## Virgo.

Saturday, April 11, 1998.

VIRGO

The astronomers say that the distant galactic clusters are only half our size.(The size of The Virgo Cluster.) Or, our cluster is twice the normal size!!!!

This is not so. They only APPEAR this way.

Virgo is thought to be forty MILLION light-years away. H.L. has it 80. They are not sure which is right!! I can tell them. It is neither!! Virgo is 160 MILLION(the centre of The Virgo CLUSTER)light-years away.

The magnitudinal distance to Virgo is wrong anyway. It is actually twice that. This is due to failing to double H.L., and wiping out the 2-1, AS THEY DO SUPPOSE!!!!

The correct Hubble Law figure is 160, not 80!!

This is due quite simply to the fact that Hubble’s Law actually starts at the observer and not at The Virgo Cluster’s Centre. Which is the accepted base-line. Now all Hubble Law values are 2x under-stated. Due purely and simply to the wrong doubling of zero(to equal zero,of course)for the observer as base line(thus resulting in no increase!!)!!!!What DOES need doubling is The Virgo Centre’s distance.(When the size of the universe doubled they failed to do this – because they think that the base line is ZERO, and cannot be doubled!!!!)

Thus ALL Hubble Law distances are wrong. They do need doubling. What they did was double the magnitudinal distances. To remove the 2-1, which they NOW think no longer exists!!!! BUT IT DOES!!!!

They THOUGHT, you see, that Hubble’s Law could not be wrong, and if the size of the universe doubled(due to the diameter changing from 1 x 10 to 2 x 10 thousand million light years)(otherwise the big bang did not occur long enough ago to fit the evidence of an earth older than the universe!!) since the magnitudinal distances were mysteriously only about half of The Hubble Law distances, then they could kill two birds with one stone!! Get rid of the annoying inexplicable 2-1, AND double the(but only the magnitudinal)distances!!!!

A most cunning move. But quite utterly fallacious!!!!

No!! You double the TRUE base-line, which(since we are applying it to galactic clusters)IS THE VIRGO CLUSTER’S CENTRE!!!!! – And,of course, EVERY other Hubble Law distance. But you leave the magnitudinal distances ALONE. Because THEY ARE RIGHT!!!!(Once they are double due to failing to double Hubble’s Law, AND ignoring the magnitudinal values to TRY TO get rid of the 2-1!!!!)

This now makes magnitudinal Virgo 80, from 40, and Hubble Law Virgo 160, from 80. NOW it is right!!!!(The 2-1 SHOULD remain!!!!)

They reasoned(wrongly)that the magnitudinal and Hubble Law distances MUST correspond!!(It does seem reasonable that no 2-1 should exist. AND, also, it does seem reasonable that magnitudes should equal “velocities”. However!! Neither is correct!! They have simply played off two blacks against each other!!!!) No. There is a VERY GOOD reason for magnitudinal distances to be half Hubble Law ones!!!(The 2-1 “velocities” to distances’ discrepancy IS REAL!!)

Now,then!! Since Virgo IS 160, and not 80 m.l.y’s away, then all the distant galactic clusters’ sizes NOW FALL INTO LINE!!!! They now are on the average about the same size as The Virgo Cluster of galaxies. And are not half its size due to the early days of some expansion!!!!(Which we could not see anyway. Even though it does exist!! BUT IN TIME TWO!!!! And in space TWO!!!!)

Some think that the magnitudinal 40 is the correct distance of Virgo. And that Hubble’s Law is for some reason over-stated by a factor of two. But this is quite wrong.

The Virgo Cluster’s CENTRE is about 160 m.l.y’s away!!!!

And the distant galactic clusters are normal sized.

The Virgo Cluster’s size is quite normal!!!!

You obviously start at the proper base line, and therefore you must treat Virgo as the true zero. But though it is zero in Hubble Law terms, its distance must be correctly stated!! Which is 80 x 2 = 160. And not 40 or 80!!!!

So Virgo is 80 x 2 = 160.

So why the 2-1 DISCREPANCY??

It is because while Hubble’s Law measures AROUND the circumference, ALL OTHER(including magnitudinal)distances get measured ACROSS!!!!

In other words, the red(H.L.)distances are arcs. And the black(magnitudinal)distances are chords!!!! Very simple.

Since velocities (or their equivalents!!) are RATES, the 2 – 1 exists FOR EVERY comparison(between blacks and reds)!!!!

And thus SHOULD be there!!!!

But they got rid of it(as they have supposed)(as they go ever deeper into their delusions – which are the opposites of the truth!!!!)!!!!

THEY are very happy. But the TRUTH could hardly be farther away!!!!

Familiarity does breed contempt.

“It is what you get used to!!!!”.

My distances are the best.

NONE of the orthodox distance finders,ETC. is correct!!!!

Even the good Hubble’s Law is out by Mass Effect(Gravitation Effect plus Universal Gravity(Mach’s Principle.).).

The quasars are out by ONE HUNDRED fold.(Over-stated!!)

The point is their gravitation effect is massive. 80% of The Cosmological Red Shift!!!!

All objects and fields have some.

Trigonometric Parallax is wrong. Because space is WARPED!!!! How can you measure ACROSS a warped space?? Yes. I know we measure around the circumference, warped or not. BUT!! The gaps between the stars is ALSO WARPED!!!! And,of course,this must throw trigonometric parallax out by a factor of two down. Incidentally this is WHY all orthodox distances seem to vary by up to a factor of two!!!!

Though we PARTICULATE see AND MEASURE around the circumference, when we look cross-sectionally AS WE MUST to get the parallax changes, we then see WAVE METHOD, STRAIGHT ACROSS!!!! And thus(yes!!)the BREADTH view necessarily crumples up to mere CHORDS!!!! IN THE MEASURING.(Even though not in the seeing!!!!)

When we view depth wise, we see normally BECAUSE TRIGONOMETRIC PARALLAX does not involve 3d, but the 2d parallax gaps!!!! Now THOUGH we see these as chords, we measure these IN OUR ARC TERMS AROUND the circumference!!(In other words a bending exists cross-sectionally WHICH WE CANNOT SEE!!!!)

So you have a COMMON ERROR.

Which is also a COMPENSATING ERROR!!!!

And,so,you think you are right, when you could hardly be more wrong!!!!

There is not one method that I know of that is 100%. Yours are at BEST 47% right.(Except for Hubble’s Law, which(except for the quasars 1%!!)(accuracy)is about 90% upon the average.) My method is nearly 100%.

The distance modulus is wrong!!

I do not know about the new focal telescope!!!!

The fact is we live in a curved static universe, which we see STRAIGHT ACROSS. Spectroscopic ALSO see(everything does!!)straight across, BUT THEY MEASURE AROUND, because THE SUPPOSED velocities are actually merely WAVE ANGLES OF VIEW, – which naturally measure THE CURVATURE. – Which,of course, is the MEASURE AROUND, even if it was not OBTAINED that way!!!!

It seems impossible to deduce distances,etc.(other properties)(BUT IT IS POSSIBLE)(I did it!!))from The Hubble Diagram(You SHOULD count in the variations. Because they are the warps, which particulate light,etc.TRAVELS AROUND!!!!) As for the warpage, THAT IS the bendings!!!! Of course!!!!

Incidentally the apparent rough spread of The Hubble Diagram plots is not real!! It is due to poor distance finders’ errors. It is the ERRORS that get spread. And NOT THE NATURAL GAPS!!!!

Life is what you make it.

Make it what you can!!

Viva la GOD!!!!

Correction. I do not think they really thought that the observer was the base-line with Hubble’s Law. – Though it is actually!!!! They measure, though, from The Virgo Cluster’s Centre. Which is taken as ZERO. Which, doubled, remains zero.

Vic