Durable cosmological heresies from Aristotle to Hoyle & beyond — Part 2

1:22:30 The expression of my question seems a little crazy, but alas, I speak French with confidence, but there is a name that was absent in your catalogue of heretics, that of Siegel. Do you have an opinion on the subject?

1:25:00 So, the spectral deviation and the distance were not a linear relationship or a quadratic relationship. We have to discuss this problem a little. We haven't talked about it, I should have talked about it. At the beginning, that is, at the time when we started measuring spectral deviations, the first were measured by Slipher in the 1910s, between 1910 and 1920, and Slipher will measure spectral deviations. At the same time, it is clear that Ludmark, a Swedish astrophysicist, had shown that the distribution was in fact a square distribution, that is to say that the spectral deviation varies according to the square of the distance, and to the precision of Ludmark, it was to the precision of the time, that is to say with only relatively close distances, it was quite reasonable. Havel came up with this. Havel demolished quadratic relations that were only very close to the galaxy. So, taking into account particular movements within the galaxy, and therefore having a very long time, Havel reconstructed the linear law. Segal came later. There is a big book called Grenoble Geometry. It was written by Segal and published by Harvard University Press, I think. He was a professor at MIT. Segal proposed another way of thinking with two different times, a cosmological time and a local time.

1:27:30 And the difference, however, I suppose, between Witten and Hawking was to lead to a quadratic law. And he demonstrated with a large sample that the quadratic law was better than the linear law. And I admit I never really understood why he called it this way. He was a very mathematician and not at all an observer. Yes, Bianco. But he was very subtle and considered by the French mathematicians as an excellent mathematician. His specialty was not cohomology. I always said that, well, I didn't talk about it because indeed his work was very funny in the debate, but I should have talked about it, you're right. Thank you. No, merci, merci pour le... J'ai encore une question pour vous d'après, d'ailleurs, il me semblait que, disant qu'il n'y ait pas d'ordre comme ça de l'image d'une même étoile, les spectres étaient très parallèles, les stèpes sont les mêmes. Et qu'il n'y a rien que là si les spectres sont les mêmes? That's why I said that I wasn't quite sure that... No, no, no, it seems... I think it's magnificent. These two cases are two cases where I think that... And precisely, the idea of parallel spectra, where they are the same, because the two parallel spectra are identical. They are identical. They are very good, they are not parallel spectra. I have a question. Does the fact that there is no mass mean that there will not be a terrible barrier in the future? Well, that doesn't work. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. None of these theories accept the normal model. Neither Zwicky nor Hoyle, because they are also philosophers, nor Vigier because he holds the mass of photons, nor Bermude because he sees the heterogeneity in the... We haven't talked about heterogeneity yet. I don't know how to say it.

1:30:00 It is important to note that all the works of the Theodosians are, in the end, the same. It is a language that we can read. That is to say, all the works of the Theodosians are very different. There, the heretics have all this, they call it... Or is it... There are young people here. You can see all the things I have done, people around Roy Klix. There is a lot of young people now. Thank you for watching this video. Ah yes, I think so. Ah yes, that's right, the topological model. What we call the topological model, is in fact the model of the Big Bang, but within the framework of Friedman's model. That is to say, models that are the solution of the equations of relativity in a perfect, total way, with a singular point of origin. Say what you will speak for the minimum amount of time. We introduced inflation because of the homogenous, isotropic nature of the ontosmological radiation, which needed to be corrected. So, as soon as inflation was introduced, it was no longer the standard model. It became what I often call the new Big Bang. The new Big Bang has several forms. After inflation, there will be dendriticization, and now we have to put the ropes in it, I don't know if we can put the ropes in it or not. That's basically what we do. And the current one is called, some people call it, some people who are authors,

1:32:30 some others, it's called the model of concordance. Because we manage to realize a veil with all that is measured. Among the research that has been done, can we mention the model of the world? Yes, yes, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course, of course. Hans Heidegger, because he was in trouble because of a mercury peril, I was going to say like everyone else, because of the delay, the advance of the mercury peril, and to explain that he had introduced into the law of permutation, instead of 1 over R2, it was 1 over R2 multiplied by a power less than something. R, SSR2, SSR2, I don't remember any more. It's an exponential and multiplicative term. My impression is that the word is pretty much the same thing. And that, in fact, it represents, in a way, it is a substitute for the introduction of the cosmological constant as well. As perhaps the dark energy, the dark energy, and perhaps also a way to evoke the... I don't know how, I'm incompetent to answer exactly. But yes, it's true, but it's not exactly relative. Not at all. Before I start, I would like to point out that, as you said, for young people, I think it is not possible to enter into the same scientific field today if we are not orthodox. And so there is a bias that exists. I don't want to say that there are no three reasons, but we have to realize it in an important way. In the list of people we don't see, there are several people who have been forced to change the subject in order to have a job.

1:35:00 I don't want to say that both of them are right, but there is a mistake. We have to thank Jean-Claude. We are from Saint-Exupéry, from Lausanne-Bergen, and we live in St. Petersburg.