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.

20250728

Einstein’s Perfectly Empty Space is a Bust

PSI Blog 20250728 Einstein’s Perfectly Empty Space is a Bust

Imaginary nonexistence takes another hit.

“The turbulent flow of the Phantom Galaxy, as seen by the James Webb Space Telescope (Image credit: ESA/Webb, NASA & CSA, J. Lee and the PHANGS-JWST Team)”

Thanks to Bill Howell for this heads up on the goings on in interstellar space:

https://www.livescience.com/space/astronomy/trippy-supercomputer-simulation-offers-unprecedented-view-of-the-space-between-stars

Einstein’s Imaginary Empty Space

Einstein’s rejection of the aether set the stage for what became Bishop Lemaître’s explosion of everything out of nothing. In his invention of the photon Einstein assumed light was a particle instead of a wave in the aether. In support, he assumed light was a massless particle containing perfectly empty space traveling perpetually through perfectly empty space. There was no evidence for any of that. All real particles lose velocity over distance, just like a baseball when you throw it. The velocity of wave motion through a medium is controlled by that medium. That is why light speed is constant.

The Space Between Stars

In our naivety we have consider outer space to be perfectly empty. Infinite Universe Theory (IUT) rejects that totally. You see, perfectly empty space is an idealization. The opposite is perfectly solid matter. Neither of these exist. All real things—including subatomic particles—consist of mixtures of both. According to Aristotle (and IUT), the universe is infinitely subdividable.

Previously, I mentioned that the 2.7^oK temperature indicated by the Cosmic Microwave Background is a result of the motion of matter in outer space. The simulations produced by Beattie et. al. support that claim. As reporter Thompson writes:

“The charged particles in the interstellar medium are significantly more diffuse than even ultrahigh vacuum experiments on Earth. Still, their motion is enough to generate a magnetic field. This field is millions of times weaker than a fridge magnet, but in the vacuum of space, it plays a major role in shaping galaxies, and even in forming stars.”

Existence and the Infinite Universe

The fact that we exist and that nothingness does not is support for our assumption the universe is infinite. It exists everywhere for all time. Nonexistence is imaginary, just like the perfectly empty space Einstein had to imagine for his massless light particle.

PSI Blog 20250728

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.

20250721

US Support for Big Bang Theory Starts to Crumble

PSI Blog 20250721 US Support for Big Bang Theory Starts to Crumble

“Now-canceled CMB-S4 project would have searched the afterglow of the Big Bang for signs of cosmic exponential growth spurt.”

“Plans to replace the current South Pole Telescope with a more sensitive array have been scrapped. Alamy Stock Photo”

This article by Science reporter Adrian Cho is about one of many budget cuts being implemented by the current administration. The cut of $900 million pales in comparison to the failed $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope, which also was supposed to support the Big Bang Theory. It is somewhat ironic, but not surprising, that the decline of the US empire and the decline of the Big Bang Theory are going hand in hand:

“U.S. abandons hunt for signal of cosmic inflation”

Of course, there was no way that the proposed project was going to support the silly inflation idea anyway. The whole expansion trope was based on Einstein’s ridiculous “Untired Light Theory,” which assumes light is a massless particle filled with perfectly empty space traveling perpetually through perfectly empty space. None of that is possible. Light simply is a wave in the aether, which is denied by regressive physicists and cosmogonists. Aether particles have mass, and any such measurements are the results of collisions of ubiquitous local particles. They do not travel from galaxy to eyeball like Einstein’s imaginary photons.

The sought for changes in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) would never be found. That is because the 2.7^oK temperature indicated by the CMB is simply a measure of the motion of the matter existing in outer space. Had Einstein’s initial replacement of aether with perfectly empty space been correct, the CMB temperature would have been 0.0^oK. Of course, without aether denial the whole Big Bang mess would have been forgotten long ago.

Whether this reality check had anything to do with US abandonment of the project is not known. And, as the Hubble Space Telescope showed early on, the $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope would find only “Elderly Galaxies” instead of the empty space predicted by Big Bang Theory. On the other hand, few scientific projects are complete failures no matter what hypotheses they are trying to support. Because the universe is infinite, something new is likely to be found, even if it is the fact we do not know enough.

PSI Blog 20250721

20250714

Time before Time Began?

PSI Blog 20250714 Time before Time Began?

Hodgepodge showing the mess cosmogonists are now facing with even Hawking’s singularity taking a hit.

“A diagram (not to scale) depicting the major milestones in the evolution of the Universe since the Big Bang – around 13.8 billion years ago. The Universe was initially in a neutral state until light from the first stars started to ionise the hydrogen.” Photo credit: Phil Halper.

Thanks again to Bill Wesley for this heads up:

“I thought you might enjoy the absurdity of this mess
Completely bonkers insane is the new sanity, crazy is the new rational, why yes of course time began before time began otherwise how could there be enough time for time to begin?

Do these people even hear/read themselves? they will say ANYTHING to hold onto an audience, the less sense that it makes the more it is considered to exhibit a higher kind of sense.

https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/we-can-know-what-came-before-big-bang”

[GB: Here, in one place, are large parts of the discombobulations taking place in today’s faltering cosmology. This BBC article by Phil Halper, a member of the Royal Astronomical Society, catches much of the cognitive dissonance over what is left of the Big Bang Theory. I like Phil’s photo (above) stretching out NASA’s timeline to better show the hypothesized “younging effect” that failed to show up in JWST photos. Watch the video too, as long as you can stand it. Listening to the greatest minds of the 20^th century is not pleasant.

I presented a list of the falsifications (disproofs) of the Big Bang Theory here, with an updated list here. See how many you can find in Halper’s report and video. The winner gets a free copy of any of our books.]

PSI Blog 20250714

20250707

Bust of the Black Hole Universe

PSI Blog 20250707 Bust of the Black Hole Universe

Another reformist theory bites the dust.

“A black hole pictured by the Spitzer space telescope Credit: AFP/Getty Images”

Question from George Coyne (“author of Notfinity Process: Matter in Motion):

“Glenn,

An international team of physicists concluded that the Big Bang theory is wrong and the universe is sitting inside a black hole. Their study suggests that the universe was formed following a gravitational collapse that generated a massive black hole. Glenn, what is your view of this study?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/06/10/big-bang-theory-is-wrong-claim-scientists/?recomm_id=f396b8c0-b9b8-4658-a99a-24aa56171993”

[GB: Thanks George. Always glad to see that some brave physicists are calling the Big Bang Theory wrong! However, like many of our unemployed reformists, they come up with some new outrageous ideas as a replacement. Of course, as you know, the real replacement for the finite Big Bang is Infinite Universe Theory. The universe has existed everywhere for all time.

Cyclic theories have been popular for over a century. That is because cycles occur everywhere. There is the cycle of birth and death for each microcosm in the universe. We also don’t know what lies outside of our observed universe that causes some of the perturbations we observe within. For instance, galactic clusters appear to be heading toward some large microcosm outside the universe.[1] Then there is the mis-match the authors mention regarding the clockwise/counter clockwise ratio for galaxies at the edge of the observed universe. Both the Big Bang Theory and the Infinite Universe Theory hypothesize the ratio would be 1.0.

Some cosmogonists have suggested the (finite) universe itself was spinning. But of course, that would be impossible, as I explained here. There are other explanations. The one in tune with IUT emphasizes observational problems:

Here is a quote from reporter Margherita Bassi: “Another possible explanation involves the Milky Way’s rotation. Due to an effect called the Doppler shift, astronomers expect galaxies rotating opposite to the Milky Way’s motion to appear brighter, which could explain their overrepresentation in telescopic surveys.]

“If that is indeed the case, we will need to re-calibrate our distance measurements for the deep universe,” Shamir explains in the statement. "The re-calibration of distance measurements can also explain several other unsolved questions in cosmology such as the differences in the expansion rates of the universe and the large galaxies that according to the existing distance measurements are expected to be older than the universe itself.””

[GB: Nuff said. According to Infinite Universe Theory, distance measurements that use cosmological redshifts are a result of “tired light.” That is, due to the imperfection of light wave reproduction, light waves must get longer as a function of distance. The resulting redshift is on top of other red and blueshifts involving the Doppler effect and the “gravitational redshift.”[2] The suggested “recalibrations” will get rid of some cosmogonical problems, but not all, as long as the ridiculous expanding universe interpretation is included.

The suggested replacement for the Big Bang is incorrect because it essentially is an “expansion-contraction” theory similar to those proposed by other reformists. They can’t give up the expanding universe nonsense, inventing acausal reasons for each expansion and contraction just like the mainstream cosmogonists for their theory. Sometimes miraculous dark energy is hypothesized as the cause. Readers know energy neither exists nor occurs—it is a calculation. It describes matter in motion just like momentum (P=mv) describes what happens when a microcosm (containing matter) is in motion. If you are hit by something having momentum, you are still hit by that something, no matter what the calculation says.

The “gravitational collapse” needed to produce the contraction is fraught with the same error bedeviling all of physics: attraction. There is no such activity. There is no physical mechanism Newton ever presented for his attraction. He did try to mount a push theory by hypothesizing a dense distal medium, but got it backwards. The gravitational medium is denser proximally than it is distally. That is because aether particles lose velocity after colliding with ordinary matter. Like other reformists under the influence of aether denial, these folks have no causative macrocosmic agent outside their assumed finite universe. The reasons for the contraction and expansion parts of their hypothesis are not physical. They are magical.

All in all, I give this reformist theory an F+. The plus is for recognizing the Big Bang Theory is a bust.]

PSI Blog 20250707

[1] Kashlinsky, A., Atrio-Barandela, F., Ebeling, H., Edge, A., and Kocevski, D., 2010, A New Measurement of the Bulk Flow of X-Ray Luminous Clusters of Galaxies: The Astrophysical Journal Letters, v. 712, no. 1, p. L81–L85. [10.1088/2041-8205/712/1/L81].

[2] Borchardt, Glenn, 2018, The physical cause of gravitation: viXra:1806.0165.