“During my investigation I was amazed to find how many times the evidence came after the theory.”
M88
In other words human thought alone preceded any evidence at all. Theoretical physicists would have to have the luck of a lottery winner to be ‘right’ so many times. Big bangs and black holes were first dreamed about in the forties. Discoveries may well start with an idea, because mine definitely did. My idea was that the whole of cosmology had gone completely overboard and had ceased to be science at all. It had gone too far and my intuition told me it was all wrong and that an answer must be somewhere. Cosmology appeared as a conglomeration of dreams, thoughts and imagination. My Dad used to tell me what ‘thought’ did and ‘he’ followed a dustcart and thought it was a wedding.
If you do not know the laws of one of the two major forces of nature (gravity) and you disregard the other large-scale force of the cosmos (electrical considerations), any sensible science or analysis is impossible. Einstein had further severe handicaps. He did not know galaxies exist, that most of the universe is not spherical and that plasma constitutes 99% of the universe. I believe it is a grave mistake to have accepted Einstein’s pontifications on the whole universe. I would compare it to asking Archimedes to design your latest model of an automobile back in 212 BC.
If you do not know Sir Isaac Newton’s laws of nature for the non-spherical, then you are not only handicapped, you are totally impotent in the world of cosmology, astrophysics or just plain physics. Yes – every expert in large-scale astrophysics is going to look a little daft. Yes – there is going to have to be a worldwide inquiry into how this situation occurred. And yes – there are going to be losers. How many years is this going to take for acceptance even in the light of absolute proof?
NGC 2841
We are all scientists.
A baking pal quite innocently asked me just recently: ‘What’s the difference between a baker and a physicist?’ In good humour I replied, ‘Not a lot. Only, you bakers know what you’re doing!’
Please reflect on these questions:
- Is a cook a chemist?
- Is a gardener a botanist?
- Is a bridge builder a physicist or an engineer?
- What is health and safety?
- Is a cosmologist one of those people who appear on TV or a book cover, with that mathematical gobbledegook in the background?
I am sure you get my point. So please consider this:
- How can space possibly curve round a flat disk?
- Can we make a fourth dimension out of just two? I personally will not be asking Einstein.
- Have you ever heard of Theoretical Chemistry or perhaps Theoretical Biology? Theoretical Mathematics might be next!
And here’s another poser for good measure:
CATSEYE NEBULA
Please be inquisitive. Please listen to others, but make your own decisions. Do not be brainwashed. Please look at concrete rather than circumstantial evidence. Do not be affected by celebrity. Forget legends and myths. Look out for the truth amongst all the confusion. Above all, please beware of all those illusions that are continually thrown at us by the supposed experts. Illusion can lead to delusion. Look out for self interest and motive.
If you can do all this, I am absolutely certain that you will share with me that ‘eureka moment’ and the thrill of understanding what I wanted to understand. With the help of Newton, Arp, Scott and hundreds of other real, sensible, and intuitive scientists and using scientific method, I was able to see and comprehend my picture of our universe to a level I wanted to achieve. Now it is your turn to search and find the truth. Here are some of the ‘battles’ you will resolve along the way:
• Sir Isaac Newton v Einstein
• Reality v Illusion
• Science v Science-fiction
• Halton Arp v Doppler Redshift
• Mordehai Milgrom v Spergel
• Sir Fred Hoyle v Hawking
• The Alternative Cosmology Group v The Big Bang
All the winners drive down the left hand side of the road. The leading issue is mainly about Newton v Einstein and the fact that both only considered gravity of the perfectly spherical. Why has mankind never thought of testing both out for the non spherical and especially those structures that are approximately in two dimensions? I suspect this is because Einstein invented ‘curved space’ which couldn’t possibly occur around a flat structure.
I heard this statement on the television.
"The controversial idea that Newton was wrong and that gravity is not constant is the only alternative to dark matter. "
Here the writer of the above fails to see that Newton remains correct and gravity is not constant when applied to the non-spherical. When we apply Newton’s Law to the non-spherical we find that gravity or G is not a constant. It is only constant for the perfectly spherical. Here lies the biggest blunder.
You will find in this book that Newton was correct all the time and that Newton’s Law of Gravitation for the perfectly spherical transforms into Newton’s Law of Variable Gravity for the non-spherical. As nothing is perfectly spherical in the universe the elite of cosmology have up to now only been considering the mathematics of what does not exist. This is how we got to all the ridiculous concepts of pseudo-physics which now prevail.
Dark matter, dark energy, curved space, expanding space, acceleration of expanding space, gravitational lensing, bending of light, neutron stars, singularities, black holes, the Big Bang Theory and General Relativity all disappear when you know Newton’s Law of Variable Gravity. This is not theory. It is straight forward FACT