What Big Bang???

Oct 14, 2020
36
21
535
I found this interesting article that argues against any Big Bang ever happening:


If this article is anywhere near the truth, then a hell of a lot of present day "science" is wrong. Then again, this article might be totally wrong.

I don't care one way or the other. I'm just posting this to see what fellow forum members think.
 
Jun 1, 2020
1,768
1,508
5,060
If this article is anywhere near the truth, then a hell of a lot of present day "science" is wrong.
Indeed.

Then again, this article might be totally wrong.
Yep. He is implying Hubble was quite dumb. Cepheids are quite accurate, as far as astro ladders go. Originally, it wasn't known that there are two basic types. Hubble used what was known when he discovered his first one (in Andromeda), so his measurement was off considerably. So much so, that the age of the universe, due to his fast and false rate calculated, put the age younger the stars. This is another reason why he likely would never say redshifts were associated with expansion. He left that to theorists.

Today, redshifts are not considered Doppler but due to space itself -- cosmological redshifts.

BBT is supported, today, but was highly rejected originally, by many lines of evidence, including these. :)
 
Aug 14, 2020
558
105
1,060
I found this interesting article that argues against any Big Bang ever happening:


If this article is anywhere near the truth, then a hell of a lot of present day "science" is wrong. Then again, this article might be totally wrong.

I don't care one way or the other. I'm just posting this to see what fellow forum members think.
Sometimes it is a wonder how someone can be so right about something ("a timeless Universe"), but at the same time be so wrong in so much of their logic, and progression to it. The Planck Big Bang happened: The Planck Big Bang is a happening right now: The Big Bang will continue to happen: The Planck Big Bang is a fixed horizon constant that we and most everything else are always both inside of and outside of (always on both sides of). To steal from Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time, "a 'Grand Central Station'" of Universe having one central clock (and one only), having one hand pointing to the one and one only digit, 't=0'.

Every most distance point of background Universe is a collapsed horizon point of the mural of the Planck Big Bang collapsed Horizon. It isn't a one way street, it is a two way street always. One of its dimensional faces is convexity while another face of the same horizon is concavity (like a solid ball that is a wormhole-like hole at the same time). The background Universe has infinities of masses and energies and radiations of every sort galore, regardless of apparent reductions in space.... and time, to a point (to points) of single-sidedness always observed from any foreground. Hawking appeared to centralize it to a closed systemic infinite mass density of blob in his "Grand Central Station", and decentralized it at exactly the same time, in exactly the same place (the Station), to an infinitely open system of individuality. Every seeming point, including point particle, is then also a wormhole end on. Even our Earth, and even us with it, is vastly more space -- going down and in in ever increasing distances of depths toward the Planck Big Bang collapsed Horizon -- than anything else.

The Universe can be both an infinite "timeless Universe" and have a Planck Big Bang collapsed Horizon at the same time. It can be both an infinite and timeless Universe and have every apparent finite aspect, detail, and physic we see it to have. Rowland D's absolute, to me, is just as bad, just as wrong, as the other and opposite absolute.
--------------------------

Planck Big Bang (Energy) -- Big Crunch (Mass) -- Big Vacuum (C^2)
(Energy -- Mass -- C^2)
(E = M x C^2)
Mirror
(M = E / C^2)
-----------------
C = 300,000kps = 0 (Universe's 0-point)
C = 300,000kps
(and/or)
C = 0
-----------------
It's a Multiverse Universe
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts