Transcript Slide 1

Big Bang Cosmology Believed:
 The Expansion was:
 Isotropic = having the same properties in all directions
 Homogeneous = uniform distribution of all properties
 This eliminates a center to the universe, since
everything is the same wherever you are.
First Challenge to Homogeneity
Hubble’s Horror
“…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, 1937
Spatial Curvature = Homogeneity
Expanding Universe
1989 COBE Probe Finds Anistropy
and Inhomogeneity in CMB
2001 Wilkinson Microwave
Anisotropy Probe (WMAP)
COBE = WMAP
Tegmark’s Original WMAP Image:
Anisotropic Heat Distribution
Hubble’s Galactic Isotropy Problem
Compounded by CMB Anisotropy Problem
CMB Dipole Intersected by Ecliptic Plane
Quad- & Octupole Aligned with Earth’s Ecliptic;
Intersects Dipole at Earth’s Equinoxes
Lawrence Krauss’ Admission on the
CMB’s Ecliptic Alignment
 “But when you look at CMB map, you also see that the structure
that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the
plane of the earth around the sun. Is this Copernicus coming
back to haunt us? That's crazy. We’re looking out at the whole
universe. There’s no way there should be a correlation of
structure with our motion of the earth around the sun — the
plane of the earth around the sun — the ecliptic. That would say
we are truly the center of the universe….The new results are
either telling us that all of science is wrong and we're the center
of the universe, or maybe the data is simply incorrect, or maybe
it’s telling us there’s something weird about the microwave
background results and that maybe, maybe there's something
wrong with our theories on the larger scales.”
 “The Energy of Empty Space is Not Zero,” 2006
Leading Cosmologists Admit EarthCentered CMB Axis (2004)
“The correlation of the normals [vectors] with the
ecliptic poles suggest an unknown source or sink of
CMB radiation ….Physical correlation of the CMB
with the equinoxes is difficult to imagine, since the
WMAP satellite has no knowledge of the inclination
of the Earth’s spin axis.”
Dominik J. Schwarz, Glenn D. Starkman, Dragan Huterer and Craig J.
Copi, “Is the Low-l Microwave Background Cosmic?” Physical Review
Letters, November 26, 2004, pp. 221301-1 to 4
2010 Restudy of the Issue:
Galactocentrism Eliminated
…there is no obvious way to explain the observed
correlations….Our studies indicate that the observed
alignments are with the ecliptic plane, with the
equinox or with the CMB dipole, and not with the
Galactic plane: the alignments of the quadrupole and
octopole planes with the equinox/ecliptic/dipole
directions are much more significant than those for
the Galactic plane.
“Large-angle anomalies in the CMB,” Craig J. Copi, Dragan Huterer,
Dominik J. Schwarz, and Glenn D. Starkman, November 12, 2010,
arXiv:1004.5602v2.
A Final 2012 Paper
“Looking into this anomaly more deeply we
will find that it remains robust through all
seven years of published WMAP data….
The best one can say is that these full-sky
solar-system correlations remain
unexplained.”
“The Oddly Quiet Universe: How the CMB Challenges Cosmology’s
Standard Model,” Glenn D. Starkman, Craig J. Copi, Dragan
Huterer, Dominik Schwarz, January 12, 2012, acXiv:1201.2459v1.
CMB Does not Match Big Bang
“…and furthermore that it is very difficult to
explain within the context of the canonical
Inflationary Lambda Cold Dark Matter of
cosmology [i.e., the Big Bang]….Our first
observation is that none of those data curves
look like the [LCDM] theory curve.”
“The Oddly Quiet Universe: How the CMB Challenges Cosmology’s
Standard Model,” Glenn D. Starkman, Craig J. Copi, Dragan Huterer,
Dominik Schwarz, January 12, 2012, acXiv:1201.2459v1.
2004 Paper by Land & Magueijo
Double arrow at 7:00 o’clock to 1:00 o’clock is the Axis of Evil and the CMB Dipole, with
upper arrow pointing to Virgo-Leo and about 23.5 degrees off center.
Double arrow at 10:00 o’clock to 4:00 o’clock is Asymmetric Axis aligned with the SunEarth ecliptic and is formed by the CMB quadrupole and octupole
The Hair on Your Neck
“The discovery that the CMB is
cosmically aligned to the Earth
should make the hair on the back of
your neck stand up.”
Lawrence Vescera, “The Discovery that Dare Not Speak its
Name,” November 9, 2007,
2005 Sloan Digital Sky Survey
Concentric Galaxies Disappear Unless Observed
from Within 0.3% of the Center of the Universe
“the probability of our galaxy being so
close to the centre of the cosmos by
accident is less than one out of a trillion”
“Our galaxy is the centre of the universe, ‘quantized’ redshifts
show,” D. Russell Humphreys, Journal of Creation 16(2):95–104,
August 2002.
2010 paper by Hirano and Komiya
“A widespread idea in cosmology is that the universe is homogeneous
and isotropic above a certain scale. This hypothesis, usually called the
cosmological principle…is thought to be a generalization of the
Copernican principle that “the Earth is not in a central, specially favored
position.”
“However, according to a Fourier analysis by Hartnett & Hirano, the
galaxy number count N from redshift z data (N – z relation) indicates
that galaxies have pre- ferred periodic redshift spacings of ∆z = 0.0102,
0.0246, and 0.0448 in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), with very
similar results from the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey (2dF GRS). These
redshift spacings have been confirmed by mass density fluctuations,
the power spectrum P(z), and Npairs calculations.”
2011 study of the SDSS DR7 data by
Russian team
 “The radial density method indicates inhomogeneities
in the spatial distribution of galaxies with a scale
length of 200 Mpc/h and a density contrast of two,
confirming the recently established violation of
statistical homogeneity in deep samples of SDSS
galaxies.”
 “The Non-Uniform Distribution of Galaxies from Daa of the SDSS DR7
Survey,” A. O. Verevkin, et al., Sobolev Astronomical Institute, St.
Petersburg University, Russia, Astronomy Reports (2011) Vol. 55, No. 4, p.
340.
Periodic Distribution of Quasars
Y. P. Varshni on Quasar Distribution
 “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.”
 “The Red Shift Hypothesis for Quasars: Is the Earth the Center of the
Universe?” Astrophysics and Space Science, 43: (1), (1976), p. 3.
Periodic Gamma Ray Bursts
Jonathan Katz on Gamma Rays
 “The uniform distribution of burst arrival directions tells us
that the distribution of gamma-ray-burst sources in space
is a sphere or spherical shell, with us at the center. But
Copernicus taught us that we are not in a special preferred
position in the universe; Earth is not at the center of the
solar system, the Sun is not at the center of the galaxy, and
so forth.”
 Jonathan Katz, The Biggest Bangs:The Mystery of Gamma-
Ray Bursts, The Most Violent Explosions in the Universe,
2002, pp. 90-91.
Other Earth-Centered
Celestial Bodies
 BL Lacertae
 X-Ray Bursts
 Spectroscopic Binaries
 Globular Clusters
Now for the “Z” Axis
Michelson-Morley Revisited:
Einstein Admits STR Based on MMX
 “You, my honored Dr. Michelson, began with this work when I was only
a little youngster, hardly three feet high. It was you who led the
physicists into new paths, and through your marvelous experimental
work paved the way for the development of the Theory of Relativity.
You uncovered an insidious defect in the ether theory of light, as it then
existed, and stimulated the ideas of H. A. Lorentz and Fitzgerald, out
of which the Special Theory of Relativity developed. Without your
work this theory would today be scarcely more than an interesting
speculation; it was your verifications which first set the theory on a real
basis.”
 Bernard Jaffe, Michelson and the Speed of Light, 1960, pp. 167-168.
Einstein’s 1923 Kyoto Speech
 “Soon I came to the conclusion that our idea about the
motion of the Earth with respect to the ether is
incorrect, if we admit Michelson’s null result as a fact.
This was the first path which led me to the special
theory of relativity. Since then I have come to believe
that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any
optical experiment, though the Earth is revolving
around the sun.”
 Yoshimasa A. Ono, Physics Today, 35 (8), 45 (1982).
Why Was Michelson-Morley
So Important?
 Einstein’s biographer, Ronald W. Clark:
 “In the United States Albert Michelson and Edward Morley
had performed an experiment which confronted scientists
with an appalling choice. Designed to show the existence of
the ether…it had yielded a null result, leaving science with
the alternatives of tossing aside the key which had helped
to explain the phenomena of electricity, magnetism, and
light or of deciding that the earth was not in fact moving at
all.”
 Einstein: The Life and Times, p. 57.
Non-Moving Earth Was “Unthinkable”
 “The problem which now faced science was
considerable. For there seemed to be only three
alternatives. The first was that the Earth was standing
still, which meant scuttling the whole Copernican
theory and was unthinkable.”
 Einstein: The Life and Times, pp. 109-110.
What Was Expected from MMX
Actual Results from MMX
“Less Than One-Sixth of Earth’s Velocity”
 “The experiments on relative motion of earth and ether
have been completed and the result is decidedly negative.
The expected deviation of the interference fringes from the
zero should have been 0.40 of a fringe – the maximum
displacement was 0.02 and the average much less than 0.01
– and then not in the right place. As displacement is
proportional to squares of the relative velocities it follows
that if the ether does slip past [the Earth] the relative
velocity is less than one sixth of the Earth’s velocity.”
 Letter dated August 17, 1887, from the Rayleigh Archives, cited in Dorothy
M. Livingston, The Master of Light: A Biography of Albert A. Michelson,
1973, p. 130.
Lorentz-Fitzgerald Length
Contraction to the Rescue
Expected Results
Fixed Results
Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity
Based on False Assumption
 Instead of saying that MMX did not detect the Earth
moving through ether, Einstein claimed that MMX did
not detect ether.
 He then made space a vacuum, dilated time and
increased mass by the Lorentz factor of
√1 – v²/c².
Shortening of Length and Time is made a
Principle of Nature Rather than Ether
Expected Results
Fixed Results
The bare fact is, MMX did
measure an ether drift. It just
didn’t measure a drift
commensurate with an Earth
moving around the sun at
30kms, but a movement of
about 5km/sec.
In fact, All Experimenters
Found Ether of about 2-10km/sec
 Morley-Miller in 1903-1905
 Rayleigh, 1902
 D. B. Brace, 1904
 Trouton-Noble, 1903,
 Georges Sagnac 1913,
 Kennedy-Thorndike, 1927
 Michelson-Pease-Pearson, 1926-1929
 Michelson-Gale, 1925
 Dayton Miller, 1905 to 1925.
1925 Michelson-Gale Most Significant
 “The observed displacement of the fringes was found
to be 0.230 ± .005, agreeing with the computed value
0.236 ± .002 within the limits of experimental error….
All we can deduce from this experiment is that the
earth rotates on its axis.”
 Fact: Michelson-Gale found a diurnal rotation
within 98% of 24 hours.
Proper Conclusion Must Be…
 Since Heliocentrism requires both the earth to revolve
around the sun and rotate on an axis, but empirical
evidence shows only a rotation, Heliocentrism is
apparently falsified.
 The better solution is: the ether rotates around a non-
moving Earth. The universe, filled with either, rotates
around the Earth, giving Michelson-Gale a perfect
result and Michelson-Morley a negative result.
A “Relative” Irony
 Einstein invented Special Relativity to escape the
evidence from Michelson-Morley that pointed to a
non-moving Earth.
 He then had to invent General Relativity due to the
inadequacy of Special Relativity,
 General Relativity supports the viability of
geocentrism.
Einstein’s GTR Agrees with Geocentrism
 “Let K [the universe] be a Galilean-Newtonian coordinate
system [a system of three dimensions extending to the edge
of the universe], and let K [the Earth] be a coordinate
system rotating uniformly relative to K [the universe]. Then
centrifugal forces would be in effect for masses at rest in
the K coordinate system [the Earth], while no such forces
would be present for objects at rest in K [the universe].
Already Newton viewed this as proof that the rotation of K
[the Earth] had to be considered as “absolute,” and that K
[the Earth] could not then be treated as the “resting” frame
of K [the universe]. Yet, as E. Mach has shown, this
argument is not sound. One need not view the existence of
such centrifugal forces as originating from the motion of K
[the Earth]; one could just as well account for them as
resulting from the average rotational effect of distant,
detectable masses as evidenced in the vicinity of K [the
Earth], whereby K [the Earth] is treated as being at rest.”
Thus Einstein Said…
 “The struggle, so violent in the early days of science,
between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would
then be quite meaningless. Either CS [coordinate
system] could be used with equal justification. The
two sentences: “the sun is at rest and the Earth moves,”
or “the sun moves and the Earth is at rest,” would
simply mean two different conventions concerning two
different CS.”
G. J. Whitrow on MMX
 “It is both amusing and instructive to speculate on
what might have happened if [the Michelson-Morley]
experiment could have been performed in the
sixteenth or seventeenth centuries when men were
debating the rival merits of the Copernican and
Ptolemaic systems. The result would surely have been
interpreted as conclusive evidence for the immobility
of the Earth, and therefore as a triumphant vindication
of the Ptolemaic system and irrefutable falsification of
the Copernican hypothesis.”
 G. J Whitrow, The Structure and Evolution of the Universe, 1954, p. 79
Disproof of the “Proofs”
for Heliocentrism
Newton’s Laws and the Center of Mass
Heliocentric View
Geocentric View
Stellar Parallax
Stellar Parallax Slide 2
Stellar Parallax Slide 3
Stellar Aberration
Heliocentric Explanation
Geocentric Explanation
Retrograde Motion of Mars
Heliocentric
Geocentric
Retrograde of Mars Slide 2
Heliocentric
Geocentric
Foucault Pendulum
Geocentric Seasons
Winter
Summer