It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Big Bang Never Happened

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+31 more 
posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 04:30 PM
In this post I will focus on presenting overwhelming evidence against the theory of the Hubble law.

Many prominent scientists rejected the idea of the big bang when it was first proposed by Georges Lemaître, a catholic priest, in 1927. Notably, these scientists included Einstein himself. Lemaitre's intent with his theory was to find a way to tie science and theology together for the betterment of man. The defining piece of evidence that finally led scientists such as Einstein to change their minds and accept Lemaitre's proposed theory of a big bang was an astronomical finding by a man named Edwin Hubble.

Hubble made what amounted to the finding of the century. When looking at the spectrum of light coming from distant galaxies, Hubble found that absorption lines in the spectrum of galaxies were red shifted in accordance with their luminosity. When you take a piece of light and break it down into its spectrum with a prism, you will see faint dark lines in the spectrum. These lines are called absorption lines, because elements in the light absorb certain frequencies of light blocking them from view.

An example of red shifting absorption lines:

What Hubble found was that if you plotted the location of these dark lines in the spectrum of light coming from galaxies, the further to the red end of the spectrum the lines fell, the dimmer the galaxy was observed to be. This red shifting of light lead Hubble to conclude that red shift was a function of distance. This function of distance could be explained by something called the Doppler effect which postulates the faster something is moving away from us the more red shifted its light will be. This idea matched nicely with Lemaitre's idea of expanding space and the Big Bang.

A plot of galaxies red shift compared to their luminosity:

Enter Quasars

At the time Hubble made his findings, quasars were not known to exist. Quasars, or quasi-stellar objects, are dim point like objects we see in space that have HUGE red shifts. According to standard theory, this means they must be on the edge of the observable universe and output extraordinary amounts of energy for them to be visible. Why are quasars so important? Because their red shift does NOT correlate to their observed luminosity (brightness). In fact, Fred Hoyle (famous astronomer) commented that had Hubble first seen the plots for quasars instead of galaxies, he never would have concluded that red shift was a function of velocity (distance).

A plot of quasars red shift compared to their luminosity:

The finding of quasars caused a stir among cosmologists. They weren't quite sure what to make of these objects, but they had already done so much work involving Hilbert's black holes and Lemaitre's ideas of expanding space that rather than scrapping the big bang, they formulated hypothetical theories of ultra-massive black holes spewing out more energy than millions of Milky Way galaxies combined. They had simply put too much effort in to the assumption of expanding space to give it up.

There is actually a tremendous body of work out there observationally falsifying red shift as a function of distance if one chooses to look for it, however these findings are simply dismissed and ignored by mainstream cosmologists.

Red Shift != Distance

More to follow.

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 04:30 PM
We see things such as high red shift objects visibly connected to low red shift objects (impossible if red shift is an indicator of distance). We see quantized red shift, which means the quasars and galaxies around us formed in concentric shells with the earth being the center of the universe (obviously impossible). We also see a lot of evidence refuting things such as gravitational lenses or other supposed phenomena associated with warping space and expanding space. Also, we see quasars grouped around host galaxies in highly improbable configurations. Quasar luminosity and power DOES match the host galaxies they reside around if one ignores red shift as an indicator of distance, further disproving red shift as an indicator of distance.


If red shift is not an indicator of distance, which I believe has been conclusively demonstrated that it is not by observational evidence, then we can reject the big bang as science and move on to looking at the universe as being steady in state. That is to say, the universe is infinite in size, it is ageless, it is timeless, and no big bang ever occurred. We are simply not privileged to know what caused the universe to exist or when it came into existence, it simply does. We must assume it is infinite in age as it is infinite in size.

Evidence to follow:

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 04:33 PM
Papers showing quantized red shift:

Fourier spectral analysis has been carried out on the quasar number count as a function of redshift calculated from the quasar data of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey DR6 data release. The results indicate that quasars have preferred periodic redshifts with redshift intervals of 0.258, 0.312, 0.44, 0.63, and 1.1. Within their standard errors these intervals are integer multiples 4, 5, 7, 10 and 20 of 0.062. Could this be indicative of an intrinsic redshift for quasars as has been suggested by some?

The redshift distribution of all 46,400 quasars in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) Quasar Catalog, Third Data Release (DR3), is examined. Six peaks that fall within the redshift window below z=4 are visible. Their positions agree with the preferred redshift values predicted by the decreasing intrinsic redshift (DIR) model.

Evidence is presented for redshift quantization and variability as detected in global studies done in the rest frame of the cosmic background radiation. Quantization is strong and consistent with predictions derived from concepts associated with multidimensional time. Nine families of periods are possible but not equally likely. The most basic family contains previously known periods of 73 and 36 km s–1 and shorter harmonics at 18.3 and 9.15 km s–1.

Using new data for unassociated galaxies with wide H I profiles and values of period and solar motion predicted by Tifft and Cocke (1984), a periodicity has been found which is significant at the conventional 5 percent level. Together with Tifft's work on galaxy pairs and small groups, this result appears to provide evidence in favor of the hypothesis that measured galaxy redshifts occur in steps of a little more than 72 km/s or a simple multiple of this period.

Power spectrum analyses of the corrected redshifts are used to search for a significant periodicity in the prescribed range 70-75 km/s. No such periodicity is found for the dwarf irregulars, but there is a possible periodicity of about 71.1 km/s for the bright spirals. In a further exploratory study, the sample of 112 spirals is divided up according to environment. The spirals in high-density regions of the cluster show no quantization, whereas those in low-density regions appear to be partially quantized in intervals of about 71.0 km/s.

The present study investigates the notion that extragalactic redshifts are periodic in ranges around 24.2, 36.3, or 72.5 km/s for an independent sample of 89 nearby spirals, in the general field, with accurately determined heliocentric redshifts. A strong periodicity of about 37.2 km/s is found, against a white noise background, for an assumed solar vector coincidental, within the uncertainties, with that corresponding to the sun's probable motion around the Galactic Center. Comparison with sets of synthetic data simulating the overall characteristics of the real data show the periodicity to be present at a high confidence level.

[edit on 4-7-2009 by mnemeth1]

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 04:36 PM

Published observational data on galaxies of redshift z less than about 1000 km/s are compiled in extensive tables and diagrams and analyzed, searching for additional Local Group members among fainter higher-redshift galaxies. A concentration toward the center of the Local Group and a concentration associated with NGC 55, NGC 300, and NGC 253 are identified in the south Galactic hemisphere and characterized in detail. The galaxies near the centers of the concentrations are found to obey a quantization interval of Delta-cz0 = 72.4 km/s, as for the Local Group (Tifft, 1977); the accuracy of this finding is shown to be to within + or - 8.2 km/s (for galaxies with redshifts known to + or - 8 km/s) and to within 3-4 km/s (for a subset of galaxies with more accurately measured redshifts).

Samples of 97 and 117 high-precision 21 cm redshifts of spiral galaxies within the Local Supercluster were obtained in order to test claims that extragalactic redshifts are periodic (P36 km s–1) when referred to the centre of the Galaxy. The power spectral density of the redshifts, when so referred, exhibits an extremely strong peak at 37.5 km s–1. The signal is seen independently with seven major radio telescopes. Its significance was assessed by comparison with the spectral power distributions of synthetic datasets constructed so as to closely mimic the overall properties of the real datasets employed; it was found to be real rather than due to chance at an extremely high confidence level.

Persistent claims have been made over the last ~15yr that extragalactic redshifts, when corrected for the Sun's motion around the Galactic centre, occur in multiples of ~24 or ~36km/s. A recent investigation by us of 40 spiral galaxies out to 1000km/s, with accurately measured redshifts, gave evidence of a periodicity ~37.2-37.7km/s. Here we extend our enquiry out to the edge of the Local Supercluster (~2600km/s), applying a simple and robust procedure to a total of 97 accurately determined redshifts. We find that, when corrected for related vectors close to recent estimates of the Sun's galactocentric motion, the redshifts of spirals are strongly periodic (P~37.6km/s). The formal confidence level of the result is extremely high, and the signal is seen independently with different radio telescopes. We also examine a further sample of 117 spirals observed with the 300-foot Green Bank telescope alone. The periodicity phenomenon appears strongest for the galaxies linked by group membership, but phase coherence probably holds over large regions of the Local Supercluster.

A project intended to examine the long-standing claims that extragalactic redshifts are periodic or quantized was initiated some years ago at the Royal Observatory, Edinburgh. The approach taken is outlined, and the main conclusions to date are summarized. The existence of a galactocentric redshift quantization is confirmed at a high confidence level.

It is pointed out that the discrete velocities found by Tifft in galaxies are harmonically related to the discrete intrinsic redshifts found in quasars. All are harmonically related to the constant 0.062±0.001, and this is the fourth independent analysis in which the redshift increment 0.062 has been shown to be significant. It is concluded that there is a quantized component in the redshift of both quasars and galaxies that has a common origin and is unlikely to be Doppler-related.

Halton Arp, Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies

[edit on 4-7-2009 by mnemeth1]

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 04:39 PM
High and low redshift objects connected to each other:

NGC 7319:

The Discovery of a High-Redshift X-Ray-Emitting QSO Very Close to the Nucleus of NGC 7319
Pasquale Galianni et al 2005 ApJ 620 88-94 doi: 10.1086/426886

A strong X-ray source only 8'' from the nucleus of the Seyfert 2 galaxy NGC 7319 in Stephan's Quintet has been discovered by Chandra. We have identified the optical counterpart and show that it is a QSO with ze = 2.114. It is also an ultraluminous X-ray source with LX = 1.5 × 1040 ergs s-1. From the optical spectra of the QSO and the interstellar gas of NGC 7319 together, we show that it is very likely that the QSO is interacting with the interstellar gas.

NGC 7603:

Two emission line objects with z>0.2 in the optical filament apparently connecting the Seyfert galaxy NGC 7603 to its companion
M. Lopez-Corredoira, Carlos M. Gutierrez Astron.Astrophys. 390 (2002) L15

We present new spectroscopic observations of an old case of anomalous redshift--NGC 7603 and its companion. The redshifts of the two galaxies which are apparently connected by a luminous filament are z=0.029 and z=0.057 respectively. We show that in the luminous filament there are two compact emission line objects with z=0.243 and z=0.391. They lie exactly on the line traced by the filament connecting the galaxies. As far as we are aware, this is the most impressive case of a system of anomalous redshifts discovered so far.

NGC 4319:

Evidence for Activity in the Spiral Galaxy NGC4319
Sulentic, J. W. Observational Evidence of Activity in Galaxies: Proceedings of the 121st Symposium of the International Astronomical Union, held in Byurakan, Armenia, U.S.S.R., June 3-7, 1986.

Radio and optical evidence for activity in the spiral galaxy NGC 4319 is presented. NGC 4319 appears to be one of the first spirals to exhibit double lobe radio structure outside of the nuclear regions. The optical data show that (1) the quasar M205 is connected to the nucleus of NGC 4319 and (2) that a similarly connected region on the opposite side of the nucleus is expanding towards us with V ≡ 103km s-1. It is suggested that the unusual Hα/[N II] λ6583 ratio (≤0.3) indicates that the entire central (7 kpc diameter) disk of NGC 4319 has been shock excited by this activity.

The galaxy-quasar connection - NGC 4319 and Markarian 205. I - Direct imagery. II - Spectroscopy
Sulentic, J. W. & Arp, H. C. Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 319, Aug. 15, 1987, p. 687-708.

New direct-imaging data are presented for the disturbed spiral galaxy NGC 4319 (z = 0.005) and the apparently connected quasar-like object Markarian 205 (z = 0.072). Image processing of this CCD data reveals (1) an almost continuous luminous connection extending from Mrk 205 into the nucleus of the spiral galaxy; (2) a corresponding feature on the opposite side of the disk, appearing to link a bright UV knot with the nucleus; and (3) extensive morphological peculiarities in NGC 4319 that are consistent with hypothesized explosive nuclear activity. These data support the conclusion that NGC 4319 is an active spiral galaxy that recently ejected Mrk 205 from its nucleus.

[edit on 4-7-2009 by mnemeth1]

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 04:42 PM
Quasar clustering in a highly improbable fashion

Some more:

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 04:53 PM

Originally posted by mnemeth1

If red shift is not an indicator of distance, which I believe has been conclusively demonstrated that it is not by observational evidence, then we can reject the big bang as science and move on to looking at the universe as being steady in state. That is to say, the universe is infinite in size, it is ageless, it is timeless, and no big bang ever occurred. We are simply not privileged to know what caused the universe to exist or when it came into existence, it simply does. We must assume it is infinite in age as it is infinite in size.

The problem here is that I cannot grasp ageless nor infinite in size.

If I think about this too much I will either get a massive headache or go completely insane.

Excellent work on your thread..

I do wonder though, can anyone really grasp infinity??

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 05:36 PM
Excellent effort for a truly excellent thread!!! Star & Flag!

Isn't it outrageous how the scientific communities love of closed minded,
orthodoxy, is allowed to retard almost every area of human knowledge?
I think (in an ideal world!) people who tarnish others careers because of a love of orthodoxy (or is it just hatred of radicalism?) would be disqualified from scientific institutions in much the same as openly racist people were-are.

Some day (because of the consistent nature of reality) it will indeed be revealed that the Big Bang stands for Big Bull. It will happen in much the same way as a contracting universe was de-bunked at the start of the 90's. Kinda ironic as it was the hubble telescope that proved the theory to be 100% trash, and Hubble is named after an advocate of the big bang, yet this is another observation that contradicts the Big Bang, as nobody has found the "Dark Matter" that is supposed to be (somehow) causing the universe to excellerate (a reverse of normal gravity). The only thing that makes me see sence about Dark Matter is that it's probably dark, because it's also Bull.

But I fear whenever BB is disproven, I will either be a middle aged, or old man. The only sad thing that changes is that the older I am, the more effort of "naive or conformist" minded geniuses & interlecturals will have been wasted. Who does science have to blame? A state of mind, and how incredibly unscientific is that!!!

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 05:36 PM
reply to post by tribewilder

not sure "infinity" is a concept to 'grasp' or intellectualize (other then in the abstract).

however, 'experiencing' it may be the way to perceive it.

is that not what monks, mystics, artists and lovers all seek? a direct experience with the eternal?

but then, once experienced, how does one communicate such a profound thing?

ones and zeros? cause and effect? measurable statistics? science, of course, should have a say in these matters... but not the final say.

the infinite is far to broad a notion for deductive reasoning alone.

anyhow, pardon the existential rant.

PS... i believe the big-bang was a big-exhale. then we'll have a big-inhale, and so forth. the Vedics understood this and framed this knowledge in the poetry of gods and ages.

we vaguely understand this, and frame it in the language of rationality.

whose to say who is right? it is the infinite. how could anyone deduce it?

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 06:09 PM
reply to post by mnemeth1

Excellent work and research! While I do not believe in Steady State you certainly have made a well presented case. I will read through this more and make a better response then.

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:45 PM
I'm reading this in the morning... and I've got one word for you:


Meanwhile, while I recover, here's what I want to ask:

Are you Christian and do you believe that God created the universe, then?

Or are you a fair, unbiased, unreligious scientist who has done his research and think there are loopholes the BBT does not cover, including the redshift and Doppler effects, which I, incidentally, have studied too? Do you factor in the research done on dark matter, which helps support the idea that the universe is being "pushed away" by the expanding nature of dark particles and antimatter in the blackness of space?

Dark matter is, essentially, miniscule, hyper-particulate form of plasma that creates additional gravitational effects that can widen the orbits of heavenly bodies and thus, push them further. It's not been fully proven yet (there are experiments currently working on that like super deep underground, last I read) but you can observe its effects on how light is distorted around planets due to the concentration of said matter.


Do you just want to, like so many of the people that I have come across on this site, disprove evolution and BBT JUST for the sake of saying God created all that we know?

That's all I've got to say on this topic.

[edit on 3-7-2009 by KarlG]

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 10:03 PM
reply to post by KarlG

Um, I honestly mean no offense but I think you are tying in subjects that the OP didn't even hint at covering and straying into the realm of ad hom. And even so, if that had been his aim, how would that effect the validity of his or her information? It is possible for atheist or a theist to not believe in a Big Bang after all.

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 10:14 PM
Very interesting. Does your theory of an infinite age and size universe also have an explanation for the chemical composition of the universe?

The Age of the Chemical Elements

Age of the Universe

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 10:28 PM
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

I am not the OP but I just figured I'd chime in, but it seems to me that both of your assertions *the articles* are assumptions based off assumptions. I respectfully have a few questions: 1)If a White Dwarf's fate is to eventually "go out" how could that be a very valid indicator of the age of the universe? Even the oldest White Dwarfs. 2) Are not chemicals being converted/created even now in the heart of the stars? If that is true then how can you use chemicals to deduce an age for the universe?

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 10:30 PM
Hmm. If the Universe is a big raspberry, then it must have come from a seed...

Mod note: This is not a one liner. I am attempting to get Sir William of Ockham to do some housecleaning.

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 10:36 PM
reply to post by Matyas

Ah but that is petitio principii fallacy.

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 10:37 PM
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

Stars use fusion, which turns lighter elements into heavier elements. So if the universe is an infinite age, where are the lighter elements coming from and where are the heavier elements going?

Radioactive isotopes decay at a certain pace, and reach half life at precise periods. Why are the oldest seen radioactive isotopes only 10-20 billion years old? Shouldn't we be seeing lot older ones if the universe is an infinite age?

[edit on 7/3/09 by Ferris.Bueller.II]

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 10:56 PM
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

Keyword here is, seen. And even then sometimes the methods can be questioned as simply more assumptions based off assumptions.

[edit on 3-7-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 10:59 PM
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

And the basis of his theory is based only on seen evidence also. In fact all we know of the universe is based off seen evidence. Did the OP ask you to field questions for him?

[edit on 7/3/09 by Ferris.Bueller.II]

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 11:00 PM
If the universe is infinite there must be an infinite amount of matter as well, or else the majority of infinity is essentially nothing and contains nothing... which would make our area of the universe special.

If there is an infinite amount of matter then there is also an infinite amount of stars. If the infinite stars have had infinite time for their photons to travel omni directionally across the infinite universe then every line of sight from anywhere would end on a star.

Space wouldn't be black. It would be white.

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in