Astronomers From The United States

"It's virtually impossible to entertain me at a . I've had to aim that [24 inch] telescope for the public for... a lot... 4,000 nights... so I've seen most of those things from 7 to 10 thousand feet through a 24 incher... and my eyes are no longer as young as they used to be."

"I was in ... and they've had star parties on the dark of the moon... probably for 100 years... Run off to the wilderness with their telescopes so they can lick their chops and go to bed. And now on the next week, when there is a quarter moon, they have a public star party in the old in Seattle, and they blame that one on me. But they get quite a number of telescopes... and several hundred people looking... A lot of amateurs do this kind of thing now. We sidewalk astronomers used to do it on every clear night, but... I can't do that any more. They run me all over the place in a plane."

"Now if the universe weren't made out of frustration, it couldn't go on like this. Cheer up. There's no way out of it."

"[T]here's nothing invariant about how it [the universe] looks to all of us. There are a lot of us and it looks different to a whole bunch of us... But if you ask... the fundamental questions what's underneath, then I think it comes out the same. ...[T]he changeless, the infinite and the undivided, and if there's no other way to do this except making mistakes, but you're not required to make a mistake. I think it's time to fire me."

"[Y]ou need to make telescopes so you can see what's going on out there. You can't see it any other way. Watching TV doesn't do it. They get all mixed up when they run the TV, and they get you all mixed up if you're not careful."

"I didn't create a telescope. ...I'm famous for being too retarded to make an . You're supposed to do something to get famous for it! But we... weren't going to do photography. We just wanted to see what's out there and we made a 24 incher, that's more than 13 foot , and we've run it for more than 80,000 miles in the public parks and in Indian reservations, up to Canada and down to Mexico. But we weren't going to do photography. We din't need to track things across the sky, so we never did all that. ...So the people who need to be blamed are the people who invented those equatorial mounts. You should get on their case, not mine, because that's an invention. What we did is not an invention."

"We were in the monastary and it must have been in our curriculum to grind telescope mirrors, and these were just gallon jug bottoms, just little 5 1/2 incher things, and I was doing them under water so as not to make a stir... but we had enough stir anyway."

"Why would I need a newer type telescope. Our older type telescopes do everything I need... There are a lot of people who like to invent... harder ways to do things. I let them do it."

"In 1958, Dobson was transferred to the ’s monastery in Sacramento, where he... surreptitiously built telescopes... At night Dobson trundled his reflectors... around the... neighborhood and taught local children... to build telescopes. But monastery rules forbade leaving the monastery... without permission, and in 1967, after 23 years... Dobson was expelled. ...[H]e had constructed fifteen 12-inch and two 18-inch telescopes from scavenged junk."

"Nearly a million people have looked through Dobson's telescopes, which he constructs from castoff pieces of plywood... scraps of two-by-fours, cardboard centers of hose reels, chunks of cereal boxes and s from old ships."

"[I]f the mass of the particles approaches zero, their must... approach zero... [B]y Heisenberg's uncertainty principle... if we... know the momentum... we cannot know that it's at the border... its position."

"[I]f the particles... recycle by "tunneling" back into the observable Universe as (with its ... restored)... the entropy of the... Universe might not increase."

"The Big Bang people wanted to get everything out of nothing. They want us to believe that nothing made everything out of nothing."

"You can't persuade a kid that nothing made everything out of nothing. ...It's impossible to get everything out of nothing."

"[W]e used to consider that no matter how many evidences in favor of your model, [if] you have... one evidence against you, and you're dead."

"So I have to replace the Big Bang. ...[L]et's confine ourselves to the observational evidence, and since there is no observational evidence for Creation, we'll leave it out. Now that leaves out the Big Bang people, the mini bang people, the steady-state people, The people... almost everybody."

"But if you don't know about that... when a fire engine is coming toward you the bell has a high pitch, and when goes past you it goes away with a low pitch. Ding, ding, ding... The reason that it slurs like that, is because the fire engine missed you."

"So radiation does a similar thing. If something is coming toward you, the s are shifted toward the blue end of the spectrum. That's the high energy end of the spectrum, which corresponds to the high pitch of the bell on the fire engine... [W]hen it goes away, the radiation is shifted to the lower end... the red end of the spectrum. That's called ed."

"S^2 = x^2 - t^2This is Einstein's 1905 geometry. All he noticed was that distances are not objective. How far it is from New York to Chicago depends on how fast you're going by when you look at it. And lengths of time are not objective. What you call a minute or an hour depends upon how fast you're going by when you look at the clock."

"Suppose we have two space ships [travelling opposite directions]... These people see those clocks [in the other spaceship] are spinning around too fast. These people [in the opposing spaceship] see those clocks [in the first spaceship] are spinning around too fast. After they've passed each other these people see those clocks have slowed down, and those people see those [other] clocks have slowed down. Now whose clocks have slowed down? There is no such thing as how fast a clock is going."

"Einstein knew that distances... and lengths of time are not objective, and he wanted to know what is objective. The S, this is objectiveS^2 = x^2 - t^2The spacetime separation between here-now and there-then is objective. The spacetime separation between two events, here-now and there-then. That's objective. So this [x] is the distance between here and there, and this [t] is the time between now and then."

"Now what Einstein's geometry pointed out is that the time comes in squared with a minus sign. ...[R]emember ...Euclid's geometry... every time you square something it's got a plus sign. No, it's got a minus sign. ...You have to subtract the time separation from the space separation, and if they're equal, this [S] goes to zero."

"E = mSo this... says that what we call matter, was just potential energy. Now we got both these [spacetime and energy equations] in 1905."

"\triangle x\;\triangle mv \ge \hbarThis we got from Heisenberg in 1927, but he blames it on Einstein. Heisenberg says, ....for more than three ...months they tried to describe the track of an electron across the , which they can see. They tried to describe it in quantum mechanics, and they couldn't ...These are the biggest shots in quantum mechanics, and they couldn't do it. Heisenberg, Bohr and Schrödinger... couldn't do it. ...[H]eisenberg said, then I remembered and suggested what Einstein had ...[said] earlier, "Theory must first say what can be observed" and when I looked at the problem from that side, I had the uncertainty relation."

"Now back to the border... where the radiation as seen by us approaches zero. The energy of the particles approaches zero. If the energy of the particles approaches zero, [E = m] the mass of the particles approaches zero. If the mass of the particles approaches zero, [\triangle x\;\triangle mv \ge \hbar] the momentum of the particles approaches zero. The momentum is the mass multiplied by the velocity... If the momentum approaches zero, our uncertainty in the momentum approaches zero. You can't have a big mistake about nothing. ...If the uncertainty in the momentum approaches zero, the uncertainty in where they are [\triangle x] goes to totality, and they can recycle back anywhere. I don't see any way to avoid that, understanding physics the way we understand it now. You would have to change the physics to get out of the mess."

"So as I see it, the stuff recycles from the border."

"I give these talks in Hollywood... at the church in the Vedanta center... There are all these monks lying around and... people ask me questions... So I tell them, "I'm just your tour guide. I'm here to tell you where you are and how you got here. If you want to get out, talk to the people in orange.""

"I'm not responsible for any of those equations. ...I'm just your tour guide."

"[T]he way I understand it from those old physicists is that there's something underneath which we didn't notice, and... they said... they have an answer for why inertia shows, why gravity shows, why electricity shows. We have no answer at Caltech. We know how things fall... how they coast... how they're electrical. We don't know why. ...[T]hose old physicists gave us a way of looking at this thing that says why. If you mistake one thing for another, the one thing has to show, and they said what's underneath has to be changeless, infinite and undivided... [T]he... [unchanging] that shows through is inertia, the infinite is the electrical energy and... gravity is the undivided showing through."

"Einstein never changed it, the way he put it in his words. He said toward the end of his life, ..."Matter had fallen out of the physics... as a fundamental concept." We're left only with energy. ...That's going to have to be cleaned up. The physicists can't be this retarded permanently."

"I have a feeling... that the physicists are going to have to learn to read, because the... physicists have taught... that thisE = mmeans that matter can be converted to energy... and that's not this equation. That would be E + m = \text{a concept}. If mass goes down the energy goes up. If the energy goes down, the mass goes up. There's only one way to write that E + m = k, and that's not Einstein's equation... and Einstein never took it the other way. He always took it the way he wrote it. ...I don't think he ever saw how it was taught in school. If you were teaching... and Einstein is visiting... are you going to talk relativity?"

"S^2 = x^2 - t^2S is zero only if x is equal to t. If x is equal to t then S is always zero. ...[O]ur evidence that the universe is out there and inde-god damned-pendent of us, is that we look out there and see it... [T]he equation says that... the separation of every event that you've seen... and your seeing of that event has always been zero. ...[W]e knew it was like that when we're dreaming. We didn't know that it's better than that when we're awake."

"It shows through in us too. Everybody runs after peace and security. That's running after the changeless. Everybody runs after freedom. That's running after the infinite, and everybody runs after happiness. We all get married and have children... and you're restricted to the pursuit of happiness, not to its attainment. It's written."

"I think that the is ordinary matter. I don't think we need any fancy stuff like the Big Bang people need. The Big Bang people needed all that fancy stuff because their inflationary models said that it has to be in there... [T]hen they ran into this difficulty... If there's all that extra stuff in here, out of which and could be made, then the Big Bang model is wrong. ...If all this extra matter is ordinary matter, then the helium abundance is not ok for the Big Bang model! So then they had to invent that this dark matter responds only to gravity. I was having dinner with a physicist... I said in that case why didn't it fall into the galaxy? ...[H]e said, "It can't fall into anything without getting rid of its gravitational energy, and it has no way to do that." So what's the use of the dark matter? It can't do anything. ...[T]hat's the problem with the dark matter..."

"I asked 3 astronomers in the last 25 or 30 years... When a cluster of stars is formed out of a cloud of dusty , what proportion of this stuff makes into the stars, and what proportion is blown away by the stellar wind? ...[T]he first 2 ...said they don't have an immediate answer... but they thought that between 1 and 10% would make it into the stars, and between 90 and 99% would be blown away. ...[T]he 3rd man ...in more recent time ...said 95% ...is blown away, and in some cases more and in some cases less. So... what is all this ? It's blown away from when the stars were formed. ...[W]hen a galaxy is formed, it's just a cluster of stars and 99 or 95%... of this stuff is going to be blown away. Now that's what we see. Vera Rubin measured this for ... around it is all the rest of this stuff which is 10 times as much as we see in the galaxy... So the is perfectly ordinary matter..."

"[T]he dark matter that they invented said that the universe should be not expanding so fast. ...So then they had to invent the to make it speed up. ...[I]f you want to invent all these things you can get out of any model."

"In order to mistake one thing for another you have 3 things to do. ...[Y]ou have to fail to see what it was. That's the veiling power of your mistake. Then you have to jump to the conclusion that it was something else. That you do on your own hoofs. That's called the projecting power of the mistake. But... you had to see the thing in the first place, or you would have never made the mistake that way. In order to mistake your friend for a ghost, you had to see your friend. Your friend shows through in the ghost. So those old physicists said the changeless has to show through in our physics. That's inertia. The infinite has to show... That's the in the miniscule particles. And the undivided has to show... and that's why they all fall together by gravity."

"Stars are not hot because of ... [but] because [of]... energy of falling... transformed to . The heat [of]... fusion... keeps them from collapsing farther and... getting too hot. But it's... temporary."

"[H]ow do I get the background radiation? It turns out that way out near the border, where the mass of the particles is very low, all radiation going through a field of low mass particles gets so often picked up and re-radiated that it gets thermalized to 3°K. ...[T]he amount of 3K background radiation that we get in this model corresponds to what we measure, and the Big Bang gets about 1% of what they predict."

"Now it's not as though we Europeans had another explanation for any of this. We don't! ...We have only an explanation of how things fall, not why they fall; and how they coast, not why they coast; and that they are made of electricity and not why they're made of electricity. Those old physicists had the why answer on this."

"One of the troubles of the Big Bang is they invented the initial conditions so that it would come out like this. Well, that's not usually the name of the game. ...You're supposed to look to see what the initial ingredients might have been. ...I don't take seriously dark energy and dark matter. Dark matter, as I see it... we already know that we see only a little bit of the universe that's out there. Vera Rubin measured it a long time ago. We know where it is, and I have a good idea what it is."

"[I]f this whole thing is due to a mistake, there's a reason why it's made out of frustration. ...My model says that the universe is going to be made out of frustration."

"[T]he first and second laws of thermodynamics... laws doesn't mean edicts, but ally statements about how matter behaves. Physics is about how matter behaves... [[Entropy (thermodynamics)|[E]ntropy]] tends to go up."

"The observable Universe has a border... fifteen billion light years distant in all directions, imposed... by... "the expansion." ...At [the border distant objects] ...are estimated ...receding at the speed of light. ...[T]his apparent "expansion" ...imposes a border ...because things receding faster than ...light are not observable. ...[I]f the rate of expansion ...increased, the border would ...be closer."

"Galaxies are formed when clouds of fall together... The clouds, unlike the stars, are large with respect to the spaces between them... So the [cloud] particles of each collide... and... scramble their motions to . ...energy of falling is transformed to heat. ...[T]he entropy has gone up."

"Long ago there were some physicists who said that the whole universe was made out of energy. We Europeans were so retarded that we didn't notice... energy until 1845. But there were some physicists who... probably 5,000 years ago said the whole universe is made out of energy, and their name for the universe was... "the changing"... [T]hey said if the universe is the changing, there has to be something with respect to which it changes. So there has to be a changeless underneath, and if it's not in time it can't be in space, so it has to be changeless, infinite and undivided. Then their problem was, if what exists is changeless and what we see is changing, how the hell do you do that? ...[T]hey said it could only be by mistake. You can't change the changeless, but you could mistake the changeless for the changing. So they said, we'll have to study mistakes."

"So if you ask what's beyond the observable universe, and the observable universe... is due to a mistake... and you want to know what's beyond the mistake, it's the changeless, the infinite, the undivided."

"All we see is that things are moving away from each other, but if you see from the center of an observational universe, as seen by you they're going away from you. ...[R]edshift is not an actual thing. This is not an actual model of the universe. It's not a model of an actual universe, it's a model of an observational universe... [T]hat's the difference between this model and all of the other cosmological models. All the other cosmological models have taken the universe to be actual. What do we mean by actual? We mean that it arises by a process in physics. Since universes are fairly well known not to arise by processes in physics, I don't think that we have any actual universes. I think we're stuck with observational physics. I think this stuff that we wrote on the board is about an observational universe, not about an actual universe."

"[I]n recent times we've discovered... that about 1/2 of the neutron stars that we know about have from the galaxy. ...Now these are neutron stars with a density of 100,000 battle ships in a one pint jar, and they're about 10 or 12 miles in diameter and they weigh a hell of a lot, and they're leaving the galaxy, and they're , and they're too bloody small for you to find. ...They're not going to shine for you."

"[O]nly the quality of the energy... usableness... gets degraded. ...[[Entropy (thermodynamics)|[E]ntropy]] is a measure of this ..."