A Beginner's View of Our Electric Universe - New

One value does indeed relate to the motion of the object, and the other much more significant value, relates to
the object's age. It so happens that both these values have traditionally been taken together as the single redshift
value from which all the motion characteristics of deep space objects have been determined. This has obviously
been an invalid step to take because the redshift component that relates to the object’s age, termed the ‘intrinsic’
component, should be subtracted from the total before any motion calculations can be performed. Nevertheless,
astro-scientists have continued to take no account of this, so an astounding situation exists. This is why the
results of their calculations cannot now be taken as proper evidence to support anything they have claimed to
be true to this point.
The further important but sad part of this is that the conclusions drawn from these calculations are still put
forward to support well-entrenched claims: the age of the universe at 13.7 billion years; its ongoing expansion
and the Big Bang’s moment of creation. These grand inferences now all appear to be wrong. I hope later to show
that the intrinsic redshift component, most often mentioned in association with quasars, is actually an inherent
property indicative of their recent formation. I will go on to suggest that the fantastic amount of redshifted
light energy they are judged to radiate is actually an indication of their age and that this has nothing to do with
distance or speed of motion.
It seems that a proper analysis of redshift would threaten the house of cards that has been built around it. This
is important to mention because it is yet another example that highlights the attitudes that have evolved to be
widespread throughout the astro-science establishment. What seems therefore to be the case is a situation where
exists an open door to questionable theories; the resulting environment also likely influencing the decisionmaking
hierarchy that determines the future direction of research and education. I would venture to suggest
that many good scientists see this going on and regret it deeply. I remind you here of the quote I included in my
introduction to this book; a statement made in 2006 by Wallace Thornhill, physicist and major advocate of the
Electric Universe model. The quote comes from his website article “A Real Theory of Everything” [3-2]
“We have to discard ‘modern’ physics and return to classical physics of a century ago. This, perhaps, is the
greatest hurdle – to discard our training and prejudices and to approach the problem with a beginner’s mind.”
This is a powerful statement that has implications beyond astro-science. It takes courage to say something like
this, for it seems that if you do, you are kissing goodbye to any hope for a successful and comfortable career
in the mainstream. Nevertheless, various honourable people have done just this; they have acted on firmly held
convictions and I think, therefore, deserve our respect.
40 | We are waiting for answers to these questions