I was not aware of Miles Mathis' work.
Grok explain Miles Mathis solar theory
Miles Mathis’ solar theory, particularly his explanation of solar cycles, is an alternative model that diverges significantly from mainstream astrophysics. It’s rooted in his broader "Charge Field Theory," which he claims unifies gravity and electromagnetism through a field of photons that mediate forces across scales, from subatomic to cosmic. Below, I’ll outline the core claims of his solar cycle theory, based on his writings and discussions found in available sources, while critically examining its key points.
Core Claims of Mathis’ Solar Theory
1. Solar Cycles Driven by Planetary Charge Interactions:
Mathis argues that the roughly 11-year solar cycle (the periodic variation in sunspot activity) is not caused by internal solar dynamo processes, as mainstream science posits, but by the
interaction of the Sun with the four gas giant planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune). He suggests these planets emit and recycle a "charge field" of photons that influences the Sun’s magnetic activity.
The charge field, according to Mathis, is a physical stream of photons moving between celestial bodies, creating a circuit-like interaction. The Sun recycles this charge, taking it in at its poles and emitting it near the equator, which drives sunspot activity and solar cycles.
He emphasizes the angular alignments of these planets (e.g., conjunctions) as critical to cycle timing. For instance, he predicted the solar maximum for Cycle 25 would occur in 2021, not 2020, due to the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction and Neptune’s position.
2. Rejection of Mainstream Dynamo Theory:
Mainstream science attributes solar cycles to the solar dynamo, where differential rotation and convection within the Sun generate magnetic fields. Mathis dismisses this, claiming the
Sun’s magnetic field and sunspot activity are externally driven by planetary charge interactions, not internal nuclear or magnetic processes.
He argues that the mainstream model fails to predict cycle timing accurately and that his charge-based model better matches observed data, such as the timing of solar maxima and minima.
3. Charge Field Mechanics:
Mathis’ charge field is a universal medium of spinning photons that he claims underlies all physical phenomena. In the solar context, planets emit charge toward the Sun, and the Sun recycles it, creating a feedback loop. The density of this charge increases as it approaches the Sun, amplifying its effect.
Sunspots, in his view, are tied to charge emission at specific solar latitudes (around 30 degrees), explained by the geometry of charge recycling, not internal magnetic processes.
4. Specific Predictions:
Mathis made testable predictions, such as the solar maximum of Cycle 25 occurring in 2021 with an extended duration and a sharp drop-off afterward.
He also predicted that Solar Cycle 26 (peaking around 2037) would be as strong as Cycle 19 (1957, the strongest on record), linking this to long-term galactic cycles.
He claims his model accurately matches past solar cycle data and that mainstream miscounting of sunspots (e.g., by NASA/NOAA) is an attempt to obscure his theory’s success.
5. Connection to Broader Phenomena:
Mathis ties solar cycles to terrestrial and galactic effects, suggesting they influence climate (e.g., challenging global warming narratives by linking temperature changes to solar activity) and even planetary axial tilts and tides.
He controversially suggests his findings give a scientific basis for planetary influences, reluctantly noting parallels to astrology due to the importance of planetary angles.
Critical Examination
While Mathis’ theory is provocative and claims to offer a simpler explanation than the mainstream, it faces significant challenges:
1. Lack of Peer Review and Empirical Support:
Mathis’ work, including his solar theory, has not been subjected to rigorous peer review. His charge field theory is not recognized by the scientific community, and his dismissal of established concepts like the solar dynamo lacks engagement with the extensive observational and theoretical evidence supporting it (e.g., helioseismology, magnetic field measurements).
His predictions, such as the 2021 solar maximum, are contentious. Mainstream data places the Cycle 25 maximum around mid-2025, not 2021, contradicting his claim. His assertion of sunspot miscounting by NASA/NOAA is speculative and unsupported by independent verification.
2. Unorthodox Physics:
The charge field, central to his theory, redefines fundamental concepts like charge, gravity, and electromagnetism without clear experimental validation. Mathis’ claim that celestial mechanics are primarily driven by charge, not gravity, contradicts well-established gravitational models (e.g., Newton, Einstein) that accurately predict orbits and tides.
His rejection of standard mathematical tools, like derivatives, and his claim that π=4 in kinematic contexts, undermine his credibility, as these ideas are widely criticized as mathematically incoherent.
3. Conspiracy Allegations:
Mathis frequently accuses mainstream institutions of suppressing his work, claiming NASA and others manipulate data to discredit him. This persecution narrative weakens his arguments, as it shifts focus from evidence to unproven claims of systemic bias.
4. Comparison to Mainstream Models:
The mainstream solar dynamo model, while complex, is supported by decades of observations, including magnetic field reversals, sunspot migration, and solar wind measurements. Mathis’ model, by contrast, relies on a speculative charge field and planetary alignments, which do not account for detailed solar phenomena like the butterfly diagram or torsional oscillations.
His dismissal of solar wind as a factor (e.g., in forum discussions) ignores its well-documented role in heliospheric dynamics.
5. Astrological Overtones:
Mathis’ emphasis on planetary angles and their influence on solar activity echoes astrological ideas, which he acknowledges reluctantly. This connection, while intriguing to some, lacks a mechanistic basis and is not taken seriously in scientific circles.
Strengths and Appeal
● Simplicity: Mathis’ model attempts to unify diverse phenomena (solar cycles, tides, climate) under a single charge field framework, which is appealing to those skeptical of complex mainstream models.
● Testable Predictions: Unlike many alternative theories, Mathis offers specific predictions (e.g., 2021 maximum, Cycle 26 strength), which, if correct, could challenge mainstream views. However, these predictions have so far been inaccurate or unverifiable.
● Engagement with Data: He uses NASA data to anchor his arguments, showing an effort to ground his theory in observation, though his interpretations are highly unconventional.
Conclusion
Miles Mathis’ solar theory proposes that solar cycles are driven by a charge field interaction between the Sun and gas giant planets, rejecting the mainstream solar dynamo model. It’s an ambitious attempt to unify celestial mechanics under a single framework, but it lacks empirical support, relies on unproven physics, and is undermined by Mathis’ broader rejection of established science. While his predictions are bold, they have not been borne out by data, and his reliance on conspiracy narratives further isolates his work from serious consideration. For a deeper understanding, mainstream sources like NASA’s solar cycle research or peer-reviewed papers on the solar dynamo offer a more robust foundation. If you’re curious about specific aspects of his theory or want to explore related mainstream models, let me know!
End of Grok overview.
Mathis' theory reminded me of Frank Hoogerbeets' (SSGEOS) theory of planetary positions at the time of large earthquakes.
Here is an example of what he calls Solar System Geometry Index (SSGI)
View attachment 107791
The magnitudes in red and blue on the graph are mine and as can be seen there is a certain relationship between a planetary/lunar alignment or geometry and a significant earthquake (>=M6) mainly when Mercury and/or Venus and any of the planets mentioned by Mathis are present: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune.
Also planetary geometries cause atmospheric anomalies/fluctuations in the Earth that precede major seismic activity. The Cs have confirmed this phenomenon.
Now, the Cs have also mentioned that the Sun's twin/companion star or Nemesis also interacts with the Sun and the solar system. From what Grok said about Mathis' Theory, he is not aware of the binary system.
It will be interesting to continue reading about Mathis, no doubt he is on to something and of course he is going to be reviled by established Science.
watchers.news
