• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Alternative Cosmology

giantrobot1

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Messages
549
Alternative Cosmology - Was there really a Big Bang?

There are some serious questions to be asked about the validity of the Big Bang hypothesis, questions that are being asked by a minority that I'd never heard of until I came across the work of world-renowned astronomer Halton Arp.

http://www.haltonarp.com
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/lempel/halton_arp_uk.htm

Here's an introduction to some of the major points of contention:

http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/top10BBproblems.asp

For many, it seems the Big Bang hypothesis is flawed on many accounts, including being unable to explain various observable facts such as the presence of 'superstructures' such as galactic walls and voids that cannot have been formed in the lifetime of the universe as it currently is specified by the BB theory.

More links:

http://www.metaresearch.org/publications/books/SeeingRed-Arp.asp
http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/DidTheUniverseHaveABeginning.asp
http://home.pacbell.net/skeptica/
 
Looks like it may be time for a cosmological paradigm shift!

The thing I like most about science is the way in which ideas evolve almost organically for a while as scientists test out their hypotheses and add to the knowledge bank. Then, every so often, things just flip on their heads and a totally new world view takes hold.

It's lovely, don't you think? :)


Paradigms in Science
 
In my opinion, science should always try to find the anomaly and go for as many paradigm shifts as possible. Unfortunately, there's lots of grants etc. tied up in the old paradigms...

But yeah, paradigm shifts are great. :)
 
Big Bang

Without even having read those links, I have to ask if anyone else notices that the Big Bang theory doesn't really explain the origin of the Universe but merely pushes it back a ways? I mean, it tells you that at first the universe was concentrated in this big ball of super dense mass which then exploded but it doesn't explain where that ball of mass came from. So the the BB paradigm only ever left frustrated especially when I tried to explain that to a teacher and they looked at me like I was from Mars or something for questioning it.

I too like paradigm shifts btw,:) .
 
I too like paradigm shifts btw

I think it's impossible to be a Fortean and not like 'em!

I mean, it tells you that at first the universe was concentrated in this big ball of super dense mass which then exploded but it doesn't explain where that ball of mass came from.

Exactly - you can't (ever) get something from nothing. Doesn't work.

More links:

http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/galaxy/G_Reber.html

http://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/index.html

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/9335/stein.html
 
Some interesting critiques of current cosmology by Sabine Hossenfelder:

Two years ago, I told you about a paper by Subir Sarkar and his colleagues, that showed if one analyses the supernovae data correctly, without assuming that the cosmological principle holds on too short distances, then the evidence for dark energy disappears. That paper has been almost entirely ignored by other scientists. Check out my earlier video for more about that.

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2021/09/new-evidence-against-standard-model-of.html?m=1

Already in nineteen-ninety-one they found the Clowes-Campusano-Quasar group, which is a collection of thirty-four Quasars, about nine point five Billion light years away from us and it extends over two Billion Light-years, clearly too large to be compatible with the prediction from the concordance model.

Since 2003 astrophysicists know the „great wall“ a collection of galaxies about a billion light years away from us that extends over 1.5 billion light years. That too, is larger than it should be.

Then there’s the “Huge quasar group” which is… huge. It spans a whopping four Billion light-years. And just in July Alexia Lopez discovered the “Giant Arc” a collection of galaxies, galaxy clusters, gas and dust that spans 3 billion light years.

Theoretically, these structures shouldn’t exist.
 
Last edited:
Some interesting critiques of current cosmology by Sabine Hossenfelder:

Two years ago, I told you about a paper by Subir Sarkar and his colleagues, that showed if one analyses the supernovae data correctly, without assuming that the cosmological principle holds on too short distances, then the evidence for dark energy disappears. That paper has been almost entirely ignored by other scientists. Check out my earlier video for more about that.

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2021/09/new-evidence-against-standard-model-of.html?m=1

Already in nineteen-ninety-one they found the Clowes-Campusano-Quasar group, which is a collection of thirty-four Quasars, about nine point five Billion light years away from us and it extends over two Billion Light-years, clearly too large to be compatible with the prediction from the concordance model.

Since 2003 astrophysicists know the „great wall“ a collection of galaxies about a billion light years away from us that extends over 1.5 billion light years. That too, is larger than it should be.

Then there’s the “Huge quasar group” which is… huge. It spans a whopping four Billion light-years. And just in July Alexia Lopez discovered the “Giant Arc” a collection of galaxies, galaxy clusters, gas and dust that spans 3 billion light years.

Theoretically, these structures shouldn’t exist.
That is why theories are just theories until they are proven to be fact, or superseded by a different theory.
 
Some interesting critiques of current cosmology by Sabine Hossenfelder:

Two years ago, I told you about a paper by Subir Sarkar and his colleagues, that showed if one analyses the supernovae data correctly, without assuming that the cosmological principle holds on too short distances, then the evidence for dark energy disappears. That paper has been almost entirely ignored by other scientists. Check out my earlier video for more about that.

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2021/09/new-evidence-against-standard-model-of.html?m=1

Already in nineteen-ninety-one they found the Clowes-Campusano-Quasar group, which is a collection of thirty-four Quasars, about nine point five Billion light years away from us and it extends over two Billion Light-years, clearly too large to be compatible with the prediction from the concordance model.

Since 2003 astrophysicists know the „great wall“ a collection of galaxies about a billion light years away from us that extends over 1.5 billion light years. That too, is larger than it should be.

Then there’s the “Huge quasar group” which is… huge. It spans a whopping four Billion light-years. And just in July Alexia Lopez discovered the “Giant Arc” a collection of galaxies, galaxy clusters, gas and dust that spans 3 billion light years.

Theoretically, these structures shouldn’t exist.


Alexia Lopez has discovered a second ultra-large structure.

The discovery of a second ultra-large structure in the remote universe has further challenged some of the basic assumptions about cosmology.

The Big Ring in the Sky is 9.2 billion light-years from Earth. It has a diameter of about 1.3 billion light-years, and a circumference of about 4 billion light-years. If we could step outside and see it directly, the diameter of the Big Ring would need about 15 full moons to cover it.

It is the second ultra-large structure discovered by University of Central Lancashire (UCLan) Ph.D. student Alexia Lopez who, two years ago, also discovered the Giant Arc in the Sky. Remarkably, the Big Ring and the Giant Arc, which is 3.3 billion light-years across, are in the same cosmological neighborhood—they are seen at the same distance, at the same cosmic time, and are only 12 degrees apart in the sky.

Alexia said, "Neither of these two ultra-large structures is easy to explain in our current understanding of the universe. And their ultra-large sizes, distinctive shapes, and cosmological proximity must surely be telling us something important—but what exactly?

"One possibility is that the Big Ring could be related to Baryonic Acoustic Oscillations (BAOs). BAOs arise from oscillations in the early universe and today should appear, statistically at least, as spherical shells in the arrangement of galaxies. However, detailed analysis of the Big Ring revealed it is not really compatible with the BAO explanation: The Big Ring is too large and is not spherical."

Other explanations might be needed, explanations that depart from what is generally considered to be the standard understanding in cosmology. One possibility might be a different theory—Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC)—which was proposed by Nobel-prize winner Sir Roger Penrose. Rings in the universe could conceivably be a signal of CCC.

Another explanation might be the effect of cosmic strings passing through. Cosmic strings are filamentary "topological defects" of great size, which could have been created in the early universe. Another Nobel-prize winner, Jim Peebles, recently hypothesized that cosmic strings could have a role in the origin of some other peculiarities in the large-scale distribution of galaxies.

Furthermore, the Big Ring challenges the Cosmological Principle, as did the Giant Arc previously. And if the Big Ring and the Giant Arc together form a still larger structure then the challenge to the Cosmological Principle becomes even more compelling.

Such large structures—and there are others found by other cosmologists—challenge our idea of what an "average" region of space looks like. They exceed the size limit of what is considered theoretically viable, and they pose potential challenges to the Cosmological Principle. ...

https://phys.org/news/2024-01-discovery-ultra-large-distant-space.html
 
Alexia Lopez has discovered a second ultra-large structure.

The discovery of a second ultra-large structure in the remote universe has further challenged some of the basic assumptions about cosmology.

The Big Ring in the Sky is 9.2 billion light-years from Earth. It has a diameter of about 1.3 billion light-years, and a circumference of about 4 billion light-years. If we could step outside and see it directly, the diameter of the Big Ring would need about 15 full moons to cover it.

It is the second ultra-large structure discovered by University of Central Lancashire (UCLan) Ph.D. student Alexia Lopez who, two years ago, also discovered the Giant Arc in the Sky.
Is Alexia the only person working in this particular bit of astronomy? Are lots of people discovering things this old and she just happened to find a second one? Is she some super-genius?

/at least the third one seems likely.
 
Is Alexia the only person working in this particular bit of astronomy? Are lots of people discovering things this old and she just happened to find a second one? Is she some super-genius?

/at least the third one seems likely.
That one, clearly.
 
Back
Top