‘Dr X’ says Universe Is NOT Expanding
What first began as ‘rumored’ science on conservative websites is now being reinforced by what can only be described as the foremost authority on the Expanding Universe.
The thought that there was a Non Expanding Theory has been introduced by a trained engineer, who has turned rogue astronomer. The following quote from Dr X does add credibility to this challenge to eight decades of ‘settled’ science:
Dr X has “admitted that the expanding universe might be an illusion, but implied that this was a cautious and colorless view. Last week it was apparent that he had shifted his position even further away from a literal interpretation of red shift, that he now regards the expanding universe as more improbable than a non-expanding one.”
What gives this Dr X usurper, along with that engineer turned rogue astronomer, the right to challenge this cornerstone of modern astronomy ?
The identity of the mysterious Dr X is none other than “Mount Wilson Observatory’s brilliant Astronomer Edwin Powell Hubble,” who with coworker Milton LaSalle Humason first observed the red-shift of light from distant stars. Continuing, “It was assumed that the distant nebulae were retreating in all directions.”
One interesting fact is that this interview was for Time Magazine and was published as “Science: Shift on Shift” on Dec 14, 1936. Here you have proof that the ‘father of the Expanding Universe Theory’ had misgivings just years after his 1929 disclosure. Following the motto of P T Barnum, of “there’s a sucker born every minute” the existing ‘big science’ teams saw an unlimited opportunity to expand astronomy budgets.
The ‘sucker’ in this case is the taxpayer, forced by errant bureaucrats for fund side-show science on an ever expanding universe with ever expanding grants, awards and fellowships. Bureaucrats do have an affection for expanding concepts, witness the vast expansion of planetary maladies they have been able to ascribe to the ‘expansion of carbon dioxide’ gas in our atmosphere.
Dr Hubble (the previous mentioned Dr X) made his scientific discoveries on the 100 inch Hooker telescope, the world’s largest at the time. In the Times interview, he communicated to the National Academy of Sciences that:
“The distribution of these bodies [distant nebulae] in space forced him to conclude that a non-expanding universe theory is more economical and less vulnerable”
Having birthed this brand of Franken-science the good doctor was now powerless to stop what now had a life of its own. He was “now willing to abandon the expanding universe to mathematical cosmologists” and they we only too happy for this new gravy train.
In a Pontius Pilate moment during the interview, Dr Hubble states his hope that the new 200 inch Caltech super telescope to be completed in the 1940’s would settle this question. Since the ability to gather light is a function of area, and therefore of a square, this new eye in the sky could see four times as much, four times as far back, as the Hooker telescope.
What dismayed Dr Hubble at the time was that the speed of the then edge of the universe was “equal to 25,000 miles per second”. This was the speed that Milky Way sized galaxies were perceived to be moving. The world had to take time out to counter a virulent form of ‘master race planet domination’ which caused a delay in completing of the 200 inch Mt Palomar telescope until 1948.
When even deeper space light was showing even greater ‘apparent acceleration’ the mathematical cosmologists descended on the witless bureaucrats at the NAS for an ever expanding list of fanciful solutions, including dark matter, invisible universes and vacuum energy.
SXDF-XCLJ0218-0510
No, this is not the tattooed armband coordinates for Anglia Jolie’s latest offspring. This is the name for the newest and most distant cluster galaxy estimated at 9.6 billion light years away and closest yet observed to the 13.7 billion year old universe edge. As the speed of these supposed distant galaxies are now approaching the actual speed of light, we are left to question some of the hypothesis of these bureaucratically over fed cosmologists.
One must question the hypothesis that 90 percent of the matter in the universe is invisible dark matter, yet light is able to pass such great distances unblocked and un-absorbed. The supposed vacuum force is many times greater than gravity, but curiously also invisible.
The last count on invisible universes also included five invisible dimensions. In addition to the four ‘visible dimensions’ of length, width, depth and time there were sorcerers equations for five more dimensions. A radio interview last week indicated that a hopeful cosmologist was seeking grants for two new additional invisible dimensions.
With unlimited funding we will soon find that we live in a universe with more invisible dimensions than Starbucks locations. What began with a real scientist and a Hooker at the observatory has turned into a science whorehouse. What we must do is to show these spend thrifts the real meaning of ‘invisible’ as in the invisible universe that we are all now experiencing.
We must show these NAS pimps and their cosmologist harlots the meaning of ‘invisible paycheck’, ‘invisible pension’ and ‘invisible health benefits’. It is time for the honest voices of science to demand that this circus side show be closed. I’m certain that Dr X would heartily agree. By the way, that engineer turned rogue astronomer is ME.
See more here: jennifermarohasy.com
Header image: the Ultra Deep Field Image captured by the Hubble Space Telescope. Courtesy Extreme Tech
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Joseph Olson
| #
Dopler shift occurs with compression or elongation of a moving source. An approaching train compresses sound waves, giving higher pitch, which shifts to longer, lower pitch as it departs. The same is true for a rotating source, like an air raid siren. A rotating Universe would have a shift, without expansion, so I wrote “Cure for Cosmology’s Peptic Ulcer” at CanadaFreePress.
The i discovered the Edwin Hubble 1936 Time magazine article, “Shift on Shift” and his admission that with 100 inch telescope he could see ~3 billion light years away and observe 25,000 mph expansion velocity. Hubble stated with a 200 inch (4X power) he could see 12 billion light years and 100,000 mph velocity, which would prove impossible.
A reader suggested my 2010 CFP article hypothesis had been explained before, see the
Einstein-Godel Metric from 1949. Giant problem, if the Universe was rotating, then time travel was AXIOMATIC, a huge threat of our rulers, so zero funding for this.
“Federally Funded Frankenscience” at CFP explains.
Reply
Allan Shelton
| #
Right on…..
I have been a skeptic if the BBT for years, and am glad to read your analysis.
Thanks……….
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
The red and blue shifts are a result of the speed of light not being constraint or a particle but a wave traveling in the magnetic and electric fields emitted by objects. An increasing field strength produces an accelerating wave and a blue shift while a weakening field strength produces a slowing wave causing a red shift. If the speed of light is not constant then all of Einsteinian physics is garbage.
Reply
Zhivko
| #
The astronomer Halton Arp studied red shift all his life and discovered that visibly connected objects have very different red shifts. He hypothesised an intrinsic red shift related to the objects age rather than its velocity.
Reply
Joseph Olson
| #
How convenient, the Milky Way is in the center of a 13 billion light year Universe extending in all directions. Or maybe space is curved and we have a hall of mirror glimpse of reality. Or maybe light is a particle, moving at 1.7 times the Speed of Light, creating the wavefront we see as the speed of light. Rethink everything.
“Confirmation of the Helical Travel of Light Through Microwave Waveguide Analysis” by
Robert Ashworth, PE at Physics Essays, 1998
Reply
JaKo
| #
Hello,
There’s inherent problem with most of the “modern science.” As Jerry and others insist on observation as a foundation of all science, there is, IMHO, a more important aspect: interpretation of this observation. That is, the ever-present “observational bias.”
(a) The 1965 discovered microwave “background radiation” could be some really “tired EMR,” e.g. IR decaying into microwaves from beyond the “observational light limits;” but instead, it was defined, wrapped and sold as the echo of the (Let it be light) “Big Bang!”
(b) The omnipresent red shift, as “observed,” could be explained as that the only observer-centrist relationship with the cosmos is based on how/what we observe (EMR), but instead, an explanation with expanding universe, that is expanding (near uniformly) in all directions, was peddled, and indirect implication of the “observer” being situated in the center of such universe was swept under the rug of ridicule.
And one could go on to “modern” climatology, medicine, ad nauseam…
Cheers, JaKo
Reply
Ken Hughes
| #
General relativity shows us that as the rate of time speeds up, then so does the “size” of space as a consequence. So, if time were to pass faster now than it did in the past, our universe would be bigger than it was then, as a result.
Of course, this increase in “size” is always exactly matched by the associated increase in time rate, such that it would take the same time to cross a particular distance now, as it did for our ancestors “then”. The result is that living in the universe at any time throughout the last 13.8 billion years is always the same and in that sense, the universe is NOT expanding.
However, if you could see into the past and look at the old universe, as we do when we look across vast distances, you WOULD see a “smaller” universe then, compared to now, so in that sense, the universe IS expanding. Universal expansion is relative, relative to when you observe from.
The driver of this “expansion” is the changing rate of time, (and its consequential changing speed of light). ‘Ever wondered why the units of the Hubble constant are inverse seconds squared?
This is the only logical explanation for Hubble’s red shift, the ONLY possible cause and effect for cosmic “expansion”.
Reply
JaKo
| #
Hi Ken, nothing personal:
If the rate of time is speeding up toward future, then that rate of time should slow down toward the past; therefore, if you go far enough into the past, here we have it — a big bang again!
Ho [1/s] — I don’t see any acceleration. I may be living in the past though 😉
Or should I add “modern units” into my rant?
Cheers, JaKo
Reply
Tom O
| #
Oddly, I’ve always contended that if I am looking at light that comes from an object that is 8 billion “light years” away, I would have to believe I am looking at something that was THERE 8 billion years ago, not that it was a reflection of something that existed 8 billion years ago, but somewhere else. The idea that we are looking back in time as we look to the edge of the expanding universe just seems to be so illogical, but to be seeing something that existed at that place in a static universe makes sense.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Ken,
What about the blue shift? Does it represent the future?
We know that light does not travel in a straight line. Could these distant galaxies we see be the same galaxies we observe in other areas of the universe, where the light has traveled a different path and is a different perspective from the past? Could the universe be spherical (like everything in it) and when the light reaches the edge, after expanding from its source, it is then reflected and converges as with a concave mirror? So much we assume about what we see is based on assumptions on the constant nature (direction and velocity) of light but if light is a form of energy it must always change just as energy does.
Herb
Reply
Ken Hughes
| #
So called “Dark Energy” is this accelerating rate of time.
Reply
jamesbbkk
| #
Halton Arp published a Catalogue of Discordant Redshift Associations.
Reply