The insane but all-powerful ideology called "relativity" is starting to crumble. Thanks to the James Webb Telescope, the Big Bang madness is approaching its end: https://youtube.com/watch?v=bnRq80szNFg&t=309s. Soon Einsteinians will have to answer "the
embarrassing question":

"This paper investigates an alternative possibility: that the critics were right and that the success of Einstein's theory in overcoming them was due to its strengths as an ideology rather than as a science. The clock paradox illustrates how relativity
theory does indeed contain inconsistencies that make it scientifically problematic. These same inconsistencies, however, make the theory ideologically powerful...The gatekeepers of professional physics in the universities and research institutes are
disinclined to support or employ anyone who raises problems over the elementary inconsistencies of relativity. A winnowing out process has made it very difficult for critics of Einstein to achieve or maintain professional status. Relativists are then
able to use the argument of authority to discredit these critics. Were relativists to admit that Einstein may have made a series of elementary logical errors, they would be faced with the embarrassing question of why this had not been noticed earlier.
Under these circumstances the marginalisation of antirelativists, unjustified on scientific grounds, is eminently justifiable on grounds of realpolitik. Supporters of relativity theory have protected both the theory and their own reputations by shutting
their opponents out of professional discourse...The triumph of relativity theory represents the triumph of ideology not only in the profession of physics bur also in the philosophy of science." Peter Hayes, The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the
Clock Paradox https://tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02691720902741399

Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Space expansion allegedly confirmed by the Hubble redshift is radial with respect to the Earth's centre. But there must also be directly observable tangential expansion - celestial objects must move away from one another. No such movement has been
observed, so there is no expansion.

"Reber (1982) pointed out that Hubble himself was never an advocate for the expanding universe idea. Indeed, it was Hubble who personally thought that a model universe based on the tired-light hypothesis is more simple and less irrational than a model
universe based on an expanding spacetime geometry...any photon gradually loses its energy while traveling over a large distance in the vast space of the universe." Wilfred H. Sorrell, Misconceptions about the Hubble recession law, Astrophysics and Space
Science, Sep 2009 http://paperity.org/p/19837385/misconceptions-about-the-hubble-recession-law

Dec. 14, 1936: "Other causes for the redshift were suggested, such as cosmic dust or a change in the nature of light over great stretches of space. Two years ago Dr. Hubble 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 the redshift, that he now regards the expanding universe as more improbable than a non-expanding one." https:/
/content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,757145,00.html

Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

NASA: Panic in the Cosmos - Rewriting Cosmic History Beyond the Big Bang Theory https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xnpNwDS5tw

"The first results from the James Webb Space Telescope have hinted at galaxies so early and so massive that they are in tension with our understanding of the formation of structure in the universe. Various explanations have been proposed that may
alleviate this tension. But now a new study from the Cosmic Dawn Center suggests an effect which has never before been studied at such early epochs, indicating that the galaxies may be even more massive..."ΛCDM"—pronounced "Lambda-CDM"—is the
moniker given to the best model we have for describing the structure and evolution of our universe. The model is based upon one of the most well-tested theories in physics, the theory of general relativity, which describes how matter affects space, and
how space affects matter...We therefore do expect ΛCDM eventually to be expanded or replaced by a better theory." https://phys.org/news/2023-05-james-webb-massive-galaxies.html

Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)