Oh dear something seems to be coming to light to confirm another suspicion I had over the years.
I was never quite happy with the official lines of distances in the universe, I touched upon recently, nor the age or the size of the universe. Once again its one of those things where they wont have it .. their egos tell them they are eight and they and their hoards would laugh at you for questioning anything.
Except it never .. I just never felt quite comfortable with it. At first glance the numbers did not quite make sense. Now a perfect example has popped up.
But first remember two things before I explain what I just heard .. just two ..
Universe is 13.8 billion years old
Sun is 4 Billion years old
Even just thinking that the Sun was the third the age of the entire universe seemed somewhat .. off?
Now they have discovered a new supermassive black hole the centre of a galaxy that is the largest, brightest and hungriest .. it has already shocked scientists, yeeaaah happening a lot, but how about these facts .. or are they ..
12 Billion times the Mass of the Sun
How long does that take to accumulate all that mass
Centre of a Galaxy of Stars
Our Sun is 4 billion years old
12.9 Billion years old meaning
This is what it looked like 12.9 Billion Years ago
800 Million Years after the 'Big Bang'
But wait a minute how can this be?
A supermassive black hole and the biggest and brightest we have ever seen at the centre of an entire galaxy and every single object in this galaxy is less than a quarter of the age of our humble Sun?
He says 'we don't really know' but its amazing how much they do not immediately realise about their own statements too, no?
Here we go again with what they stated was confirmed science and I always had issues with their claims about the Hubble Constant is there way of explaining how the Universe is expanding .. I have expressed my issues for years .. light travelling over vast distances of often for millions or billions of years ..
.. well first it was 50km per second before it changed to 67km per second .. only now a team has discovered that at closer distances its expanding at 73km per second?
So .. we got it wrong? Is it changing its expansion rate over time? Are different part of the universe expanding at different rates for some unknown reason? Is the universe shaped differently to what they have been stating? In which case the age of the universe is also not what they stated it was either.
When you talking of billions of light years which means billions of years and I have stated this before .. you have got no way of knowing what effects this has. Its not possible to test some things.
This is something I really never expected to hear in all honesty.
This is in the back of several things .. needing to work out how to protect humans from radiation beyond the Van Allen Belts, announcing that we have been in a period of increased meteors and admitting that they were not aware of this before and nor how they were judging this?
Known for a while they had other things wrong .. the Sun being behind climate change for a start and the torsional oscillations of the Sun, Sunspot numbers and altering peaks which many believe works via cycles over specific periods of time. Very large periods of time.
So the age of the universe that they have insisted was accurate is now out of the window and heaven only knows when it will ever come back.
I have lost track of the number of times I have heard "We can measure this with absolute/relative accuracy" only for months or years later they go and realise they screwed up.
Here is something to make you think .. we assume everything using measurements of a photon of light but .. it might seem to be unchanging to us but how do you know this different over ..
Thousands of light years
Millions of light years and therefore millions of years
Billions of light years and therefore years
We have only been measuring for hundreds of years
I had wondered what happens to light over millions or billions of years .. maybe its possible that the waves that make up light ever so slightly change over vast amounts of time?
Now think of the distances .. how do you know that light has not .. passed though something over all that distance we are unable to detect?
They insisted that CO2 was the reason for climate change and I knew it was not CO2 and was a natural process and simply looking at the evolution and locations of small slow moving animals showed you that the warming had been going on a God damn long time before the industrial revolution started.
Three decades on and two decades on from seeing my proof and trying to explain to people and posting it on this very blog .. and ..
None of their predictions have really come to light .. some have been the exact opposite to what they claim and we have had to record breaking winters and possibly three and we know we are going to break more records in the next two to three years.
Science is about theory .. or guessing .. and hoping you prove that your right.
But today its either about egos "Oh yeah this is definitely how it is" or getting on TV "Were all going to boil and be under water in ten years .. in ten years .. in another ten years"
Hack scientists or sensationalist scientists chasing fame or money is how I see it today and it has gradually deteriorated over time.
There are many names that I do admire though .. but mainly the big ones. Carl Sagan came across as someone who was genuinely interested, passionate and wanted to know the truth and the facts. Feynman, Schroedinger, Kaku and Greene are among others.
News media science correspondents are not .. and the absolute trash they often write is enough to make my eyes water.
Should read universe older than THEY previously thought.
I never bought into that theory and thought they were way off base with that one.
I also thought they were way of base with the previous given maximum amounts on the mass of stars.
Now we have those naive theories out the way it is another removal, well two actually, of obstacles in our pursuit of the answers to life, the universe and everything.
Also let us not be st quick to accept theories in future based on the ones that SOUND like they make the most sense regardless if who our is who makes them.
I have no idea who stated the she if the universe our the maximum mass limits possible on stars, please God I hope it was not Dr Carl Sagan, lol. Also there was nothing wrong with these theories and only really in the speed to accept them.
If I had, or ever do in future, written a book you would NEVER have had me writing these theories as facts as I have in many books I have read and many subjects. I have found over the years it is all golgi easy to use the words if others in part our as a whole, to make yourself look and seen to understand them as will as quantify them.
I have on occasion over the years been scorned by fellow TV viewers for disagreeing with scientists and narrators in scientific documentaries.
Over time they that achieved me only then saw my own theories and beliefs stated as being the case whether it be months or even years later.
Indeed my relationship before last was with an intelligent career girl who had elocution lessons but she could not handle the fact that I was highly knowledgeable in the fields I am and even used to attack me on occasions. Despite her being more successful than I was career wise and owned a house.
Mt life is littered with stories like that of envy of new where there was no realistic cause to have any. Also I find it odd that to have that much hatred and jealousy if people that are intelligent but there would be no technology, heat and light without them.
