Quasars: Why Einstein Was Wrong (The Electric Universe)


Supporting papers

If you’ve enjoyed this video and wish to know more about this emerging paradigm or wish to become personally involved, please consider attending the upcoming Electric Universe Conference 2013:

The Tipping Point
Albuquerque, New Mexico; January 3-6, 2013

For further information or to register please visit the conference page here

  • Ed Dawson

    I concur. I concluded that Edwin Hubble was wrong 22 years ago. My tentative theory was that supposedly empty space was/is actually a slightly resistive medium; given the presence of fields of various sorts (including gravity), this is not an unwarranted assumption. Then what would red shift be? My conclusion is that since the velocity of photons seems to be a constant in the medium of space, then the resistive medium would have to make photons lose energy in a different manner than slowing its velocity. Then it came to me: it would have to lose wavelength, as a photon lost energy its wavelength would become longer. There’s your red shift. I would also posit that the resistance of the medium might vary from one region to another of intergalactic space, due to variance in field strengths. In any case, this would indicate that the universe is not expanding; and that red shift is merely a rough indication of distance. I say rough because of variance in the resistance of the medium. As for the overall structure of the universe, allow me to suggest that what we observe in our solar system, and in our own galaxy applies: the observable streams of galaxy clusters are probably rotating around a common center of gravity somewhere. Cheers! 🙂
    Ed Dawson