Changes

What?! Says every physicists I told this story to. If it were so simple we would learn it already in a high school<ref>So why don't you teach it in high schools? I say. Explanation in part 3, titled '''sociology'''.</ref>.  

What?! Says every physicists I told this story to. If it were so simple we would learn it already in a high school<ref>So why don't you teach it in high schools? I say. Explanation in part 3, titled '''sociology'''.</ref>.  

I am a "crank" though with zero credibility among scientist and so despite I discovered those things already in 1985 they were not published before this essay (OK, they were published in RW, but suppressed by university of Warsaw since I was not their student any more and so my paper explaining gravitation and cosmological redshif shouldn't be linked to from their server making them suspected of supporting my papers. So when the university banned my main one page paper ''"[[Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]]"'' I typed it in into conservapedia as an essay<ref>[[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]]</ref>, and let's see how long it survives here.  

I am a "crank" though with zero credibility among scientist and so despite I discovered those things already in 1985 they were not published before this essay (OK, they were published in RW, but suppressed by university of Warsaw since I was not their student any more just a unofficial PhD student writing thesis on GTR, and so my paper explaining gravitation and cosmological redshif shouldn't be linked to from their server making them suspected of supporting my PhD thesis. So when the university banned my one page paper ''"[[Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]]"'' I typed it in into conservapedia as an essay<ref>[[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]]</ref>, and let's see how long it survives here.  

Let's hope that CP readers don't consider anybody who don't share their prejudice about the Big Bang hypothesis, apparently the main cosmological theory of our times, not so seriously as RW readers did. They made it clear that a crackpot like me should find himself a different wiki for debunking the [[Big Bang]], apparently supported even by [[Richard Dawkins]]. Too bad that not by the elementary physics.  

Let's hope that CP readers don't consider anybody who don't share their prejudice about the Big Bang hypothesis, apparently the main cosmological theory of our times, not so seriously as RW readers did. They made it clear that a crackpot like me should find himself a different wiki for debunking the [[Big Bang]], apparently supported even by [[Richard Dawkins]]. Too bad that not by the elementary physics.  

For the time being the readers of CP, may find except a short form of my paper [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe|here]], a longer form, with extensions that physicists normally "know by heart", but which a high school student may repeat and understand in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] in a form of a step by step derivation of ''cosmological redshift'' of our universe, that the Big Bang aficionados neglected to calculate before jumping to conclusion that the universe is ''"surely"'' expanding since ''"so many astronomers and brilliant mathematicians as them can't be all wrong"''.  

For the time being the readers of CP, may find except a short form of my paper [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe|here]], a longer form, with extensions that physicists normally "know by heart", but which a high school student may repeat and understand in [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] in a form of a step by step derivation of ''cosmological redshift'' of our universe, that the Big Bang aficionados neglected to calculate before jumping to conclusion that the universe is ''"surely"'' expanding since ''"so many astronomers and brilliant mathematicians as them can't be all wrong"''.  

Incidentally, the majority of non believers of RW turned out to be believers in ''creation'' of the whole universe from nothing as it might have been planned by John Archibald Wheeler, who believed in it too. He just might be ashamed to admit it being a [[relativists|relativist]] himself. Though he believed that the expansion would turn out to be decelerating due to his belief in "attractive gravitational force", while the expansion turned out to be looking like accelerating. That I managed to explain after splitting the illusion of acceleration into Taylor series and confirming the observations with accuracy to one standard deviation.

Incidentally, the majority of atheists of RW turned out to be believers in ''creation'' of universe as it might have been planned by John Archibald Wheeler, who believed in it too. He just might be to shy to admit it being a [[relativists|relativist]] himself. Though he believed that the expansion would turn out to be decelerating due to his belief in "attractive gravitational force", while the expansion turned out to be looking like accelerating. That I managed to explain too after splitting the Hubble (so called) "constant" into Taylor series and confirming the observations with accuracy to one standard deviation.

===Why cranks are sometimes right===

===Why cranks are sometimes right===