Cosmo-Icono-clash

[Jones Beene]

"Iconoclastic" - Adj. Characterized by attack on the established belief structure or the institutions which uphold it.   How can a nearby spiral galaxy contain a quasar whose light spectrum indicates that it is billions of light years away?   It cannot if the normal, and almost universally held, assumptions on which our "mainstream cosmological paradigm" have based for the past 50 years - are correct.   But it can and they are not.   One of many such stories: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050111115201.htm   Some few observers (outside the mainstream) might consider this finding to make a 'prima facie case' that red-shift is NOT an accurate measure of distance, and that there is a very strong gravitational component to redshift, and by inference that *everything*... well, if that is so great an exaggeration lets say: __almost everything which science now assumes about the age and dynamics of our universe is incorrect__   that the universe may NOT be expanding at all, and certainly not in an inflationary manner, and furthermore, that there is no necessity for a "big bang" at all, from a re-evaluation of the evidence.    A sequential succession of "little bangs" fits the evidence better (in size, each would be the extent of our "Virgo supercluster," for instance, which was our particular "little bang").   Is the preceding analysis (of the "#1 neglected science news story of the past decade") is the iconoclastic conclusion just the raving hyperbole of a professional iconoclast? ... perhaps, but if it were not so shocking... especially to the career status of so-called experts, maybe it would be considered an understatement, as much more could be made of this finding (including a "cover-up"), because....   We have actually known details about several of these red-shift "anomalies" for at least 20 years, maybe longer, but they have been consistently pushed aside by the professional mainstream of cosmology as something akin to "measurement error" (sound familiar, vortexians?). This is because the implications of them being accurate are not just "unsettling," they are absolutely devastating to the majority viewpoint. Now that firm and undeniable proof is beginning to accumulate, to the stage that it can no longer be censored and held in abeyance, and it is starting to leak-out around the seams.... when will the dam break?   In the meantime, readers of vortex will probably be among the few on the fringes of science who really appreciate the impact of this coming "icononclash"... as a similar situation is also ongoing in the alternative fields which they follow most intently. Note to mention past high level cover-ups.   Jones   P.S. Wouldn't it be nice if both levels of "icononclashes" were to transpire and resolve themselves simultaneously against the mainstream ... i.e. the macro and the micro both overturning prior "laws"...   What could be going here in the "big picture" that so much iconoclasm is in the offing in so many different areas,?   ... ahem... can you spell "quickening"... ("Aquarians" from the late 60s can, but they got their timing off by two-score, apparently)   "quickening" noun: 1) the first motion of a fetus in the uterus felt by the mother near the middle of the period of gestation  2) the process of showing signs of life or vigor ; 3) the act of accelerating; increasing speed or opening of new horizons.   NOTE to John Fields... is it time to upgrade (downgrade?) your "big bang" simulator to focus on "little bangs" ... <G>