The Big Bang _could_ be right. But then...maybe not. Your guess is as
good as mine or this guy's:
Why the
Big Bang is Wrong
Why the Big Bang is Wrong
John Kierein
The Big Bang theory of the universe is wrong because the cosmological
red shift is due to the Compton effect rather than the Doppler effect.
See The Endless, Boundless, Stable Universe by Grote Reber and Hubble's
Constant in Terms of the Compton Effect by John Kierein.
Reber showed that the Compton effect was the cause of the red shift in
order to explain the observations of bright very long wavelength
extragalactic radio waves. Kierein used the Compton effect explanation
to explain quasars and the red shift on the sun.
Quasars may be much closer than their red shift would indicate if they
have an "intrinsic" red shift due to being surrounded by a 'fuzzy'
atmosphere containing free electrons and other material. This
concentration of electrons produces the unusual red shift as the light
travels through it and loses energy to these electrons per the Compton
effect. If quasars are nearby, they may even exhibit proper motion in
the sky as the Earth travels around the sun. Such a proper motion has
been seen. See Quasar Absolute Proper Motion for a table that includes
such proper motion observations.
Some quasars may be double stars, with one member being an ordinary star
and the other exhibiting a large red shift and being labeled as a
quasar. The 100,000th Hubble Image is a good candidate for such a pair.
The red shift on the sun is obviously not Doppler since the sun is not
moving away from us. This shift shows a variation in magnitude that
correlates with the number of electrons along the line of sight. It is
smallest at the solar center and greatest at the limb where we are
looking through the thickest part of the sun's atmosphere. Kierein and
Sharp showed this correlation as a Compton effect interpretation in the
journal "Solar Physics" in March of 1968. Compton himself believed this
was the cause of the solar red shift (see Compton, A. H., 1923 Phil.
Mag. 46, 897). The electrons on the sun are concentrated in altitude by
gravity with the greatest density near the sun's surface (the
photosphere) to produce the sun's intrinsic red shift. Similarly, the
quasar red shift (and other bright, hot young stars' "K effect"
intrinsic red shift - see Arp's book.) have an intrinsic Compton effect
red shift concentrated at or very near the object's surface.
For the Compton effect to cause the cosmological red shift,
intergalactic space must have a density of free electrons and/or
positrons. The further light travels through this transparent medium,
the greater the red shift - and Hubble's law follows. The existence of
electrons and positrons in intergalactic space has been shown by
observations of electron-positron annihilation gamma rays coming from
above our galactic plane. This is the direction our galaxy is plowing
into the intergalactic medium. (See "Peculiar Velocity of the Sun and
its Relation to the Cosmic Microwave Background" by J.M. Stewart &
D.W.Sciama, Nature vol. 216,p 748f, Nov. 25, 1967.) This is observed
from the, appropriately named, Compton Gamma Ray Observatory in orbit
above the Earth's atmosphere.
Indeed, while intergalactic space was once thought to be empty, now we
know it is filled with clouds of high velocity gas that contain
molecular hydrogen. This molecular hydrogen is thought to come from the
condensation of hydrogen atoms that are just free electrons and protons.
When light hits these free electrons, it produces the Compton effect red
shift.
If the Compton effect causes the red shift, the universe is not
expanding, but rather is "static". Max Born (and others - see below) did
an analysis of the background temperature of such a universe and found
that it doesn't differ greatly from the observed 3 degree kelvin
background.
Grote Reber predicted that this interpretation of the red shift would
result in a dispersion in the arrival times of extragalactic signals.
The recent pinpointing of the extragalactic nature of gamma ray bursts
and the delay in arrival times of longer wavelength radiation from these
events confirms this prediction as shown in Dark Matter by John Kierein.
This time lag for longer wavelengths is shown by Dr. Jay Norris to
provide a method of measuring distance to the gamma ray source.
Some say that the Compton effect should cause the light to be scattered
and distance sources blurred. Does scattering cause blurring? Not
necessarily. Note how the Milky Way stars at the edge of the Barnard 68
dust cloud are not at all blurred even though they are dimmed to
extinction as their photons are absorbed and scattered. Also note how,
when this object is viewed in the Infrared, the background stars shine
right through this cloud without blurring! Dark matter causes light to
bend without blurring.
The Big Bang Has Many Problems
There are a great many problems with the Big Bang Theory that have not
been solved. Many of these are identified in Bill Mitchell's paper, "
Big Bang Theory Under Fire". These problems include the idea that there
are many objects observed that are older than the time from the big
bang, which is variously estimated to be from 10 to 15 billion years
ago, with the best estimates being 10 billion years.
Stars and globular clusters in our galaxy are thought to be older than
15 billion years and there seem to be similar stars that are seen in
galaxies that are many billions of light years away from us and thus
apparently formed closer to the time of the big bang.
Measurements of the uranium content of stars has produced a minimum age
of the universe of at least 12 billion years, whereas the best
measurements of Hubble's constant produce an age of 10 billion years.
Even our earth is thought to be 5 billion years old, and is expected to
exist for another 5 billion years before the sun expands and swallows it
up. The atoms and molecules of the earth are thought to have been
generated in previous stars that went through several cycles of
supernovae. Even though supernovae are thought to last only fraction of
our sun's lifetime, it is highly improbable that there is sufficient
time for these cycles to have occurred since a big bang.
Similarly, our galaxy is rotating at a speed that only permits from 45
to 60 rotations since the big bang, which (according to Mitchell) is not
a long enough time for it to achieve its spiral shape. Many spiral
galaxies are seen at a large distance and therefore from a time closer
to the big bang which would indicate they would have had time for even
fewer rotations. Recent Hubble Photo shows spiral galaxies within 5% of
big bang time leaving time for only 2 or 3 rotations at our galaxy's
rotation rate. The galaxies in this photo don't seem to be crowded
closer together as one would expect if they were really so close to the
big bang.
There are some very large chains of galaxies spread throughout the
universe. It is believed these large structures, like the "great wall",
would require many hundreds of billions of years to form.
Galactic redshift surveys show a regularity in the spacing of galaxies a
quarter of the way to the time of the supposed big bang. This is totally
different from a big bang expectation which would have them closer
together as they get closer to the time of the big bang.
How do galaxies collide if they are flying away from each other?
There are also some great problems with the "singularity" of the big
bang. What happened before the big bang?? The big bang theorists can't
answer this question and just say it's a meaningless question. (They
like to say it's like asking "What's north of the North Pole?" -
Actually it's not like asking that at all. North is a direction; time is
a measure of change. If there was no change before the big bang, then
how could it have started?)
If there was a big bang, the temperature of the background radiation
would have had to be much higher in the past. Yet there are observed
cosmic ray particles, that are protons or nuclei of atoms that are
traveling through space at speeds approaching the speed of light. These
particles can't plow through the background radiation field at these
higher temperatures without interacting with the photons of such a high
temperature background and being stopped. But the highest energy cosmic
rays are observed at energies beyond this theoretical cutoff energy.
The temperature of intergalactic space was predicted by Guillaume,
Eddington, Regener, Nernst, Herzberg, Finlay-Freundlich and Max Born
based on a universe in dynamical equilibrium without expansion. They
predicted the 2.7 degree K background temperature prior to and better
than models based on the Big Bang. See "History of the 2.7 K Temperature
Prior to Penzias and Wilson" by A. K. T. Assis and M. C. D. Neves in
Aperion Vol.2, Nr. 3, page 79f, July 1995.
There are many other discrepancies in redshift observations that are
much better explained by non-Doppler shifts. Hubble, of course, didn't
agree that the redshift was Doppler (see his book "The Observational
Approach to Cosmology" or Allan Sandage's discussion of Hubble's
beliefs). There were several difficulties with this interpretation that
he pointed out. Not the least of which is that if it were Doppler, then
not only should each photon be stretched out by the Doppler effect, but
also the distance between each photon. Because the photon flux is
reduced, this causes the object undergoing a Doppler redshift to appear
less bright than a corresponding object undergoing a non-doppler
redshift. Hubble knew his observations were not in agreement with this
brightness correction. He also knew that a simpler, non-curved-space
cosmology resulted from a non-Doppler interpretation, and he felt that
simpler was better. He didn't know what causes the photons to lose
energy as they travel through space, but he felt that it is some "new
principle of nature" that I think is the Compton effect.
As big bang theorists attempt to solve the age problem by making the
time to the big bang longer, they exacerbate the quasar problem. Quasars
become even farther away and intrinsically brighter. Yet their
temperature remains that of ordinary stars as exhibited by emission
spectra of metallic ions that can only exist at a limited range of
temperature. They are known to be about stellar size since they vary in
brightness on a scale of a few minutes to seconds. How do they stay so
bright at such a low temperature in such a small volume? They can't.
They must have an intrinsic non-Doppler redshift and be nearby to be
explained.
If neutrinos have mass about 1 ten millionth the mass of the electron,
their Compton Effect red shift would be 10 million times that of that of
the electron. The probability of a neutrino Compton Effect remains to be
determined.
Paul Marmet has presented ideas very similar to the idea that the
Compton effect causes the red shift and presents additional evidence
against the big bang at his web site.
Ever wonder what causes gravity? See the new book: PUSHING GRAVITY.
The videotape, "Gravity and the Red Shift", is also available from the
author. It describes the cause of gravity in the endless, static
universe. $10 for a postpaid copy ordered from the email below.
Checkout my other website: Where the Extraterrestrial Life Is
Positrons and electrons outside our galaxy
Quasars ejected from galaxy
Bad Astronomy Bulletin Board
Arp's new book - Seeing Red
Making electrons and positrons
Natural Philosophy Alliance
Non-curved universe agrees with Hubble's static model
Sauve's Challenges to Big Bang Assertions
Arp
Unexplained attraction of Pioneer Spacecraft to the Sun
Hoyle, Burbidge, Narlikar's new book;
Gamma Rays as a source of electron-positron pairs in intergalactic space
Light Elements Made Without a Big Bang
Where are the Quasars?
Intergalactic Stars - Another Challenge to the Big Bang
Paul Marmet's web page
Gravity 1960 Russian paper
Universe Only 10 Billion Years Old
Solar Eclipse Gravity Anomalies
It's Not Accelerating After All?
Too Many Distant Galaxies for Big Bang
Pendulum Anomalies Seen in 8/11/99 Eclipse Path
Lots of electrons between us and quasars
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
Check out http://clik.to/sf for other lists to join.
A93MR48T18
==^================================================================
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?b1dhdK.b1tdRU
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================
