Cosmologists who have promoted the Hubble redshift relation and the 2.7K Cosmic Blackbody Radiation as virtual proof of the big bang have led the rest of the scientific community to consider it one of the outstanding scientific triumphs of all time. Witness, for example, the recent claim that the big bang is bang on because CBR measurements at z = 2.34 bracket big bang's prediction of T = 9.1K. Despite this, some of history's greatest surprises have occurred when apparently well-established scientific theories were overturned after long-overlooked critical testing revealed flaws in their cornerstone postulates. In this instance the scientific community at large has been unaware of cosmologists' failure to verify big bang's cornerstone postulates. This lapse may yet become known as one of the greatest faux pas in the history of science because this series of papers reveals that big bang's cornerstone postulates have always been seriously flawed.
2007-09-05 04:47:53 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Disproof of big-bang cosmology directs attention to GENESIS, a new model of the cosmos that has a nearby universal Center, one whose astrophysical framework is equally "bang on" because its T (z) = 2.73 (1 + z) prediction duplicates big bang's predictions at both z = 2.34 and z = 0, plus accounting for the Hubble relation, but with Doppler and gravitational redshifts instead of F-L expansion redshifts.
2007-09-05 04:48:01 · update #1
Question from: http://www.orionfdn.org/papers/arxiv-1.htm
Is this argument valid?
2007-09-05 04:48:22 · update #2
No surprises there. Pseudo-scientific bafflegab, interspersed with whining about how the scientific establishment has suppressed his ideas.
To give an example of the problems with the site cited, the author claims that the expansion of the universe should preclude the formation of galaxies. His argument is that the gravitational force between galaxy clusters is greater than the gravitational force within a galaxy; therefore the clusters are more tightly bound together. This ignores 1) the very small magnitude of the expansion on the scale of an individual galaxy and 2) that the force he calculates is distributed across an entire galaxy cluster, so that its local effects are minuscule.
2007-09-05 06:17:25 · answer #1 · answered by injanier 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
What's your point?
If the current theory about the origin of the Universe is overturned by a newer theory... so what? It's particularly COOL about science that it is not absolute, as scientists, we take nothing on faith.
I am sure the next widely accepted theory... say, "Little Bang"? will be just as neat and free of those troublesome dieties as the "Big Bang".
Big Bang has been around awhile though, so don't expect it to go away without a fight.
2007-09-05 05:13:55 · answer #2 · answered by Faesson 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yup, there's still some worry about the accuracy of the big bang theory, thats why its called a theory. The data obntained and being debated is realtively recent. We really don't know a whole lot about what happened but are doign our best to guess from the observed data.
The argument really is kind of worthless though. Everyone knows that the theory is a theory and not well worked out yet. Its just that so many people have heard of it that people seem to believe that it is absolute truth. Just because they may have messed up the numbers doesnt mean it didnt happen anyways.
2007-09-05 05:05:18 · answer #3 · answered by billgoats79 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Very good, Geezus...thanks for the great info....
BB is not the only 'cult-like' illusion that is about to get overturned due to lack of verifiable evidence...so is the whole theory of evolution!
Is not an accident that the new model is named GENESIS since it parallels what theologians have been telling us all along from Scripture...
2007-09-05 06:50:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Hey, this forum here is about real questions, not about discussions on theories. Don't you think you'd be that smart. I doubt you fully understand what you wrote yourself. And even if, science is eveolviong by putting up one theory after another until something is proven, only to be "disproven" again years later or similar. That's what science is about. SO what is your point? The BB also is just one of many o theories, it only happens to be the most belieed theory ... that's it.
2007-09-05 05:23:03 · answer #5 · answered by jhstha 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Probably not. The link looks like some fundie site out to disprove evolution.
2007-09-05 12:11:00 · answer #6 · answered by Stainless Steel Rat 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
to me the point is moot
some things we will never fully comprehend at our current life frequency
it similar to the chicken or the egg argument
2007-09-05 07:07:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No
It's a bunch of made up statistics. Baffle with Bull ****.
Big bang is still alive and well...and supported by Genesis.
2007-09-05 05:27:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
I predict that your life will be full of surprises.
2007-09-05 17:07:01 · answer #9 · answered by aviophage 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the big bang is coming
2007-09-05 07:18:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋