PSI Blog 20221110 The Last
Creation Myth
As the last gasp of creationism, the demise of the Big Bang Theory and its replacement by Infinite Universe Theory, will
have a tremendous effect on humanity.
Creation in the time of Covid and the James Webb Space Telescope. Photo by visuals on Unsplash.
Throughout history, almost every tribe has had creation myths, which
have come and gone. What is unique though about the Big Bang Theory is its
world-wide appeal. That there should be such tenacious agreement (at least
among cosmologists) shows humanity is one big tribe. Globalization has done its
job magnificently. Of course, as fallacious paradigms go, this one is
arch-typical, being the toughest of all. As the cliché so often and so wisely
claims: “The bigger they are, the harder they fall.” The Last Cosmological
Revolution will not be achieved without a world-wide clash, with the James Webb Space Telescope having triggered a minor skirmish. Unfortunately, as
proponents of Infinite Universe Theory, we expect to lose that
one due to the geniosity of those who yet again will imagine new ad hocs for the
salvation.
Those of us who have studied the Big Bang Theory over the last few
decades are used to the process. The theory has more ad hocs than Carter has
little liver pills. Soon we will present a table including over 70
falsifications, contradictions, paradoxes, and philosophical errors common to
the theory. I will try to keep that updated as more of them rush in.
Inflation Theory: Ad hoc away…
By the way, my favorite ad hoc is the “inflation theory.” It is a great
example of what the cosmogonists (those who assume the universe had a
beginning) will do. A huge problem turned up when telescopes gathered firm
evidence for large cosmological redshifts. Calculations based on the Big Bang
Theory implied galactic recession was occurring at greater than the speed of
light. Now, Hubble had worked only with relatively nearby galaxies and simply applied
the doppler mechanism to his interpretation. Light from close ones, like
Andromeda, sometimes was blueshifted because those galaxies were coming toward
us. But, as he looked farther out, the number of redshifted galaxies increased,
while those with blueshifts eventually dropped out. His initial interpretation
was his greatest mess up, as seen in the title of his 1929 paper announcing the
discovery: “A relation between distance and radial velocity among
extra-galactic nebulae.”[1] From
that, the little-studied cosmogonists and nearly all science reporters have
ever-more promulgated the false claim that “Hubble discovered the universe was
expanding.”
Hubble subsequently admitted his mistake numerous times,[2]
but to no avail. Cosmogonists eagerly pushed his early mistake, in tune with the good Bishop Lemaître, who had come up with the universal
expansion hypothesis a couple years earlier.[3] Good
luck finding anything in mainstream literature on Hubble’s subsequent idea that
cosmological redshifts simply were a function of the distance light traveled. All
the graphs now are plotted as “recession velocity” vs. redshift. To recognize
Hubble’s belated contribution, I had to draw my own redshift vs. distance graph.
Of course, the idea that galaxies were going away from us at faster
than the velocity of light contradicted Einstein’s assumption light was the
speed limit for the universe. What to do about this major falsification of Big
Bang Theory? According to Guth, his inflation theory was the best answer.[4] In
other words, if you can imagine the entire universe is expanding for no reason
at all, you also should be able to imagine it could have expanded really,
really fast in the beginning. The upshot is that the doppler explanation is no
longer used, with the latest ad hoc being the cosmogonical claim that it is
space itself that is expanding. Presumably, the imagined perfectly empty space
has the power to expand at greater than c, carrying all those sluggish
galaxies along with it. I don’t see why not, in view of the fact the latest creation
myth is based on Einstein’s “Untired Light Theory,” which assumes light is a
massless particle filled with perfectly empty space traveling perpetually
through perfectly empty space.
Although there is no evidence for “perfectly empty space,” that trope
fits well with the traditional idea of creation. For millennia, folks have
imagined at first there was nothing, and then there was something. Of course,
that is not like the kind of creation us realistic, hands-on folks otherwise
are accustomed to: The making of things out of other things. That kind of
creation always requires ingredients, which is one of the reasons the universe cannot be finite. The whole idea of “nonexistence,” which is fundamental to creationism
and the Big Bang, is purely imaginary. Perfectly empty space, like perfectly
solid matter are the imaginary endmembers of the space-matter continuum. We use
them in trying to understand the reality in between. The universe can produce
an infinity of things, but it cannot produce either perfectly empty space or
perfectly solid matter. The upshot is that nonexistence is impossible
everywhere and for all time.
[1]
Hubble, Edwin, 1929, A relation between distance and radial velocity among
extra-galactic nebulae: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 15,
no. 3, p. 168-173. [10.1073/pnas.15.3.168].
[2]
Hubble, Edwin, 1947, The 200-inch telescope and some problems it may solve:
Publications of the astronomical society of the Pacific, v. 59, no. 349, p.
153-167; Sauvé, Vincent, 2016, Edwin Hubble... and the myth that he discovered
an expanding universe [https://sites.google.com/site/bigbangcosmythology/home/edwinhubble].
[3]
Lemaître, G., 1927, Un Univers homogène de masse constante et de rayon
croissant rendant compte de la vitesse radiale des nébuleuses
extra-galactiques: Annales de la Société Scientifique de
Bruxelles, v. 47, p. 49-59. [https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1927ASSB...47...49L];
Lemaître, Abbé G., 1931, A Homogeneous Universe of Constant Mass and Increasing
Radius accounting for the Radial Velocity of Extra-galactic Nebulæ: Monthly
Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, v. 91, no. 5, p. 483-490. [10.1093/mnras/91.5.483]; Lemaître, Georges, 1950, The Primeval Atom: An Essay
on Cosmogony: New York, D. Van Nostrand, 186 p. [Note that Lemaître bravely used the correct word for what he was
proposing.]
[4]
Guth, Alan H., 1981, Inflationary universe: A possible solution to the horizon
and flatness problems: Physical Review D, v. 23, no. 2, p. 347-356. [10.1103/PhysRevD.23.347].
To read this and its updates
on Medium, click here.
On Medium.com you can read
more than three essays monthly by joining for $5/month.
Half of your membership fee
supports the endowment of the Progressive Science Foundation, which will
continue advancing Infinite Universe Theory as the ultimate replacement of the
Big Bang Theory. You’ll also get full access to every story on Medium. Just
click here.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment