3D-Simulation of our solar system with barycenter


select german language
click here to see german page

fullsize picture
See fullsize  picture
Use back button
of browser to return
This is a solar system simulation with high precision, not an animation. It is calculated in this moment you watching.

The red cross at the center is the barycenter (another name for barycenter is 'center of mass') of our solar system.
You see the Sun and Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune rotating around the barycenter (Scroll downwards to see the consequences).
The shown movements of  Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune are greatly reduced in size compared to the movement of  the sun.  The reason for these different scales is that the real distances in the universe are gigantic and  todays lcd-screens have limited resolutions.
 The slider of the timescale shows the year, month and day. You can position the mouse over the timescale to stop the simulation. You  can  click on the timescale to set a date or you may drag the  timescale pointer to every date you wish. The timescale range reaches from approx. 1916 to 2083.
Uranus and  Neptune normally move outside of  the visual field. Only from  time to time do they come  into sight.

As you can clearly see our solar system does not rotate around the sun, as german or US-universities such as Harvard or Berkeley or english universities such as Oxford or Cambridge teach till today, instead it rotates around the barycenter of the system. To say that our solar system rotates around the sun is a very much  simplified claim in face of the real situation, because our solar system for a long time could  not be calculated exactly (n-body problem not a two-body-problem! as the english wikipedia wants to tell  you, Voyager and co. were a much easier task,  there have been large tabular works about the solar system for centuries.). Here you can read what NASA 2014 learnt from  this site about barycenters (in  the first year not accesible because of invalid certificate).The theory of this site was finally 2020 confirmed by  an international team of astronomers and  2021 - nearly 20 years after this site was in the web - confirmed  by  a scientific study of the german Helmholtz-center. But what  is  perhaps even more interesting, this clearly demonstrates that Einstein's Relativity Theory (RT/GRT) is wrong, since  Einstein  assumed that star systems rotate around the central  star. Which they don't do since the star itself rotates around the barycenter. And because star systems rotate around the barycenter and not around the star  all of Einsteins assumptions and all of his calculations are wrong. Where Einstein assumed that there is a mass that curves space-time, there is no mass, the mass of the star is in a completely different location. Although in our solar system this is not such a big error , in other star systems this becomes  a huge error, especially in systems where 'hot jupiters' of 13 and more jupiter masses rotate in a near orbit around the barycenter of the system and thus keep the star also rotating around the barycenter. And  physics  is an exact science where small errors are just as intolerable as big ones. And it was this error or not-knowing that prevented for centuries that planets around other stars were found. So it was this  knowledge  that became known to a broader public in 1988 that allowed only 7 years later to find the  first exoplanet. Mayor and Queloz received 2019 the Nobel prize for the artisanal detection of an exoplanet and "understanding (..) of Earth’s place in the cosmos". They tried with a very oldfashion telescope to detect the approaching and distancing of  the central  body in 51 Pegasi, just as the simulation above   shows. An exoplanet is  a planet outside our solar system, around another star far out in the universe. As you can see in the above simulation mankind is still far from "understanding (..) of Earth’s place in the cosmos".
This quite naturally renders Einstein's theory completely and  in whole wrong. Whats more all derived theories, such as Black Holes and gravitational waves are quite  naturally as well wrong. You can click on this link to visit the Harvard Relativity theory page or the Harvard Black hole page, here is  the relativity page of Berkeley, Society of women in physical sciences, here Berkeley science relativity, here the Berkeley Black Hole page .  Here is the Oxford Relativity page, here the Oxford Physics Department (scroll down to see the relativty lectures), Oxford first picture of a Black Hole, here Cambridge Relativity lectures , Cambridge Black Hole lecture. Here you find the 2020 physics nobel prize for the discovery of  the Black Hole at the center of the milky  way https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2020/summary/. By the way: there should be absolutely no doubt that Newton's laws are till today used if the motion of planets or satellites are calculated. If you want to read more, what science knows today that makes Einsteins Relativity theory obsolete, you find many examples here....

if you should have problems whether the above written is really true, I recommend  you to download a similar  program from a really trustworthy site, the Physics Institute ( = department) of University of Kassel.  It will show you an  absolute  identical movement of the  sun. The name of the program is  Solarsystem2009 - EXE and its size is  939,50 KB. It is on this site downloadable  free  of charge and additionally you should download the datafile concerning our solar system named Sonnensystem-01-01-2010 - DAT 924,00 B. Now if you open under "Datei" the menu item "Sonnensystem öffnen" the said Sonnensystem-01-01-2010 - DAT 924,00 B file and click the zoom-button to enlarge the shown simulation you will see exactly what you see in the above simulation.

Since twenty years I keep saying that this presentation in the english wikipedia is a wrong presentation, because it intenionally exchanges  sun and barycenter (or center of mass which means the  same). Before it appeared very dominating (full size) in wikipedia as center of mass (the page changed very often its title - even back and forth -  in this time: centroid, mass point, center of mass, center of gravity, barycenter, ,...What is all too obvious: they all started shortly after my site was online in 2002 and brought the knowledge to the world of the all important barycenter: the english wikipedia barycenter page appeared for the first time in march 2003, the centroid page started  feb 2003, center  of mass in jan. 2003 , mass point in dec. 2007....) the grafic had been published for years on a private page in the web. 2015 then it appeared on the barycenter page, pretty much at the same time as the NASA barycenter-page went online.  And while it was  very well legible in the beginning, it became smaller and smaller  over the years and 'center of mass' was  hardly legible in the end. Today it grew again, so that  it is legible again. And since twenty years google marks my site  as 'trustworthy poor' because of this faked presentation. Since this presentation in the  beginning appeared in full size format on different sites in the web and  later on the wikipedia barycenter page right  after my site  was online it does not seem too far-fetched to assume that this presentation was only created to make my site seem untrustworthy, so that naive scientists believe that all what they read on my site is not true (click on  the picture to get a fullsize version.)  Quite in contrast to the intenionally  wrong title of the presentation: 'Motion of the solar systems barycenter relative to the sun' you can see in the above simulation that the barycenter is fixed and the sun rotates around the barycenter. So this is clearly fake science:
how the english wikipedia exchanges sun and barycenter the person who created this graphic can't have had the slightest idea of physics. Think what it would mean if this were reality. Are the people who put this graphic in Wikipedia aware of what incredible nonsense this represents, what strange nonsense they publish in  wikipedia? And since thousands of .edu-visitors ( = visitors  of US-universities) or british .ac.uk.-teachers and students  have seen over the years my criticism of this graphic, is this what they learn and teach in US-universities or in british universities ? How is it possible that this grafic is shown till today in wikipedia? Haven't they read this article (paper of apr. 2020)? Or this  one?  Here it is  expressed more popular , here too : "Therefore, the precise gravitational centre (or barycentre) of the Solar System is not smack-bang in the middle of the Sun, but somewhere closer to its surface, just outside it. But it hasn't been easy for us to figure out exactly where this barycentre is"  "Now,(..) an international team of astronomers has narrowed down the location of our Solar System's barycentre to within 100 metres (328 feet)"  Question: is it possible to narrow down a  barycenter  which rotates around the sun ? Simply skip in  this text the textparts concerning 'supermassive black hole' and 'gravitational waves'. By the way, the  Science Mission Director at NASA, Thomas Zurbuchen, who  was responsible  for the above mentioned NASA barycenter-page, was fired  by the end of 2022. This NASA barycenter page (this simple link provoked a DOS = denial of service on the NASA server for over a day (18.+19. of feb. 2023),  since millions of people, the whole world wanted to read if this  is really written on the NASA-barycenter-page) contains the remarkable, if not to say strange sentences: "Our solar system’s barycenter constantly changes position. Its position depends on where the planets are in their orbits (feb 2023 link is dead, see DOS). The solar system's barycenter can range from being near the center of the sun to being outside the surface of the sun. As the sun orbits this moving barycenter, it wobbles around (feb 2023 link is dead, see DOS)."  It is absolutely necessary that anonymous publishing and editing in wikipedia must be questioned!

You find  this picture on the english  wikipedia barycenter page if you  scroll down (lately the layout changed a  bit, but the content is still the same):
english wikipedia barycenter page

Here you can see how Google deceives the whole world. Since this presentation was never on the german wikipedia-barycenter-page  (click on screenshot to visit the page), this is a double betrayal. (this  screenshot was  taken 5-6 years ago when Larry page was still the CEO of google):
google  fooling the world

Here you  can see how Google deceives the world today. Since this presentation has never been on the german wikipedia-barycenter-page (click on screenshot to visit the page), this is double betrayal of google. That google keeps this faked presentation over the years shows clearly that this presentation has been produced to tell, that the content of my site is untrustworthy (screenshot taken  on 3 of february 2023) By the way, have you ever wondered why  the english language wikipedia offers no more easy to find articles in other languages in the left column? (its now in the title row):
google screenshot barycenter 2.3.23

By the way: If you ask Google today in 2023 the right question it tells you that the simulation  on top of this page is a conspiracy theory. How it should be possible to simulate a 'conspiracy theory' with a computer, Google doesn't tell you.

Another by the way: even the businessinsider learnt it already in 2020: A scientist's mesmerizing animation shows how our entire solar system orbits an unseen center — and it's not the sun. Here you can read the sciencealert article: https://www.sciencealert.com/mesmerising-animations-show-our-entire-solar-system-doesn-t-exactly-orbit-the-sun This businessinsider/sciencealert article is completely  cribbed from my new_facts_page and the frontpage of my site which was online since 2002. The above shown simulation (not animation!) was downloadable for years from this site since 2002 as a dos-program, executable on a local computer. It was adapted to the at that time low resolution screens (2002: 640x480 to 1024x768) and needed special drivers to get higher resolution. These were later no more available (if someone still remembers: univbe and other vesa-drivers). The above shown simulation is only  thought for all those people who are  not used to read diagrams. My actual programs are still in cpp and c#, it should be absolutely clear that the highest possible precision is necessary for these  calculations. And  it should be absolutely clear that only 3-D calculations give valid results.

A last question: Is the wobbling of the stars around the barycenter really a too complicated task for the human brain? Will we, will mankind never "understand (..) Earth’s place in the cosmos" ? Now, even NASA seems to have understood that there is  something completely wrong with todays theories. Since more than fifty years I'm telling physicists that stars rotate around the barycenter of their respective star system and get only mockery and ridicule.