Hi all,
When folks say "science has proven", what's actually happened is that recent telescopes have allowed a precise mapping of the distribution of galaxy redshifts. By assuming such redshifts are an indicator of distance, researchers adopt "a cosmology of redshifts". Surprisingly (given those famous limitations of revelation), the author of paper 12 states bluntly that using redshifts in this way will lead us up the garden path:
"Although your spectroscopic estimations of astronomic velocities are fairly reliable when applied to the starry realms belonging to your superuniverse and its associate superuniverses, such reckonings with reference to the realms of outer space are wholly unreliable. Spectral lines are displaced from the normal towards the violet by an approaching star; likewise these lines are displaced towards the red by a receding star. Many influences interpose to make it appear that the recessional velocity of the external universes increases at the rate of more than one hundred miles a second for every million light-years increase in distance. By this method of reckoning, subsequent to the perfection of more powerful telescopes, it will appear that these far-distant systems are in flight from this part of the universe at the unbelievable rate of more than thirty thousand miles a second. But this apparent speed of recession is not real; it results from numerous factors of error ... " (134.3) 12:4.14
PS: that 2011 Nobel prize was awarded for extrapolating the assumptions upon which redshift cosmology is based. This may turn out to be embarrassing, for all concerned 
Nigel
After that paragraph you quoted from Paper 12 is then this one:
"But the
greatest of all such distortions arises because the vast universes of outer space, in the realms next to the domains of the seven superuniverses,
seem to be revolving in a direction opposite to that of the grand universe. That is, these myriads of nebulae and their accompanying suns and spheres are at the present time revolving clockwise about the central creation. The seven superuniverses revolve about Paradise in a counterclockwise direction. It appears that the second outer universe of galaxies, like the seven superuniverses, revolves counterclockwise about Paradise."
I've always had trouble visualizing how this would lead to red shift in all observed galaxies like scientists see, and maybe someone can explain it if they don't mind. I would be grateful! If distortion is from rotation of a whole outer space layer that is surrounding us in the inner grand universe of 7 superuniverses and Havona, then from our vantage point in the inner grand universe, only half of these galaxies further out should be red shifted it seems, while the other half would appear to be blue shifted.
Imagine a large playground merry-go-round that is spinning round and round. Also imagine that there is a rotating ring built just beyond the edge which is separately rotating in the opposite direction of the merry-go-round.
If you were in the very middle of the merry-go-round (Isle of Paradise in grand universe), then nothing on either the merry-go-round itself or the counter-rotating disk would have an appearance of either moving away (red shift) or moving toward you (blue shift). They would just have sideways rotational motion from that point of view.
(There is also space respiration to consider, but the paragraph says the "
greatest of all such distortions" on the red shift effect is the counter rotational movement instead of respiration, so I think we can set that aside for just the moment in visualizing this.)
Now let's say we aren't in the middle of the merry-go-round but are sitting on the disc off-center. While it rotates, let's say our back is directly facing the center (the Isle of Paradise) and so we are directly looking outwards. In just this narrow line of sight, we will have an observation the same as if on Paradise -- both the edge of the merry-go-round disc and the counter-rotating ring beyond it would be moving sideways rotationally.
But if we would be looking off to one side, the rotating ring would have an appearance of still moving sideways but also to a certain amount
away from us (red shift!). So there it can be seen, a distortion causing apparent "speed of recession" that "is not real". But -- the difficulty I have is that by simply looking off to the
other side, the observation would be of the ring moving sideways also but instead a certain amount
toward us (blue shift). This should apply to observations in fully one half of the sky and be symmetrical to the other half of the sky showing red shift, and I'd be very curious to hear more from anyone (or a pointer to an article somewhere) that can clarify how the rotations described in the UB as the "greatest of all distortions" end up giving only a one-sided result of
only red shift galaxies instead of half the sky showing red shift and half showing blue.
Also interesting to note I've always thought, going back to respiration, I find it fascinating that the UB does describe where the central universe is, in Paper 15 section 3:
"Observation of the so-called Milky Way discloses the comparative increase in Orvonton stellar density when the heavens are viewed in one direction, while on either side the density diminishes; the number of stars and other spheres decreases away from the chief plane of our material superuniverse. When the angle of observation is propitious,
gazing through the main body of this realm of maxi mum density, you are looking toward the residential universe and the center of all things."
This seems to give us a very interesting place to point telescopes in the future -- the exact opposite place in the sky from the "center of all things". In looking this direction, "the greatest of all distortions" is exactly neutralized and there is no red shift or blue shift from that rotational effect. It will be interesting to find out if the measured Hubble constant drops off noticeably as should be the case.
Edited by Cal, 03 December 2012 - 02:04 PM.
