web metrics

Quasars and geocentricity

Several past articles in the Bulletin of the Tychonian Society as well as both books, With Every Wind of Doctrine and Geocentricity have mentioned Varshni's conclusion that if the quasars (quasi-stellar objects, hot, blue, star-like objects whose light spectral lines appear strongly redshifted) are at cosmic distances, that they appear to be geocentrically distributed. Varshni still holds to that conclusion, insisting that the quasars are situated about nearby galaxies, not near the edge of the universe.

In a 1978 paper1 Green and Schmidt conclude the complement, namely, that if the quasars are local that then they are geocentric. They looked at the results from the Palomar Bright Quasar Survey and concluded in their abstract that there is “compelling evidence for strong cosmological evolution of optically selected quasars, if their redshifts are cosmological. The results are incompatible with the local hypothesis of quasars (i.e., noncosmological redshifts) unless the space density increases strongly with distance.”

In their study, Green and Schmidt expected 74 quasars to fall within their study range. Instead, they found only four. They effectively conclude that the local quasars have evolved out of view, and they claim compatibility of this with radio quasars. The four quasars are incompatible with the local hypothesis because it implies a nonuniform space distribution. The local hypothesis assumes a uniform distribution or else that quasars are associated with local galaxies which do exhibit an approximately uniform local distribution through space. “We conclude,” the authors state, “that any hypothesis of quasars, local or cosmological, has to be rejected unless it incorporates a space density increasing with distance.” In other words, the quasars are unavoidably geocentrically distributed.

The peculiar number of comets

I came across an interesting letter from Fran Tabor which was published in Science News in 1978.2 The letter was in response to an earlier article which suggested that every now and then the sun passes through interstellar clouds which darken the sun's light and thus instigate ice ages. Tabor references chapter 1 of Fred Hoyle's 1955 edition of Frontiers of Astronomy where Hoyle, in talking about how comets could disrupt the greenhouse effect, states that: “the break-up of many comets is taking place at such a rate that they will be entirely disrupted within a million years.” In other words, if evolutionary ages are true, then there should be no comets unless a hidden source of comets (Oort cloud) has been triggered to spew forth a collection of comets to favor us (for example, we've recently passed through a thick cloud or cluster of stars).

Fusion and solar power

As I've been filtering through old files, I came upon a Science News3 note which could have some implications for theories about solar energy. Experimenters at the University of Rochester, Argonne National Laboratory, and the University of Maryland, reported that accelerated heavy ions, (xenon 136,) when hitting dense material such as bismuth 209, form nuclei which cling together but do not actually fuse. Eventually they break apart in pieces which “remember” their initial states. Nuclear fusion theory constructs the elements from fusion between smaller nuclei, such as hydrogen to helium, helium to carbon, etc. The experiments imply that the fusion may not be as smooth as theory predicts. The dearth of solar neutrinos also points to problems with nuclear fusion theory as an energy source to keep stars going for billions of years. Furthermore, this may also account for the difficulty encountered in constructing a working fusion reactor, something which has never been done after almost forty years in the making.

Is the Great Attractor a figment of evolution?

Ron Cowan reports in the April 23 issue of Science News that the great attractor may be a myth, after all.4 At a joint meeting of the Royal Astronomical Society and the European Astronomical Society it was reported that the assumption of evolution may have played a trick on the discoverers of the great attractor.

The great attractor was supposed to be a region in space, more dense than its surroundings, which was gravitationally pulling the Milky Way, indeed, this region of the universe, towards it. A key assumption in reaching that conclusion is that Elliptical galaxies in clusters of galaxies consist entirely of old, evolved stars. In assuming that these galaxies consist only of old stars, the researchers consistently underestimated the true distances to the galaxy clusters and thus overestimated their velocities. When the presenter, Rafael Guzman of the University of Durham, England, applied an evolution-independent measurement of distance to these clusters, the Great Attractor disappeared. In other words, no evolution, no Great Attractor.

Evidence for geocentricity from gamma rays

A report published in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on 16 January, 1994, claims that the mysterious gamma-ray (rays more energetic than x-rays) bursts last longer if they are weak than if they are strong. Jay Norris, reporting at the American Astronomical Society meeting in Arlington, Virginia, claims that time dilation is the culprit, that the fainter bursts are at tremendous distances from the earth and so appear to last longer than their closer counterparts. In other words, the effect is geocentric.

Convection flows and magnetic fields

In order to account for the tape-recorder model for the magnetic fields trapped in rocks on the ocean bottom, geologists have speculated that the earth's magnetic field periodically reverses itself. Unfortunately for them, they have not been able to come up with a satisfactory model to account for such reversals. The problem is not that there is no theory, just that experiment doesn't conform to theory. A 1993 article in Science5 drives another nail in the theoretical coffin. Sun, Schubert, and Glatzmaier report that the experimentally observed rotating columns can account for the banded appearance of the great planets such as Jupiter and Saturn. Hence, experiment meets observation and counters theory, and a theoretical base for the alleged magnetic reversals of the earth becomes even more distant.

Experimentally observed convective motion of a fluid

More evidence for a large universe

In the recent past we've considered the question of the size of the universe; is it really billions of “light years” across or is it only a couple of light months across? One of the strong arguments for a large universe rests on supernova explosions. A report from the January 1991 meeting of the American Astronomical Society claims a large universe.
In 1987 the massive star exploded in the Large Magellanic Cloud, a satellite galaxy to the Milky Way. The light from the supernova went out from it and illuminated a ring surrounding the supernova. Nino Panagia used observations from two satellites, the Hubble Space Telescope and the International Ultraviolet Explorer to analyze the light from the ring. The ring is 1.66 arcseconds in diameter and the light from the supernova reached the point of the ring closest to the earth 80 days after the explosion.
Emissions from the farthest edge did not arrive until 340 days later. Thus the diameter of the ring (inclined 47 degrees to the plane of the sky) is computed to be 1.37 light years. It is straight-forward geometry to derive that the distance of the ring from earth is 169,000 light years. Previous distance estimates for the Large Magellanic Clouds range from 143,000 to 179,000 light years.

A free Proxima Centauri?

The red dwarf star, Proxima Centauri, is the closest star to the sun. For years it was assumed that Proxima was part of the Alpha Centauri star system, making a triple star. It seems that the widely published velocity for Proxima is too large to keep it with Alpha Centauri A and B, the other two stars in the system. Proxima's distance is some 330 times the distance from the Sun to Pluto, and it lies 4.22 light years from earth.
Now there's more at stake here than whether or not Proxima belongs in the Alpha Centauri system or not. You see, Proxima is a flare star, a star which unpredictably flares in brightness. If Proxima is a member of Alpha's system, then they would presumably be the same evolutionary age, namely, about 5 billion years. The problem is, red dwarfs should cease flare activity before the 5 billion years is up. Freeing Proxima from Alpha's influence would free it up to be younger than Alpha Centauri. On the other hand, here's another problem for evolution.
6 Fortunately for evolutionists, its is next to impossible at this time to obtain an accurate measurement of Proxima's radial velocity.

The Sagnac effect observed in crystals

In an article entitled “Neutron Interferometry,” Helmut Rauch7 reports that the Sagnac effect has been observed in neutron interferometry. “The coupling of the neutron to the gravitational field has also attracted interest as it offers a way of testing some of the connections between gravity and quantum fields. The effect of the Earth's gravitational field manifests itself when the interferometer crystal is rotated around a horizontal axis in such a way that one beam path experiences a higher gravitational potential [energy] that the other. The induced phase shift therefore contains terms of both gravitational and quantum mechanical origin. Neutron interferometry also permitted the observation of the Sagnac effect, which is the phase shift between two paths oriented in opposite directions about the Earths rotation axis.” The Sagnac effect cannot be explained by the theory of relativity and it also cannot distinguish whether the earth is rotating inside the universe or the universe rotates in the opposite direction about the earth. When contrasted with the Michelson-Morley experiment which failed to find the motion of the earth about the sun, the Sagnac effect becomes a potent experiment in favor of the geocentric hypothesis. Now its been observed using neutrons, too.

Hubble trouble

As every thinking, educated person “knows,” evolution is a proven fact and the universe was formed in a big bang some 15 billion years ago. So what if the oldest stars in the Milky Way are supposed to be 12 billion years old, we have plenty of time to fill in those minor gaps in the theory. Or do we?

The Hubble space telescope now confirms evidence that the “oldest stars” are “older” than the universe. A team of researchers have looked at the galaxy, Messier 100 in the Virgo cluster of galaxies with the Hubble scope, in particular, looking at Cepheid variables. The properties of Cepheid variables (the most famous is Polaris, the pole star) are well defined and thus they are used as a cosmic distance ruler. The Hubble telescope has thus been used to refine the “Hubble constant,” the unit held as a measure of the expansion rate of the universe.

For several decades now, pressure has been on to lower the value of the Hubble constant and to keep it well below 50 km/sec/megaparsec (1 megaparsec = 3.26 million light years). The Hubble scope places the value at 80 (between 63 and 97). This gives an “age” in the range of 8 to 12 billion years. Globular clusters have ages estimated at 16 billion years.

Be careful in claiming this a death-knell for the big bang, however. Other lines of evidence point to values of 25 to 55 indicating an age in the range of 18 to 20 billion years. (Earlier this year8 we looked at the Hubble constant from a young-age universe perspective.) Besides, the Hubble constant is not necessarily an expansion rate for the universe as a whole. It may be local value which is far different from a universal one. Still, it's one more piece of evidence. Actually, the Hubble constant is itself a piece of evidence for geocentricity since it is the same in all directions centered on the earth.

Old stars may not be so old after all

Above we noted that the assumption that stars in elliptical galaxies are old may have led to the erroneous conclusion that our region of the universe is being drawn into the Great Attractor. It is the standard astronomical assumption that any region of stars which contains little or no dust is a region containing old stars. Thus it has been assumed that the stars in the bulge of the Milky Way must also be old. A study by Jon A. Holtzman of Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff Arizona, using the Hubble Space telescope, has now shown that the stars in the Milky Way's bulge may only be “middle age” instead of “old,” if, that is, the assumption that massive stars age more quickly and die off sooner than less massive stars is true (and from all evidence it seems to be true regardless of the actual age of the universe). The same seems to be true for the bulge stars of other neighboring galaxies such as the Andromeda Galaxy, one of its satellites, and M33. The problem is that such stars should be old if the collapsing cloud model of galactic origin is correct. Evolutionists propose that collisions between galaxies have triggered star formation in the halos at a later date than the formation of the galaxy itself. The problem is, how many collisions can there be if all four of these galaxies have undergone collisions at about the same time. Still, one can always add more and more hypothesis to save any theory.

Speaking of Sagnac effect

Hitachi has developed an optical fiber gyro for automotive (yes, that's right, automotive) navigational systems. The gyroscope, which works by circulating light beams in opposite directions around a spool, detects rotation of the car and thus provides an azimuth (angle from north) reading. It's already been installed as an azimuth sensor in certain Toyota vehicles.

Hitachi fiber optic gyro


1 Green, Richard F., and Maarten Schmidt, 1978. “Evidence For Nonuniform Radial Distribution of Quasars, Regardless of the Nature Of Their Redshifts,” Astrophysical Journal, 220:L1-L4.

2 Tabor, Fran, 1978. “Comets and Clouds,” Science News, 113(13):307.

3 Schroder, W. U., J. R. Birkelund, J. R. Huizenga, K. L. Wolf, J. P. Unik and V. E. Viola Jr., in Physical Review Letters of March 8, 1976. The Science News note, “Heavy ions: Damped collisions,” appeared in 109:203, 27 March, 1976.

4 Cowan, Ron, 1994. “Death of the Great Attractor?” Science News, April 23, p. 271.

5 Sun, Zi-Ping, Gerald Schubert and Gary A. Glatzmaier, 1993. ”Banded Surface Flow Maintained by Convection in a Model of the Rapidly Rotating Giant Planets,” Science, 260:661.

6 Cowan, Ron, Science News, 143, 204.

7 Rauch, Helmut, 1993. “Neutron Interferometry,” Science, 262:1384-1385. Quote is on page 1385.

8 ”Redshift and the age of the universe,” Biblical Astronomer, 4(67):27, 1994.

Translated from WS2000 on 4 September 2005 by ws2html.