Big Bang regressives and reformists compete for cosmogonical superiority in Nature and New Scientist

PSI Blog 20190925 Big Bang regressives and reformists compete for cosmogonical superiority in Nature and New Scientist

I guess “Nature” was trying to outdo “New Scientist” in pandering to the latest cosmological nonsense on August 14.

Here is the latest regression from Nature:

"The quest to unlock the secrets of the baby Universe

Radioastronomers look to hydrogen for insights into the Universe’s first billion years."

Here is the latest reform attempt from New Scientist:

"What if there was no big bang and we live in an ever-cycling universe?

There is no good evidence that our universe even had a beginning, a startling proposition that means the cosmos could collapse in about 100 billion years"

You can read these or not, depending on how confused you wish to be. They are instructive as comparisons of the regressive approach and the reformist approach.

We define regressives as those who have fallen for relativity and the Big Bang Theory hook, line, and sinker. The Nature article does that by pursuing Kuhn’s “ordinary science” as if the regressive paradigm had no flaws whatsoever. And who knows? They might find something useful, just like the Microwave Background and dark matter that must be taken into account in Infinite Universe Theory as well. It makes sense to start with hydrogen, which is small enough and ubiquitous enough. Maybe they will even survive the shock of their eventual discovery that hydrogen is being produced as this is written.

We define reformists as critical thinkers who accept part of the mainstream paradigm but not other parts. The New Scientist article rejects the assumption that the universe had an origin. Strictly speaking then, the proposal brought forth is not a cosmogony. But like the mainstream regressives and the Steady State Theorists, it accepts the universal expansion hypothesis. The author obviously has no qualms about Einstein’s eight ad hocs that kept the particle theory of light and the expansion ideas from their deserved demise. Of course, the cycling idea, like the oxymoronic multiverse ideas both depend on magical causation just like the Big Bang Theory itself.

Dark Matter older than the universe?

PSI Blog 20190918 Dark Matter older than the universe?

 

Big Bang illustration (stock image).

Credit: © Andrea Danti / Adobe Stock

PSI Blog 20190918 Dark Matter older than the universe?

Thanks to Luis for this heads up:

Here is the latest Big Bang Theory contradiction:

“Dark matter, which researchers believe make up about 80% of the universe's mass, is one of the most elusive mysteries in modern physics. What exactly it is and how it came to be is a mystery, but a new study now suggests that dark matter may have existed before the Big Bang.”

Note that Dark Matter is a mystery only to cosmogonists and other aether deniers. According to Aether Deceleration Theory, it is simply decelerated aether that surrounds all baryonic matter after it produces the acceleration called gravitation.[1] The “discovery” (actually only a calculation) is no contradiction for Infinite Universe Theory. 

---

[1] Borchardt, Glenn, 2018, The Physical Cause of Gravitation: viXra:1806.0165.

Big Bang Theory wastes tax dollars on the search for nonexistent “Dark Energy”

PSI Blog 20190911 Big Bang Theory wastes tax dollars on the search for nonexistent “Dark Energy”

The atom interferometer. Credit: Imperial College London

“Dark Energy” supposedly drives the universal expansion assumed in the Big Bang Theory. Only one problem for researchers looking for this particular Big Bang ghost: “energy” does not exist. Energy is a calculation; energy neither exists nor occurs. Energy is a matter-motion term we use to describe matter and motion. The E=mc² calculation requires a material carrier for it to be valid. If m=0, then E=0. That is why matterless motion is impossible and energy cannot exist. What does exist is the material carrier and what does occur is its motion. But there is no material carrier for Dark Energy. It is not the well-established “Dark Matter,” which is the decelerated aether that surrounds all baryonic matter as a result of gravitation.[1]

Failing to find a particle for their phony Dark Energy, regressives now hypothesize an equally mysterious “Fifth Force.” This they mistreat in the same way as “energy.” Force gets to be some magical matterless ghost pushing things around. Those pushes require a material pusher. They will never find that either because the universe is not expanding (unless you believed in Einstein’s matterless particles with perpetual motion).

Despite all the public money wasted on the search for nonexistent Dark Energy, the whole brouhaha serves as a great example of the importance of proper theory. It is only the tip of the monetary iceberg engendered by the ridiculous Big Bang Theory and its genuflecting to the religious idea the universe had a beginning. It is time we put a stop to it.

https://phys.org/news/2019-08-lab-based-dark-energy-narrows-options.html

---

[1] Borchardt, Glenn, 2018, The Physical Cause of Gravitation: viXra:1806.0165.

Pierre Berrigan’s French translation of Infinite Universe Theory (Théorie de l'univers infini) now available

PSI Blog 20190904 Pierre Berrigan’s French translation of Infinite Universe Theory (Théorie de l'univers infini) now available

Many, many, many, thanks to Pierre Berrigan for translating IUT into French. As far as I can tell, he did a wonderful job. I met Pierre through a response he gave on Quora. It turns out that physicist Paul Marmet was his uncle. Professor Marmet was one of the early dissidents, having written 30 papers and books refuting the Big Bang Theory and the solipsism of quantum mechanics. One of my favorites is:

Marmet, Paul, 1990, Big Bang Cosmology Meets an Astronomical Death: 21st Century, Science and Technology (P.O. Box, 17285, Washington, D.C. 20041), v. 3, no. 2, p. 52-59. [https://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/bigbang/index.html].

Another is his self-published book:

Marmet, Paul, 1993, Absurdities in Modern Physics: a Solution, or, A Rational Interpretation of Modern Physics, Éditions du Nordir; 1st edition (January 1, 1993), 144 p. [https://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/heisenberg/index.html]. [This is a collector’s item, with hard copies selling for up to $900. Lucky you. Most chapters are available for download at the above link. An excellent 5-star review is on the Amazon sale page.]

Pierre apparently caught the bug from Paul in that he also has been critical of the Big Bang Theory for a long time. Pierre recently retired as an IT consultant and has answered over 160 questions on Quora. If you have any French-speaking friends, “Théorie de l'univers infini” might be the perfect holiday gift.