Quasars disprove Relativity, the Big Bang; and support geocentricity and the 'axis of evil' (oh no).
Quasars (and gamma rays) completely eviscerate Einstein's cult and the Big Bang religion. This is why they are rarely discussed or taught.
“...the quasars in the 57 groups...are arranged on 57 spherical shells with the Earth as the center. The cosmological interpretation of the redshift in the spectra of quasars leads to yet another paradoxical result: namely, that the Earth is the center of the universe.”
(Y.P. Varshni, astronomer, in, The Red Shift Hypothesis for Quasars: Is the Earth the Center of the Universe?” Astrophysics and Space Science, 43: (1), (1976), p. 3)
Quasars have always been a problem for the Big Bang theology. As Varshni stated, quasar phenomena support geocentricity. Few know about Varshni or quasar data. Gamma rays also present the same problem for the Bangers. This planet sits in a protective void. I am sure you were taught this at ‘school’.
Points of light and problems
In the 1960s radio telescopes were deployed and found traces of radio wave transmission from outside our solar system. Optical telescopes were then built and pointed in the direction of these radio waves. The optical scopes found faint points of light, which were named ‘quasi-stellar radio sources’, or ‘quasars’. It was a fascinating discovery.
Quasars: quasar, an astronomical object of very high luminosity found on opposite sides of a parent galaxy. They are proven to be young and they could be formed from ejected material from a White Hole.
Since the 1930s, the discredited and incorrect ‘redshift’ recessionary theory has held sway. Quasars are yet another disprove of ‘redshift’. The narrative is that redshift is understood as representing a recessional velocity, so these ‘quasars’ or sources of light and radio emissions, would have to be moving away from Earth at tremendous speeds, some supposedly between 15% and 95% of the speed of light.
If quasars were moving away from us at anything resembling the wrong ‘invariance of light speed’, they should be near the outer edge of the universe. This means that if we are able to see their light, they must be putting out tremendous amounts of energy, starting at about a thousand times the luminosity of a galaxy. Not only that, but since any given quasar will vary in brightness, this means that the lower ebb of the luminosity translated into the quasar being an amazingly small object.
I am sure you were taught this during your ‘education’.
Distribution of Phenomena
In the 1970s Indian astronomer Y.P. Varshni did extensive research on quasars. By 1975 he had catalogued some 384 quasars, with a supposed ‘redshift’ (recessionary velocity) of 0.2 to 3.53. He found these orbs of light, rather surprisingly, to be organized into 57 separate groups of concentric spheres around the Earth. He made the shattering, shocking conclusion:
“The Earth is indeed the center of the Universe. The arrangement of quasars on certain spherical shells is only with respect to the Earth. These shells would disappear if viewed from another galaxy or quasar. This means that the cosmological principle will have to go. Also it implies that a coordinate system fixed to the Earth will be a preferred frame of reference in the Universe. Consequently, both the Special and General Theory of Relativity must be abandoned for cosmological purposes.” (Astrophysics and Space Science, 43: (1) (1976), p. 8)
Varshni calculated the odds against such an arrangement and found using the multiplicative law that the probability of these 57 sets of coincidences occurring in this system of 384 quasars was roughly 3 × 10-85. In common terms we take a 3 and add 85 zeroes before the 3 to get the percentage chance of this occurring, which gives us:
.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000003 or about as close to 0% as you are going to get. Big Bangers would say this rounding error impossibility of course proves their theology! They will undoubtedly trot out a tortured, mutilated carcass of a math equation to justify the claim that the disproof is actually a proof and something they have known all along! Cue the Globaloneywarming cult sneer to explain away inconvenient realities, ‘the models are performing exactly as predicted’.
Varshni’s conclusion caused much wailing, grinding of teeth, rending of pharisaic tunics and pulling of hair.
Soon after Varshni’s work, other astronomers found over 20,000 quasars and none of them altered Varshni’s original results. ‘The Science’ calls it the ‘quasar distribution problem’. It is only a problem if you believe in endless age and expansionary Copernicanism, premised on the fraud of Relativity.
Varshni’s astounding evidence has also been confirmed by other astrophysicists, with even more extensive studies. A Ukrainian team of N. A. Zhuck, V. V. Moroz, A. A. Varaksin, who examined 23,760 quasars, confirmed the following:
“Regularity in quasar allocation…revealing that the quasars are grouped in thin walls of meshes [with] quasars spatial distribution in spherical and Cartesian coordinates… quasars have averages of distribution, root-mean-square diversion and correlation factors, typical for uniform distribution of random quantities; in smaller gauges the quasars are grouped in thin walls of meshes…. It is impossible to term these results, and the results of other similar investigations, as ordinary accidental coincidence. Obviously we have the facts confirming that the quasars are distributed uniformly in the universe…”(“Quasars and the Large Scale Structure of the Universe,” N. A. Zhuck, V. V. Moroz, A. A. Varaksin, Spacetime and Substance, International Physical Journal, Ukraine, Vol. 2, No. 5 (10) 2001, p. 193, 196)
I am sure they teach the above in ‘education’ and in the fake science news.
The real issue is that these quasars are distributed around the Earth with such specific periodicity, which indicates that the Earth is situated in a ‘quasar-free hole’. No other such holes exist anywhere in the universe.
Even if I was to dispute Varshni’s findings by positing an alternative explanation for red-shift (e.g., the belief that red-shift does not measure distance, when Hubble and ‘The Science’ froth and rage that is all about distance), the 57 concentric groupings of quasars will nonetheless appear when put in terms of a ‘phase space’ which, in astrophysics, is a multidimensional view of the sky utilizing Cartesian dimensions coupled with time and momentum to plot positions on a map. In other words, there is no way around the phenomena and what it is telling us.
Power, Energy
The distribution and the symmetrical, rather obvious design and arrangement of quasars is a serious issue – rarely discussed. But that is not the only important disproof of the Big Bang when we discuss quasars. We have posted on ‘gamma ray bursts’ which eradicate the prevailing cosmological principle of Big Banging, and like gamma rays, quasars pose the same ‘power’ dilemma.
If quasars are at the distances from this planet that ‘The Science’ maintains, it would necessitate the emission of simply inconceivable quantities of energy to match their stellar luminosity. In fact, each quasar would need to emit at minimum, some 10,000 times the combined energy of our own galaxy. There is no possibility this can be valid and there are no physical laws which can account for such a power projection.
Further, in most astronomical models, they have quasars positioned at such a vast distance from this planet, that under their ‘acceleration’ hypothesis, the quasars are moving away from the Earth at greater than light speed. Keep in mind the invariance of light speed (186.000 miles/sec) is wrong. But if we just accept that dogma we can see that quasars refute Einstein’s theory.
The only way the Bangers can explain this is to perform magical maths and claim that as the quasar moves it ‘creates space’, or that Einstein’s limitations only apply to the speed of ‘information’ and not to the speed of light. In any case, light speed invariance is demolished and with it, Relativity. There is no way out for the Big Bangers.
As one Relativist admitted:
“When quasars were first discovered in the nineteen-sixties, they confronted astronomers and astrophysicists with an acute dilemma: If their enormous redshifts truly represented distance, nothing known in physics could explain their source of energy. Indeed, the very existence of such a compact but colossal source of energy seemed for a time to challenge the known body of physical principles, and a variety of fanciful notions like the “white hole” (portal of energy between multi-verses) hypothesis were seriously considered in some quarters.” (Mosaic, 9:18-27, May-June 1978).
Big Bust
The power and energy issues cannot be ignored. But it gets worse. If some entirely unknown physical mechanism could mimic the Doppler displacement of the emission lines of a receding object, then the whole concept of an expanding universe would be thrown into question; the Hubble scale of cosmic distances, an essential tool for both astronomers and cosmologists, would have to be discarded (Mosaic, 9:18-27, May-June 1978).
As everyone should know but few do, ‘redshifting’ has nothing to do with recessionary velocity, but is simply a light spectrum, emission and frequency issue.
Big Bang theology rests on Relativity and Hubble’s theory of an expanding universe. Both are wrong. Quasar evidence – to name just one variable – indicates a reasonably static ‘incontrovertible’ universe, which is diametrically the opposite of what ‘The Science’ has marketed for over 100 years.
Pace quasar formation and power, the universe cannot be a dynamic, dilating, multi-variable speed model, emanating from a large ‘bang’ some 13.7 billion years ago. The Big Bang model is old news and needs to be rubbished.
As we have discussed in many posts, the Big Bang is premised on:
the non-steady solutions of Einsteinian equations which are tautological if not absurd,
supported by the Soviet geophysicist and mathematician Friedmann’s forced equations built at the beginning of the 1920s,
this admixture was advanced by the American physicist Gamov with his various Big Bang theories developed from the 1940s.
Old news indeed. So here we are, saddled with a theory that is 100 years old. Yet ‘the science’ cult chatters about its ‘logical positivism’ and ‘rationality’. Cults don’t do science.
In his 2 books, heretic astronomer Halton Arp provided ample evidence that the Big Bang interpretation of redshift (i.e., redshift = distance) is fallacious (Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies, 1987; Seeing Red: Redshifts, Cosmology and Academic Science 1998). Among his many proofs, Arp begins with the observational evidence from Burbidge and Karlsson:
“In 1967 Geoffrey and Margaret Burbidge pointed out the existence of some redshifts in quasars which seem to be preferred (particularly z = 1.95). In 1971 K. G. Karlsson showed that these, and later observed redshifts, obeyed the mathematical formula (1 + z2)/(1 + z1) = 1.23 (where z2 is next higher redshift from z1). This gives the observed quasar redshift periodicities of: z = 0.061, 0.30, 0.60, 0.91, 1.41, 1.96. In my opinion this is one of the truly great discoveries in cosmic physics…. Many investigations confirmed the accuracy of this periodicity.”
What Arp and many others found (Depaquit et al, 1984, Bi, Zhu), is that quasars have a preferred axis, the same as found for radio wavelengths and micro wavelengths or the cosmic background radiation. A team studying the orientation of quasars confirmed this fact:
(D. Hutsemekers, et al., in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 332, 410 (1998); 367, 381 (2001); 441, 915 (2005)); “Observing very distant quasars, the authors of have found evidence … these vectors tend to identify an axis in the sky which closely align with the direction of the cosmological dipole. The use of slightly different statistics gives rise to consistent results, and in particular yields the same preferred axis.
What is important for us is that this fact seems to not be related to the local environment we are immersed in (one may indeed think it arises from an incorrect galactic foreground subtraction), and this is corroborated by the result being redshift-dependent: were the observed polarisations contaminated by galactic dust they would all be so irrespective of their redshift. Moreover, the rotation fits linearly to redshift at the rate of 30° per Gpc.” (The P-Odd Universe, Dark Energy and QCD,” Federico R. Urban and Ariel R. Zhitnitsky, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, July 13, 2011, p. 2)
This axis is called ‘the axis of evil’ because it leads to geocentricity.
This identifiable preferred axis, the cosmological dipole, means that the quasars all point all in the same direction, to the Sun-Earth ecliptic or equinox. In other words, quasar distribution is centered around the Earth, just as Varshni had discovered in the 1970s.
Bottom Line
Varshni’s data has been confirmed every year since 1975. The quasars behave as he stated. They are aligned toward the Earth. They cannot be at the edge of the universe ‘billions of miles’ away. Their energy and power distribution eviscerate Relativity and Hubble’s theorems.
Figure 1: Longo, 2012 paper showing what Varshni had previously discovered.
Quasars provide our farthest-reaching view of the Universe. The Sloan Survey now contains over 100,000 quasar candidates. Sloan and other data points reveal an angular distribution of quasar magnitudes which shows a surprising intensity enhancement with a ‘bulls eye’ pattern toward our ecliptic (α, δ) ~ (195°, 0°) for all wavelengths from UV through infrared. The angular pattern and size of the enhancement is very similar for all wave lengths, which is inconsistent with a Doppler shift due to a large, peculiar velocity. They are pointing at us.
Quasars do not conform to any of the assumptions and predictions of Relativity, Hubble or the Big Bang. Quasars call into question Copernicanism, endless ages, endless expansion and the nature of light speed.
But I am sure all of this is taught in ‘education’ and is eagerly debated without ad hominins and censorship, within the hallowed confines of the ‘science’ media and university halls. Or maybe not. Better to ignore inconvenient facts and realities in the pursuit of philosophy parading as ‘science’.
All hail.
We do not know what they are. We do not know where they are. We do not know how far they are from us or how big they are. But we do that they all point to us. Nobody taught us that at school.
A great piece. I had no idea about this issue with Quasars. The delusion is so massive it's almost beyond imagination. It's going to be a heck of a job to convince most people that their conception of space is so out of whack.