The Vedas are the oldest spiritual texts known to man. They have existed since the beginning of creation, passed down from one generation to the next by great saints and sages. At that time people had good memories and were able to accurately hear and remember all the details.
About five thousand years ago the sage Srila Vyasadeva understood that due to the commencement of the current age of Kali, the age of quarrel and fighting, memory would decrease and these ancient spiritual texts could no longer be preserved by being passed down through oral tradition only. So Srila Vyasadeva recorded the Vedas in written form around five thousand years ago. His literary works form an immense library of knowledge, both material and spiritual, and among everything else he has given descriptions of the creation, the universe, our solar system, the planets, the stars. He has given us a description of the mechanical system underlying the working of the universe which is radically different from the way we have come to presume the universe works.
Prior to five thousand years ago the Vedic culture was spread all over the world and that accounts for the similar descriptions of the universe found in many countries.
Srila Vyasadeva describes the whole creation including the spiritual and material worlds, and he describes the creator also, Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There are many universes, not just one, and each universe is enclosed within a globe, like an egg. There are many such globe like universes clustered together and floating in an ocean in a small corner of the spiritual sky.
Everything we perceive in our universe is contained within one of those egg like globes. Each globe is covered by layers of earth, water, fire, air and ether, so it is impossible for us to see from one globe to another. Different universes are different sizes but our particular universe is four billion miles across.
Because the description of the universe given in the Vedas is so dramatically different from what we have come to believe it is quite difficult for us to comprehend what Srila Vyasadeva is describing, however, here on flatearthfacts.com, we will attempt to try to understand the workings of the Vedic universe and try to produce a predictive model, based on the descriptions of Srila Vyasadeva, that works at least as well as the globe earth model.
29 Replies to “Vedic Earth”
Hare Krishna Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances.
Can I directly study the 5th Canto without properly understanding the first 4 cantos? Or will I not understand anything?
Hare Krishna Hrishikesh
Best thing is to read Srimad-Bhagavatam starting from the beginning. It is not that in only the Fifth Canto there is discussion of the structure of the universe. Parts of Fifth Canto specifically focus on the structure of the universe, but there is information throughout the other cantos as well.
So you should at least read the first four cantos before reading the Fifth Canto, ideally. But if you really want to read the Fifth Canto specifically there is no harm in that. But Bhagavatam is a systematic presentation and it is meant to be read from the beginning.
We will not ‘properly understand’ it from the first reading. It is very deep subject matter and there are levels of realization. So my suggestion is you make a plan to read the whole Bhagavatam, starting from the beginning.
Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!
Excellent and true
It is ridiculous to suggest that the universe is 4 billion miles across when the closest star is 24 trillion miles away.
You have no idea at all how far the stars are away from us. It is all 100% speculation. Guesses. Only guesses. No idea actually. All we can see is spots of light in the sky. We have no idea at all how far away they are. The only reason we say they are so unbelievably far away is they always remain in relatively the same positions even though, according the the globe earth theory, the earth is moving almost 200 million miles after 6 months. So if the stars were not so many light years away they would not appear they way we see them. So the stars are only so so far away because if they weren’t the globe earth model would break.
correction 4 billion light-years not miles
1 light-year is about 5.6 trillion miles
The stars are actually only a few thousand miles away and are merely points of light in the firmament. The distance can be calculated by triangulation from observations at different points across the flat surface of the Earth.
You don’t know the distance of the stars Johan, neither do the globe earth people. The truth is we only have a two dimensional view of the sky. We can measure quite reliably the positions of all the stars, planets, etc, but the distance, that is not something we have any real information about.
The distance of things in the sky from the earth, it all depends on assumptions.
The only reason why the globe earthers put the stars light years away is if the stars were not light years away that would disprove their globe earth model. They have the earth rotating around the sun, sun at 93 million miles from the earth. So after six months the earth will be on the other side of the sun, almost 200 million miles away from where we are today. But the problem is we have still got exactly the same view of the stars now as we will have in six months. That would be impossible unless the starts were so so so far away that the 200 million miles the earth moves is nothing in comparison..
So that is why the stars are light years away. Because they have to be, otherwise the globe earth model would be false.
So it is like that. We don’t know the distances of the sun, moon, stars and planets, all we can do is speculate, theorize and guess.
So you can not say “The stars are only a few thousand miles away….” Because you have no way of measuring the distance to the stars, and the globe earthers can’t say the stars are light years away. If we are to be honest we have to admit we don’t know how far away the stars are.
you could look at a star or some other small point in the sky relative to another point whose location is well defined to figure out the distance to the star though its only works for closer objects. like a thousand light-year distance, if you have very precise measurements.
Rubbish. We don’t know the distances of any of the celestial objects in the sky. The point is we only have a 2 dimensional view. We can not determine the distance. All the distances have been guessed based on assumptions that may or may not be correct.
So we don’t know distance of any of the celestial objects and we can not tell the distance of one object in the sky based on another object. We don’t know the actual brightness of a star for example. As its brightness will decrease over distance. So they say brighter stars are closer and less-bright stars are more distant. That is presuming the stars have a similar brightness so their perceived brightness to us is proportional to their distance from us.
So you have to get it through your head. We don’t know, and we can’t know. Because we only have got information of 2 dimensions, but for positioning an object you need 3 dimensions. All we can do is guess the distance. Of course they make theories like they have theorized that the color of the stars, the red shift, is proportional to its distance from Earth. But we don’t know if that is true. They presume brighter stars are closer and less bright stars are further away, but we don’t know if that is true. And they presume the stars must be so so so far away [light years] otherwise it would break their globe earth model.
So we don’t know actually. How far away the stars are. Totally unknown to us.
you can find the distance by noting the position of a star in the sky from two locations (one side of orbit and the other side of the orbit of earth) then using trigonometry also, you can use a star whose distance is known to make the measurements more precise. This is how your eyes know at what distance to focus.
This is the reason they put the stars so far away. Because these differences are so small, they could be rounding errors.
The reality is no difference can be detected, after the earth moves almost 200,000 miles.
They have to say they find some difference, but in reality, try it yourself. It is so tiny, and they so much want to find it, so they find it.
But really there is no difference. Because the earth is not moving.
So, Mr or Mrs. Flat Earth Facts,
I have read a great many of your posts and I agree with you on a large portion of your logic. You do seem to have a firm grasp of the Globe model and it’s power of prediction. You also seem to understand the ideas and explanations given by the flat-earthers and you have a firm understanding that they have absolutely no working model. You have also Advanced the idea that there may be other explanation for what we see and experience in the night sky. I would much like to discuss these alternative models with you if you have formulated them in any sophisticated way yet . I also see that you have a very reasonable but confusing belief in the lack of humanities power over physics and science in that you have a hard time in believing the power of Humanity’s ability to put a craft with a human being in it on our closest body of mass which is the Moon. I will have to agree with you that there are certain anomalies that would point to a possibility of conspiracy of lies and deceit where the moon landing with human beings is concerned some fifty years ago. However I also see that you have no ability to alter that disbelief no matter the magnitude of the extreme amount of proofs that agree with the fact that the human moon landings actually took place in the 60s and 70s. My biggest question I guess to you would be ,’how do you disregard certain positive proofs for a manned moon landing, which overwhelmingly surpasses the amounts of proof that would disagree . and yet give Credence to certain other proofs that would disagree with the fact of a man moon landing. How could you wipe away all the millions and billions of data points and people’s testimonies and people’s lives and scientists livelihood thinking that they would agree to lie about something like this and give credence to thinking the rest of humanity is gullible enough to actually believe A lie of this magnitude when the proof the actuality of all the other sciences and discipline all agree nearly 100% with everything that space exploration has already accomplished. When radio astronomy agrees that a spacecraft has orbited and landed on the moon with men on it and when actual line of sight telescopes agree with it from around the world and when Nations that hate each other agree with it from around the world and when you add all the other accomplishments that we have done like putting robots on Mars putting robots on other planets on the outer planet sending missions to the sun putting Landers on our closest planet like Venus and Mars. How does one not see the full picture when all the scientific disciplines agree nearly 100% on all of our observations all of our physical abilities all of our accomplishments all of our outstanding scientific achievements. I mean we went from not being able to fly more than a few hundred feet through the air some 10 feet off the ground in 1903 to flying hundreds of thousands of people across the planet just a decade or two later. Then in 1946 Chuck Yeager fired the X-1 engine and accelerated past the speed of sound. In 1959 the soviets put Luna 2 , i believe it was called, on the moon, took photos. In 1966 the soviets landed an probe sent from earth on Venus. All of these accomplishments and more could never have fooled the great scientific scrutiny of the entire world. However, this seemingly unscientific conclusion of your about the absolute falseness of our manned moon missions does not interest me as much as your firm beliefs that there may be a more accurate and realistic alternative to the globe earth model.
In your post I actually see you agreeing that the globe Earth model is literally 99.999% factual. So I’m kind of baffled when in some of your other post you say things like, “Well we can’t really know for sure that the globe Earth model is accurate.” I am seriously intrigued and fully prepared to entertain those other possibilities. But please, enlighten me as to the direction your ideas point towards and let’s have a serious discussion about the many, many places we can find ourselves if we just consider the possibilities that await our logical imaginations. Because I will only consider those other possibilities that firmly fit within our current understanding of physics unless some brilliant and earth shaking ideas pop out within these talks. Because truly, only an awesome and newly conceived of ideas are going to change anyone’s minds where the current understanding of our place in this universe is concerned.
So, let’s hear some groundbreaking logic. Let’s do the hard work of breaking into some new ground. I see that you have so far hesitated on giving us your actual beliefs for an alternative model. I am intrigued as to why you hesitate to put forth your hypothesis about what you think our reality actually entails. I see you have given some cursory details and hints but have yet to fully commit to a new model.
My guess would be that there are still too many unexplainable anomalies in your hypothesis so let’s go ahead and discuss these anomalies and see if we can’t get through to some basic agreement and further these hypotheses of yours to formulate some serious theory. Yes?
Thanks for listening. I look forward to learning new ideas because I see that you may be someone who can teach me a thing or two and maybe even visa versa, let’s hope.
I have studied all the evidence, for and against, the possibility that NASA sent men with a dune buggy and golf clubs to to moon in the 1960s and I can not find a single piece of evidence at all that supports this story. On the other hand, on every single aspect you study, you don’t have to dig very deeply at all to find so many contradictions.
The greatest proof that we did not send men to the moon in the 1960s is we can’t send men to the moon now, 50 years later with incredibly improved technology in all respects. Today, what to speak of the moon, if you blast a capsule with a couple of people in it up less than 100 miles and land it again, that is considered a great achievement, a marvelous advancement in space travel… And it is covered on all the media as a great advance in science.
So if we can not go to the moon today, then obviously we could not go to the moon in the 1960s.
All your words are nonsense about NASA’s man on the moon story and if you really believe what you have written you are fool. A religious fanatic blindly believing the church of NASA, not much better than the flat earthers blindly believing in the flat earth.
Globe earth model is different from NASA’s men on the moon story. Globe earth model is logical, valid scientific predictive model. NASAs man on the moon story is just an impossible story, and actually every real scientist knows that. NASA themselves are trying to unwind that story now, that they sent men to the moon, because today it is not possible for any intelligent person to believe that story.
So I can not take you very seriously if you really believe NASA sent men to the moon in the 1960’s many times, almost routinely, but today if some millionaire blasts off and goes up 100 miles and lands, that is a great advance in space travel?
So if you believe the “men on the moon” story you are a fool.
Not much point discussing it any further. It has been discussed by so many others in so many other places. I am not going to waste my time talking about it.
So what exactly is it that you want to discuss because I’ve attempted to open up a dialogue with you about alternative models that I’m interested in learning about and molding and deciding whether or not they are or can set our observations but it seems that you have shut my post down for some reason. I am curious as to why we cannot disgusting as I said before I’m not interested in what people believe of our current model I want to know what ideas are out there that can explain a current model in a better way Oregon away at least as good and as reasonable and that’s believable so please enlighten me thank you
I am trying to comprehend the Vedic model as described in the Fifth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam:
It is a correct description of the universe we find ourselves in. So you can read it and work it out for yourself.
And if you comprehend it, let me know. It is difficult for us to think “outside the box” or “outside the globe”. We are so much conditioned to believe in the globe, and it is good story, the globe earth model, we are very reluctant to consider an other possibility.
So it is difficult for me also, to conceive or anything but the globe.
However, I am convinced this book is giving the real description of the universe, and it is not saying the earth is a globe, anywhere…
Thank you for including the vedic writings in this post. I am now fully engrossed in these examples. Thanks again.
I only read the first 2 paragraphs but, we could snd people to the moon and back for about a quarter of the price now but it is still near a trillion dollars and people aren’t interested in that, they are more interested in cheaper space travel, so when a private company(space x) makes it to the Karmen line and back in a tenth of the price it takes NASA and other space agencies, people are happy that space travel close to being achieved by the middle class.
NASA has been offered twice now, a practically unlimited budget, for sending men back to the moon, first by Bush Jnr. then by Trump and both times NASA told them it is not possible.
Even, if you ask NASA, if they can send men to the moon today, they will tell you “No.” They will say there are still many issues that need to be resolved before we can send people out of low-earth orbit. There are many things, but one radiation. There is dangerous radiation in the Van Allen belts and in space also that kills people. They have send up animals, and they all die.
So yes. In theory, they can shield this radiation, but it needs like a foot of lead, which is too heavy to make it practical on a rocket…
So you are speaking total nonsense, not even checking with NASA. If you check with NASA they will tell you it is impossible, with today’s technology, that is hundreds of times better than what NASA had in the 1960s, to send men, what to speak of to the moon, even just out of low-earth orbit.
No man has ever left low-earth orbit and lived. The exception, they want us to believe, is the fabulously successful 1960s Apollo Manned moon landings.
But this is just a story. It is not real. If you go to NASA yourself, Houston, etc, just ask all the NASA people there, I have done it, none of them are sure that NASA sent men to the moon in the 1960s.
Even today NASA doesn’t believe this story, so how foolish are you to believe the story???
I read a little more of what you said and I have a question for you. Do you think we can measure the distances to other stars?
No. We have no way of measuring the distance to the stars. We only have a 2 dimensional view. We can very accurately measure the positions of the stars, in 2 dimensions, but we have no way of measuring the distance to the stars.
Our idea of the distance to the stars is based on the theory that the earth is rotating around the sun every 12 months 93 million miles away from the sun. So in 6 months the earth has moved 93,000,000 x 2 miles, almost 200,000,000 miles. So after moving such a distance we should get a different view of the stars, if the stars are all at different distances, and we move 200,000,000 miles we should see the stars arranged differently. But we don’t. Stars are still the same, even though the earth has moved 200,000,000 miles. So this is not possible unless we put the stars so so so unimaginably far away that this 200,000,000 mile movement of the earth is irrelevant.
So that is the only reason they say the stars are light years away. Because, if we believe the earth is rotating around the sun and it is 93 million miles away from the sun our actual observations of the stars would be impossible, unless the stars were so so so far away. So this is how it works. The stars are light years away because that is the only way we can explain our observations if we want to believe the earth is rotating around the sun at a distance of 93 million miles.
But if we say instead the earth is stationary and the sun is rotating around the earth, then in that model, which is equally valid, we can put the stars much closer.
So we have no idea at all actually, how far away the stars are.
What about the moon ? Can we calculate how far is it ?
It is a very good question.
Of course mankind has gazed into the sky for a very long time and tried to ponder these questions. “How far away is the moon.” and “How does it work.” But the reality is we have very little ability to observe the moon. We can see it rise and set in the sky and change shape during the month, that’s all.
So any idea we may have about what the moon is, how it works, where it is, what is the distance, etc, it is all speculation based on theories developed by our very limited powers of observation.
As far as distance to the moon, triangulation should be possible. But you need to know accurately the base of the triangle and be able to very accurately measure the angles. So presuming the earth is a globe, we get one distance for the base of the triangle, but if we presume the earth is flat, then that base of the triangle distance will be very different.
So the point is to calculate the distance to the moon we have to make assumptions. And those assumptions may or may not be correct.
So actually we can not calculate the distance to the moon.
They claim to be able to measure the distance to the moon with lunar laser ranging. They fire a big laser to the moon and bounce it off a one foot square mirror the apollo astronauts left on the moon and measure the time it takes. Now this requires you to believe the Apollo astronauts actually went to the moon and left a foot square mirror there. And it presumes that you can get enough light from your laser to that one foot square mirror on the moon and that it can reflect enough of that light back to you so you can see it from the earth. Which is, quite frankly, impossible. So this is not a valid experiment.
Now they claim to be able to measure the distance to Venus using radar??? That also seems very far-fetched to me. However if they can actually measure the distance to Venus with radar they should be able to measure the distance to the moon with radar, but I have never heard them claiming that. Probably because it does not work.
So conclusion is, no, we can’t measure the distance to the moon.
In this case…can we measure the distance between continents ?
Of course you can, what would stop you from measuring that distance between the continents? You can fly above them for sure. So you can fly in a certain direction and measure the distance over the earth that you pass below. That will measure the distance…
Well, if we can measure the distance from 2 continents, is it possible to find the distance to the moon considering the 2 points with known distance between them, and the moon being the 3-rd point of a triangle?
In this case we have a fixed triangle, where we know all 3 angles and a side. ..what do you think?
Not without knowing the shape of the earth. You can measure the distance over the land, but distance calculated to the moon would be very different on a globe than on a flat plane.
So the point is it is not possible to measure the distance to the moon without making assumptions.
If you assume the earth is a globe you will get one distance, but if you assume the earth is flat then you will get a completely different distance to the moon.
Also difficult to measure the angles accurately enough. So to measure the angles you will probably compare the background stars and their relationship to the moon from two different points and in that way, from the background of the stars, deduce the angles.
But that means you have to assume a certain distance of the stars also…
That is the problem. You can not measure the size or distance of anything in the sky actually. You have to make many assumptions and deduce it. And your assumptions may be wrong, so your resulting distance may be completely incorrect.
You have a 2 dimensional view of the sky. You can quite accurately measure where everything is in the sky, in 2 dimensions, elevation up from the horizon and degrees around the horizon from north, for example. But that is all you can measure. 2 dimensions.