atomiccolm

Hi swansot, Thanks for taking the time to reply. I should have posted a link to the paper. It can be found here: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?journal=Ap%2bSS&year=1976&volume=..43&letter=.&db_key=GEN&page_ind=5&plate_select=NO&data_type=GIF&type=SCREEN_GIF&classic=YES In your opinion, why do you think the author made the assumption, that it must mean the Earth is the center of the universe? It seems a rather bold claim considering the majority of scientists believe the contrary i.e we have no special position. Could you point me in the direction of some papers/articles that have found issue with the results/assertions? I would really like to respond to my friend with some hard evidence but I'm struggling to find any. When i search for the actual quotation, i find nothing but creationist blogs that agree with it, yet i find little in terms of rebuttal..

I was recently sent a paper by a friend relating to The Red Shift Hypothesis for Quasars. He is an active geo-centrist and creationist and used it as a means of proof that the Earth is the center of the Universe. “The Earth is indeed the center of the Universe. The arrangement of quasars on certain spherical shells is only with respect to the Earth. These shells would disappear if viewed from another galaxy or quasar. This means that the cosmological principle will have to go. Also it implies that a coordinate system fixed to the Earth will be a preferred frame of reference in the Universe. Consequently, both the Special and General Theory of Relativity must be abandoned for cosmological purposes.” - Y. P. Varshni, “The Red Shift Hypothesis for Quasars: Is the Earth the Center of the Universe?” Astrophysics and Space Science 43 (1): 3 (1976). He also provided another more recent paper listed below: However, according to a Fourier analysis by Hartnett & Hirano, the galaxy number count N from redshift z data (N–z relation) indicates that galaxies have preferred periodic redshift spacings.........*A natural interpretation is that concentric spherical shells of higher galaxy number densities surround us, with their individual centers situated at our location*.” - Professor Shigeo Hirano, "Observational tests for oscillating expansion rate of the Universe" Physical Review D, 2010. After reading the paper, i found no mention of a central Earth, or even the word Earth contained within, and certainly no suggestion that the Earth is in a favored position, but unfortunately, the advanced math contained with makes me feel that I may have missed an inference from the data! I have a general understanding of cosmology, although to most of you I am certainly a layman! When it comes to the advanced mathematics and physics in the paper, I tend to struggle. I was wondering if someone could help to explain the significance of these paper in terms of the claim made above. Is this an accepted viewpoint in modern cosmology or is it refuted? Or perhaps, has my friend misinterpreted the meaning and quote mined it to make his point? My understanding was that this type of study into quasars was to help to quantify them and the redshift they create while giving us information about the past and current rates of expansion of the Universe. Any help you could give would be most appreciated!