Edwin Hubble and The Lie That Keeps on Lying

Edwin Hubble was an American astronomer. He changed our understanding of the universe by postulating the existence of other galaxies besides the Milky Way. He discovered the degree of redshift observed in light coming from a galaxy increased in proportion to the distance of that galaxy from the Milky Way. This became known as Hubble’s law, and established that the known universe is expanding. This however came at a cost and one that will surely come back to haunt not only him, but the entire science of astronomy.

The following are some quotes by Edwin that you may find interesting. All emphasis is mine.

“Such a condition would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous, in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central earth. The hypothesis cannot be disproved but it is unwelcome and would be accepted only as a last resort in order to save the phenomena. Therefore, we disregard this possibility and consider the alternative, namely, a distribution which thins out with distance.”

“A thinning out would be readily explained in either of two ways. The first is space absorption. If the nebulae were seen through a tenuous haze, they would fade away faster than could be accounted for by distance and red-shifts alone, and the distribution, even if it were uniform, would appear to thin out. The second explanation is a super-system of nebulae, isolated in a larger world, with our own nebula somewhere near the centre. In this case the real distribution would thin out after all the proper corrections had been applied. Both explanations seem plausible, but neither is permitted by the observations. The apparent departures from uniformity in the World Picture are fully compensated by the minimum possible corrections for redshifts on any interpretation. No margin is left for a thinning out. The true distribution must either be uniform or increase outward, leaving the observer in a unique position. But the unwelcome supposition of a favoured location must be avoided at all costs….Such a favoured position, of course, is intolerable … Therefore, in order to restore homogeneity, and to escape the horror of a unique position, the departures from uniformity, which are introduced by the recession factors, must be compensated by the second term representing effects of spatial curvature. There seems to be no other escape.

If you aren’t quite sure if you read that correctly, you most certainly did. You see the proofs are starting to come out that astronomy was set up in a way to mask itself from being seen for what it truly is… a religion. Think for a second… Neil Degrasse Tyson has a phd in something he has NEVER seen and for a place he has NEVER been. Can you imagine a doctor who had never seen a human or been inside of a hospital? Would you take your medical advice from him?  I sure wouldn’t! The one thing it appears that Hubble did understand was math. Here is a quote where he says quite simply what math is capable of.

“Mathematicians deal with possible worlds, with an infinite number of logically consistent systems. Observers explore the one particular world we inhabit. Between the two stands the theorist. He studies possible worlds but only those which are compatible with the information furnished by observers. In other words, theory attempts to segregate the minimum number of possible worlds which must include the actual world we inhabit. Then the observer, with new factual information, attempts to reduce the list further. And so it goes, observation and theory advancing together toward the common goal of science, knowledge of the structure and observation of the universe.”

Nothing is very difficult for the mathematician who can deal with possible worlds and an infinite array of systems to play with. What is obvious is the hate for God in the previous quotes and the horror of having to be the center of creation. If you haven’t had a chance… you must see the movie The Principle.  Time is up for science all because they built their practice around faulty foundations and there is no coming back.  These are the two things that must be true if current cosmology is true.

1. Isotropy- the universe looks the same in any direction (and from any place)
2. Homogeneity- The make-up of the universe is more or less the same everywhere.

Together points 1 and 2 taken are called the Cosmological Principle and since it is a “principle”, this means that all cosmologists, astronomers, etc. will make this assumption. Wikipedia simplifies that Cosmological Principle “on a large scale the universe is pretty much the same everywhere”  This is of course nonsense because we all see galaxies flying away from us, so at some location they must look to someone else to be flying at them… right?  Right?  Wrong. All places must be identical and this example alone should make you understand the lies we have been buried with.  The evidence that the universe looks the same whichever direction we look in might seem to suggest there is something special about our place in the universe. In particular, it might seem that if we observe all other galaxies to be moving away from us, then we must be at the center. What did Edwin Hubble write when he first discovered redshifts moving away from the earth everywhere he looked? “Wow, look, we may be in the center?”  NO.  “Hey we appear to have a central position, but maybe there are alternate explanations?”  No… he did not say that either. He said, and I quote again…

“Such a condition would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous, in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central Earth…This hypothesis cannot be disproved, but it is unwelcome and would only be accepted as a last resort in order to save the phenomena. Therefore we disregard this possibility…. the unwelcome position of a favored location must be avoided at all costs…. such a favored position is intolerable…Therefore, in order to restore homogeneity, and to escape the horror of a unique position…must be compensated by spatial curvature. There seems to be no other escape.” -The Observational Approach to Cosmology

The assumption of uniformity has much to be said in its favor. If the distribution were not uniform, it would either increase with distance, or decrease. But we would not expect to find a distribution in which the density increases with distance, symmetrically in all directions. Such a condition would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous, in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central earth. The hypothesis cannot be disproved but it is unwelcome and would be accepted only as a last resort in order to save the phenomena. Therefore, we disregard this possibility and consider the alternative, namely, a distribution which thins out with distance.

Here is what you may have missed. The idea of the curvature of space is required to keep Earth out of a unique position. So, if you have ever wondered why they don’t try to prove the Earth to be spinning… is because to do so means that relativity is incorrect. If it is incorrect, then the curvature of space is incorrect and if it is incorrect then guess who stands at the center of the galaxy, and the entire universe in a very favored position….

YOU