http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ mirrored file
For complete access to all the files of this collection
	see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php 
==========================================================

Sep 18**, 2007*
Hoyle's Conclusion

*Three challenges for cosmology.*

Hoyle, Burbidge and Narlikar published a book in 2002
against the big bang. Unfortunately, the
Quasi-Steady-State-Cosmology (QSSC), which they propose as
an alternative, is based on the same faulty assumption as
the big bang--that redshift can be used as a measure of
distance. They devote one section of their book to quasars
as the exception to that rule. This section covers the
observational evidence that quasars are found together with
active galaxies in spite of their redshift incompatibility.

The last chapter of the book is most fascinating to a
pioneering astronomer. Here they discuss three major issues
that standard cosmology has never explained quantitatively.
In simpler words, the math doesn't match what the
observations demand. The first problem is angular momentum.
Everything in space seems to spin, although it's not clear
why. But some objects, like our Sun, don't spin as fast as
they should. And other objects, like the giant planets
Jupiter and Saturn, spin too fast.

The second problem is magnetic fields. They are found almost
everywhere, but standard theory doesn't understand what
makes them. Plasma cosmologist Alfvén explains that the
problem is with astronomers' shortsightedness. Magnetic
fields are never found without electric currents. Even the
fields of bar magnets are created by currents within their
atomic structure. So as long as astronomers refuse to accept
the existence of electric currents in space, they will never
understand the origins of the magnetic fields they see.

The third problem is quantized redshift. Not only QSOs but
also low-redshift galaxies display a preference for certain
values of redshift. This throws a monkey wrench into both
the big bang theory and Hoyle¹s QSSC, although big bang
theorists try to moot the question by declaring it to be the
"surprising new structure" of unobservable dark matter.
The authors ended this chapter and the book with good advice
for all: "... we have described in outline a number of
observed phenomena whose origins we do not understand either
within the framework of big-bang cosmology or within the
framework of the QSSC. The universe is an immensely
complicated place. There is good reason to start with simple
models, but there is no excuse for ignoring observations
which do not apparently fit into a picture which is largely
based on some well accepted results, but also a number of
preconceived ideas.

"If nothing else, we hope that we have made both theorists
and observers aware that observations remain primary in this
field."