It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Grock
I dont want to seem like im just shooting you down, I appreciate your input greatly. Its just that I dont fully agree.
Originally posted by Ionized
I agree that the big bang is wrong. It has been dis-proven for quite some time. Unfortunately mainstream academia and professional astronomers and astrophysicists have quite the edifice in place around the theory. And then you have all the general public who has been spoon fed the 'Big Bang' for 60ish years; it is not an easy task to shift the paradigm.
Here is a quick history lesson. Everyone knows Hubble's Law, it is touted as the end all observational proof of expansion. But did you know that Hubble himself didn't agree with the expansion interpretation? This is why: Hubble's original empirical observation states that redshift is inversely proportional to brightness. It was his colleagues that took this empirical formula and derived a theoretical interpretation of it, based on the only known mechanisms at the time (1920s), mixed in with a healthy dose of religion (for instance Georges Lemaître was a priest.) They turned it into a relationship between velocity and distance, which is today mistaken as the original Hubble's Law, and is consistently used as the founding proof for the Big Bang. In fact, in most textbooks you won't even see the original empirical version, but will see the theoretical version (I've read Hubble's original works and it was there that I first learned the distinction.) Near the end of his life, Hubble again strictly denied the expansion interpretation, and cautioned people to look again at the empirical version of his formula, in light of the mounting evidence that space is not a vacuum, but a plasma.
Realizing that space is filled with plasma instead of vacuum, a whole new realm of mechanisms and interpretations become available, many of which are testable in the laboratory. For instance, Forward Brillouin Scattering causes redshift in the forward direction (a key property) as light travels through a plasma. One of the major issues now is that plasma physicists are pretty well ignored by astronomers, etc etc. I could go on... Anyhow, you can check out a book called 'Cosmic Plasma' by Hannes Alfven, nobel prize winning plasma physicist. And more for the lay person, 'The Big Bang Never Happened' by Eric J Lerner.
I don't have much to say about the Holographic theory, as I have not studied it. But taking a quick glance shows parts of it agree with the plasma paradigm.