The Scientific Worldview

This is a blog that takes the name of my magnum opus on scientific philosophy called "The Scientific Worldview." Reviewers have called it “revolutionary,” “exhilarating,” “magnificent,” “fascinating,” and even “a breathtaking synthesis of all understanding.” There is very little math in it, no religion, no politics, no psycho-babble, and no BS. It provides the first outline of the philosophical perspective that will develop during the last half of the Industrial-Social Revolution.

20250630

“James Webb, Hubble space telescopes face reduction in operations over funding shortfalls”

PSI Blog 20250630 “James Webb, Hubble space telescopes face reduction in operations over funding shortfalls”

“Inflation and budget issues are threatening to hobble NASA’s most in-demand telescopes.”

Here is an apropos article by reporter Mark Zastrow:

https://www.astronomy.com/science/james-webb-hubble-space-telescopes-face-reduction-in-operations-over-funding-shortfalls/

As I mentioned in a previous post, cutting back on science is one of the measures taken by declining empires. It also is a tactic used by neofascists and religious politicians to grab what little cash is left while holding back progress that is especially disturbing to them.

I remember that when I was at the USGS for my postdoc, we awaited each budget with bated breath to see what damage the “young earthers” would try to do in that regard. Now, the whole administration seems to be doing it to science in general.

As faithful readers have seen, the space telescopes have not been kind to the Big Bang Theory. Contradictions appear almost daily, surprising cosmogonists with photos of old objects that shouldn’t be at what they calculate to be the youthful end of their imaginary exploded universe. What amounts to looking back in time shows “Elderly Galaxies” instead of emptiness or the gas precursors to stars.

Of course, how much damage actually will be done depends on the powers that be. The $10 billion cost of the JWST means there is a powerful interest group supporting it. As with other intellectual endeavors, a fight undoubtedly will eschew. My prediction is that the battle between religion and science and its proxy in the battle between the Big Bang Theory and Infinite Universe Theory will take at least another generation. Don’t hold your breath…

PSI Blog 20250630

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! Get your copy of the just-released Second Edition of "The Scientific Worldview" to see the step-by-step logic leading to the rational view of the cosmos. Be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution,” the demise of the “Last Creation Myth,” and the age of enlightenment to come. Buy Now.

20250623

Elderly Galaxies Die Earlier Than Expected

PSI Blog 20250623 Elderly Galaxies Die Earlier Than Expected

The Big Bang Theory coughs up yet another confirmation of Infinite Universe Theory.

“Illustration of the RUBIES-UDS-QG-z7 galaxy created with the Grok 3 AI. (CREDIT: CC BY-SA 4.0).”

“Astronomers discover that galaxies die much earlier than expected

JWST confirms a massive galaxy that quenched star formation just 700 million years after the Big Bang, defying cosmic evolution models.”

Infinite Universe Theory predicts cosmological objects of all ages will be found far away as well as nearby. Here is another example of the “Elderly Galaxy” problem faced by cosmogonists. As we look farther and farther into the Big Bang universe, we are supposed to see younger and younger objects. That idea was trashed in last week’s post showing a supposed 280-million-year-old galaxy was found at the edge of the observed universe. That is a far cry from our 13.61-billion-year-old Milky Way, which looks similar.

Today’s observation illustrates process (motion) as well. Some dying galaxies like the one in this observation exist throughout the observed universe. Studies have shown it takes much longer than the allotted 700 million years for such galaxies to form, complete their star formation, and begin to die.

Notice that once again cosmogonists are stuck in their paradigm and don’t have a clue as to what is wrong with their “Last Creation Myth.” When will they give up the silly assumption the entire 20 trillion galaxies exploded out of a Hawking singularity the size of the period at the bottom of this question mark? When will they read:

Borchardt, Glenn, 2017, Infinite Universe Theory: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 337 p. [http://go.glennborchardt.com/IUTebook] to find out?

PSI Blog 20250623

20250616

Radiation from Elderly Galaxies Trashes the Big Bang Theory

PSI Blog 20250616 Radiation from Elderly Galaxies Trashes the Big Bang Theory

If the Cosmic Microwave Background is from too fast-forming galaxies, then it is not the required remnant from the Big Bang.

Photo credit: NASA (as modified by Borchardt).

Thanks to Bill Howell for this heads up:

“Hi Glenn. I just saw this and think you'll find it very interesting (if you haven't already seen it). Ironically, the video, and the potential objections to it, doesn't take the next obvious step of attributing the findings to an infinite Universe. But as with most discoveries in science, it's about baby steps.”

Thanks also to Seethepattern for producing the video:

New CMB Discovery Could Shatter the Big Bang Model

In a previous post I mentioned that the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background) has a redshift of 1089, while the greatest so far measured is 14.44 from an “elderly galaxy.” Looking back in space, we actually are looking back in time. Look far enough, and you are supposed to see what the beginning of the Big Bang universe was like. According to the Big Bang Theory, that galaxy was calculated to be only 280 million years old. Our Milky Way galaxy took 13.6 billion years to form. 280 is way too fast. This major contradiction has put cosmogonists everywhere into cognitive dissonance. They have to come up with a 26^th ad hoc to save the Big Bang Theory once again.

As summarized in the video, this first attempt was a failure. The conundrum is this: the CMB is supposed to be a remnant of the Big Bang. Most cosmogony calculations of the “evolution of the universe” rely on that 2.7^oK result. Trouble is, the new paper discussed in the video suggests the 2.7^oK is not from the Big Bang, but from those “elderly galaxies” we have been seeing at the edge of the observed universe. Cosmogonists can’t have it both ways. They either have to reject the paper or they have to reject the Big Bang Theory.

I suspect the paper will not receive much attention. So other, less destructive ad hocs will have to be invented.

BTW: The 2.7^oK CMB temperature proves space is not perfectly empty as Einstein incorrectly assumed when he rejected the aether. Temperature is the motion of matter. So that means there is matter in outer space, with aether, the medium for light, being the prime candidate. Per my “Aether Deceleration Theory” of gravitation,[1] aether particles in outer space are highly active. I have speculated that their short-range interparticle velocities could be 50% greater than c. That would be analogous to the interparticle velocities of nitrogen molecules in the atmosphere. Their interparticle motion averages 515 m/s, while the velocity of sound waves in that medium is 343 m/s. After today’s revelation, the 2.7^oK CMB temperature fits better with Infinite Universe Theory than Big Bang Theory.

PSI Blog 20250616

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

(“Aether Deceleration Theory”)

20250609

800,000 Galaxies Support Infinite Universe Theory

PSI Blog 20250609 800,000 Galaxies Support Infinite Universe Theory

JWST map shows over ten times as many “Elderly Galaxies” as the Hubble Space Telescope.

"Six images of galaxies taken from nearly 800,000, from upper left to lower right: the present-day universe, and 3, 4, 8, 9 and 10 billion years ago. Credit: M. Franco / C. Casey / COSMOS-Web collaboration."

In my book, “Infinite Universe Theory,” I had an “ultra deep field” photo that cosmogonists used to calculate that there were 2 trillion galaxies in the observed universe. This current map brings that to at least 20 trillion as I subsequently predicted due to the resolution the James Webb Space Telescope was expected to have. Here is a quote from physics Professor Caitlin Casey summing that up:

“If you had a printout of the Hubble Ultra Deep Field on a standard piece of paper," she said, referring to the iconic view of nearly 10,000 galaxies released by NASA in 2004, "our image would be slightly larger than a 13-foot by 13-foot-wide mural, at the same depth. So it's really strikingly large.”

Here is a short summary of the project:

“Largest map of the universe announced revealing 800,000 galaxies, challenging early cosmos theories”

As usual, regressive physicists and cosmogonists are suffering extreme cognitive dissonance as a result. The Nobel folks should give out prizes for the best ad hocs to come.

PSI Blog 20250609

20250602

Another “Elderly Galaxy” Supports Infinite Universe Theory

PSI Blog 20250602 Another “Elderly Galaxy” Supports Infinite Universe Theory

According to the Big Bang Theory, galaxy MoM-z14 has a calculated age of 280 million years judged by its redshift of z = 14.44, which correlates with the distance light has traveled.

Data from the previous record holder: “Scientists used NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope’s NIRSpec (Near-Infrared Spectrograph) to obtain a spectrum of the distant galaxy JADES-GS-z14-0 in order to accurately measure its redshift and therefore determine its age. The redshift can be determined from the location of a critical wavelength known as the Lyman-alpha break. This galaxy dates back to less than 300 million years after the big bang.”

Thanks to George Coyne for this heads up:

“Glenn,

The JWST [James Webb Space Telescope] recently discovered this fully formed galaxy as it appeared 280 million years after the hypothesized Big Bang. The article does not mention how many hundreds of millions of years would have been required to reach its observed size. If it needed more than 280 million years to reach its observed size, then it must have started forming before the Big Bang occurred. How is that possible? Here is the link to the article.

https://www.livescience.com/space/astronomy/previously-unimaginable-james-webb-telescope-breaks-its-own-record-again-discovering-farthest-known-galaxy-in-the-universe”

[GB: Thanks George. How is that possible? It isn’t. As we look farther and farther out, we are supposed to see younger and younger objects. The light from the new record holder would have taken almost 13.8 billion years to get here. But what we see at the maximum distance are galaxies similar to our own Milky Way that took over 13.6 billion years to form. There is no way MoM-14z could have formed in 280 million years. As I pointed out before, the accepted 13.8-billion-year age of the Big Bang universe is based on dubious assumptions and math that allows no greater age than 13.8 billion years. The “Elderly Galaxy” problem is No. 9 in my list of 25 disproofs of the Big Bang Theory. When that list was prepared, the youngest “Elderly Galaxy” was 450 million years old. They get these bogus young ages by using Friedmann’s math. Here is a bit from Perplexity AI:

“Redshift and Cosmic Expansion

Redshift Type	Example	Redshift (z)	Time After Big Bang
Observable Galaxies	JADES-GS-z14-0	14.32	290 million years
CMB	Cosmic Microwave Background	~1100	380,000 years
Theoretical Limit	Near Big Bang singularity	∞	t→0

In summary, while observations are limited by the opacity of the early universe and detection capabilities, the Friedmann equations governing the Big Bang model permit redshifts approaching infinity as a _then→0 1,2.”

There will be more of these supposed baby galaxies looking elderly. You can see why Hawking’s finite singularity was needed to do the math. It also was needed for cosmogony apologists to avoid the ridiculous idea the universe exploded out of nothing. And for the misinterpretation that the universe is expanding. BTW: Don’t ask them where in hell the singularity came from.]

PSI Blog 20250602