The Big Bang Theory Flaws and Creation
IMAGE BY WIKIIMAGES FROM PIXABAY
by Owen Borville
April 1, 2019
Astronomy
The Big Bang Theory is the naturalistic mainstream scientific explanation for the origin of the universe. The theory proposes that the universe began as a small and extremely high temperature, dense mass known as a “singularity” that suddenly expanded rapidly as explained by a cosmic explosion. According to the theory, this hot and dense mass that became our universe has been expanding over a long period of time (13 billion years ago) until today. Although most of mainstream science supports the Big Bang, others propose alternative theories, such as the eternal universe theory.
One of the observations used to promote the Big Bang is the starlight distance, which modern astronomers believe are up to billions of light years away. However, one should realize that “light years” refer to distance and not to time despite the terminology. Dr. John G. Hartnett, a physicist, explains that although stars and galaxies are millions of light years away, that does not mean that it took millions of years for the light to get here to earth. Hartnett also explains that scientists in other fields mistakenly refer to the Big Bang as if it is totally proven and that there are different versions of the theory.
Old Universe Big Bang Theory advocates use the “Red Shift” phenomena to explain the expanding universe. Edwin Hubble was the first to use red shift to explain the expanding universe, which he did in 1929 while describing how nearly all galaxies are moving away from each other. Hubble also explained that further galaxies are moving away at a faster rate than closer galaxies. Other astronomers and opponents of the Big Bang refute the red shift phenomena as an evidence of universe expansion. Dr. Halton Arp and others have proposed that redshift is caused by other mechanisms and that the redshift phenomena is not caused by an expanding universe. Arp proposes that redshift could be caused by atoms having variable mass. The concept of an expanding universe is crucial to the Big Bang Theory and any evidence against an expanding universe would severely question Big Bang Theory.
Supporters of Big Bang Theory also use the existence of cosmic background radiation, or steady microwave radiation from space, as evidence for the theory. However, opponents of Big Bang Theory say that nearby galaxies to the Milky Way should be emitting x-ray radiation that would cast an "intergalactic shadow", but these shadows have not been observed in many places where they should be. Scientists at the University of Alabama in Huntsville found evidence of the lack of these intergalactic shadows from nearby clusters of galaxies from new measurements of cosmic microwave background. A team of UAH scientists led by Dr. Richard Lieu used data from NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) to scan the cosmic microwave background for shadows caused by 31 clusters of galaxies.
Is the universe expansion rate constant or did it rapidly increase? Another possibility for universe origin and development is that the universe expanded quicker at first and then slowed down later, making the universe younger than it appears. Therefore, despite the stars and planets being millions and billions of miles away, it did not take million or billions of years to travel to their current position.
While Big Bang Theory supporters claim a 13 billion year old expanding universe is confirmed by the theory, opponents of the theory question how the universe could survive and if there is not a gravitational attraction working against the expansion in order to balance the expansion. Opponents say that if the expansion is not balanced, the universe will either collapse or expand too quickly to support the proposed age of the universe. Creationists believe that the young universe model within a 6,000 year time frame solves this problem of the balance of the universe.
Opponents of the Big Bang Theory also question the lack of "anti-matter" found in the universe. Antimatter is defined as a material composed of the antiparticles or "partners" of the corresponding particles of ordinary matter with the same mass but having the opposite charge. Antiparticles can be produced artificially in laboratories but this process is extremely difficult. In addition, antiparticles can also be formed in nature during natural radioactive processes. Big Bang Theory predicts that there should be an equal amount of matter and antimatter, however very little antimatter has been observed in nature in relation to matter, which creates a significant issue in mainstream astronomy and science. Creationists use this anomaly of antimatter absence to discredit the Big Bang Theory.
In order for Big Bang Theory to be confirmed a period of cosmic inflation must have occurred in the early universe at an exponential rate. However, supporters of the Big Bang Theory have not been able to confirm this inflation period or the mechanism which caused this inflation phenomena.
Heavy elements such as carbon and oxygen have been observed by astronomers in the oldest stars, which would contradict Big Bang Theory. According to the theory, the universe began with the lightest elements including hydrogen and helium and gradually the heavier elements were formed. If the oldest stars observed contain the heavier elements, this phenomena suggests that the heavier elements were part of a special creation several thousand years ago and that the heavier elements did not form gradually over millions and billions of years as the mainstream scientists and the big bang theory suggests. The observation of heavier elements in the oldest stars questions the old age of universe and the Big Bang Theory.
The Big Bang Theory requires that the universe be homogenous in its distribution, however, creationists and Big Bang Theory opponents have explained that the red shift phenomenon shows that the universe has an inhomogeneous distribution, which shows evidence that the universe is not expanding or did not expand in the past. Density differences detected in the universe along with many large vacuum spaces and void spaces cast doubt on the Big Bang Theory, which proposes the expansion of a homogeneous universe.
Big Bang Theory supporters have difficulty explaining how galaxies and galaxy discs form. Galaxies have a rotating disc shape and the Big Bang Theory has difficulty in explaining how these discs form. The theory also cannot explain how galaxies do not hit or merge into each other. Certain forces have allowed galaxies to form their shape and to exist without interference from other galaxies but the theories of the Big Bang cannot explain how galaxies exist in their current form without interference. Mainstream theories cannot explain how accumulations of gas and dust can form disc shaped galaxies with rotating spiral arms using purely naturalistic processes. Creationists explain that the disc shape of galaxies are a unique creation that naturalist theories cannot explain or simulate with theoretical models.
In addition, Big Bang supporters cannot explain where the energy needed to initiate the Big Bang would come from. The laws of physics in modern science explain the conservation of energy and that energy cannot be created or destroyed. The energy needed to initiate the Big Bang cannot be explained by naturalistic processes and could only be explained by the supernatural forces of a special creation, which would in turn violate the principles of the Big Bang Theory. What would cause all of the galaxies in the universe to spin at their current rate? The energy needed to cause the spinning motion of galaxies would have to come from somewhere and naturalistic processes cannot explain the origin of this energy.
While Big Bang supporters focus particularly on the phenomena of gravity forces, other forces could be responsible for the phenomena observed in the formation and the existence of the universe, such as electromagnetic forces. The Big Bang Theory does not account for the possibility of other forces such as electromagnetic forces.
The concept of "dark matter" and "dark energy" is used by mainstream astronomers and Big Bang proponents to accommodate deficiencies when the actual mass of a celestial object does not match or is not sufficient to accommodate an observed gravitational effect. John Hartnett has developed a new explanation that makes the idea of dark matter unnecessary. Other secular astronomers have suspected that dark matter contains a new type of subatomic particle, however, mainstream scientists continue to have reservations about the existence of dark matter. Pavel Kroupa has published work that shows evidence against the existence of dark matter in the form of a new particle or any other form.
Despite commonly accepting the old universe model featuring billions of years of time, evolutionists have their own problems with the Big Bang and the starlight distance issue. The “Horizon Problem” is an issue that puzzles old-earth advocates. In 1964, Penzias and Wilson discovered microwave radiation surrounding earth which originated from distant regions of the universe. This radiation has a constant temperature throughout the universe, while the Big Bang theorizes that different points in the universe had different temperatures and light could not have enough time to reach from one part of the universe to the other using the time scale of the big bang.
Exploding the Big Bang. Creation 25(4):37–39, September 2003.
Big Bang Afterglow Fails An Intergalactic Shadow Test. Moon Daily. http://www.moondaily.com/reports/Big_Bang_Afterglow_Fails_An_Intergalactic_Shadow_Test_999.html.
Oard, Michael. "Missing antimatter challenges the 'big bang' theory." TJ 12(3):256, December 1998.
Lamicella, Paul W. "Antimatter and the Big Bang." Answers in Genesis, March 2006.
Kroupa, Pavel. The dark matter crisis: falsification of the current standard model of cosmology. Cornell University. April 2012.
Albrecht, A. and Magueijo, J., Time varying speed of light as a solution to cosmological puzzles, Phys. Rev. D 59(4):043513–16, 1999.
Clayton, M. and Moffat, J., Dynamical mechanism for varying light velocity as a solution to cosmological problems, Phys. Lett. B 460(3–4):263–270, 1999.
IMAGE BY WIKIIMAGES FROM PIXABAY
by Owen Borville
April 1, 2019
Astronomy
The Big Bang Theory is the naturalistic mainstream scientific explanation for the origin of the universe. The theory proposes that the universe began as a small and extremely high temperature, dense mass known as a “singularity” that suddenly expanded rapidly as explained by a cosmic explosion. According to the theory, this hot and dense mass that became our universe has been expanding over a long period of time (13 billion years ago) until today. Although most of mainstream science supports the Big Bang, others propose alternative theories, such as the eternal universe theory.
One of the observations used to promote the Big Bang is the starlight distance, which modern astronomers believe are up to billions of light years away. However, one should realize that “light years” refer to distance and not to time despite the terminology. Dr. John G. Hartnett, a physicist, explains that although stars and galaxies are millions of light years away, that does not mean that it took millions of years for the light to get here to earth. Hartnett also explains that scientists in other fields mistakenly refer to the Big Bang as if it is totally proven and that there are different versions of the theory.
Old Universe Big Bang Theory advocates use the “Red Shift” phenomena to explain the expanding universe. Edwin Hubble was the first to use red shift to explain the expanding universe, which he did in 1929 while describing how nearly all galaxies are moving away from each other. Hubble also explained that further galaxies are moving away at a faster rate than closer galaxies. Other astronomers and opponents of the Big Bang refute the red shift phenomena as an evidence of universe expansion. Dr. Halton Arp and others have proposed that redshift is caused by other mechanisms and that the redshift phenomena is not caused by an expanding universe. Arp proposes that redshift could be caused by atoms having variable mass. The concept of an expanding universe is crucial to the Big Bang Theory and any evidence against an expanding universe would severely question Big Bang Theory.
Supporters of Big Bang Theory also use the existence of cosmic background radiation, or steady microwave radiation from space, as evidence for the theory. However, opponents of Big Bang Theory say that nearby galaxies to the Milky Way should be emitting x-ray radiation that would cast an "intergalactic shadow", but these shadows have not been observed in many places where they should be. Scientists at the University of Alabama in Huntsville found evidence of the lack of these intergalactic shadows from nearby clusters of galaxies from new measurements of cosmic microwave background. A team of UAH scientists led by Dr. Richard Lieu used data from NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) to scan the cosmic microwave background for shadows caused by 31 clusters of galaxies.
Is the universe expansion rate constant or did it rapidly increase? Another possibility for universe origin and development is that the universe expanded quicker at first and then slowed down later, making the universe younger than it appears. Therefore, despite the stars and planets being millions and billions of miles away, it did not take million or billions of years to travel to their current position.
While Big Bang Theory supporters claim a 13 billion year old expanding universe is confirmed by the theory, opponents of the theory question how the universe could survive and if there is not a gravitational attraction working against the expansion in order to balance the expansion. Opponents say that if the expansion is not balanced, the universe will either collapse or expand too quickly to support the proposed age of the universe. Creationists believe that the young universe model within a 6,000 year time frame solves this problem of the balance of the universe.
Opponents of the Big Bang Theory also question the lack of "anti-matter" found in the universe. Antimatter is defined as a material composed of the antiparticles or "partners" of the corresponding particles of ordinary matter with the same mass but having the opposite charge. Antiparticles can be produced artificially in laboratories but this process is extremely difficult. In addition, antiparticles can also be formed in nature during natural radioactive processes. Big Bang Theory predicts that there should be an equal amount of matter and antimatter, however very little antimatter has been observed in nature in relation to matter, which creates a significant issue in mainstream astronomy and science. Creationists use this anomaly of antimatter absence to discredit the Big Bang Theory.
In order for Big Bang Theory to be confirmed a period of cosmic inflation must have occurred in the early universe at an exponential rate. However, supporters of the Big Bang Theory have not been able to confirm this inflation period or the mechanism which caused this inflation phenomena.
Heavy elements such as carbon and oxygen have been observed by astronomers in the oldest stars, which would contradict Big Bang Theory. According to the theory, the universe began with the lightest elements including hydrogen and helium and gradually the heavier elements were formed. If the oldest stars observed contain the heavier elements, this phenomena suggests that the heavier elements were part of a special creation several thousand years ago and that the heavier elements did not form gradually over millions and billions of years as the mainstream scientists and the big bang theory suggests. The observation of heavier elements in the oldest stars questions the old age of universe and the Big Bang Theory.
The Big Bang Theory requires that the universe be homogenous in its distribution, however, creationists and Big Bang Theory opponents have explained that the red shift phenomenon shows that the universe has an inhomogeneous distribution, which shows evidence that the universe is not expanding or did not expand in the past. Density differences detected in the universe along with many large vacuum spaces and void spaces cast doubt on the Big Bang Theory, which proposes the expansion of a homogeneous universe.
Big Bang Theory supporters have difficulty explaining how galaxies and galaxy discs form. Galaxies have a rotating disc shape and the Big Bang Theory has difficulty in explaining how these discs form. The theory also cannot explain how galaxies do not hit or merge into each other. Certain forces have allowed galaxies to form their shape and to exist without interference from other galaxies but the theories of the Big Bang cannot explain how galaxies exist in their current form without interference. Mainstream theories cannot explain how accumulations of gas and dust can form disc shaped galaxies with rotating spiral arms using purely naturalistic processes. Creationists explain that the disc shape of galaxies are a unique creation that naturalist theories cannot explain or simulate with theoretical models.
In addition, Big Bang supporters cannot explain where the energy needed to initiate the Big Bang would come from. The laws of physics in modern science explain the conservation of energy and that energy cannot be created or destroyed. The energy needed to initiate the Big Bang cannot be explained by naturalistic processes and could only be explained by the supernatural forces of a special creation, which would in turn violate the principles of the Big Bang Theory. What would cause all of the galaxies in the universe to spin at their current rate? The energy needed to cause the spinning motion of galaxies would have to come from somewhere and naturalistic processes cannot explain the origin of this energy.
While Big Bang supporters focus particularly on the phenomena of gravity forces, other forces could be responsible for the phenomena observed in the formation and the existence of the universe, such as electromagnetic forces. The Big Bang Theory does not account for the possibility of other forces such as electromagnetic forces.
The concept of "dark matter" and "dark energy" is used by mainstream astronomers and Big Bang proponents to accommodate deficiencies when the actual mass of a celestial object does not match or is not sufficient to accommodate an observed gravitational effect. John Hartnett has developed a new explanation that makes the idea of dark matter unnecessary. Other secular astronomers have suspected that dark matter contains a new type of subatomic particle, however, mainstream scientists continue to have reservations about the existence of dark matter. Pavel Kroupa has published work that shows evidence against the existence of dark matter in the form of a new particle or any other form.
Despite commonly accepting the old universe model featuring billions of years of time, evolutionists have their own problems with the Big Bang and the starlight distance issue. The “Horizon Problem” is an issue that puzzles old-earth advocates. In 1964, Penzias and Wilson discovered microwave radiation surrounding earth which originated from distant regions of the universe. This radiation has a constant temperature throughout the universe, while the Big Bang theorizes that different points in the universe had different temperatures and light could not have enough time to reach from one part of the universe to the other using the time scale of the big bang.
Exploding the Big Bang. Creation 25(4):37–39, September 2003.
Big Bang Afterglow Fails An Intergalactic Shadow Test. Moon Daily. http://www.moondaily.com/reports/Big_Bang_Afterglow_Fails_An_Intergalactic_Shadow_Test_999.html.
Oard, Michael. "Missing antimatter challenges the 'big bang' theory." TJ 12(3):256, December 1998.
Lamicella, Paul W. "Antimatter and the Big Bang." Answers in Genesis, March 2006.
Kroupa, Pavel. The dark matter crisis: falsification of the current standard model of cosmology. Cornell University. April 2012.
Albrecht, A. and Magueijo, J., Time varying speed of light as a solution to cosmological puzzles, Phys. Rev. D 59(4):043513–16, 1999.
Clayton, M. and Moffat, J., Dynamical mechanism for varying light velocity as a solution to cosmological problems, Phys. Lett. B 460(3–4):263–270, 1999.
