The message
from Martin Brown contains these words:

/snip/

Actually we do have some pretty good examples in the millisecond pulsars
for instance. Shortly after the first discovery of a binary ms pulsar an
error was found in the FORTRAN converter of the early VSOP computer
algebra generated planetary ephemeris thanks to a systematic error in
the GR predicted delay observed when the signals passed near to Jupiter.
The spin down rate matches the GR predictions very nicely.

Ah, early 486 chip then?

or even that the red shift is due to recession, and

We don't know this for certain (but it is likely to be true for the vast
majority of normal light emitting stars), but for some extremely compact
objects some of the redshift could come from photons having to climb out
of a very deep gravitational potential well. But on a galactic scale
such objects seem rather unlikely except near the central black hole.

And we do see a picket fence of intervening Lyman alpha absorbtion lines
in the continuum of allegedly distant sources at high redshift.

there are alternative hypotheses that are mathematically consistent
and compatible with known physics. Yes, they're probably wrong, but
that doesn't prove the current hypotheses are right.

Indeed. But the evidence for a Big Bang cosmology is pretty compelling.
There are very few die hard Steady Staters remaining these days.

Depending on what you mean by that. There are plenty who believe that
the universe is continuously expansing and then falling in on itself in
an unending cycle of big crunches ans big bangs.

There are also some who posit continuous creation/generation of matter
at the centre of the universe, and yet others who maintain that by means
of a contorted space/time continuum what goes out of the fringes appears
to be coming in through the centre...

Anyway, how come the universe doesn't rank a capital letter, and Belgium does?

--
Rusty
Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk
Separator in search of a sig