Authentic Science Fiction Monthly No. 50 — page 63: what you’re looking at

Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.

AUTHENTIC SCIENCE FICTION If, however, we do not assume that the atoms vibrated more slowly in the past, then it necessarily follows that we are receiving the pulses more slowly than they were emitted. Of two consecutive pulses, the second takes longer to reach us than the first. The simplest explanation is that the distant star is moving away from us. It would follow from observa- tions that all distant stars are moving away with velocities proportional to their distance. But if Mr. Puttick or any other amateur scientist wishes to dispute this universal re- cession the onus is upon him to give an alternative explana- tion for the delay of, say, the second pulse as compared with the first. A slowing down of light in transit would not explain it, for both pulses would be slowed down to- gether. Except perhaps if it is assumed that all light is con- tinually getting slower. This 62 would imply that a _ few thousand million years ago the velocity of light was 372,000 instead of 186,000 miles a second. It seems rather less plausible than an expand- ing universe. Thus the proof of the ex- panding universe really does exist and is almost watertight. The alternatives of continu- ally accelerating atoms, or of the continual slowing down of light, are not real alternatives. They are different ways of regarding the same pheno- mena, depending on how your chosen units of length and time vary as the time passes. The proof is almost, but is not absolutely, watertight. An explanation of the red shift could be found which leaves the universe static. Perhaps Authentic readers would try to test their ingenuity to find a flaw in the reasoning. Next month I will deal with that flaw. comicloooks.conm