the axis of the Earth rotation.
As a result we find that in the presence of the Earth’s orbit the earth's axis in the diurnal and annual rotations makes inclined or conical motion over α cynosure (Polar Star), such as a conical surface (by Drozdov), it doesn’t moves parallelly to itself (by Copernicus). That’s why it becomes clear why according to the Copernican theory if the Earth axis moves falsely in parallel, we watch the same heavenly bodies «a - b», as well during diurnal as annual observation (Fig. 1, left) and we never see bodies «q - l», that Figure 1 (right) shows us by mistake.
Figure 2, b meets all requirements of the celestial coordinate system during the conical orbital rotation of the Earth's axis. In equatorial scientific coordinates at seasonal periodicity celestial poles PP’ are almost inclined relative to a common vertex R(P) in the ??North Star area. Following the Euclid's geometry theory during parallel motion of the Earth’s axis (Copernican theory) the celestial Poles have to be parallel, not inclined. No wonder, even in astronomy textbooks during celestial coordinate generation the Poles PP’ are equal directed with a slope to the Polar Star in some pictures to the left (summer), in others – to the right (winter) or v.v.
However, when celestial coordinates were adopted in the 17th century, science lost its lack in theoretical knowledge in order to define heavenly bodies in the celestial sphere.
But, I guess, celestial coordinates existence is the non-public confirmation of the hypothesis of Sun funnel, which is different from Figure 2b.
But if during the year the earth's axis will make conical motion, then for season change the Sun isn’t always to be in the center of the Earth's orbit (the negation of the second Copernican postulate). For example, if the sun is stationary and is located in the northern hemisphere, then summer will be constantly over the year, while winter will be in the southern hemisphere, and season change will never happen.
An effect of the motionless Sun in the center of the Earth's orbit is incompatible with seasons’ change. It is known that even Copernicus noticed that by himself, when he put a globe on a rotating wheel rim of the cart. Therefore, in order to present really existing season change he had to introduce  declinac annual motion of the Earth's axis (that is reverse to conical or wedge-shaped), and the Earth’s axis theoretically moves in parallel to itself (Fig.1, right). However, when declinac annual motion of the Earth's axis wasn’t explained by any scientists, then it was decided, following the Galileo's proposal, to adopt parallel motion of the Earth’s axis in order to stop disputing. And when Kepler introduced an ellipses rule and that excluded 48 epicycles of Ptolemy, then essentially nothing is left at the Copernican theory besides the parallel movement of the earth's axis and the Sun location in the center of the Earth's orbit.
Moreover, Copernicus himself did not confirm the Earth's motion around the Sun. Otherwise, in his «De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium» it wasn’t stated that he only simplified complicated calculations of Ptolemy, but he didn’t move the Earth around the Sun.
But respected scientists, among them especially Newton and Kepler, didn’t have any other hypothesis about the Universe formation competing to the Copernican theory, that’s why they considered this theoretically calculated theory as the only “true”.
On top of that it’s still possible to add that Copernican theoretical scheme doesn’t correspond to the observed culmination of the Sun in the equinox days at every terrestrial meridian at all latitudes.
All observed culminations aren’t dependent on the seasons’ change, because during one turnover of the stellar sphere around the earth the Sun culminates or crosses a north-south line and a geographical meridian at all latitudes in the upper and lower halves twice a day. It is clear that during the conical rotation of the Earth's axis observed Sun culminations at each meridian will not significantly differ at all their latitudes at solstices and equinoxes, because the slope of the earth's axis to the Earth’s orbit doesn’t change during the year.
By Copernicus the earth's axis only is tilted to the centeral Sun in summer and winter and lays in the culmination of its area. The earth's axis has a 900 angle towards to the Sun in fall and spring. Why on equinox days (in both hemispheres a day is equal to a night) do solar culminations occur by turns at different latitudes at the same meridian in contrast to solstices? That does not meet the practical observations of the Copernican theory.
Seasonal rotation of the lunar landscape visibly describes the conical motion of the Earth axis. In spring in the northern hemisphere right lunar spots, similar to the human figure, are observed parallelly to the horizon or even like they’re mounted (Fig. 3, left), in summer – they are inclined in a proper way to the observed horizon (Fig. 3. right). It is clear that during conical rotations of the Earth's axis we actually do not commit such inclinations to the horizon. But seasonal rotation of the moon perfectly illustrates that.
Fig. 3. Such a seasonal rotation of the lunar spots can be seen with the naked eye in all hemispheres of the Earth that is visibly recorded by cameramen in some movies.
Therefore, only one above mentioned explanation of the conical motion of the Earth's axis on Earth's orbit is closely attuned to the astronomical phenomenon of the apparent sky rotation. This quite reliably excludes as well two of the above postulate as and the whole theory of Copernicus (!)
Fig. 4. Vesica Piszis (lit. Fish bladder). 
But the most surprising besides the conical orbital motion of the Earth's axis, Fish Bladder(VESICA PISZIS) of the Egyptian ancient civilization (Fig. 4) aimed to solve the centuries-old indeterminate problem of the scientist and philosopher Aristotle. According to him,  the Earth can’t own an orbit in the motionless field. Many my opponents insisted on that idea either.It is a pity that this mysterious drawing, found in the wall of Egyptian pyramids,  was discovered in other countries, and science tagged it as a sign  of esoteric (sacred) geometry for a long time. Even modern science has not seen a conical surface (cone of the 2nd order), the golden proportion or golden section (pentagram) and celestial coordinates accepted by the science in this drawing. Then the scientists themselves have not been publicly ridiculed the representations of our ancestors that the Earth is the center of the universe, while in the celestial coordinates it was always at the center of the celestial sphere. Moreover, then visible constellations like the Milky Way, Magellanic Clouds, and many others didn’t belong to other galaxies, which invisibly exist and evolve beyond the observable celestial sphere of our Galaxy. 
All this information and even more can be read online on the site of V. Drozdov “The Earth’s model" (
So if the Earth does not rotate around its axis during the year (according to Copernicus) and its axis makes daily and yearly conical rotation (Fig. 2b) by Drozdov’s opinion, then the Earth's equator, that’s rigidly connected to the earth's axis, respectively follows the similar rotations. Hence, as a natural result in the space of the celestial sphere the entire not small rotating mass of the Earth forms its own gravitational funnel, more truly a magnetic electric field of interaction with the Moon.
 It means that during the orbital conical rotation of the Earth's axis not only the Sun (Fig. 2b), but also the moon should be located aside the Earth, butit doesnt revolve around the Earth (the moon is sometimes observable together with the Sun in the daytime sky and moves in the same way). And even this theoretical basis can already be considered as the first argument of that the moon can not be rotated around the Earth (the third postulate and the postulate of the theory of Copernicus was rejected). Moreover, sometimes the Sun and the Moon are visible at the daytime. In the scientific measurement they evenly move in the celestial sphere (see the Bjalko quote in the paragraph below). When the Sun is in the center of the Earth’s orbit, the Moon changes location not by a fraction of a degree but by 13 0around the Earth in the observed sky every day. How then can it happen?
We will try once more to thoroughly explain the mysterious and difficult explainable motion of the Moon. No wonder, even in modern science the unified theory of lunar motion doesn’t still exist. We will prove by apparent motion of the Moon that it doesn’t rotate around the Earth. A scientific quote proves that: “In addition, it is useful to know that during a minute the Sun and the Moon rotate by a half of their disks across" (Bjalko A.V. Our planet Earth. Moscow: "Nauka", 1989, p. 50).
It is known that the magnitude of the observed solar and lunar disks is 30' (arc minutes) in average, otherwise there would be no solar eclipses. Then, according to this idea the Moon disk will move in the sky by 15 'or 0.25 degrees per minute, 2 minutes - 30 'or a full disk, which is 0.5 о. And during 4 minutes the lunar disk will move by two of its full disk size in the sky, what amounts  10during the moon motion like around the Earth.
Consequently, following the Copernican theory the Moon will accomplish its assumed full rotation around the Earth at 360 ° (if  a 1о rotation lasts 4 minutes) for 24 hours or per day, equal to 1440 min (360 × for 4 min.). But then it means that change of moon phases must have been observed during each day. This 2nd argument, I guess, is an important proof that the visible Moon doesn’t move around the Earth doubling it from the East to the West.
And if we assume that intuitively observed moon doesn’t double us by 3600 in the sky, then in which connection is Copernicus taken into account and why are all these authors' bases necessary?? However, when the theory is scientifically valid, then it must be accepted unconditionally or it must be unproven; there is no other way.
So, if the moon shifts 1о in the sky equal to its two full disk size, then if it can be theoretically assumed that  these disks locate around the Earth adjoining each other, then a trajectory will be of 720 full lunar disk (360 ° × 2 disks). And if the diameter of the visible lunar disk is 3,476 km according to the data, the total turnover of a lunar trajectory around the Earth will be 2,502,720 km (720 × 3,476 km).
If we disjoint kilometer length of the lunar trajectory, supposedly located around the Earth, on the duration of a day in the second dimension – 86,400 seconds (24 hours × 3,600 s), we obtain the number of 28.96(6) days (2,502,720 km: 86,400 sec). 
Perhaps, the proponents of the Copernican theory think that the number of 28.96(6) will indicate the speed of apparent motion of the Moon if the proposed orbital speed of the Earth and the Moon is ca. 30 km/s around the Sun and if  distance divided by time according to the well-known formula (V = S / t).
However, this is not true. Firstly, we measured the kilometer trajectory of the Moon around the Earth by the same unit of time - "minute." Secondly, using the already known in the science speed of the Moon (1, 023 km/s) we will define its daily numerical distance, equal to 88,387.2 km (1,023 km/s × 86,400s).
The assumed trajectory of the Moon around the Earth in km (2,502,720 km) will be divided by the number of calculatede lunar diurnal kilometers (88,387.2 km). Instead of the moon’s speed we get the number of days that it spends for one full turnover in the Erath’s side, but not around it: 2,502,720 km / 88,387. km 2 = 28.32 days. If we compare this number with calculated above - 28.96(6) days (if the moon moves around the Earth), then we will see that the whole number of days is the same. This is the 3rd argument that the moon doesn’t rotate around the Earth.
Moreover, it’s necessary to consider that the resulting number of the lunar days (28.32) can not relate to the speed of the moon, because they came out of the division of kilometers to kilometers instead of the distance by duration - V = S / t. The moon’s rotation in the sky has apparent speed of its motion around us, like the high flying and scarcely noticeable jet aircraft or satellites (baby moon).There is more surprising another fact: Why does the moon’s motion actually refer to its rotation aside the Earth that was theoretically proven by the above calculations. Evidently it is any unknown scientific paradox of the Moon or another mystery, neither known to any ancient civilization, nor to our current progress.
Indeed, if the Earth is in a single system with the Moon and they both rotate around the Sun at the speed of approx. 30 km/s, then the moon’s speed relative to the Sun should be ca. 28 km/s (the moon is closer to the Sun than the Earth) and ca. 29 km/s (the Moon is farther to the sun than the Earth). This speed correlation between them is quite consistent with the laws of classical mechanics: their linear speeds are different at equal angular speed in a single system. To make it easier for understanding this motion can be compared to the rotation of the gramophone record in the music player. Moreover, the Moon is considered within the connection to the Earth, and even sometimes it’s called a double planet.
Actually, from theoretical point of view the Earth flies the orbit of 150 × 106 km radius around the Sun at the astronomical speed of ca. 30 km/s. Simultaneously the Moon hardly moves after the Earth (and even doubling the Earth at a snail's speed of 1.02 km/s calculated in the sidereal month).
But with such a difference in the speeds, the Moon would have to be beyond the gravitational field of the Earth long time ago and it would become a celestial body or an independent planet itself.
By the way, even without science the average moon’s speed (1, 023 km/s) can be easily determined when monitoring the Moon for one day, rather than in monthly periods of its rotation relatively the same observable star (approximately 27, 32 day). Data on the rotational moon’s speed (1,02 km/s) are usually provided for the sidereal month in the popular scientific literature.
So, if 1о moon's motion in the sky is equal to the 2nd full disks’ distance, then according to scientific measurements of 130 and the theoretical calculations of a sidereal month 13о/day(3600: 27,32 days) daily moon’s motion will be amounted to 26 disks (130 × 2).
Then we get the distance of the moon which will pass 90,376 km (26 disks × 3476 km) per day. Hence, the daily speed of the rotating Moon will be equal to 1.046 km/s (90,376 km: 86,400 sec), which differs a little from the speed of 1.023 km/s, calculated in the sidereal month (27.32 days) of its motion in the sky.
It’s strange, when daily speeds of moon’s rotation visible in the sky (1,023 km/s) are equal in value to its monthly movements, that aren’t dependable even on the speed of the Earth’s rotation around its axis. Indeed, the mystery of the moon still exists in our world. You see, one degree of the Earth’s rotation around its axis is equal to 4 minutes (1440 min:  3600). During these 4 minutes the Moon shifts 10 by 2 its disk size aside the Earth.
And is not it a wonder of nature, when the angular speeds in a single system Earth- Moon are equal, but a real multiple-valued kinematics of their movements is inexplicably different? (!)
Perhaps physicists agree that 28.96(6) days are related not to the moon’s speed, but to the period of its motion around the Earth. But if it were like this, then the Moon would rise in one place, but it wouldn’t move across the horizon every season. It seems due to the Earth’s axial motion that stars moves around the Earth. But stars rise and set in the same locations of the horizon. And the Moon rises and sets in different parts of the horizon either.
But if the Moon is slightly inclined to the orbit of the Earth (for example, during the period from new moon to full moon it makes a continuous trajectory of the circle (ellipse), but does not jump from one orbit to another), then it is to rise in one observed location of the horizon and not to appear in different locations.
However, when according to the solar funnel hypothesis the Moon turns aside the Earth, then during the seasons a moon’s scarcely observed daily shift across the horizon is quite justified and scientifically provable.
I assume, the2 recent arguments are enough in order to thoroughly prove of the moon’s rotation not around the Earth, but aside from it. All the more there are 2 different ways of the numerical determination of days in the apparent motion of the moon in the sky hemisphere:
a) the 1st way is through a 4-minute observation of the moon revolving supposedly around the Earth in the degree measurements, when 10 is equal to 2 lunar disk sizes;
c) the 2nd way is through the speed of moon’s rotation in a sidereal month, ca. 1.023 km / s.
Finally, it’s not fair to forget about one more important argument which is closely connected with the observed astronomical phenomena of moon’s changing phases in the sky. It is noticed that in the evenings after about three days of the new moon the Moon is close to the sunset location in the form of a narrow crescent (Young Moon) which is convex to the right. This crescent will be visible not only in the northern hemisphere, but also - and in the southern either!
Now let’s try to imagine this phenomenon of nature described above in another interpretation. If the Earth is spherical in shape, slightly flattened at the poles, then for observers of the northern and southern hemispheres the Earth’s equator will be a specific horizon behind which all is not visible.  
When the moon moves for 130per day, then in three days a narrow moon crescent will move at 39 0 (13 0 •3) and it will be already visible at sunrise in the East, for example, in the northern hemisphere at mid-latitudes, particularly in the latitude of 510 (900 – 390).  But such a wonderful observation can’t be in the southern hemisphere if the Moon rotates around the Earth; because for a southern observer the narrow crescent, located from the Moon at 384,400 km, will be behind the equatorial horizon and will look like pressed against it and closed from the south observer with a thick cover of its surface.
Evenastronomically far-located heavenly bodies observed in the northern hemisphere of the sky (for example, Big Bucket (B. Dipper) and Cassiopeia) are not visible in the southern hemisphere. And does anyone can see the constellations of Centaurus and the Southern Cross in the northern hemisphere? And it will be the 4th argument of moon’s rotation aside the Earth. The same statement can be attributed to the observed moon in its full moon.
CONCLUSION, if the Moon does rotate aside the Earth, the baby moon must be launched between the moon and its gravitational funnel, not around Earth's equator for hundreds of years or even more. Based on the solar funnel hypothesis in 2003 any author applied the invention for a launch of baby moon and other celestial bodies aside the Earth; he gave in to the Patent Office of examination of the Russian Federation. And, of course, a negative response was received based on a calculated but not a true theory of Copernicus.
In conclusion, it is not possible to forget about the Big Bang, supposedly directly connected with the theory of Copernicus. Firstly, due to the chaotic Big Bang the hot universe neatly scattered in all directions, and then cooling down, it started to unit in the centuries-long gravity period. As a result, the Sun, stars, planets, black holes, relic radiation, dark matter with a negative gravity, etc. were generated in the universe. However, based on the achievements of other scientists it’s possible to clearly judge about the denial of such The Big Bang (Figure 5 - 9).
For example, according to Einstein’s general theory of relativity the curvature of space-time at the Sun instead of the central spherical source of gravitation by Newton forms a funnel-shaped gravitational interaction (Fig. 5). Had they only depicted several planets instead of a planet P (dashed line) in the Figure 5, as the entire planetary system would have become in the form of solar funnel by Drozdov (Fig. 6).
Fig. 5. In this picture of Hoffman, co-author of one of the worksEinstein, the planet "P" is moving towards the "bottom" of the Sun in the presence of the solar curvature in space-time. Moreover, there is not the spherical Sun, located inside the orbit of the moving planet "P" (marked with the dotted line), that clearly contradicts the Copernican theory.
Astrophysicists frequently refer to prominent Friedman’s solutions of equations, which are based on Einstein's general theory of relativity and which describe the structure and evolution of our universe from the Big Bang theory as applied to the N. Copernicus. But it's not clear at all when the Einstein's theory of curvature in space-time forms a funnel shape of the gravitational interaction with the Sun (Fig. 5) instead the central source of gravitation by Newton. How can planets rotate around a stationary solar Copernican center?
Even some prominent scientists, using the hyperbolic functions, the golden section and Fibonacci series of numbers, without guiding by any theory (hypothesis), independently from each other and even on the basis of experimental data with a probe WMAR (Fig. 7) made a conclusion about the funnel form in the universe formation (Fig. 7 - 9). So, the new hypothesis of the solar funnel by V. Drozdov (Fig. 6)is not the only phenomenon in the science for understanding the universe. And It’s necessary to suppose that it correspond to these extraordinary minded modern scholars (!). The author knows the Russian researcher, AB Lebedev, who thoroughly denies the Copernican theory. Although according to his views the Moon still rotates around the Earth, but there are some  theoretically proved and unique solutions that can be interesting and useful to analyze. Perhaps, in due course some new supporters of the solar funnel hypothesis including scientists from abroad will appear..
Thus, based on previously approved conical motion of Earth's axis (Fig. 2b) the spherical Sun has to be located aside the Earth's orbit for seasons’ change. Then, how does this luminary of the Einstein’s funnel-shaped interaction (Fig. 5) motionlessly standl at the center of the Earth's orbit?
Even in a funnel-shaped centrifuge (Fig. 5 - 9), the bottom is not the very bottom, but the bottom is its walls. And depending on the own weight subjects are spirally positioned on different levels from the centrifuge bottom  and not around it. Then, everything is captured by a whirlwind hurricane (typhoon) and then crushingly falls on the Earth.             
This means all planets, large and small, comets and other celestial bodies have to be placed only aside the Sun according to V. Drozdov (Fig. 6), but not to calculated and density theory of Copernicus, because the Sun is in the orbital level and doesn’t move out of its orbit. Consequently, our present idea of the universe is similar to the ancient and pagan interpretation of a planar view of the universe.
Описание:         Описание:           Описание:
Fig. 6. Some planets, moving aside the Sun according to the solar funnel theory, are schematically shown in the figure. That corresponds to the theory of the solar curvature of space-time according to Einstein (Fig. 4) and other authors (Fig. 7 – 8). 2 figures depict the Drozdov’s theory of the solar funnel: the left one shows the side view, while the right – the top.
Fig. 7. The universe has a funnel-shaped appearance. This information is based on the experimental data, obtained in 2003 by a well-known probe WMAR (NASA), F. Steiner and his colleagues at the German University of Ulm.
Fig. 8. The shape of a hyperbolic universe is obtained by A. Stahov and B. Rozin in the form of a curved surface in three-dimensional space that in general précises the Drozdov’s theory of the solar funnel (Fig.5).
So, the practically well-studied calculated heliocentric theory of Copernicus can not correspond to the real system of our Universe. Therefore, the theoretical Big Bang should not be chaotic, but it has to be specific. It means that the modern science does not investigate enough even theoretically the significance of the solar system in the universe formation (!).
If we consider that Mendeleev’s chemical table naturally transforms into Lobachevski’s pseudosphere (Fig. 9), likewise to Drozdov’s theory of the solar funnel (Fig. 6) and to other scientists (Fig. 5, 7 - 9), then we can firmly assert about indissoluble connection of all things on Earth and in heaven. So, everything is united in the galactic world from the microcosm to the macrocosm! Moreover, vortical and closed funnel-shaped structuring of chemical elements (Fig. 9) allows the whole universe to grow, to update, to materialize and to evolve without violating the fundamental principle of the golden section.
Fig. 9. V. Drozdov and A. Dinkov independentlycameto spiral formations of elements in the Mendeleev's table. However, A. Dinkov was the first who performedthe distribution of chemical elements on the surface of the pseudosphereand he kindly allowed using it to V.A. Drozdov.
CONCLUSION: According to the author's argument, the formation of all galactic worlds, visible and invisible, was caused not by the Hot Big Bang, but most probably by multidimensional measurements of universe vortex structures which still continue to work in the form of underground volcanoes, terrestrial typhoons, tsunamis and all kinds of marine atmospheric or air pockets. It means that all such vortex formations surround us, inside, outside and beyond the Earth, as in the standard genetic or blood ties of the living bodies on the Earth.
V. Drozdov - Scherbinka, Moscow region, September 2010.
You can read all this information and even more on the site by Vasily Vasilievich Drozdov.
In particular, that the author's calendar 16 moons 28 days is a continuation of the Mayan calendar of 13 moons 28 days which ends in December, 2012. Nowadays the Mayan calendar is caught up with Julian (Church) calendar of the Gregorian Computation whose existence does not interfere with each other .
I think most scientists-atheists, especially sitting in the Russian Academy of Sciences, are not willing to accept the author's solar funnel, otherwise they all will have to believe in God's creation of the universe, and of course, to understand IT!
Please inform the author about all deficiencies and comments on the refutation of the Copernican theory as a true and a new hypothesis of the solar funnel.