Monthly Archives: February 2012

Big Bang Stupidity

When Maxwell’s equations predicted the speed of Light as ‘C’ (i.e. 3×108m/sec), then all the physicist had rightly asked “C with reference to what?’’, until Einstein mesmerized them with his weird theory of relativity.

But the same crowd had failed to raise a similar question on the Big Bang singularity of infinite density and energy. ‘Infinite’ with reference to what?

Apparently our universe came into existence when a point of infinite density and energy (dubbed as ‘singularity’) exploded about 15 billion years ago. The weird theorists propose that Time and Space also came into existence only after the Big bang. Apparently space and time didn’t exist before that and even if they had existed, some preach that they shouldn’t influence things in our ‘present’ Universe.

Let’s use a little bit of our commonsense here (relativists and quantumists won’t of course!).

If the singularity was of infinite density and energy, this was with reference to what?

If we assume that there was ‘nothing’ (and not even space) outside this ‘point’ called singularity, there shouldn’t have been an explosion in the first instance because there was no energy gradient for the explosion to occur. On the other hand, if we believe that there was empty space around that singularity into which it exploded, then that implies that there was space even before and the so called big bang just represents a local phenomenon in the already existing Universe. So it would be ridiculous to theorize that this Universe came into existence after big bang.

Also, if there was ‘nothing’ around the singularity and if big bang would still occur in this scenario, then even an electron or a photon could constitute a point of infiniteness (with respect to the nothing around it) and could trigger a ‘big bang’. But our Universe has much more matter and energy.

Better if the cosmologists understand the real explanation for the ‘red shift’ without falling prey to the bizarre theories of relativity and quantum physics. And Ether model provides a much better explanation for all the observations including the so called ‘cosmic microwave background radiation’ (CMBR).

(The origin of Big bang theory: Astronomers have discovered that the further away a galaxy is, the more red-shifted its light is. This implied for them that the further away the galaxies are, the faster they are moving away. And scientists interpreted this red-shift data as evidence that the Universe, including space itself, is expanding. So if our universe is expanding, it must all have started from a single point (of infinite energy and density) in the very remote past, they concluded, and Big bang theory came into existence. And then they observed what is called as cosmic microwave background radiation which again they took as another evidence for the big bang theory.)

Relativists’ Logic

While relativists believe that light, time and space do not obey commonsense and logic, they expect Ether to behave as per their primitive sense, and muon to travel as per their logical extrapolations.

While they don’t bother about logic when it comes to believing the weird mathematical predictions, they use ‘logic’ to draw conclusions from experiments to support their weird thinking.

Why can’t Ether behave vastly different to the relativists’ logical expectations and why can’t a muon live longer than what they ‘found’. Why do we think our previous calculations, of muon’s life span and velocity, should be universally correct? (That to in a world where there is no absolute time and space!)

Anyway relativity has established itself as a strong religion and it is difficult to challenge its beliefs. Those who challenge stand the risk of isolation, humiliation and suppression. The situation is not very much different from what Galileo and Copernicus had faced when they questioned the then religious beliefs.

Scientific journals out rightly refuse articles that contradict this ‘established science’. If someone tries to explain how various experiments were wrongly interpreted as supportive of relativity, scientific society either refute them as mere claims by people who can’t grasp the complex maths or expect them to provide the ‘experimental’ proof with weird formulae. (Those who challenge relativity can’t even continue their career in science, let alone undertaking the costly and ridiculous experiments like digging the earth through and through!). So basically scientific society as a whole stopped using commonsense and is obsessed with magical maths and ridiculous experiments.