This is Kierein Part 1.
See Kierein Part 2 at ilki.substack.com/p/lilki-no-big-bang-universe-part-2
See Kierein Part 3 at ilki.substack.com/p/lilki-kierein-on-redshift-gravity
This is a copy of the first part of John Kierein’s website. I’ll add some notes in double curly brackets {{ }}. Note also that some links don’t work. I don’t think I’ll have time to fix those. PS, I have an older post about No Big Bang at ilki.substack.com/p/lilki-no-big-bang. But I wanted to get a copy of John’s website too. His videos are included in the previous post.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why the Big Bang is Wrong
John Kierein
https://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/
Here's a couple references to my publications:
Kierein, J., "A Mechanism for Particle Acceleration in Space Plasmas and for Planetary Mass Accretion, Aperion Vol.14 October 1992.
Kierein, J., 1990. "Implications of the Compton Effect Interpretation Red Shift" IEEE Trans. Plasma Science 18, 61.
The Big Bang theory of the universe is wrong because the cosmological red shift is due to the Compton effect rather than the Doppler effect. See The Endless, Boundless, Stable Universe http://www.bazaarmodel.net/Onderwerpen/Endless-Boundless-Stable-Universe/ by Grote Reber http://www.answers.com/topic/grote-reber and Hubble's Constant in Terms of the Compton Effect https://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/Hubble_latest_web.htm by John Kierein. The latter describes how the Compton effect cosmological red shift accelerates with increasing distance.
Reber showed that the Compton effect was the cause of the red shift in order to explain the observations of bright, very long wavelength, extragalactic radio waves. Kierein https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1968SoPh....3..450K/abstract used the Compton effect explanation to explain quasars and the red shift on the sun.
Quasars may be much closer than their red shift would indicate if they have an "intrinsic" red shift due to being surrounded by a 'fuzzy' atmosphere containing free electrons and other material. This concentration of electrons produces the unusual red shift as the light travels through it and loses energy to these electrons per the Compton effect. The famed astronomer, Margaret Burbidge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Burbidge , is a strong proponent of the quasar intrinsic red shift. She questions their distance http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/science/cosmo.htm and believes quasars are associated with lower red shift galaxies {{That’s what Halton Arp found and if high redshift objects exist near low redshift objects, the redshift can’t be caused by greater distance}}. She is co-author of the definitive book on quasars, "Quasi-Stellar Objects", and even has an asteroid named for her. If some quasars are so nearby, even in our galaxy, they may even exhibit proper motion in the sky as the Earth travels around the sun. Such a proper motion has been seen. See Quasar Absolute Proper Motion http://laserstars.org/V1982/Luyten.html for a table that includes such proper motion observations. {{Proper motion means observable changes in the coordinate distances between stars etc relative to background stars etc.}}
{{I think the best evidence against the Big Bang and the Redshift = Distance theory is the following image of a high redshift quasar in front of a low redshift galaxy:
https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/041001quasar-galaxy.htm. How can something farther away be in front of something closer? The galaxy is NGC 7319. As I said above, Arp found many high redshift quasars near low redshift galaxies. Most or all of them have visible connecting bridges of matter to their galaxies. See also Fingers of God at https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/041018fingers-god.htm.}}
Some such quasars may be double stars, with one member being an ordinary star and the other exhibiting a large red shift and being labeled as a quasar. The 100,000th Hubble Image http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/1996/25/image/a/ is a good candidate for such a pair.
Ken Kellermann of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory has also suggested that the red shift of quasars may be intrinsic and not an indication of their distance in a classic 1972 paper Radio Galaxies, Quasars and Cosmology https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?db_key=AST&bibcode=1972AJ.....77..531K published in the Astronomical Journal.
The late Halton C. Arp summarizes the observational evidence in this wonderful YouTube video Halton Arp Intrinsic Red Shift
that gives the connection of intrinsic red shift quasars to low red shift galaxies. His theoretical explanation is in agreement with my "Gravity and the Red Shift" YouTube video linked below where I give the mechanism for electrons to increase in mass. (Arp and I had a friendly relationship since the late 1960s. He gave me R. F. Sistero's paper I reference in my papers when we visited in his Pasadena office before he transferred to Max Planck in Munich. He eventually agreed with the validity of Lesagian pushing gravity theory I presented to him, as he mentions in the video.)
A recent discovery of a quasar with a huge red shift greater than 7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ULAS_J1120%2B0641 has called into question whether the big bang is wrong. Most distant quasar raises questions http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/331980/title/Most_distant_quasar_raises_questions . All problems are gone if its redshift is intrinsic. Similarly, this quasar http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v518/n7540/full/nature14241.html would not be so huge if it were close-by.
The red shift on the sun is obviously not Doppler since the sun is not moving away from us. This shift shows a variation in magnitude that correlates with the number of electrons along the line of sight. It is smallest at the solar center and greatest at the limb where we are looking through the thickest part of the sun's atmosphere. John Kierein and Brooks Sharp https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1968SoPh....3..450K/abstract showed this correlation as a Compton effect interpretation in the journal "Solar Physics" in March of 1968. Compton himself believed this was the cause of the solar red shift (see Compton, A. H., 1923 Phil. Mag. 46, 897). The electrons on the sun are concentrated in altitude by gravity with the greatest density near the sun's surface (the photosphere) to produce the sun's intrinsic red shift. Similarly, the quasar red shift (and other bright, hot young stars' "K effect" intrinsic red shift - see Arp's book, "Seeing Red") have an intrinsic Compton effect red shift concentrated at or very near the object's surface.
In addition to this red shift on the sun, which is there all the time and is on the order of 1 part in a million, there has been measured a gamma ray red shift that occurred only during a large solar flare. This solar flare red shift was nearly 1 percent or one part in a hundred! It was measured by the RHESSI satellite http://sprg.ssl.berkeley.edu/adminstuff/webpubs/2003_ajl_L81.pdf . The red shift varied by the element, the heavier element having a bigger red shift. I believe this red shift is also due to the Compton effect and is caused by the gamma rays ionizing the elements and releasing electrons from these element "targets". The heavier elements have greater numbers of electrons to release and consequently have multiple Compton collisions and greater red shifts. Other gamma ray red shifts such as this http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap090429.html are also intrinsic Compton effect red shifts.
A quasar can change into a non-quasar if its red shift is intrinsic. See The Case of the Missing Quasar http://www.sdss.org/releases/the-case-of-the-missing-quasar/ .
When the Pioneer 6 spacecraft passed behind the sun, its telemetry signal travelled through the sun's corona and was shifted in frequency to the longer wavelength by approximately 1 part in 100 million. This shift is compatible with the solar shift and can be explained http://art.torvergata.it/bitstream/2108/55384/1/A%20third%20hypothesis%20on%20the%20origin%20of%20the%20redshift.pdf as an interaction with the electrons in the solar atmosphere. (Note that this paper explicitly says this is not due to the Compton effect. I disagree with this. The Compton effect is the underlying mechanism for the explanation given. The authors do not recognize the proportionality of the number of collisions to the photon wavelength, nor the reconstruction of the group velocity wavefront vector consisting of Huygens' secondary wavelets, which results in no blurring.)
For the Compton effect to cause the cosmological red shift, intergalactic space must have a density of free electrons and/or positrons. The further light travels through this transparent medium, the greater the red shift - and Hubble's law follows. The existence of electrons and positrons in intergalactic space has been shown by observations … of electron-positron annihilation gamma rays coming from above our galactic plane. This is the direction our galaxy is plowing into the intergalactic medium. (See "Peculiar Velocity of the Sun and its Relation to the Cosmic Microwave Background" by J.M. Stewart & D.W. Sciama, Nature vol. 216,p 748f, Nov. 25, 1967.) This is observed from the, appropriately named, Compton Gamma Ray Observatory in orbit above the Earth's atmosphere.
Indeed, while intergalactic space was once thought to be empty, now we know it is filled with clouds of high velocity gas http://www.astronomische-gesellschaft.org/en/publikationen/reviews/reviews-in-modern-astronomy-19/Richter.pdf that contain molecular hydrogen. This molecular hydrogen is thought to come from the condensation of hydrogen atoms that are just free electrons and protons. When light hits these free electrons, it produces the Compton effect red shift.
Recently discovered cosmic radio bursts http://www.nature.com/news/mystery-extra-galactic-radio-bursts-could-solve-cosmic-puzzle-1.13332 show dispersion as they interact with intergalactic electrons. These interactions also must cause a Compton effect red shift. About 10,000 of these bursts are inferred to occur every day http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6141/40.summary . Next generation radio telescopes should be able to detect these highly dispersed sources routinely http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/09/19/mnras.stt1598.abstract . The high dispersion of extragalactic radio pulses was predicted by Grote Reber and me from the Compton Effect interpretation of the red shift. See my 1981 video "Gravity and the Red Shift" on YouTube linked below.
The recent pinpointing of the extragalactic nature of gamma ray bursts and the delay in arrival times of longer wavelength radiation from these events confirms this prediction as shown in Dark Matter https://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/darkmatter2.html by John Kierein. This time lag for longer wavelengths is shown by Dr. Jay Norris to provide a method of measuring distance to the gamma ray source.
If the Compton effect causes the red shift, the universe is not expanding, but rather is "static". Max Born (and others - see below) did an analysis of the background temperature of such a universe and found that it doesn't differ greatly from the observed 3 degree kelvin background.
Some say that the Compton effect should cause the light to be scattered and distance sources blurred. Does scattering cause blurring? Not necessarily. Note how the Milky Way stars at the edge of the Barnard 68 dust cloud http://www.eso.org/public/images/eso9934b/ are not at all blurred even though they are dimmed to extinction as their photons are absorbed and scattered. Also note how, when this object is viewed in the Infrared, the background stars shine right through this cloud without blurring! Dark matter causes light to bend http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/News/Lensing/index.html without blurring.
The Compton effect is completely explained in terms of conservation of energy and momentum. The electric and magnetic vectors of the radiation are not affected, so the ExH vector proceeds with a slower velocity than c according to the index of refraction of the transparent intergalactic medium. The wavefront of the group velocity travels in the ExH direction with the wavefront reconstructed as Huygens' secondary wavelets at the scattering center sites. Thus, the light is slowed slightly by the Compton interaction with the transparent medium, but the source is not blurred. When the radiation is a short pulse, this slowing shows up as dispersion of the pulse.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE: MARCH 2022: {{No Sign of “Cosmic Dawn”}} https://nautil.us/four-years-on-new-experiment-sees-no-sign-of-cosmic-dawn-14185/
UPDATE: APRIL 2021: Intergalactic space filled with plasma of ions and electrons which cause the red shift by the Compton Effect.
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap200903.htmlUPDATE: JUNE 2020: Wolfe Disc https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/23/world/distant-galaxy-wolfe-disk-scn-trnd/index.html (The quasar red shift is intrinsic. It has a big cloud of electrons whose synchrotron radiation produces its radio brightness. The Compton effect causes the red shift. Distant galaxies have unusual shapes because the older stars are red shifted outside the visible spectral range. We saw that when the Hubble deep sky images were updated with the NICMOS instrument that included the near IR spectral range. The older red stars came into view and showed more regular galaxy shapes than the earlier deep sky images.)
UPDATE: MARCH 2016: GALAXY WITH RED SHIFT GREATER THAN 11 FOUND https://www.spacetelescope.org/news/heic1604 . IT CAN'T BE THERE, IF THERE WAS A BIG BANG! ….
UPDATE: JULY 2014: MICROQUASARS HAVE BEEN RECENTLY DISCOVERED IN OUR GALAXY WITH HIGH INTRINSIC RED SHIFTS. THE FIRST ONE, A DOUBLE STAR MEMBER, SS433 HAS A RED SHIFT CORRESPONDING TO 12,000 KILOMETERS PER SECOND DOPPLER. (SEE WIKIPEDIA SS433 ARTICLE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_433 ). (Would these really be called "micro" if they weren't known to be in our galaxy? If its red shift obeyed Hubble's law, SS433 would be over 5,000 galactic diameters distant.)