Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Sunspots & Stocks

There is a correlation between the Sunspot Cycle and the Stock Market: Since 1933-34 all bull market highs (= start of a bear market) occurred 0-13 months after the peak of the Solar Cycle (List):
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #17 in 4/1937 = bear market starts in the Dow Jones 8/1937 (+4 months)
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #18 in 5/1947 = bear market starts in the Dow Jones 6/1948 (+13 months)
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #19 in 3/1958 = bear market starts in the S&P 500 8/1959 (+6 months)
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #20 in 11/1968 = bear market starts in the S&P 500 12/1968 (+1 month)
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #21 in 12/1979 = bear market starts in the S&P 500 11/1980 (+11 months)
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #22 in 7/1989 = bear market starts in the S&P 500 7/1990 (+12 months)
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #23 in 3/2000 = bear market starts in the S&P 500 3/2000 (+0 month)
In early 1968 the quasi gold standard was more or less abolished, which lead to the inevitable expansion in money supply and inflation. Since that time every solar top made a bubble burst, in 3 of the 4 cases even in the same or following month which is incredibly precise:
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #20 in 11/1968: stock market bubble bursts 12/1968 (the S&P 500 high of late 1968 was only exceeded nominally but not in real terms for decades)
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #21 in 12/1979: commodity bubble bursts 1/1980
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #22 in 7/1989: Japan bubble (stocks & real estate) bursts 12/1989
  • HIGH of Solar Cycle #23 in 3/2000: stock market bubble bursts 3/2000
The more sun-spots, the more important for financial markets. The solar super-storms of 1859, 1921 and 1989 went along with inflation peaks (Credits: Manfred Zimmel):
  • September 1-2, 1859 (highest inflation 1810-1910).
  • May, 1921 (highest inflation 1860-1940).
  • 1989 (highest inflation since mid 1960s).

The Peak of the current Sunspot Cycle #24 is projected for spring 2013 (HERE). More related online resources: Solar Cycle Progression - Monthly SSN - Calculated annual average SSN - Solar Cycle start – end months, mid-point

In 1965 Charles J. Collins presented his investigation on "The Effect of Sunspot Activity on the Stock Market" (reprinted in the March 1966 of the 'Cycles' Magazine). His theorem is (briefly stated) the following:
(1) An important market peak has been witnessed or directly anticipated when, in the course of each new sunspot cycle, the yearly mean of observed sunspot numbers has climbed above 50.
(2) In each solar cycle, the largest stock market decline, in terms of percentage drop, comes after the sunspot number, on an annual basis, has climbed above 50.
HERE

HERE


Another pattern of stock market tops about 2.5 years before the Sunspot Peak is based on a 11-year smoothing of the data yielding slightly different highs compared to nominal prices (HERE):



Jeffrey Owen Katz and Donna L. McCormick  developed a profitable Trading System based on Sunspot numbers (HERE & HERE p. 198 ff.):
Like  seasonality  and  lunar phasesolar  activity  appears  to  have  a  real  influence  on some markets, especially the S&P 500 and Minnesota Wheat. As with lunar cycles, this influence is not sufficiently strong or reliable to be a primary element in a portfolio trading system; however, as a component in a system incorporating other  factors,  or  as  a  system  used  to  trade  specific  markets,  solar  activity  is  worth attention. We personally do not believe solar influences directly determine the market.  We  do  suspect  that  they  act  as  triggers  for  events  that  are  predisposed  to occur, or as synchronizers of already-present market rhythms with similar periodicities. For example, if a market is highly over-valued and unstable, as was the S&P 500 in October 1987, a large solar flare might be sufficient to trigger an already-imminent crash.

The observation that sharp down-turns can occur after solar flares has been supported.

Flares are the most powerful and explosive of all forms of solar eruptions, and the most important in terrestrial effect. Large flares release energy equivalent to the explosion of more than 200 million hydrogen bombs in a few minutes' time, sufficient to meet mankind's energy demands for a 100 million years (HERE - HERE - HERE).

HERE
HERE

Monday, August 6, 2012

Arch Crawford on Financial Astrology

Interview (April 30, 2010)
  
Hi, my name is Dave Goodboy. I'm Executive Producer of www.RealWorldTrading.com, and today I'm pleased to be joined by world-renowned financial astrologer Arch Crawford (www.crawfordperspectives.com). I fully realize that this is a highly controversial and unusual subject, however, Arch has one of the best documented historic records for correct market calls of any market analyst. In fact, over the last 3 and 6 month time frames,Timer Digest, has ranked him #3 of all market letter writers. Jump on board for a journey into this esoteric subject!
Dave: How are you today, Arch?

Arch: Very well, thank you.

Dave: Let's start at the beginning. What first got you interested in the financial markets?

Arch: I always loved numbers as a child as used to extract square roots for fun and I saw my Father looking in the paper an there's this whole page of numbers. I loved the numbers so I started watching the stock market, pulling out stocks under $10 through the A's, B's and halfway through through the C's -- and there were a lot of them in 1954. The methods I studied were basically technical. In 1960, I kept a chart of US Steel -- there was a big steel strike -- and I kept the headlines on the chart. And it made sense whatsoever.

Dave: There was no correlation between the headline and the stock movement?

Arch: Exactly. One of the first books I read was Darvas' How I Made $2 Million In The Stock Market. He was a dancer and he used a simple trend-following method. A couple of years later I went to work for Merrill Lynch in Raleigh N.C., putting up prices on a chalkboard and 2-3 months after that they got an electronic board and I became an assistant in the cage.
Dave: This is the early '60s?
Arch: Yes, this is 1961. I had been studying math and physics at the University of North Carolina and I started off with really great grades and they were beginning to drift lower and lower and I figured I would go do what I wanted to do before I got thrown out, so I left while I still had decent grades. I told Merrill Lynch "this is what I want to do with my life, send me to New York" and they said,"don't be ridiculous." So later, after I'd been there a while I said I quit, I'm going to New York and look for a job. They said "don't do that,we'll transfer you." They said "what department would you like?" and I told them technical research. They sent me right up to the research department but the technical things I was doing at that time was I was actually drawing the weekly charts of Merrill Lynch's industry specialists and that took me three days to do 45 charts. While I was in Raleigh the commodity guy there got me Edwards & McGee and they were getting the trendline charts from Commodity Research Bureau and it had 600 charts every week. I use to draw all the lines and supports and resistance and trendlines and look at the moving averages and make a projection as to what was going to happen and go back and look at last week's while I'm doing this week's and see what worked out and what didn't. I'm self-taught from that standpoint, using Edwards & McGee. I was spending every night in the library. I made friends with the librarian--an elderly Irish lady--and I bought lottery tickets from her, so she let me stay in the library at night and lock it up at 12:00. I was looking at the chart of the market and it was beginning to form a multiple head and shoulder top pattern.

Dave: When you say the market, you mean the Dow?

Arch: The Dow Jones, yes. I said if this pattern remains symmetrical, the market will top in the middle of December and it will crash next year in 1962. It topped in the middle of December. It finished the head and shoulder top and broke down on April 13, the day Kennedy made the steel companies roll back the price increases. That broke the neckline and it started down and then it drifted down and rallied a bit and drifted down and rallied a bit and then started turning very nasty and we went into the crash of '62. And I was going around saying "it's going to crash" and I got the nickname "Crash Crawford." And then it actually did it--the worst crash since 1929.

Credit: www.astropro.com
Dave: That was your first major accurate prediction?
Arch: Yes. I also turned 21 in the meantime on April17th and inherited $1000 from a sweet aunt who had died and I put it all in puts and made seven times my money, so that was my beginning.
Dave: How did you go from being a technical analyst to a financial astrologer?

Arch: On the day before my birthday, in 1963, the Wall Street Journal had a front-page article about three guys who were predicting the market using astrology. The credible one was Lt. Cmdr. David Williams who had been head of the purchasing department for Con Ed for 40 years and a Lt Cmdr in the Navy in the Big War and he was a fine gentleman. Williams had written a pamphlet called Astro-economics in 1955. I went out and bought it. Next to that pamphlet in this metaphysical bookstore was Donald Bradley Stock Market Prediction and he had developed a model using all two-planet pairs. I started keeping his model by hand and--thank God for computers! It was a lot of calculation but it was worth it. The market would follow that line for several months and then if would go off and do something else and for several months it would be off of that line and then it would come back onto it sometime later.

HERE
Dave: What particular planets?

Arch: All of them. Ten counting the Sun and moon. The Moon didn't count in them because it was too quick. What I found in following that for a while was that when there is a large configuration involving several planets it becomes what the Mandelbrot set, the chaos people, call a "strange attractor" which would take the market up or down to the date of this large configuration was most exact or to the last aspect between whatever planets were involved and then the market would turn and go the other way.

Dave: When you say configuration, what do you mean?

Arch: A number of planets in harmonic relationship. A harmonic relationship of one means two planets have the same longitude in space.

Dave: They're in line with each other?

Arch: Yes. Looking out from Earth, they're in the same place. A harmonic of two is like a full Moon where one is opposite the other separating the sky into two different parts, the left half and the right half. The second harmonic is 180 degrees, which is one-half of the 360 degree circle, and the third harmonic is 120 degrees which is one-third of the 260 degree circle. So a trine is 120 degrees and a square is 90 degrees. These are the ones most traditional astrologers use.

Dave: You noticed that these configurations would affect the market,am I following you?

Arch: Oh absolutely. When several planets are involved instead of just these two-planet pairs, it becomes a unique event and that's what makes it a strange attractor and the market will pull up to that day and then down or down to that day and then up.

Dave: How many times a month do these strange attractors occur?

Arch: Two to three times a year on a good year. Other than that they follow the Bradley somewhat.

HERE
Dave: You found David Williams' pamphlet and the Bradley book...

Arch: First I got a book of planetary positions and I noticed when they were in the one-third and one-sixth harmonic harmonic the market tended to go up and when they were in the second and fourth harmonic it tended to go down. That's what I entered into my notes and that's what Williams said in his book. In terms of statistics there are so many factors involved that a lot of scientists can look at this and they will say "Ahh, there are not statistically meaningful" but you can combine them in two or three or four cycles together and they become extremely meaningful.

Dave: These strange attractors that occur two to three times per year... is it something that changes the trend of the market?

Arch: Yes. It'll either take them up to that day and drop it or down to that day and rally it.

Dave: This really sounds crazy. What's the theory behind the concept? Why does it seem to work?

Arch: You got me. The closest I know about was from another guy named John Nelson, who was a radio propagation specialist for RCA Corporation, and they put him on the top of a building with a telescope and said "figure out when the darn sunspots are going to blow up" because before the days of the satellites they were sending dataflow across the North Atlantic. When the sunspots hit they had to switch to sending to South America and then over to Africa and then back up to Europe and it was time consuming and costly so they wanted to know when these things were going to happen. Nelson by regular cyclical means got up to a 65% accuracy rate which was not satisfactory at all and someone said "why dont you look at the planetary alignment around the sun at the times of these sunspots because that may give you a handle on what you want to look at." So he took the 13 worst magnetic storms on the Earth that were on record with RCA and drew the horoscope heliocentric chart - heliocentric meaning the Sun in the middle. He was totally blown away by all the harmonic ratios in the days that these sunspots popped off in a big way.

Dave: So it's basically somehow affecting the magnetic field which in turn is affecting people's behavior?

Arch: Yes. Nelson and I figured that if there is a powerful alignment heliocentrically they'll blow the sunspots out and if it happens to be a high tidal force - a new Moon or full Moon - then the ionized layer of the Earth's atmosphere will be brought down close to the Earth and make people crazy.

Dave: Let me see if I follow you. It affects people's emotions--making them feel elated--therefore they will buy stocks, and when they're depressed hit they will sell stocks?

Arch: When the electrons hit it tends to be depressive and when the protons hit hit it tends to be elating and so if you get a major solar flare it tends to throw a lot of heavy protons but the electrons get there first so the first couple of days the market drops and then when the protons get there it goes screaming the heck up. But there are a lot of complications with that. In the 1987 crash, there were the largest number of electrons hitting the atmosphere that I had ever seen for the longest period of time. When the electrons got over 1 to the third per cubic centimeter, that's when the market started coming apart. It proceeded on down on Friday--of course that was options expiration - and crashed on more Monday. The strategy at that time was if the market went down a certain amount you sell S&P futures are you are protected to whatever level. The system they had would protect you down to five standard deviations from normal. Monday, it was a seven standard deviation event and the whole system was threatening to come down.

Dave: What happened the day after that?

Arch: The next morning it was down like another 200 points in 15 minutes with hardly any stocks open. The Fed said "anybody comes in from Wall Street that wants money, give it to them" and the market came roaring back and was positive by 10:00.

Dave: Let's talk about another astrological event--the eclipse. Are there any correlations between market movements and eclipses?

Arch: Yes. They are the most powerful events, taken individually. W.D. Gann wrote seven books about the market and he was an astrologer but he rarely said anything specifically about astrology in all of those books.

Dave: He was very vague in everything he wrote.

Arch: Well he was very secretive about it and swore the people around him to secrecy relative to astrology. David Williams actually introduced me to a friend of his who had worked for Gann and he said "yeah he swore us to secrecy but we didn't know anything anyway." (laughs)

Dave: What happens during a solar eclipse?

Credit: www.astropro.com
Arch: The solar eclipse tends to have a longer-term effect, not necessarily so much on the day it happens--in other words it will be a more important event, but the lunar eclipse tends to be more dramatic for one day or two days.

Dave: How many eclipses are there per year?

Arch: There are 3-5 eclipses per year. Around the time of the 1987 crash, The Wall Street Journal ran an article about a guy who had come up with a Mayan calendar date that was very important, and that was supposed to be August 17 and all the new new age people were going to sacred sites and dancing and drumming and praying and meditating and doing what they do. It was called the "Harmonic Convergence." It was supposed to be this Mayan date. Well I looked at this date and I didn't see anything . I looked forward and here seven days later was the tightest 5-body conjunction in at least 800 years and they were all visible bodies. And I said "that is what the Mayans were talking about." I said "this market will peak on August 24, give or take three days, after which we will have a horrendous crash." The market peaked at Noon on August 25 and it dropped and dropped and it stopped and turned violently on the day of the solar eclipse on the Fall equinox and it had the biggest up-day in history, to that date, in points. It broke down in the morning, scared the heck out of traders, turned around and had the biggest up-day in history. Then it rallied for two weeks; at the top of that rally we had the biggest earthquake in Southern California in at least seven years and two days later we had the lunar eclipse, which was the biggest down day in history to date. So the lunar eclipse touched off the earthquake.

Dave: Does astro work the same across all markets?

Arch: These are things that act on emotion and it depends on what markets are moving emotionally at the time. Another thing I discovered in calculating these cycles was the Mars/Uranus cycle and it's just about a two year cycle. The market does not crash every two years but every crash that's taken place in the last 100 years took place in the same 40% of that cycle...every one. So I watch those periods whether we are technically weak or strong, whether we are set up for a possible bad time or not. I said on September 4, 2001 "this market may crash by October 5." The week after the towers fell we had the worst percentage decline since the fall of France in 1940. I also said that there was an event--I think it was Mercury changing direction on the Fall equinox which was September 21--and I said that may make that timeframe more important than normal, and that was the low actually, the 21st--within one day I think Friday was the low and the equinox was Saturday morning. Also, in that September 4, 2001 letter I said the United States will be at war around the weekend of the 7th or 8th of September

Dave: Impressive. What do you see for the near future?

Arch: There was nobody else--astrologer or psychic or card reader or anybody else--that had anything close to that. We are not in that crash period now but the Bradley model shows a high around the middle of July and goes down all the rest of this year. I think it looks pretty bad right now and it could turn down right now. We may have a hard hit for 2-3 days next week and then a rally into July, which may or may not make a higher high and then down the rest of the year. The next crash cycle takes place from August '06 to March '07.

Dave: When you say crash cycle, you mean a major 1987 style event?

Arch: Yes, The Mars/Uranus cycle, where every crash has taken place.

Dave: What do you see for gold?

Arch: I believe gold will hit a high maybe Monday and will then drop into the summer and after that we will have a super up-move in it beginning around Labor Day and going for close to a year. Gold, oil, silver, metals, CRB Index generally. Inflation hedges are ruled by Neptune for whatever reason. I've never paid any attention to rulership they were telling me that when Saturn came up to 0 degrees Leo the price of gold would drop because Saturn is contractive and I said that's horsepuckey. Well, the day that Saturn hit Leo the IMF announced it would sell tons and tons of gold over months and months of time and it was the only limit move that year. But, it was the day Saturn hit in apparent right ascension, which is the way astronomers look at the sky, not ecliptic longitude, which is the way astrologers look at the sky. So I learned a little about rulership stuff and I said "oh my God." Why should some rulership thing work? I don't know...

Dave: Is the rulership something astrologers learned from the ancients?

Arch: The ancients had it pretty much locked up in terms of what was supposed to happen theoretically in those times, yes.

Dave: Arch, we're almost out of time. I look forward to speaking with you again soon.

Arch: It's been fun and I always enjoy talking about this work; it's meant a lot to me for many many years.

STD Red Week (August 6 - 10)

For previous Short-Term-Delta Red Weeks in the S&P 500 see also HERE

STD Red Weeks oftentimes are trenders from Tuesday open to Friday open.  Monday and Friday often reverse the Tuesday - Thursday trend. This is the STD Red Week's pattern:



Alex Roslin's - COTs Timer (Aug 4)
Smart Money Commercial Hedgers dump S&P 500, COT signal flips to bearish

David Hickson - Hurst cycles (Aug 4)
We are expecting the 80-day cycle peak to form in the US markets soon, after which there will be a fall into the 80-day cycle trough which is expected in late August.
[Hurst triad] lines are presently projecting a target for the peak of 1400-1420.

Mike Burk - Seasonality (Aug 4)
As measured by the S&P 500 August has been, by far, the strongest month of the 4th year of the Presidential Cycle. I expect the major averages to be higher on Friday August 10 than they were on Friday August 3.



www.chartsedge.com
www.alphee.com
www.astrocycle.net
The Nasdaq 100 ETF (QQQ) broke above resistance from the July highs
and remains in an uptrend, but a spinning top formed on Friday.
These candlesticks show indecision and the prior two foreshadowed
pullbacks within the uptrend [Arthur Hill]

SPX vs George Bayer's Rule #1 - Mercury Turning Direct

SPEED OF MERCURY IN GEOCENTRIC LONGITUDE
WE TAKE Raphael’s geocentric Ephemeris for this purpose, looking up page 26-29. the value we have to use is given in the second last column on these pages. This speed changes from day to day. Periodically the speed comes to a stand-still. At such times the planet moves from a direct motion into a retrograde motion or from a retrograde to a direct motion, see illustration No. 2 below. The extreme speed of Mercury is 2degrees 12’, however at times this extreme speed is reached at 2 degrees 4’. 
It is advisable to plot this Mercury speed on K&E paper through an entire year and note the effect of such changes. We obtain tops or bottoms.
It is not a law that gets one rich quick, but one in which several contracts can be taken and held a few days. When the previous movement is down, Wheat must be bought on weakness of the day; if the market moves upward prior to change of Mercury’s speed, short positions must be taken on strength during the day mercury changes its speed.
[George Bayer (1940): Stock and Commodity Traders´ Hand-Book of Trend Determination. Carmel, California; p. 13]
 
2010-09-12 (Sun) 17:57:00 = MERCURY (D)
2010-12-10 (Fri) 06:47:00 = MERCURY (R)
2010-12-30 (Thu) 02:19:00 = MERCURY (D)
2011-03-30 (Wed) 15:49:00 = MERCURY (R)
2011-04-23 (Sat) 04:59:00 = MERCURY (D)
2011-08-02 (Tue) 22:40:00 = MERCURY (R)
2011-08-26 (Fri) 16:49:00 = MERCURY (D)
2011-11-24 (Thu) 02:04:00 = MERCURY (R)
2011-12-13 (Tue) 20:49:00 = MERCURY (D)
2012-03-12 (Mon) 02:44:00 = MERCURY (R)
2012-04-04 (Wed) 05:07:00 = MERCURY (D)
2012-07-14 (Sat) 21:08:00 = MERCURY (R)
2012-08-08 (Wed) 00:28:00 = MERCURY (D)
2012-11-06 (Tue) 17:39:00 = MERCURY (R)
2012-11-26 (Mon) 17:54:00 = MERCURY (D)
2013-02-23 (Sat) 04:35:00 = MERCURY (R)
2013-03-17 (Sun) 15:05:00 = MERCURY (D)
2013-06-26 (Wed) 08:03:00 = MERCURY (R)
2013-07-20 (Sat) 13:08:00 = MERCURY (D)
2013-10-21 (Mon) 05:17:00 = MERCURY (R)
2013-11-10 (Sun) 16:15:00 = MERCURY (D)
2014-02-06 (Thu) 16:33:00 = MERCURY (R)
2014-02-28 (Fri) 09:01:00 = MERCURY (D)
2014-06-07 (Sat) 06:53:00 = MERCURY (R)
2014-07-01 (Tue) 07:41:00 = MERCURY (D)
2014-10-04 (Sat) 11:43:00 = MERCURY (R)

Sunday, August 5, 2012

Element One & Element Eight



Universes create other universes - a snow flake under a microscope shows this fractal pattern - each part is itself an ice crystal, and therefore can be a centre of growth. It can pull in material from outside, and grow.

Hydrogen is the universal ONE. It is the first element on the periodic chart. It takes 90% of the universe, leaving only 10% for all the other 143 possible remaining elements. H is the most appropriate symbol for the ONE, for this letter is the 8th letter of the European alphabet, as it is also of the Runic, as well as of the Egyptian and Greek.
In a hydrogen-atom the phase velocity difference between the velocities of the orbits of the proton vs. the electron is 8 = 8 hz = 1 / 0.125. Hydrogen resonates fundamentally at note C = 8 hz = Unity = the golden 7 + 1. The various renderings of H, show it into archaic times, to have the DNA H-bond shape, which only unzips at 8hz, H’s fundamental frequency. 

  
"Space is filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and momentum over large or very large distances. The currents often pinch to filamentary or surface currents. The latter are likely to give space, as also interstellar and intergalactic space, a cellular structure."
Hannes Alfvén, Swedish electrical engineer, plasma physicist and winner of the 1970 Nobel Prize in Physics

"The whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds. We have assumed that each stellar system in evolution throws off electric corpuscles into space. It does not seem unreasonable therefore to think that the greater part of the material masses in the universe is found, not in the solar systems or nebulae, but in "empty" space."
Kristian Birkeland (1913 HERE)

WATER is the union of the gaseous elements ONE and EIGHT = O = Oxygen.  One molecule of water contains hydrogen and oxygen in a 1:8 ratio by mass. This is due to the law of multiple proportions which basically states that when elements combine they do so in a ratio of small whole numbers.  

1 + 8 = 9 = the most worldly and sophisticated of all numbers. Of all the single digit numbers, 9 may be the most profound. Composed of 3 trinities (3 x 3 = 9), 9 represents the principles of the sacred Triad taken to their utmost expression. 9 x 9 = 81 = the mass of the Earth is approximately 81 times that of the Moon.
"[This] would be unprofitable if it did not lead us to appreciate the wisdom of our Creator,  and  the  wondrous  knowledge  of  the  Author  of  the  world,  Who  in  the  beginning created the world out of nothing and set everything in number, measure and weight, and then in time and age of man formulated a science which reveals fresh wonders the more we study it."
Hrotsvitha of Gandersheim (935 – 1002)

Thursday, August 2, 2012

The Electric Universe


What is wrong with present-day accepted astrophysics ?

It is not scientific. In today's world many people characterize themselves as being 'scientists'. Only those who always carefully follow the scientific method are deserving of that title. Modern establishment astrophysics fails the test in several ways.
 
Scientists are distinguishable from artists, poets, musicians, and others in that they use what is known as the 'scientific method'.  It is not that 'inspiration' or 'the muse' is not valuable in science, it is - but it is not the starting point of what we call science.  In the process called the scientific method a true scientist will:
  • Observe nature - carefully record what is seen.
  • Seek patterns in the observed data - put numbers on the data - fit equations to those numbers.
  • Generalize those equations into a word description of the process - this is a hypothesis.
  • Carry out experiments and/or gather independent data to see how well the hypothesis predicts future observations and results. This is called "closing the loop" on your hypothesis.
  • Reject, or modify the hypothesis if the experiments show it falls short of success in these predictions.
  • Only after the results of several experiments have been successfully predicted by the hypothesis, can it be called a theory.
If two different theories predict a given phenomenon equally well, the simpler theory is probably the best one. This principle is called Occam's Razor.

Theories can never be proven to be correct - some other mechanism entirely may be the cause of the observed data.  But theories can be disproved if they fail to predict the outcomes of additional experiments. Such theories are termed to be falsified. Sometimes the scientific method as described above is called the empirical method.
 
The Deductive Method
As an alternative to the empirical method, there is a method of deriving theories from assumed generalizations about the universe.  This is called the deductive method.  In this process one starts with a "law of nature" or "obviously correct" generalization about the "way things work" and deduces (reasons out - derives) its consequences in detail.  A hypothesis arrived at via this method is promoted to the status of being a Theory if a large enough body of experts 'accept' it.  Thus, in this method, a vote of the experts determines if a theory is correct.  Once such a theory has been accepted it is not easily rejected in light of conflicting evidence; it is, however, often modified - made more complex - and, unfortunately, new data is often selectively chosen to support it.

The selection and publication of only the data that support the accepted theory is expedited by the "peer review system".  If the experts who have accepted a given theory control both the funding of future research and also what gets published, there is little chance for conflicting viewpoints to develop.
 
Pseudo Science
Some hypotheses, when presented by august, well established scientists, are given credence without anyone questioning whether the hypothesis has been developed using the scientific method. Yet in most cases it is not difficult to check whether or not the scientific method has been used correctly.  For example, consider the hypothesis that "There are gnomes in my garden that always make themselves invisible when anyone tries to observe them."  Clearly, no conceivable experiment or observation could falsify that statement.  This is evidence the hypothesis comes from a pseudo-scientific source.  Legitimate theories must be falsifiable.
 


The Problem Faced by Modern Astronomy is that Experiments Are Not Possible 
Because the stars are light years away, we cannot hope to be able to go there and perform experiments on them. Until relatively recently even the planets were out of our reach.  Thus, cosmologists never get to complete the scientific method.  We cannot 'close the loop' in cosmology. But, if we cannot test our hypotheses, how can we reject or modify them?  The answer, of course, is that astrophysicists, more than those in any other branch of science, must be exceedingly careful to continually examine their hypotheses in light of any new data.  It is the contention of the author [...] that they have not been doing this.

Einstein was a purely theoretical physicist - he never went near a physics lab.  He conducted only 'gedankenexperimente' - thought experiments - in order to arrive at his general theory of relativity (GR).  This is a perfect example of the deductive method at work.  Its use is exceptionally dangerous in an area like cosmology wherein it is difficult to falsify any theory.  Now that the GR Theory is accepted by establishment astrophysics, any new data (such as photographs of the astronomical object known as the "Einstein Cross") are discussed only within the framework of this complicated theory.

The images of the four small objects in the Einstein Cross when looked at only from this viewpoint, are considered to be supporting evidence for the GR Theory.  However, they could just as well be interpreted as being evidence supporting a much simpler cosmological theory.

Evidence contradictory to the accepted Big Bang Theory, such as images of connections between objects that have widely different red shift values, are dismissed as being mirages.
 
False Assumptions in Astrophysics
Most of today's accepted astronomy/cosmology is a set of deductively arrived at hypotheses precariously based on two false assumptions :
  1. Electrical fields, currents, and plasma discharges are not important in space. Only gravitational and magnetic fields are important.
  2. If the light from an object exhibits redshift, the object must be speeding away from us.  And its distance from us is directly proportional to that speed.
Both of these assumptions are demonstrably wrong. They have been, and continue to be, contradicted by actual observations of the sky.  Those observations tell us that
  1. The universe is highly electrical in nature.
  2. Redshift is more a measure of an object's youth than its velocity.
Invisible Entities Invented To Patch Up Failing Theories
The theories that have sprung from these faulty, overly complicated mathematical models have given birth to such arcane notions as: curved space, neutron stars, WIMPs (and now WIMPZILLAS), MACHOs, several different types of black holes, superluminal jets, dark energy, and magnetic field lines that pile-up, merge and reconnect.  All of these inventions are fictions put forth by astrophysicists in desperate efforts to defend their theories when faced with contradicting observations.  None have ever been observed or photographed.  Many of them are demonstrably impossible.  But their existence is repeatedly invoked to explain new observations and measurements that contradict the enshrined theories of modern astronomy without resorting to the use of electrical principles.

We continually hear statements such as, "There must be a black hole at the center of that galaxy." (Otherwise we cannot explain its level of energy output.)  "There must be invisible dark matter in that galaxy." (Otherwise we cannot explain how it rotates the way it does.)  "Ninety nine percent of the universe is made up of dark energy." (Otherwise the Big Bang Theory is falsified.)  "Pulsars must be made up of strange matter." (Otherwise we might have to look for an electrical explanation). We are also asked to believe that two objects (like galaxy NGC 4319 and its companion Markarian 205) are not connected together even though we have photographs of the connection. So, we are told not to believe in the things that we can see, but that we should believe in the existence of the magic entities that their theories require - even though we cannot see or measure them.
 
Astrophysicists Denigrate Outsiders - Then Quietly Adopt their New Ideas
There have been several instances in the past when the astronomical mainstream has long rejected an idea that is later accepted.  There is usually no public disgrace for the in-group who were on the wrong side of the issue.  When, after being viciously denigrated, the validity of a new idea becomes inescapably obvious, a few years go by, and then we quietly hear: "Well, Everyone has known for a Long Time that this (the new idea) was always true."  An example of this is Hannes Alfvén's discovery of plasma waves. This relatively recently discovered property of plasmas is now being wrongly used by astrophysicists to explain away all sorts of (what is for them) enigmatic phenomena - such as the temperature inversion in the Sun's lower corona.
 
The Future
In a few years, perhaps we will hear: "Well, Everyone has known for a Long Time that quasars are not extremely distant, and red shift is more a measure of the youth of an object than its recessional velocity and distance.  No one said for sure there ever was a Big Bang.  It was just another false theory. Everyone has known for a Long Time that electric currents flowing in plasmas produce many of the mysterious observed solar and cosmic phenomena."  And we will not hear of machos, wimps, neutronium, dark energy, and broken magnetic field lines from any serious scientist ever again.

Time will tell. Will the founders of the Electric / Plasma Universe Theory be acknowledged as having been the pathfinders they are? Or will lesser men quietly adopt these ideas without giving credit to their originators and then claim them to be 'well known'? 


More HERE & HERE & HERE & HERE