The Fall of the Big Bang Theory

  Since its beginnings, the Big Bang Theory has evolved to rely on a growing number of hypotheses required to explain observations:
- Nucleosynthesis theory: to explain the colder than expected temperature of the universe,
- Luminosity correction for galactic evolution: to explain the failure of the Tolman test,
- Inflation: to resolve the flatness problem, the uniformity of the CMBR temperature and the monopole problem,
- Dark matter: to explain the problem of galactic rotation curves and the dynamics of clusters and groups of galaxies,
- Dark Energy: to explain the acceleration of distant supernovae.


  The continuous addition of new hypotheses to a theory constantly in disagreement with new observations is a strong indication that the underlying assumption, that the universe expanded from an extremely dense and hot state, is incorrect.  Based on the large number of publications which expose the theory's weaknesses, it is becoming clear that the Big Bang Theory is collapsing under the weight of its own untested assumptions.

  The arguments against the Big Bang theory are different from some arguments given to reject theories such as relativity or quantum mechanics.  While the latter theories have seen some refinements over the years, no major additional hypothesis was added.  Both theories have had their predictions confirmed to a very high accuracy.

  In contrast, the Big Bang theory has failed repeatedly to produce predictions that agreed with observations.  Instead of rejecting the initial assumption of an initial hot, dense state of the universe, a large number of additional hypotheses are used to hide the inconsistencies.  Today, more than 95% of the universe is claimed to be made of a substance which has never been seen.

  Many questions remain unanswered by the Big Bang theory:
- Why don't Quasars follow the Hubble law?
- Quasars appear as small objects yet are very energetic.  Why don't we see quasars nearby?
- What causes the asymmetry in the temperatures of the CMBR on opposite sides of the sky?
- Why doesn't the timescale of quasar intensity variations increase with redshift?
- Why are mature galaxies seen in the early universe?

- How to explain the very large galaxy structures in the universe?

   I list on this page several web sites and publications reporting inconsistencies in the Big Bang theory.    "The Paradigm Shift is Upon Us!"
Louis Marmet

"Quasar quartet embedded in giant nebula reveals rare massive structure in distant universe"
J. F. Hennawi et al., Science, vol. 348, no. 6236, pp. 779–783, May 2015.
  All galaxies once passed through a hyperluminous quasar phase powered by accretion onto a supermassive black hole.  But because these episodes are brief, quasars are rare objects typically separated by cosmological distances. In a survey for Lyman-a emission at redshift z ≈ 2, we discovered a physical association of four quasars embedded in a giant nebula.   The chance probability of finding a quadruple quasar is estimated to be ~10−7, implying a physical connection between Lyman-a nebulae and the locations of rare protoclusters.

"A dusty, normal galaxy in the epoch of reionization"
Darach Watson et al., Nature (2015 March 2) doi:10.1038/nature14164
  Astronomers discovered a surprisingly dusty little galaxy within the cluster Abell 1689.  This object from the very early universe is bafflingly rich with dust that theory says shouldn't have formed yet.
"Astronomers Find a Dusty Galaxy That Shouldn't Exist", National Geographic

"An ultraluminous quasar with a twelve-billion-solar-mass black hole at redshift 6.30"
Xue-Bing Wu et al., Nature 518, 512–515 (2015 February 26) doi:10.1038/nature14241
  An incredibly massive black hole in the early universe was recently discovered.  The existence of such black holes when the Universe was only 890 million years-old presents substantial challenges to theories of the formation and growth of black holes and the coevolution of black holes and galaxies.
"Gigantic Black Hole Discovered From the Dawn of Time:" Astronomers find a cosmic monster that pushes theories of the early universe to the limit.  National Geographic.

"First Direct Measurement of the 2H(α,γ)6Li Cross Section at Big Bang Energies and the Primordial Lithium Problem"
M. Anders et al. (LUNA Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 042501 – Published 21 July 2014
  Recent observations of 6Li in metal poor stars suggest a large production of this isotope during big bang nucleosynthesis (BBN). In standard BBN calculations, the 2H(α,γ)6Li reaction dominates 6Li production.  Here, [...] the primordial 6Li/7Li isotopic abundance ratio has been determined to be (1.5±0.3)×10−5, from our experimental data and standard BBN theory. The much higher 6Li/7Li values reported for halo stars will likely require a nonstandard physics explanation, as discussed in the literature.

"Alcock–Paczyński Cosmological Test"
M. Lopez-Corredoira, The Astrophysical Journal 781, p. 96 – Published 1 February 2014
  In order to test the expansion of the universe and its geometry, we carry out an Alcock–Paczy
ński cosmological test, that is, an evaluation of the ratio of observed angular size to radial/redshift size. The main advantage of this test is that it does not depend on the evolution of the galaxies but only on the geometry of the universe. [...]  We used six different models: concordance ΛCDM, Einstein–de Sitter, open-Friedman cosmology without dark energy, flat quasi-steady state cosmology, a static universe with a linear Hubble law, and a static universe with tired-light redshift. Only two of the six models above fit the data of the Alcock–Paczyński test: concordance ΛCDM and static universe with tired-light redshift, whereas the rest of them are excluded at a >95% confidence level.
  It is no surprise that the concordance ΛCDM model fit the data since several adjustable parameters (including the inflation field, dark matter and dark energy) have been tuned to fit the data. However, that a simple tired-light theory, without the hypothesized inflation field, dark matter nor dark energy, fits the data this well shows that a tired-light theory is still a serious alternative to the Big Bang theory.

"UV surface brightness of galaxies from the local Universe to z ~ 5"
Eric J. Lerner et al. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 23, 1450058 (2014) DOI: 10.1142/S0218271814500588
  The Tolman test for the expansion of the Universe is reexamined by adopting a static Euclidean Universe with a linear Hubble relation at all z.  The result is a relation between flux and luminosity that is virtually indistinguishable from the one used for Lambda-CDM models.  Based on the analysis of data taken from HUDF and GALEX datasets up to z ~ 5, it is shown that a static model of the universe is compatible with observations.
Universe is Not Expanding After All, Controversial Study Suggests:

"Astronomical redshifts of highly ionized regions"
Peter M. Hansen, Astrophysics and Space Science, Vol. 352, Issue 1, pp. 235-244
, July 2014
  This paper identifies intrinsic redshifts based on an investigation of the so-called Broad Line Region in galaxies.  The results suggest that some contribution to the redshift is intrinsic as it is related to plasma properties in highly ionized regions of Active Galactic Nuclei.

"The Most Luminous z ~ 9-10 Galaxy Candidates Yet Found: The Luminosity Function, Cosmic Star-Formation Rate, and the First Mass Density Estimate at 500 MYR"
P. A. Oesch et al., Astrophysical Journal 786, 108 (2014) doi:10.1088/0004-637X/786/2/108
  "Four surprisingly bright galaxy candidates [...] at z ~ 9 − 10 were discovered, doubling the number of z ~ 10 galaxy candidates that are known, just ~500 Myr after the Big Bang.  The abundance of such luminous candidates suggests [...] higher number density of bright sources than previously expected."  These observations come from many data sets: the HST CANDELS WFC3, the IR GOODS-N, the very deep Spitzer/IRAC 4.5 µm and the GOODS-S.  The redshift is not evaluated from spectroscopic observations.  The reliability of the redshift based on colour is yet to be determined.
  However, since the data does not make sense to the authors, they repeatedly write how surprised they are by many aspects of this discovery:
- "... the detection of such bright z ~ 9 − 10 galaxy candidates in the GOODS-N dataset is surprising given previous constraints on UV LFs at z > 8." §3.3
- "... the unusual brightness of our GOODS-N sources led us to give particular attention to this aspect." §3.3.3
- "While it is quite unlikely that we have identified sources with very unusual SEDs, the possibility remains, though finding four such undocumented sources seems a remote possibility." §3.3.4
- "While it would be surprising (though very interesting) to see significant AGN activity just a few hundred million years after the formation of the first stars, without spectroscopic observations, it is of course nearly impossible to reliably assess such a contribution." §3.4
- "To see if magnification was contributing to their[two highest-redshift sources] unusual brightness we estimated their possible magnification bias based on the simplified assumption ..." §3.5
- "The detection of four very bright z > 9 galaxy candidates in GOODS-N is quite surprising given the dearth of candidates in the very similar GOODS-S data..." §4
- "...the most plausible outcome is that these galaxy candidates are really at z ~ 9 − 10. Yet we cannot rule out that they constitute very unusual objects at lower redshift." §6
- "...the detection of four such bright sources is surprising given the expected number of only 1 source at H160 < 27 mag in the full search area." §6
- "The unusual brightness of these z ~ 9 − 10 candidates makes them obvious targets for spectroscopy, both from the ground and from space." §6
- "Spectroscopic redshift measurements could show if these surprisingly luminous candidates are really at high redshift as all the photometric tests suggest." §6

"A Substantial Population of Massive Quiescent Galaxies at z ~ 4 from ZFOURGE"
Caroline M. S. Straatman et al., Astrophysical Journal 783 L14,
(2014) doi:10.1088/2041-8205/783/1/L14
  The paper reports the observation of mature galaxies having masses similar to that of the Milky Way but with a very low star formation rates.  How did these galaxies form so rapidly and why did they stop forming stars so early, ~1600 Myr after the Big Bang?  The authors "report the likely identification of a substantial population of massive M ~ 1011 M galaxies at z ~ 4 [...]  Fitting stellar population models suggests large Balmer/4000 Å breaks, relatively old stellar populations, large stellar masses, and low star formation rates (SFRs)".  These galaxies have essentially stopped producing stars: "Assuming all far-IR undetected galaxies are indeed quiescent, [...] they comprise a remarkably high fraction (~35%) of z ~ 4 massive galaxies, suggesting that suppression of star formation was efficient even at very high redshift. [...]the galaxies likely started forming stars before z = 5, with SFRs well in excess of 100 M yr–1, far exceeding that of similarly abundant UV-bright galaxies at z ≥ 4."
  It is worth mentioning that if galaxies at z = 5 with SFRs in excess of 100 M yr–1 existed, they could be seen easily.  However, very few such monsters have been seen.  A press report by the Carnegie Institution for Science states: "
It is an enigma that these galaxies seem to come out of nowhere."
We see mature galaxies as massive as the Milky Way but with a lower SFR, a sign of galactic maturity.  Taking the age of the Milky Way as 13 Gyr, this work implies that these galaxies would have formed 11 Gyr before the Big Bang.  This would indeed explain why these galaxies seem to come out of nowhere.

"A galaxy rapidly forming stars 700 million years after the Big Bang at redshift 7.51",
S.L. Finkelstein et al., Nature 502, 524–527 (24 October 2013)
  A new paper published in Nature describes the measurement of the redshift of galaxy z8_GND_5296 identified in the Cosmic Assembly Near-infrared Deep Extragalactic Legacy Survey (CANDELS), which uses the infrared spectrometer on one of the Keck telescopes.  The redshift is measured to be z = 7.508, an accurate determination based on Lyman-alpha emission from hydrogen gas.
  "This new observation of a galaxy that formed about 700 million years after the Big Bang is significant because astronomers have only measured accurate distances for five of them.  This galaxy marks the sixth, and it is the farthest of them all."  Galaxy z8_GND_5296 is relatively rich in “metals” (elements heavier than helium).  These elements are produced by stars rather than the Big Bang, which indicates a very rapid cycle of star birth and death only 700 million years after the Big Bang.
  While there are dozens of galaxies with redshifts greater than 7 (determined indirectly by the apparent color of the galaxy), the redshifts cannot be checked spectroscopically for most because something appears to be preventing much of the Lyman alpha light from reaching us.  At this time there are too few galaxies observed to confirm the hypothesis that intergalactic gas scatters the light.
  The Nature paper reports "a deep near-infrared spectroscopic survey of 43 photometrically-selected galaxies with z > 6.5.  We detect a near-infrared emission line from only a single galaxy, confirming that some process is making Lyman alpha difficult to detect [...] placing this galaxy at a redshift z = 7.51, an epoch 700 million years after the Big Bang.  This galaxy’s colours are consistent with significant metal content, implying that galaxies become enriched rapidly.  We calculate a surprisingly high star-formation rate [...] which is more than a factor of 100 greater than that seen in the Milky Way.  Such a galaxy is unexpected in a survey of our size, suggesting that the early Universe may harbour a larger number of intense sites of star formation than expected."

"Galaxies had evolved to the Hubble sequence 3.3 billion years after the Big Bang",
B. Lee et al., "CANDELS: The Correlation Between Galaxy Morphology and Star Formation Activity at z ~ 2"
  Studying the evolution and anatomy of galaxies an international team of astronomers have established that mature-looking galaxies existed when the universe was only about 3.3 billion years old++.  The study shows that the shapes and colors of these extremely distant young galaxies, big and small, fit the visual classification system introduced in 1926 by Edwin Hubble and known as the Hubble Sequence.
  "Clearly, the Hubble Sequence formed very quickly in the history of the cosmos, it was not a slow process," adds Giavalisco, one author of the study.  "Now we have to go back to theory and try to figure out how and why."
  "Taken altogether, our results show that the correlations between morphology as traced by a suite of common diagnostics, and broadband UV/optical spectral types of the mix of relatively massive galaxies (i.e., M > 10^9 M_sun) at z ~ 2 are quantitatively and qualitatively similar to those observed for their counterparts in the local universe.  We interpret these results as evidence that the backbone of the Hubble sequence observed today was already in place at z ~ 2."
++ Taking z = 2, the age of the universe is calculated with the cosmology calculator at [ Wright (2006, PASP, 118, 1711)]

"Planck reveals an almost perfect Universe",
  Acquired by ESA’s Planck space telescope, the most detailed map ever created of the cosmic microwave background – the relic radiation from the Big Bang – was released today revealing the existence of features that challenge the foundations of our current understanding of the Universe. [...]  This ‘cosmic microwave background’ – CMB – shows tiny temperature fluctuations that correspond to regions of slightly different densities at very early times, representing the seeds of all future structure [...]  Planck was designed to map these fluctuations across the whole sky with greater resolution and sensitivity than ever before. [...]
  Because precision of Planck’s map is so high, it also made it possible to reveal some peculiar unexplained features that may well require new physics to be understood. [...]  One of the most surprising findings is that the fluctuations in the CMB temperatures at large angular scales do not match those predicted by the standard model – their signals are not as strong as expected from the smaller scale structure revealed by Planck.   Another is an asymmetry in the average temperatures on opposite hemispheres of the sky. This runs counter to the prediction made by the standard model that the Universe should be broadly similar in any direction we look.  Furthermore, a cold spot extends over a patch of sky that is much larger than expected.
  The asymmetry and the cold spot had already been hinted at with Planck’s predecessor, NASA’s WMAP mission, but were largely ignored because of lingering doubts about their cosmic origin.  “The fact that Planck has made such a significant detection of these anomalies erases any doubts about their reality; it can no longer be said that they are artefacts of the measurements. [...],” says Paolo Natoli of the University of Ferrara, Italy.  “Imagine investigating the foundations of a house and finding that parts of them are weak. You might not know whether the weaknesses will eventually topple the house, but you’d probably start looking for ways to reinforce it pretty quickly all the same,” adds François Bouchet of the Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris.
  One way to explain the anomalies is to propose that the Universe is in fact not the same in all directions on a larger scale than we can observe. In this scenario, the light rays from the CMB may have taken a more complicated route through the Universe than previously understood, resulting in some of the unusual patterns observed today. [...]
  Finally, the Planck data also set a new value for the rate at which the Universe is expanding today, known as the Hubble constant. At 67.15 km/s/Mpc, this is significantly less than the current standard value in astronomy. The data imply that the age of the Universe is 13.82 billion years.

"Trends in Cosmology: Beyond the Big Bang",
David Pratt,
  The big bang theory – also known as the lambda-cold dark matter model, or the concordance model – is based on three main pieces of observational evidence. Firstly, in the early decades of the 20th century it was discovered that the light from distant galaxies is 'redshifted', i.e. the spectral lines indicating their constituent elements are displaced towards the red or long-wavelength end of the spectrum when compared with spectra for the same elements on earth. One possible explanation is that the galaxies are rushing apart at great speed because the universe is expanding; from this it was inferred that the universe originated in a huge explosion. Secondly, the universe is filled with a uniform microwave radiation, which is claimed to be the faint echo of the big bang. Thirdly, the big bang theory is believed to explain the relative abundances of hydrogen, helium, and other light elements in the universe. Commenting on the evidence for the big bang, an editorial in the New Scientist stated: 'Never has such a mighty edifice been built on such insubstantial foundations.'
  Over the years, various auxiliary hypotheses have been added to the big bang theory to bring it into line with new observations. Inflation theory, and the invention of exotic 'dark matter' and mysterious 'dark energy' (which are said to make up over 95% of the universe) are the most flagrant examples. Michael Disney has shown that the number of 'free parameters' (i.e. fudge factors) exceeds the number of independent measurements supporting the big bang theory, and there is no sign of any systematic improvement over time. He concludes that the big bang has all the hallmarks of 'a folktale constantly re-edited to fit inconvenient new observations'.

"The Paradigm Shift Is Upon Us!"
Hilton Ratcliffe,
  Big Bang Theory has been my nemesis. Fighting against what I perceived to be an irrational theory impacting on my chosen field was hardly a rewarding endeavour. I certainly didn’t make any money out of it. To be fair, though, in attempting to show the scientific weakness of the prevailing Holy Cow, I learnt a lot, not so much about science as about human nature. It was clear that notwithstanding whatever it was that seeded the development of this theory, what it had become within a decade of its inception was a fully-fledged belief system, even in the minds of scientists.

Is Dark Matter "The Emperor’s New Clothes?"
D. Dilworth,
  "To claim that you have simulated the Big Bang is like a schoolboy claiming after winning a high jump medal that he is close to jumping on to the moon."  Esteemed Cosmologist Professor Emeritus Jayant V. Narlikar reports from a Cosmology Conference on the latest developments in Dark Matter, Gravitational Waves, FTL Neutrinos, Big Bang cosmologists hugely overstating their conclusions, and a few other topics.

"Oldest Spiral galaxy BX442 supports Hubble’s belief: Redshift does not mean expansion",
L. Marmet,
  A team of astronomers have reported the discovery of the oldest spiral galaxy known so far. What makes this discovery interesting is that this grand-design spiral galaxy already existed 3 billion years after the Big Bang when the universe was too hot and chaotic to allow such a regular structure to survive long enough to be seen.

"The 2dF Redshift Survey. I. Physical Association and Periodicity in Quasar Families",
C.C. Fulton, H.C. Arp,
  Physical associations of candidate companion quasars with putative parent galaxies are found in the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey (2dFGRS) and quasars from the 2dF Quasar Redshift Survey (2QZ).  Control trials against the pure physical associations are obtained by replacing the actual redshifts of the candidate companion quasars with quasar redshifts drawn randomly from each respective right ascension hour.
  The Big Bang theory does not explain such associations.
The Astrophysical Journal, Volume 754, Issue 2, article id. 134.

"News: International Astronomical Union has no Definition for Big Bang",
David Dilworth,
  The world’s most widely respected astrophysics organization, the International Astronomical Union (or IAU), has affirmed that it has no definition for any Big Bang model.  At the same time the world’s most cited cosmologist, Princeton’s Professor P. James E. Peebles, says that the Standard Cosmology Model’s "definition is a mess."  "The name Big Bang is a very poor choice because it suggests a moment of time — a bang — and maybe also a place — where the bang occurred. Neither is part of the reasonably well tested theory of the evolution of the universe from a hot dense state to what we see around us. But the name has stuck, so I have stopped boycotting it."

"Observation of two early yet mature galaxies: Rare objects or is Big Bang model inaccurate?"
L. Marmet,
  The European Southern Observatory (ESO) recently reported a surprise while observing two extremely distant galaxies; at a very high redshift (z = 3.57); so far away that they are seen as they were a long time ago: only 1.8 billion years after Big Bang.  The surprise was to discover that the cool gas in these presumably young galaxies was very rich in heavy elements (all called metals), a chemical composition usually only seen in older galaxies because it takes so long to make heavy elements. The ESO web site reports that an international team used the flash of a distant gamma-ray burst GRB 090323 as a probe to study the spectra of the two galaxies (G0 and G1).

"The Static Universe: Exploding the Myth of Cosmic Expansion",
Hilton Ratcliffe,
  "The Static Universe" is an anthem for the growing number of skywatchers who are heartily sick and tired of being led up the garden path. Is the Universe expanding? Maverick astrophysicist Hilton Ratcliffe, author of the highly controversial book "The Virtue of Heresy", argues that it is not, and if he's right, an entire body of science is brought to its knees. The impact of the ensuing catastrophe will be devastating, and the cost to those who doggedly defend the prevailing paradigm is inestimable. It certainly runs to billions of dollars. In a world where self-interest rules, the author of this shocking expos is literally putting himself on the line. Big Brother does not want you to read this!

"Discordancy Report",
Shannon Sims,
  The Big Bang Theory postulates that the entire Universe is expanding from the enormous explosion of an infinitely hot and dense singular point of matter almost 14 billion years ago.  However this theory is based upon many assumptions.  The first of which is that the redshifts observed in the electromagnetic spectra of galaxies, quasars and other extragalactic bodies are the result of the acceleration of these bodies away from the observer.  It is also assumed that the higher the redshift of an object’s spectrum the faster its acceleration and the further its distance away from the observer.  It is thus further assumed that this acceleration is caused by the expansion of the Universe in all directions since the optical spectra of almost all extragalactic bodies are redshifted to some degree regardless of the direction in space observed.    For over 80 years this theory has grown in acceptance among astronomers and cosmologists to the point of ubiquity in the scientific community.  But what if all of these assumptions are wrong?  What if extragalactic redshifts aren’t caused by cosmic acceleration?  What if extragalactic redshifts  aren’t a true measure of distance?

"Hydrogen Cloud Separation as Direct Evidence of the Dynamics of the Universe"
L. Ashmore,
  Despite the idea of an expanding universe having been around for nearly one hundred years there is still no conclusive, direct evidence for expansion. This paper examines the Lyman Alpha forest in order to determine the average temperature and the average separation of Hydrogen clouds over the aging of the universe. A review of the literature shows that the clouds did once become further and further apart (showing expansion?) but are now evenly spaced (an indication of a static universe?). Doppler parameters give an indication of the temperature and/or the degree of disturbance of the clouds and the evidence is that the temperature or degree of disturbance is increasing rather than decreasing as required by an expanding universe. Whilst these results do not support any cosmology individually, they do support one where the universe expanded in the past but that expansion has now been arrested and the universe is now static. A separate mechanism for redshift would be required to explain why, in this scenario, the Hydrogen clouds are evenly spaced in the local universe -- but have differing redshifts.  High z Hydrogen cloud separation can be used to give an independent estimate on the lower limit of the age of the universe in an expanding model and it is found that the age must be far greater than the presently accepted value of 13.8 billion years -- if the H1 clouds are to achieve their present separations without some mechanism other than inflation being involved.

"Evidence that Quasars and Related Active Galaxies are Good Radio Standard Candles and that they are Likely to be a Lot Closer than their Redshifts Imply",
M. B. Bell,
  For many years some astronomers have continued to argue, using redshift periodicities and quasar-galaxy associations, that quasars may be closer than their redshifts imply. Here, for the first time using raw radio data, I re-examine this question and find new evidence that supports this argument. Using VLBA flux densities and angular motions in jets, I show that the central engine of quasars and BL Lac objects appears to be a good radio standard candle. Using this information, relative distances are calculated and absolute radio distances are then obtained by referencing to a source whose true distance has been obtained using Cepheid variables. The results reveal that in this model most of the strong radio sources found in early surveys are nearer than 100 Mpc.
Submitted to the Astrophysical Journal

"Sandage versus Hubble on the reality of the expanding universe",
Domingos S.L. Soares,
  A critical reading of Lubin & Sandage's 2001 paper on the Tolman effect for the reality of the expansion of the universe clearly reveals that Sandage is far from winning the dispute with Hubble on the issue. After all the years, Hubble's doubt about the reality of the expansion remains as valid as Sandage's certainty expressed in a series of papers in the last decade.

"A high abundance of massive galaxies 3–6 billion years after the Big Bang"
Karl Glazebrook et al., Nature 430, 181-184 (8 July 2004) | doi:10.1038/nature02667
   Observations challenge standing view of how and when galaxies formed.  A rare glimpse back in time into the universe's early evolution has revealed something startling: mature, fully formed galaxies where scientists expected to discover little more than infants.  "Up until now, we assumed that galaxies were just beginning to form between 8 and 11 billion years ago, but what we found suggests that that is not the case," said Karl Glazebrook, associate professor of physics and astronomy in the Krieger School of Arts and Sciences at The Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. "It seems that an unexpectedly large fraction of stars in big galaxies were already in place early in the universe's formation, and that challenges what we've believed. We thought massive galaxies came much later."
  From the paper in Nature: Hierarchical galaxy formation is the model whereby massive galaxies form from an assembly of smaller units. The most massive objects therefore form last. The model succeeds in describing the clustering of galaxies, but the evolutionary history of massive galaxies, as revealed by their visible stars and gas, is not accurately predicted. Here we report the results of a spectroscopic redshift survey that probes the most massive and quiescent galaxies back to an era only 3 Gyr after the Big Bang. We find that at least two-thirds of massive galaxies have appeared since this era, but also that a significant fraction of them are already in place in the early Universe.

"An Open Letter to the Scientific Community",
  The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed-- inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory.

"Time Dilation and Quasar Variability",
M.R.S. Hawkins,
the Astrophysical Journal, 553:L97–L100, 2001 June 1
  The timescale of quasar variability is widely expected to show the effects of time dilation. We analyze the Fourier power spectra of a large sample of quasar light curves to look for such an effect. We find that the timescale of quasar variation does not increase with redshift, as required by time dilation. Possible explanations of this result all conflict with widely held consensus in the scientific community.

"The Big Bang Theory is Absurd",
Vincent Sauvé,
  The purpose of this website is to provide the public with reasons to be skeptical of Big Bang cosmology. [...] It is my view that Big Bang cosmology is the sophisticate's creation story. The expression Big Bang cosmythology is fitting. For whenever I dug deep into an aspect of modern day cosmology, I discovered that the real history, combined with reasonable logic, doesn't provide for a kind view of the whole affair. Rather, it seems to be a massive (conscious or unconscious) pandering to the prejudice of a culture brought up on the belief of a creator who created us, and the entire cosmos.

"A Group Of Quasi-Stellar Objects Closely Associated with NGC 1068"
The Astrophysical Journal, 511:L9–L11, 1999 January 20 q 1999.
E. M. Burbidge
  It is shown that three of the compact X-ray sources detected by ROSAT close to the nearby classical Seyfert galaxy NGC 1068 are quasi-stellar objects (QSOs). The distribution and very high surface density of these QSOs strongly suggest that they are physically associated with NGC 1068 and were ejected from it.

"Some Critiques of the Big Bang Cosmology",
Jean-Claude Pecker,
  Still more shocking than the metaphysical assumption of some initial singularity, is the constant insistence upon the so-called cosmological principle of “homogeneity” and “isotropy” of the Universe. Observations do contradict this principle. And to me, the inhomogeneous, fractal at least on a certain scale range, of the distribution of matter is in itself an important cosmological fact, hitherto almost neglected. Moreover difficulties as to the applicability of the second principle of thermodynamics, observations of abnormal redshifts, etc., are casting large doubts not only upon the standard cosmological models, but even on the interpretation of the observed redshift as due solely to a universal expansion.
J. Astrophys. Astr. (1997) 18, 323–333

"Arp banished, but not redshift anomalies",
William R. Corliss,
  Several years ago, H. Arp, a noted American astronomer, moved to Europe to continue his research because, in part, of the hostility of American astronomers to his discoveries. The problem was (and still is) that Arp found galaxies that seem to be physically interacting and, therefore, at the same distance from earth, but yet have radically different or "discordant" redshifts. Since redshifts are supposed to be a measure of distance from the earth, an anomaly comes into focus. This anomaly; that is, the credibility of the redshift distance scale, challenges the ideas of an expanding universe and the Big Bang itself.
Also see: "Anomalous Redshift Investigator"

"History of the 2.7 K Temperature Prior to Penzias and Wilson",
A. K. T. Assis, M. C. D. Neves,
  We present the history of estimates of the temperature of intergalactic space. We begin with the works of Guillaume and Eddington on the temperature of interstellar space due to starlight belonging to our Milky Way galaxy. Then we discuss works relating to cosmic radiation, concentrating on Regener and Nernst. We also discuss Finlay-Freundlich’s and Max Born’s important research on this topic. Finally, we present the work of Gamow and collaborators. We show that the models based on a Universe in dynamical equilibrium without expansion predicted the 2.7 K temperature prior to and better than models based on the Big Bang.

"The Big Bang Never Happened",
Eric J. Lerner,
  The book, the Big Bang Never Happened, presents evidence that the Big Bang theory was contradicted by observations and that another approach, plasma cosmology, which hypothesized a universe without begin or end, far better explained what we know of the cosmos.  Since then, observations have only further confirmed these conclusions, although the Big Bang remains by far the most widely accepted theory of cosmology.

"Big Bang Cosmology Meets an Astronomical Death"
Paul Marmet,
  We are all so accustomed to reading that the universe "began" once a time with the Big Bang that most people no longer think it necessary to question or scrutinize it. A detailed analysis of the Big Bang theory, however, leads to consequences and implications that are inconsistent, or are contradicted by astrophysical observations, including important ones.
Published in 21st Century, Science and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 52-59, 1990.

"The Redshift Controversy",
George B. Field, Halton Arp, John N. Bahcall,
  The redshift controversy is the most fiercely debated in modern astronomy.  The controversy concerns the meaning of the observed large redshifts of quasars and galaxies: are they caused entirely by expansion of the universe?  The answer to this question underlies all of modern astronomy as well as man's conception of his place in the Universe.
Publisher: W. A. Benjamin

"Synthesis of the Elements in Stars",
E. Margaret Burbidge, G. R. Burbidge, William A. Fowler, F. Hoyle,
  A discussion of the origin of 2D, 3He, 4He and 7Li, as due to the x-process in primary nucleosynthesis. While it is generally argued, following Gamow, Alpher, and Herman, that these isotopes were synthesized in a Big Bang, it is equally likely that these isotopes were made in active galactic nuclei, as was the cosmic microwave background (CMB), in a cyclic universe model. The key piece of observational evidence is that the amount of energy carried by the CMB, namely about 4.5×10-13 erg/cm3.
Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 547–650 (1957)

Hit Counter by Digits visits since 2014/2/6 Web Counter

completely free
Free Counter
visitors since 2014/2/7

Copyright © 2014 Louis Marmet