THE CULT OF THE BIG BANG, WAS THERE A BANG? (BOOK REVIEW)
By William C. Mitchell, Reviewed by Hal Fox
BIG BANG BUST!
A Book Review, by Hal Fox
"The Cult of the BIG BANG, Was There a Bang?," William C. Mitchell, c1995, 240 pages, 5 figs, 85 refs, indexed. Cosmic Sense Books, PO Box 3472, Carson City, NV 89702, $11.95, ISBN 0-9643188-0-6.
William C. Mitchell presents a thoroughly-documented discussion of the successes and failures of the Big Bang hypothesis. Here is a partial list of the problems of the Big Bang hypothesis: Age of Universe, Microwave Background Radiation, Center of Universe, Conservation of Mass/Energy, Cosmic Strings and Sheets, Curved Space, Critical Mass Density, Expanding Space, Gigantic Galactic Formations, Gravitational Red Shift, Light Element Problem, Negative Energy of Gravity, Quasar Problem, Red Shift Problems, Smoothness Problem, Speed-of-Light Problems, Superluminal Flares, Zero Net Energy, etc.
Normally, within the standard view of the scientific method, any hypothesis that had so many problems would be abandoned and the search would be well along on an alternative hypothesis. To set the stage for the Big Bang, it begins with the American astronomers Edwin Hubble and Milton Humason (late 1920s and early 1930s) finding that nearby galaxies appeared to be moving away from the earth. The farther away the galaxies were, the faster they appeared to be moving away. The measurement for this effect is that a body moving away from the earth has a shift in its emitting light toward lower wavelengths (red shift). Hubble did suggest (probably without believing that anyone would take him seriously) that the universe could be expanding. Later this [ridiculous?] suggestion was seriously considered by at least three cosmologists (especially Gamow in 1948). The Red Shift, which Hubble labeled as an apparent motion of distant galaxies, is the major observation upon which the Big Bang hypothesis is based. In addition, two other major props for the Big Bang are (1) the relatively uniform (in all directions) observation of the microwave background radiation and (2) the production of light elements such as hydrogen, helium, deuterium, and lithium.
If other explanations could be found for the Red Shift, the Microwave Background Radiation, and the production of light elements, that would certainly weaken the logical basis for the Big Bang. Recently, there have been two discoveries that easily handle the first two: Red Shift and Microwave Background Radiation. Here are the references: Petar K. Anastasovski & Trevor M. Benson, "Quantum Mass Theory Compatible with Quantum Field Theory," c1995, and P. Anastasovski, H. Fox, K. Shoulders, "A New Approach to the Cosmic Red-Shift and to the Cosmic Microwave Sources," J. New Energy, vol 1, no 2, Summer 1996. In reviewing Anastasovski's book, this reviewer suggested that Anastasovski has found an explanation for the Red Shift. The result was the follow-on paper in which Anastasovski shows that not only do photons lose energy in their interactions with charged particles in space, but the relatively low-frequency energy lost is emitted in the microwave region thus the Red Shift and the Microwave Background Radiation are simply explained! More recently, Bo Lehnert and Sisir Roy, "Extended Electromagnetic Theory, Space-Charge in Vacuo and the Rest Mass of the Photon," have analytically shown the same effect the red shift by loss of photon energy and emitted as the microwave background radiation.
If the Big Bang is balanced on the three-legged stool of Red Shift, Microwave Background Radiation, and the Light Elements, there is not much left to stand on. As Mitchell points out in his book, the concept of the light elements being produced within a few seconds after the initiation of the Big Bang by matter being formed out of the primeval energy of course, light elements would be more easily formed than heavy elements has some problems.
William Mitchell cites the biggest problem for the Big Bang is to explain the operation within the context of conservation of mass and energy. As the Big Bang hypothesis has matured (from the original guess of 2 billion years ago to the present day "corrections" to 10 to 14 billion years ago), the process has been accomplished with retrodiction. Retrodiction is akin to prediction except that retrodiction occurs after the discovery of new observations, whereas prediction is provided before the discoveries. In other words, the Big Bang theory has been continuously updated in an attempt to explain the many new cosmological discoveries. If there is still some degree of logical awareness among the Big Bangers, it will be interesting to observe how they handle the much simpler explanations of the Red Shift and the Microwave Background Radiation.
William Mitchell has provided an in-depth study of all of the many facets of the Big Bang. He has exposed the multitude of problems, often by citing the Big Bang proponents. In addition, Mitchell begins his book with three excellent chapters summarizing the history of Relativity, the Standard Model of Particle Physics, and Quantum Theory. The book is worth buying and reading just for these three chapters.
In Chapter 19, Mitchell discusses an optional cosmology - a Near Steady-State Theory. This discussion was provided before the information about the Red Shift (as cited above) was available to Mitchell. It is highly probable that Mitchell and other cosmologists will revel in the concept that photons lose energy in traveling the immensity of space. It is, therefore, predicted that the continuation of exploration into the depth of the heavens will find more and more galaxies (as has been the case with the Hubble Telescope observations); that the farther off these galaxies exist, the greater will be the Red Shift; and there will be no observable edge to the universe nor evidence for a Big Bang. The conclusion is that as an explanation for the wonders of the heavens, the Big Bang is a Bust.
Return to the INE Main Page
Aug. 25, 1999.