Everything You Know About The Universe Is Wrong

Theoretical Physicists Get To Make Up Stuff

July 27, 2010

The rate of expansion of the universe observed, when calculated backward to an initial big bang, gave an age for the universe of only a few billion years, which is easily demonstrably wrong. That was certainly an embarrassment for the big bang theory.

Observations reported in 1948 purported to find that more distant galaxies were indeed older. The way the age of galaxies has been determined is being shown to be unlikely to be right. Thus, it is, in reality, undetermined whether more distant galaxies are older.

The scientific consensus disregards the great likelihood that the electromagnetic radiation frequency shift, attributed to the velocity stars and galaxies supposed to be moving away from each other, is actually due simply to attenuation of the energy over distance. This challenges their fundamental postulate that the universe is expanding, and therefore, the credibility of the big bang theory is uncertain.

Cambridge physicist and Nobel Prize winner Martin Ryle said, “Cosmologists have always lived in a happy state of being able to postulate theories which had no chance of being disproved.” I believe this also to be true about theoretical physicists.

George Gamow imagined that if there had been a big bang that started the universe it would at first be dominated by radiation like a raging sea of energy, and as this expanded the energy would mostly be converted to matter. Ralph Alpher, a graduate student at George Washington University, where Gamow taught, and Robert Herman, an employee at the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory, where Gamow consulted, in cahoots predicted that a remnant of the radiation from the proposed big bang would be cosmic background radiation permeating all space. This sounds an awfully lot like using a theory to prove itself. There is a much more plausible explanation for the cosmic background radiation.

The universe is indeed infinite. All cosmic radiation originating from stars and galaxies is attenuated over distance so great that light from them can’t bee seen. So, it ends up leveling out, by the time it reaches radio telescopes, to the 3 degrees Kelvin allegedly measured by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, working for Bell Labs, and then interpreted by Princeton physicist, Robert Dicke, to be the proof of the big bang theory.

That these outstanding physicists are most likely wrong doesn’t inevitably point to a logical implication that the steady state theory must be right. It, too, has as its basis the fundamental postulate that the universe is expanding. So, it was proved wrong by the big bang theory proponents based on the same presumption they use to claim they have proved their theory to be right. This is the very presumption that will be abandoned.

Many great minds have contemplated these ideas for a long time. It is perplexing to me how it is they couldn’t see that the universe is infinite in every way and all the stuff in the universe has always been and always will be. Overall, on average, the universe is neither expanding nor contracting. The apparent expansion of the universe is just that, an appearance. Everything is always in a state of flux and equilibrium in which galaxies and stars move toward and away from each other, and orbit around each other, collide with each other, come into existence, and just explode. When the big bang theory is dumped and the theory of the cosmos becomes based on this fundamental postulate, that everything has always been and always will be, the proof will fall right into place.