September 11, 2022
Rumors of the Death of the Big Bang Greatly Exaggerated
Carlos Velazquez
Big Bang is now seriously questioned by JWST findings. "Panic" has set in among some cosmologists and astronomers. The red shift is not proportional to distance. Detailed explanation in video.
Tim replies:
I'm skeptical. The atheists in the scientific community have always despised the Big Bang because it postulates a beginning of the universe and follows closely to the descriptions given in the Book of Genesis and that is a major embarassment for the idea that the universe is nothing but a self-contained entity that does not need a creator.
And current thinking says the universe started expanding before the Big Bang - which comports perfectly with Genesis "God created the Heavens and the Earth. And the Earth was malformed, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the Deep...then God said "Let there be light!"
I can also pick at the reasoning employed by those promoting this theory. For one thing, we don't know the composition of anything but what is in stars we can see. We have no way of doing anything but take a guess at the rest of it. And if much of the matter in the universe is tied up in dark matter? What it suggests is that we don't know everything.
But that doesn't mean the theory is wrong.
They also say the more distant stars should be dimming if we are in an expanding universe. Well, how does anyone know if they are? Definitionally we arent seeing it because we can't. We live in a specific point in time and space and have no way of knowing if the stars have dimmed over eons, much less centuries. Our measurements are only quite recent.
Actually, the brightness of distant stars and galaxies has been used in thhe past as evidence of an expanding universe; the collection of light from all over should make the sky glow, and even the dust clouds and nebulae should phosphoresce. That they aren't has been attributed to the fact the universe is expanding (I read about that in a book by George Gamow, father of the Big Bang theory, )
We do know there is the 3* background radiation, which comports with the theory.I think rumors of the death of the Big Bang are greatly exaggerated.
Here is a rebuttal of the "Big Bang never happened" argument. It was before the JWST discovery, but it is still pretty valid. https://astro.ucla.edu/~wright/lerner_errors.html
This still suggests something quite odd, probably having to do with spacetime distortions. In my mind it still doesn't say the universe isnt expanding; why wouldn't we see this behavior closer to home?
Perhaps those portions of the universe "stretched" more quickly than our has. Time may have moved at a faster rate there. For that matter time may be moving at a faster rate or slower rate in other places in general. We know a large enough mass can do that, and a planet on the edge of a black hole would see time dilation. (Although tidal forces would rip it to shreds long before you could notice it. - take that movie Interstellar!)
Scientists always are looking for symmetry in everything, but who says the universe is symmetrical? At any rate, color me skeptical about this.
Yes, it is disturbing, but I don't think this is the smoking gun some believe it to be. Here is an article in CNET that agrees with me. https://www.cnet.com/science/space/no-james-webb-space-telescope-images-do-not-debunk-the-big-bang/#:~:text=In%20addition%2C%20it%27s%20tied%20to%20a%20new%20piece,new%20and%20intriguing%20data%20emerging%20from%20the%20JWST.Here is another such article. https://bigthink.com/hard-science/big-bang-jwst-james-webb/ As the latter article points out there could be some measurement/technical problem giving this image - like a miscalibrated lense. Remember the great spicy sausage incident?https://nypost.com/2022/08/05/amazing-space-telescope-image-was-actually-a-slice-of-chorizo/ Dust between here and there could explain this too. Or we may be wrong in our estimates on how far away they are. We don't have cepheid variables to check the disttnce and obviously parlax is out of the question for determining the distance. We measure the distance to galaxies with surface brightness fluctuation and color. But what if the light between here and there is distorted by, say, dust or a huge dark mass? We might think these galaxies are farther than they are. Or the new telescope may just be wonky. This is all just speculation now, largely untested, and there are multiple reasons why this could be appearing as it is. I don't think it disproves the Big Bang even if we accept the data as accurate. It just shows that Shakespeare was right; there ARE more things on Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of in Horatio's philosophy and cosmologists static thinking.
Big Bang is now seriously questioned by JWST findings. "Panic" has set in among some cosmologists and astronomers. The red shift is not proportional to distance. Detailed explanation in video.
Tim replies:
I'm skeptical. The atheists in the scientific community have always despised the Big Bang because it postulates a beginning of the universe and follows closely to the descriptions given in the Book of Genesis and that is a major embarassment for the idea that the universe is nothing but a self-contained entity that does not need a creator.
And current thinking says the universe started expanding before the Big Bang - which comports perfectly with Genesis "God created the Heavens and the Earth. And the Earth was malformed, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the Deep...then God said "Let there be light!"
I can also pick at the reasoning employed by those promoting this theory. For one thing, we don't know the composition of anything but what is in stars we can see. We have no way of doing anything but take a guess at the rest of it. And if much of the matter in the universe is tied up in dark matter? What it suggests is that we don't know everything.
But that doesn't mean the theory is wrong.
They also say the more distant stars should be dimming if we are in an expanding universe. Well, how does anyone know if they are? Definitionally we arent seeing it because we can't. We live in a specific point in time and space and have no way of knowing if the stars have dimmed over eons, much less centuries. Our measurements are only quite recent.
Actually, the brightness of distant stars and galaxies has been used in thhe past as evidence of an expanding universe; the collection of light from all over should make the sky glow, and even the dust clouds and nebulae should phosphoresce. That they aren't has been attributed to the fact the universe is expanding (I read about that in a book by George Gamow, father of the Big Bang theory, )
We do know there is the 3* background radiation, which comports with the theory.I think rumors of the death of the Big Bang are greatly exaggerated.
Here is a rebuttal of the "Big Bang never happened" argument. It was before the JWST discovery, but it is still pretty valid. https://astro.ucla.edu/~wright/lerner_errors.html
This still suggests something quite odd, probably having to do with spacetime distortions. In my mind it still doesn't say the universe isnt expanding; why wouldn't we see this behavior closer to home?
Perhaps those portions of the universe "stretched" more quickly than our has. Time may have moved at a faster rate there. For that matter time may be moving at a faster rate or slower rate in other places in general. We know a large enough mass can do that, and a planet on the edge of a black hole would see time dilation. (Although tidal forces would rip it to shreds long before you could notice it. - take that movie Interstellar!)
Scientists always are looking for symmetry in everything, but who says the universe is symmetrical? At any rate, color me skeptical about this.
Yes, it is disturbing, but I don't think this is the smoking gun some believe it to be. Here is an article in CNET that agrees with me. https://www.cnet.com/science/space/no-james-webb-space-telescope-images-do-not-debunk-the-big-bang/#:~:text=In%20addition%2C%20it%27s%20tied%20to%20a%20new%20piece,new%20and%20intriguing%20data%20emerging%20from%20the%20JWST.Here is another such article. https://bigthink.com/hard-science/big-bang-jwst-james-webb/ As the latter article points out there could be some measurement/technical problem giving this image - like a miscalibrated lense. Remember the great spicy sausage incident?https://nypost.com/2022/08/05/amazing-space-telescope-image-was-actually-a-slice-of-chorizo/ Dust between here and there could explain this too. Or we may be wrong in our estimates on how far away they are. We don't have cepheid variables to check the disttnce and obviously parlax is out of the question for determining the distance. We measure the distance to galaxies with surface brightness fluctuation and color. But what if the light between here and there is distorted by, say, dust or a huge dark mass? We might think these galaxies are farther than they are. Or the new telescope may just be wonky. This is all just speculation now, largely untested, and there are multiple reasons why this could be appearing as it is. I don't think it disproves the Big Bang even if we accept the data as accurate. It just shows that Shakespeare was right; there ARE more things on Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of in Horatio's philosophy and cosmologists static thinking.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
12:50 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 768 words, total size 5 kb.
1
"Dark matter†has never been proven to exist. We cannot see it or detect it in any manner. We invented it in order to avoid admitting that our theory of gravity may be wrong.
Stars and galaxies are not behaving the way our theory of gravity says they should behave. The universe is expanding al wrong. We can "explain†it by using a magic form of matter which has no mass but has gravitational attraction, and which exists in quantities millions of times greater than all of the observable matter in the universe.
But that still didn’t explain some things that screwed up our math, so we invented "dark energy†to go along with "dark matter.†Same thing. Millions of times more dark energy exists than does all measurable energy in the universe. It is undetectable other than the effect it has on real energy.
Both "darks†are bullshit invented in the vivid imaginations of "scientists†unwilling to admit that they don’t know how the universe works.
Stars and galaxies are not behaving the way our theory of gravity says they should behave. The universe is expanding al wrong. We can "explain†it by using a magic form of matter which has no mass but has gravitational attraction, and which exists in quantities millions of times greater than all of the observable matter in the universe.
But that still didn’t explain some things that screwed up our math, so we invented "dark energy†to go along with "dark matter.†Same thing. Millions of times more dark energy exists than does all measurable energy in the universe. It is undetectable other than the effect it has on real energy.
Both "darks†are bullshit invented in the vivid imaginations of "scientists†unwilling to admit that they don’t know how the universe works.
Posted by: Bill H at September 11, 2022 11:46 PM (Q7br2)
2
I tend to agree with you Bill; they are nothing but convenient ways of getting around the fact the theory does not obey the observations.
I mentioned them here precisely because they illustrate the point that this latest attack on the Big Bang is equally screwy and that if they cling to the assumptions then those assumptions are either wrong and should be scrapped or they are right and the observational data show they work in some way quite different than everyone thinks. If there is dark matter then how does it effect these observations?
In short we don't know and are pretending we have more knowledge than we do.
Again, I think dark matter and dark energy are nothing more than an invention designed to balance the books. I don't think they describe reality.
But there probably is quite a big of mass out there that isn't visible to us. We don't even know what is in our own solar system; there has to be a lot of junk floating around out there. (Which also would argue against interstellar space flight; it would be nearly impossible to travel close to lightspeed through all that crap.)
More data is needed, no question.
I mentioned them here precisely because they illustrate the point that this latest attack on the Big Bang is equally screwy and that if they cling to the assumptions then those assumptions are either wrong and should be scrapped or they are right and the observational data show they work in some way quite different than everyone thinks. If there is dark matter then how does it effect these observations?
In short we don't know and are pretending we have more knowledge than we do.
Again, I think dark matter and dark energy are nothing more than an invention designed to balance the books. I don't think they describe reality.
But there probably is quite a big of mass out there that isn't visible to us. We don't even know what is in our own solar system; there has to be a lot of junk floating around out there. (Which also would argue against interstellar space flight; it would be nearly impossible to travel close to lightspeed through all that crap.)
More data is needed, no question.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at September 12, 2022 07:40 AM (reE4p)
3
"Dark Matter" (Migod, what a racist term!) was postulated just in the same way that the climate freakazoids decided that CO2 was the Bad Boy in (supposed) climate change.
It occurs to me that, regarding these matters and others, the more we know, the less we actually know.
It occurs to me that, regarding these matters and others, the more we know, the less we actually know.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at September 12, 2022 10:10 PM (oFZ1t)
4
It's sometimes refered to as the Study Syndrome.The harder you look at a thing the worse you actually see it.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at September 13, 2022 08:35 AM (q4mxm)
5
Kanpur Matka Fixx Result || satta-matkaz.com || Kanpur Matka Result Today
Kanpur Matka! Day chart Matka ! Kanpur Satta Chart ! kanpur Matka Result ! Kanpur Satta Result ! Dubai Matka Result ! Dubai Satta Matka ! Dubai Satta matka ! Dubai Matka Chart ! Kanpur Panel Chart ! Kanpur Bazar satta Matka ! Birbal matka ! Birbal satta Matka ! Taj Morning matka ! Bombay Morning Matka ! Kalyan Matka ! Kalyan Matka Result ! Kanpur satta Matka ! Kanpur Satta Result ! Gulam day Matka ! Gokul day Satta Matka ! Satta Matka ! CHARMINAR SATTA ! Kanpur matka Result Today Fixx Result !
Kanpur Matka! Day chart Matka ! Kanpur Satta Chart ! kanpur Matka Result ! Kanpur Satta Result ! Dubai Matka Result ! Dubai Satta Matka ! Dubai Satta matka ! Dubai Matka Chart ! Kanpur Panel Chart ! Kanpur Bazar satta Matka ! Birbal matka ! Birbal satta Matka ! Taj Morning matka ! Bombay Morning Matka ! Kalyan Matka ! Kalyan Matka Result ! Kanpur satta Matka ! Kanpur Satta Result ! Gulam day Matka ! Gokul day Satta Matka ! Satta Matka ! CHARMINAR SATTA ! Kanpur matka Result Today Fixx Result !
Posted by: Kanpur Matka at September 18, 2022 06:05 AM (2CCwl)
6
major embarassment for the idea that the universe is nothing but a self-contained entity that does not need a creator.
Posted by: Breitling Replica at June 03, 2023 06:18 AM (SUYyh)
31kb generated in CPU 0.0122, elapsed 0.2443 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.2362 seconds, 194 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.2362 seconds, 194 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
