PSI Blog 20250707 Bust of the Black Hole Universe
“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?
[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
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.
[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].
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment