astronomy Cosmology Physics Science

20 big bang busting bloopers

There is about as much truth in the sitcom as there is in the actual big bang theory. Credit: Wikipedia

The following are 20 conundrums for the big bang theory for the origin of the Universe. These are problems in a universe which had no Creator God, but not in this Universe, created by the eternally existing uncreated One.

1. Where did the Universe come from? “Cosmology is not even astrophysics: all the principal assumptions in this field are unverified (or unverifiable) in the laboratory … .” Cosmologists have become “…comfortable with inventing unknowns to explain the unknown.” Dr Richard Lieu (University of Alabama, Huntsville)

2. How did nothing explode? Universe started in nothing not even space, time or energy. What fluctuated in the quantum vacuum if time did not exist and how do they know which laws of physics applied. Where did those laws come from?

3. How did stars and galaxies form? It is impossible to form a star without dark matter (or a nearby supernova, which is a chicken and egg problem). No stars means no galaxies which means no Universe. Dark matter is pure fiction!

4. The ‘Axis of Evil’ in the CMB anisotropies. Why a preferred axis? Why aligned with the ecliptic? There should be no preferred axes in the Universe. The CMB data from both WMAP and PLANCK satellites conforms a weird preference for a direction in the cosmos, which aligns with the orbit of the earth around the sun. Why?

5. Expansion of space. Evolution of galaxies is used as an escape clause. When observations at high redshift don’t match what is expected in the model from expansion of space, according to big bang theory, the astrophysicists just turn the evolution ‘knob’ by the appropriate amount! It’s just another big fudge!

6. The singularity and origin of the universe. There is no Creator. But models begin by assuming time and the laws of physics are already operating. This is nothing but circular reasoning. The laws of physics assume the role of the eternally existing creator.

7. The origin of the laws of physics in this Universe. They are assumed in order to model the Universe. According to cosmic evolutionary thinking, our Universe is the random result of survival of the fittest universe in an infinite multiverse. Good imagination. Complete conjecture used to satisfy the need to explain the extreme fine tuning in the Universe. Cosmic evolutionists presume the existence of a multiverse (which is untestable) to explain our current laws and the parameters of physics that allow life to exist now.

8. Excluding the existence of the multiverse, which is pure storytelling anyway, how did the parameters of nature become so finely tuned for life to exist in this Universe? Why did the Universe begin in such a low entropy state with so much usable energy, from which it is now winding down? Why do we have the arrows of time? Many different process indicate a forward direction for time to proceed. Why is that?

9. How did the Universe start off with an initial state in such a high degree of homogeneity? According to the theory of the origin of the Universe out of a singularity, this is the initial condition required for the big bang to produce the currently observable Universe. That is, it did not produce many black holes and collapse back into the singularity. Observations do not even support a homogeneous Universe: matter is distributed on large scales, with an asymmetry of 43% in opposite directions on the sky. That is, in say the northern sky there is 43% more matter than in the southern sky.

10. How did the big bang universe start to form galaxies when it is too smooth? That is, matter and the CMB radiation is not lumpy enough to seed galaxies–to start matter condensing to form galaxies. This is called the smoothness problem. More unknowns!

11. Why is the Universe Euclidean? This is called the flatness problem. It is currently Euclidean (or flat) and has been ever since the beginning in the alleged big bang. But there is no good reason for it!

12. And what about the monopole problem? Monopoles are elementary like tiny magnets with only one pole, either a south or a north, but not both. Big bang theory says monopoles should be everywhere but none are detected, nor any cosmic strings and other weird stuff.

13. So cosmic inflation is invoked to solve many of these problems? The big bang has a light travel time problem—called the horizon problem. The proposed solution is this cosmic inflation—a super rapid expansion of the early universe–which smoothed out all the problems (?) Besides it has not been detected, despite recent media hype, and final retraction. And cosmic inflation itself introduces more problems. So more fiction.

14. Higgs boson led to Nobel prize in 2013. It’s existence means a major contradiction for the big bang. If cosmic inflation of the Universe is due to the Higgs field our Universe shouldn’t exist. It should have collapsed back into the singularity. Some quick changes in the models are needed. In fact, the retraction of the ‘discovery’ of inflation helps the big bangers here. Now, they have a few more choices, than when they thought the inflation field was of one kind–now they have no idea.

15. The ‘discovery’ of the accelerating universe led to a Nobel prize in 2011. It requires dark energy to make the theory fit the high redshift supernova observations used to argue for the accelerating expansion. But what is dark energy? It is not like normal energy but behaves in the opposite fashion, like anti-gravity. Just more fiction!

16. On all scales in the Universe, down to star and galaxy formation, dark matter is stuff that is needed without which the theory for the formation of structures does not work. Dark matter is used to explain everything that cannot be explained with the big bang model. It is really a ‘god’ of the gaps. More fiction.

17. The Standard Model of particle physics is in contradiction to the requirements of the alleged theory of big bang nucleosynthesis (BBN). BBN needs dark matter particles to solve many problems. The hypothetical axion and sterile neutrino particles have been suggested. But since there was no big bang I suppose there is not really any contradiction. But how do the big bang theorists explain it?

18. There is not enough anti-matter in the Universe. The amount we measure is tiny and in fact, it has been proposed as another tuning parameter, used to detect how much dark matter is needed in BBN. There you have an unknown amount of antimatter (which is real stuff but we detect almost none of it) to be used as proxy for how much dark matter must exist–stuff that has never been observed. More fiction!

19. When the total amount of matter in the Universe is measured using different methods, they don’t agree. The big bang model needs an extra neutrino—a sterile neutrino–or dark radiation, to fix the problem. This stuff is called dark radiation, but now apparently also dark photons, dark planets, dark galaxies and even dark intelligent life has been suggested! Crazy? You said it! Just more fiction!

20. Dwarf galaxies around our Milky Way galaxy, Andromeda galaxy and also the galaxy in Centaurus A  are too few as predicted by standard big bang cosmology and galaxy formation theory. Also the dwarf galaxies orbit in a synchronised way around their parent galaxies when the standard theory says they should be in random orbits, a reflection of their chaotic origin. Big bang theory gets it wrong again. Just more fiction!

The cast of the sitcom “The Big Bang Theory” know just as much about the big bang universe as most theorists and astrophysicists. Credit: Wikipedia

Recommended Reading and Viewing

By John Gideon Hartnett

Dr John G. Hartnett is an Australian physicist and cosmologist, and a Christian with a biblical creationist worldview. He received a B.Sc. (Hons) and Ph.D. (with distinction) in Physics from The University of Western Australia, W.A., Australia. He was an Australian Research Council (ARC) Discovery Outstanding Researcher Award (DORA) fellow at the University of Adelaide, with rank of Associate Professor. Now he is retired. He has published more than 200 papers in scientific journals, book chapters and conference proceedings.