I also went off to read the original paper (you can read it here)
summary of original paper
* says there's magnetic fields in space and they're thought to help birth stars
* says there's one around (near) our star
* says the one around our star is poorly studied
* says the field around our star is tilted differently than the general field around our galaxy (both of which have always been here.)
* says these fields affect the shape of our solar system and the particles that stream into it
* they used Voyager's data to explore it
* says they looked at the transition point from this "heliosheath" to the rest of the galaxy
* says, in concluding "We analyse the effects of non-stationarity and numerical resolution on our estimates of the magnetic field orientation and find them to be negligible."
So the original author did not understand the paper. He saw "magentic field" and "angle" and tied it together with his own books in a promotional effort.
This isn't science and it isn't reality based. You can read the paper for yourself at the link above.
edit on 23-12-2011 by Byrd because: (no reason given)