Quote:
|
Cougar: There are quite a few correlations in the above abstract. Don't these lead to any conclusions? And by "anti-correlation", do they mean no correlation or inverse correlation?
|
They don't lead to any conclusions relevant to Time dilation because that was not studied. But the burden of proof here is on the mainstream to show that these factors can explain why there is no time dilation in quasars.
Time dilation is predicted in the mainstream view and not predicted in the view that quasars are local. So the result supports the local view.
Yes - "anti-correlation" is inverse.
Quote:
|
Cougar: Fine tuning. I'm afraid this doesn't say much to me.
|
Here is the problem. The quasars studied covered a large range of redshift and therefore distance if they are cosmological. Yet the time dilation is not observed. In order to explain the lack of time dilation in quasars, the mechanism responsible must be something that precisely evolves with the quasar population in such a way as to offset the time dilation and exactly cancel it out (observationally). That is fine tuning and is never looked upon favorably. If a scenario was proposed that required fine tuning for an ATM theory, the fine tuning would be taken as a strike against the ATM theory.
In fact fine tuning as an explanation is made extremely improbable from the Hawkins study.