Thank you! I cannot afford to be anybody's patreon right now, so I'm immensely grateful for people who actively support value content creators, so they can keep on creating and adding value! Them being able to reduce the adds is a magnificent bonus! Thank you!❤🙏 I hope I can eventually add to this as well.
I never even got to see Hale Bopp from really dark skies but I still have a memory of seeing it as a kid from our house and being amazed how bright it was.
Hi Fraser, how feasible is it for private companies to have their own telescopes? How much do they need charge for telescope time to recover the costs?
8:21 “…this rocket hasn’t been launched yet…so…” A big grain of salt that should also be applied to StarShip and Super Heavy. All too often commentators go on breathlessly about StarShip like all of its aspirational performance was already a given. An enormous number of chicks have been counted long before anything has hatched.
Good to hear you're making enough off of Patreon to remove TH-cam ads. This channel for awhile has been a major source of space news for me and I'm glad to see its doing well.
Hi Fraser, I have a question: since the SLS boosters are basically the same as in the 70s, how come there was so much ground damage? Was it like that in the 70s as well?
Hey Fraser! Thanks to you I discovered the "Revelation Space" series and I am stunned by the storytelling, characters and creativity these books bring. Now, I have always had a bad hand in choosing Sci-Fi literature but you seem to know the really good stuff! Could you recommend some books in your Q&A sometime? Thanks in advance.
It was just an unfortunate turn of phrase, just like "black hole" leads us to think there's something "on the other side" of the "hole". Had NASA said the moon "resonated in an unexpected manner" then the hollow moon theory would likely not exist.
Heck yeah! JWST = Amazing! Hubble = OG helped kickstart this cool stuff and might be aging, but just like older folks, provides a different perspective you simply cannot get anywhere else... Let them work together and grab some popcorn 🍿 because you are about to have your mind blown into oblivion, reassembled and then do it again! ❤️🌎👽
Thanks for all the news, Fraser! 😊 About the Hubble, I hope they boost it or capture it and bring it back. In the words of Dr Jones (Indiana Jones), it belongs in a museum! Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
Q&A what would happen if you had 2 objects one going 50% the speed of light and another going 51%the speed of light each object is going exactly on a line apart from each other would it immediately red shift or would something else happen assuming you are on one of the objects
"Would it immediatly redshift" Edit out the "it" and just use the name of whatever you are talking about. Your question does not make sense, he will not be able to answer.
Question? What is the theoretical size of a planet, I've heard that planets will start to shrink if they get to massive. So what the limit in size before they turn into a star?
Hey Fraser, I’ve been wondering lately, what would it take for aliens on titan, or whatever planet it is, that is an icy world, and we think that it’s has an ocean underneath the ice. I can’t remember the name right now, and I don’t wanna go look, to escape from their planet, like us? I’m imagining in this scenario that there are squid like people or something, I am wondering what it would take for them to get through the ice, and then be able to escape their gravity well? Do you think there’s anything on the planet that they could use for energy to actually do that, from underwater?
A simple metal container or even a faraday cage should be adequate shielding to preserve the epinephrine and prevent it being decomposed into benzoic acid by cosmic rays…
Hi Fraser, can you help me understand the oberth effect? It seems backwards to me, when the spacecraft is at periapsis the velocity is greatest, therefore a change velocity will be relatively small compared to the total velocity so it seems that this should be the least efficient way to use fuel. What am I missing?
Did you see my recent interview. th-cam.com/video/PxYecl2QvT0/w-d-xo.html We talked about exactly that. Orbits are ellipses, so you get a multiplying effect when you burn at the closest point.
I'm not gonna hold my breath for this comet... I remember hale bopp being amazing, and Halley being disappointing.. I tracked ISON from Jupiter to here thinking that was going to be the Millenium Comet... o more getting excited 😄
I Love your show and your personality so much... wonderful high sparkling quality presentation so grateful to get to watch and enjoy! Just wonderful content thank you....🤩
I'm no scientist but I have been wondering if dark matter and anti-matter should interact in the same way as dark matter and regular matter. There are so many mysteries tied to both.
As for the starlink problems could it one day be feasible to creat a “halo” like ring around Earth for satellites and space stations. Also it would be perfectly set to harvest electricity from the earth’s magnetic field for its own use and more power could be sent back to ground stations via radio/microwave transmitters.
I would prefer a heat engine to power this. There quite a diferencial of heat at high atmosphere levels. This along with both wind and solar(both are better up there) will generate enough power to both keep the ring charged and able to radiate power down.
@@fanOmry at the altitude I’m thinking it’d need to be, in some kinda equilibrium of orbit so it stays put with minimal adjustments, and won’t crash. There shouldn’t be wind, unless your meaning solar winds? But the heat differential yes for sure.
Also NASA did a test of a simple wire copper I think, for seeing power readings from it and it was way more then they thought. So a single loop around earth would be, a lot, but yes adding more options would be better, redundancy, plus more for ion thrusters to maintain stabile orbit and for ships other remote objects and back to earth. Plus it’d have to be an amazing antenna and telescope possibly, if used as an array.
@@mattduncil I was thinking of tethered rings, they can be as low as 10-20 K in the air, at those hights, you can actually still have wind both fast and thick enough to carry power
What would the Earth's weather be like if there were no plants, but you still had all this water? And would that difference be detectable in exoplanets?
ten times size of Moon is 5 degrees field of view. Moon is .5 degree or 30 minutes of arc. Mars overhead right now is a magnitude of 0.5, so pretty bright. In Taurus and looks like the Taurus alpha star Aldebaran.
It should be noted that Roman's Wide Field Instrument will have a 300 megapixel focal plane sensor, compared to 16 Mpx in Hubble's Wide Field Channel on Advanced Camera for Surveys. Wide field of view is of little use without extremely high resolution sensor. BTW, the planned Chinese Xuntian survey telescope designed to be able to dock with their space station for maintenance and upgrades will have a bit smaller primary mirror but even wider field of view, and _2.5 gigapixel_ sensor.
@@frasercain Less optics than electronics - 30 years ago Hubble's 16 Mpx was bleeding edge. AFAIK, it was sufficient to take advantage of Hubble's ~0,1 arcsecond narrow field resolution.
@jrw9985 Umm, good point. Field of view, spectral bands and sensor resolution overlap almost completely. Even the stated goals are similar, except for Roman also carrying a coronagraph for direct imaging of exoplanets.
Hey Fraser thanks as usual. But c’mon. Ballon ride? First question from ALL friends will be “what was it like being weightless?” Long boring explanation follows. People quietly departing to get a drink. Yeah thanks but I’m all in for ORBIT not just a height ride!
Besides it's ethical qualities, Space-X's "give and take" approach seems to be a very good model for preventing political tensions among space going nations, impacting space flight and science. Especially since Russia's pull out of ISS showed the first crack! If it was possible to have an Apollo Sojus docking in the cold war we should be able to achieve good working relationships and from time to time cooperations. Those won't stop the militarisation of space, but that makes opportunities for talking to one another all the more important!
Awesome video, as always. In one of your previous videos, you had said something about a flux-tube or whatever of electrical current that connected the magnetic poles of Jupiter and Io. Assuming that there was some way that we could actually tap into that power and use some or all of that electricity, would it do anything to Jupiter or Io? Like, would it mess with their magnetic fields or alter Io's orbit?
The energy stolen from the system that you are referring to is taken from the dynamos that create the magnetic field. It wouldn't change orbits. Now if you stole momentum from a body in the form of a slingshot of a craft, this does change the orbit.
@@robertnewhart3547 That does make sense, but the part that keeps popping up in my head, is that changing electromagnetic fields induce or change currents in the conductors that carry/generate them. Like, if you had a circuit that was a big loop of wire which had two inductors in it on opposite sides, and you messed with the magnetic fields of those inductors, it would change the magnetic fields/currents in the other inductor. (I get that a planet/moon EM field is a lot more complicated, bu still.) If you were drawing enough electromagnetic energy from a dynamo the size of a moon (or bigger) would it change or modify the movement of said dynamo?
To save energy and make it possible to have more payload, I would change the technique to send material into space. Anyway, there are so much junk out there so ...
@4:31 "If you run the clock backward the entire observable Universe... was once the size of a grapefruit." I prefer to think of it as a mango. Sweet vs. tart... that's just me. 🤓
That student thing was amazing . Nasa would be in right trouble in the future with civilian space flight wouldnt they? Lucky these students worked that out at a SUPER budget cost.
the 90s spoiled me for comets, but having a 400 yr drought for visible supernovas... thats the sky event ill greedily say the universe owes me... i mean us... US!! :)
If anything, smaller and solid bodies are less subject to tidal disruption. Any planets that attended stars that are now at the center of the galaxy probably got thrown out of their orbits by the numerous close passes with the BH and other stars, so they would take up independent orbits just like those of the stars. We just would not see them. That neglects the question of whether there _are_ any planets there. The oldest stars formed from material without elements from which rocks and water can form. There is Trantor, of course. The newer novels mentioned it being some distance from the true center of the galaxy, if memory serves. I've not seen the new series on Apple TV. But, I think a fine up-to-date interpretation would be for it to be a "rogue planet" without a true sun, but the Imperial Palace (the only open ground remaining) is lit by numerous nearby stars.
The idea of dark big bang sounds interesting, but it also sounds like quite a reach. One thing I never understood about dark energy causing the universe to expand, and galaxies to fly away from each other, is the fact that in the far distant future the Milky way is set to collide with Andromeda. Confusing
Hi Fraser great video. ok ok epi pen thing, cool, China's fuel tank yeah that's exciting and you know you should be blaming the lazy Oort cloud for your lack of comet joy 😆not the universe at large but the dark matter big bang. 🙄 Yeah you see that eyeroll, in fact my eyes are still rolling. I mean seriously. How about we all just repeat " we don't understand gravity over large distances yet" a hundred times. I mean this is really taking the unicorn hunt to a whole new level 🤦 dark matter big bang 🙄 that's cute.
@@deltalima6703 you don't have to be a professional astro to have an opinion on BB theory in fact some of the greatest insights in astronomy and astrophysics have come from so called amateurs, who are passionate about the subject matter. I'm busy writing a sci-fi book not papers right now that's why you haven't heard of me 😆 I'm hiding in my little book cupboard scribbling away
If you look out in one direction to the very edge of the observable Universe, and then in the opposite direction, those two points are 92 billion light-years apart. If you could then hop in a time machine back to end of inflation, and then measures those two points again, they'd only be a few centimeters apart. Distances still existed at that point in the Universe since it was after the Big Bang.
Sooo..If traveling near the speed of light...when u sing a song and when the transition reaches earth does it sound like the chipmunks since time slower on earth?
I have a question for Q & A. Why Russia is so advanced in the Rocket technology compared to the NASA or even military rockets are way more advanced? (Explanation, you don't need to read this) Is it possible that the US cannot catch them for so long? This is happening for years now and especially when we know that Russia had financial difficulties compared to the US. Even if we are looking what they developed for their military, they are so advanced, much more than the west. Can you please explain why is that? And what NASA is doing to surpass them?
Russia was advanced 10+ years ago. Not anymore. 10-20 more years under current conditions - and nobody will even remember that Russia "could into Space".
I had a nightmare where I got pulled over by a gay cop and I refused to hand over my license & registration. I guess because he was wearing a rainbow pin & tight shorts I should try that stupid "sovereign citizen" crap. Instead of shooting me like a normal cop, he came over to the passenger side and started pleading with me through the slight crack I'd left in the window. He was trying to calm me down, and started talking about normal stuff like black holes & dark matter. In fact he kinda looked like... You. That's when I realised I had fallen asleep listening to this show. I woke up so terrified I just had to type it out. Me? "sovereign citizens?" GAAAAHHHH
don't know about dark big bang. My computer sim implies something akin to early dark energy condition phase transitioned into a condensed form and initiated inflation leaving dark matter as a non quantum information relic.
4:45 inflation how is it possible, that inflation came to be? not just economists need to rub their eyes and gasp in astonishment! for the cosmic one, the explanation is in rocket science and electro-tec, maybe. in an electric conducting circuit, there is the internal resistance of the battery and the external resistance of the loop. the max power flow in Watts is attained if R_int = R_external; it is called "power adaption". in rocketry, the photonic(impulse transfer)rocket is the one with the highest ISP and speed! in the early blinks of the Big Bang, the electromagnetic and the weak force were still united. When a state/condition was reached so that "power adaption" between particles with inertia and quanta without inertia happened then a 3D-Photon rocket ignited and a short time later fizzled out again. it could have happened more than once. Another way to try to explain it is to say that in the early times, there were short peaks in opacity ( opacity = 1/transparency ).
Some billionaire out there should get his name plastered all over Hubble and get that telescope boosted right out to the edge of the solar system, imagine the pictures of the minor planets it could take...and of course all the fly by ones on the way out there !
Why is there so much time between launches of Artemis 1 and 2? I understand that they want time to react to what they learned, but two years seems excessive.
By the way, as these 6 red dots (old galaxies) recently discovered in the James Webb space telescope imagery point out, cosmology might have to be revised fundamentally. I bet on the demise of the universally accepted Big Bang theory which depends very simplistically on reversing "mechanically" the expansion of the universe to a ridiculously small initial point of matter that are supposed to have contained all the matter and energy of the universe that exists currently. Nope, the universe is not a giant mechanical structure, with gear like watch-precision sequence of events that can be just rewind anticlockwise to its initial state! What a childish perception/analysis of a very sophisticated/complex and fine tuned universe! Time for some grown-up, more scientific cosmology thanks to the James Webb space telescope.
Nature will reveal the truths about itself, we just have to keep searching. But what alternative theory do you think better matches the observations so far, like the ratios of hydrogen/helium/lithium, the cosmic background radiation and the speed that galaxies are moving away from us? Any other theory has to explain that equally well and make new predictions that are testable.
@@frasercain Similar to Relativity and Quantum mechanics theories, both of which we know are at least incomplete, more data/observations are needed to replace them, so is the Big Bang theory. James Webb telescope has just started to give us very promising hints in the right direction but there is still, at the very least, 10 years worth of very valuable and quite possibly unexpected numerous future observations, measurements and data that I am confident will revolutionize our knowledge of the universe not just replace the Big Bang theory.
From the big bang, all that information or material/matter probably spewed from a black hole from another universe. and still is spewing. The other universe must be very old.
Could you please avoid illustrating the Big Bang with animations like the one starting at 4:05? This enhances the popular misconception that the Big Bang was an explosion happening at a specific point in an already existing space.
Hello Fraser, I like your videos, for the tongue in ckeek way you present them. I suspect you like me, find no merit in a ' Dark Big Bang ' theory. I have bee working on an hypothesis, the last part of which is a logical alternative to the ' Big Bang ', ' Inflation ', the ' CMB ', and ' Redshift '. I will stick my neck out and proffer my ' Logical ' ( not mathematical )alternative for scrutiny. If you are interested, I can send you a copy of the whole, which is a logical alternative to the standard model. Kind regards, Tony Marsh. The Big Bang Death. Abstract. An hypothesis to challenge the idea of the ‘ Big Bang ‘, being how our universe began, and the idea that the universe is expanding. It is further proposed an alternative explanation for why it is thought that the ‘ Hubble ‘ Red Shift is proof that the universe is expanding. It is also hypothesized that the ‘ Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation ‘, is not proof of the big bang, being the radiation from the leftover heat from the big bang. It is proposed that light and all electromagnetic radiation may have a limit to how far it can travel through space. It is also proposed that the universe did not emerge from nothing, but is a dynamic system, in which matter is constantly being created and consumed in a cycle over billions of years. It is proposed that the universe as we observe it has always existed much as it is today, and extends to infinity. It is further proposed that the so-called ‘ Big Bang ‘ was not some kind of massive explosion, but is a misconception of what is being interpreted as the ‘ Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation ‘. The ‘ CMB ‘ is the only proof offered for the ‘ Big Bang theory ‘, and this can only be held up by an even more preposterous idea of ‘ Cosmic inflation ‘, inflating the universe from a point of singularity to fill the whole of space in a minute fraction of a billionth of a second. I believe that the CMB is not evidence of the big bang, but is due to some other phenomena. Background. Big Bang Theory. The current widely accepted view of how the universe came into being, is the ‘ Big Bang ‘ theory, where from a sub-atomic singularity, an immensely hot dense plasma emerged. It is said that this tiny speck of plasma, then inflated to fill the whole of the universe in less than a fraction of a billionth of a second. From then on, the universe is said to have expanded at an exponential rate over 13.8 billion years to the present date. It is estimated that the universe now extends to around 46 billion light years across, but the accepted view of the cosmological community is that the ‘ Big Bang ‘ was at 13.8 billion years ago, which is as far back as we can see. This means that there are 9.2 billion light years of the universe beyond what we can see. Even though this is the accepted view, there are many problems with this model, in that observations do not match up with predictions. It is a mystery why early galaxies are smoother than predicted. It is a mystery why the universe is so homogenous. It is a mystery why there is thermal equilibrium throughout the universe without causal contact, which is referred to as the ‘ Horizon ‘ problem. The way that the thermal equilibrium is explained, is by the theory of cosmic inflation, which logically, is an impossibility. The theory has no answer to Dark Matter, Dark Energy, or gravity. Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation. According to the standard model of cosmology, the ‘ CMB ‘ is the background radiation that was emitted at the ‘ Big Bang ‘ and is the heat left over which was spread out throughout the universe. This is a contradiction in terms, as inflation is said to have to have happen to dissipate the heat evenly throughout the universe. If the hypothetical phenomenal heat of this unbelievably small singularity was spread out throughout the universe in a fraction of a billionth of a second, there would be no heat left over, because it had all been dissipated to produce the thermal equilibrium that is observed today. In the relativistic cosmological model, it is explained that the reason why the CMB can be viewed at the same distance in every direction, is because the ‘ Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation ‘, is said to exist throughout the universe, due to the heat of the plasma that existed at the ‘ Big Bang ‘, being distributed evenly during the fraction of a second inflationary period following the ‘ Big Bang ‘. Looking at it logically, it is impossible for the ‘ Big Bang theory ‘ to be correct, for the following reasons. The theory is based on two very unlikely if not impossible assumptions, first is that it is possible for all of the billions of tons of matter that makes up all of the matter in the universe being able to emerge from a singularity smaller than an atom. The second is that it is possible for this tiny hot dense singularity could inflate to the size of the universe in a fraction of a billionth of a second. This led me to look at the problem from another perspective logically, and to propose the following hypothesis, that simply and logically describes how the universe works , an alternative to the ‘ Big Bang ‘, and why the universe may be static and not expanding. Alternative hypothesis. The Big Bang. It is hypothesized that the ‘ Big Bang theory ‘ is fundamentally wrong, and can be disproved conclusively by the following observations. The cornerstone of the big bang theory, is the phenomenon referred to as the ’ Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation ’. This is said to be the afterglow of the heat left over from the big bang, which is claimed to prove it happened. However, the fact that the phenomenon called the ‘ CMB ‘ can be viewed at the same distance in every direction, leads to the following. The first conclusion that this would suggest is the only way that this could be true, is if we were at the centre of the universe, which is unbelievably unlikely. For the theory to have any credibility, our galaxy should exist at a point anywhere other than the centre. As such, if our galaxy were to exist near the edge of the universe the distance to the CMB should be different in every direction, and not the same. The Relativistic cosmological model. The counter explanation to this view is the relativistic cosmological model. In this model, it is stated that because the hot dense plasma that emerged from the singularity at the moment of the big bang inflated to fill the whole of the universe, we see back to it now at the same distance, no matter where we are in the universe. This explanation when examined closely has major flaws. In the first place, this theory is totally dependent on cosmic inflation, which itself goes totally against all of the known laws of physics. In particular, all the matter that exists in the universe, would have had to travel, not just faster than light, but many times faster than the speed of light. If inflation and further expansion has caused the big bang universe to now be at 46 billion light years across, this could mean that earth could be situated anywhere in this area. As such, if our earth was situated right at the edge of this universe, there would have to be a different view towards the edge than towards the middle. This leads me to postulate that what is being observed, must be due to some other phenomena related to electromagnetic radiation that produces the picture that is termed the CMB, at a distance 13-14 billion light years away. I hypothesize, that wherever you are in the universe, even beyond our visible universe, the same view will show the phenomena we call the CMB in every direction, over the same distance, using the same equipment. This presents us with a dilemma, in that we need to find an answer to what is causing what we have been observing and calling the CMB. From what I have described, the CMB can’t be the afterglow of any form of big bang, so new research will be needed to find a solution. Two possibilities come to mind as follows. It has always been assumed, that light and all electromagnetic radiation, can travel to infinity, and at a constant speed. This has always been my understanding, but now that may need to be reconsidered.` Distance and speed of light. One possibility is that light, and all electromagnetic radiation, has a finite limit to the distance it can travel, and when it reaches that limit, it diminishes into what we think of as the CMB. This is very possible as we can only measure the speed of electromagnetic radiation over relatively short distances, but when it comes to this radiation that has travelled billions of years, we can only calculate based on perceived parameters, that is to say, all calculations to do with distance, temperature, time and the like are based on the assumption that all electromagnetic radiation travels at a constant speed, which is accepted as being 186,000 miles per second, to infinity. I hypothesize that in fact, electromagnetic radiation loses energy and speed proportional to distance and time, and as such would impact on our perceptions of what we see and calculate. It would only take a very small drop in energy and speed, to make the calculations we make wildly wrong, and our perception of what we see. This would provide a very good argument to support the idea that the universe is not expanding, as it could explain the ‘ Hubble Red Shift ‘, where the light was losing its energy. Depending on how fast energy is lost from electromagnetic radiation, could explain what we see as the CMB, without the need for cosmic expansion. However, this would be for future research. Alternative explanation for Red-Shift.
Red-Shift is said to be the stretching of the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation, due to the expansion of the universe. I hypothesize that the universe is not expanding, and the explanation why the electromagnetic radiation moves to the red end of the spectrum over distance and time, is the speed of electromagnetic radiation drops proportional to the distance it travels. As electromagnetic radiation consists of pulses ( quanta ), the frequency is the number of these quanta that pass a given point in a given time, and the time we use is one second. This number is proportional to the distance travelled in one second of time, and it is universally accepted that this is around 186,000 miles per second. I propose that over millions of years, energy is lost from this radiation, and the speed at which it travels, decreases proportionally. This means that the number of quanta passing a given point in a given time reduces proportional to the distance travelled and the reduction in speed. Although the distance between each quanta remains the same as when the radiation was originally emitted, its position in the spectrum moves to the lower end because the number of quanta passing a given point in a given time, matches a lower frequency radiation emitted in a more recent period of time. Eventually, the frequency would fall to such a low level, the radiation would be absorbed into the fabric of space. This would explain the CMB, and would make far more sense of a static universe without any expansion or a big bang with inflation. Fabric of Space. I will just give a very brief description of this, as it may help to make sense of this hypothesis. It is explained more fully in an hypothesis I have for the composition of the atom. It is proposed that there exists, just two incredibly small monopole particles that make up everything that exists in the universe. One is a negatively charged monopole particle called a ‘ Harveytron ‘, which fills every available empty space throughout the universe in a cloud, the ‘ Harveytron Cloud ‘. This cloud is the medium in which electromagnetic radiation is able to travel through space. It is also the ‘ Dark matter ‘, and the negative force of repulsion it produces, is the ‘ Dark energy ‘. This dark energy is also one of the two components of gravity, which I propose is a force of both attraction, and repulsion. The other is a corresponding positively charged monopole particle called a ‘ Dannytron ‘, which in combination with the ‘ Harveytrons ‘, make up all of the atomic nuclei in the universe, and as such, all of the physical nuclear matter throughout the universe. Creation of matter. It is hypothesized that the matter that makes up all of the nuclear matter in the universe such as the planets etc, is produced by the combination of the two monopole particles I describe. It is universally agreed that matter is formed as plasma cools. It is proposed that the early process of matter formation, is the emergence of the two monopole particles that I propose, with an overall massive excess of the negatively charged monopole ‘ Harveytron ‘ particles. It is possible, that this process may be an endothermic reaction. As soon as a positively charged monopole ‘ Dannytron ‘ particle forms, it is immediately encompassed by the negatively charged monopole ‘ Harveytron particles. It will be realized that it is not possible for the positively charged particles to exist on their own, whereas the negatively charged particles do. If the process of matter formation is endothermic, absorbing heat in the process, thermal equilibrium is explained throughout the universe, without the need for ‘ Causal contact ‘, and solves the ‘ Horizon problem ‘. Also, as I contend that the universe has always existed, thermal equilibrium is a constant with only minor hotspots, in relative terms, due to local events such as supernova and the like Cosmic Nucleosynthesis. It is claimed that the creation of deuterium and helium, along with trace amounts of lithium and beryllium, in the first 225 seconds after the big bang is proof of the big bang, because in the first moments of the universe, the temperature was billions of degrees. This was so hot that atoms were entirely ionized. However, I claim that in a nonexpanding infinite universe, violent events such as supernova and the like, happen regularly throughout the universe creating the conditions for cosmic nucleosynthesis to occur, without the need for the big bang.
If it is accepted that the universe has always existed, and was not born all at once in the big bang, most of the problems explaining things such as the ‘ Horizon problem ‘ and the like cease to be a problem. What has caused most of the problems in understanding cosmology, has come from a misconception of the ‘ CMB ‘, and believing that beyond around 13-14 billion light years, there only existed hot plasma. We know that throughout the universe, violent events, such as supernova exists, and matter is transformed into a plasma, also it is consumed by black holes, only to be born again in stellar nurseries. This is a perpetual cyclic process, where all matter is not formed in one big event, rather evenly throughout the existing universe. Antimatter. I believe that this first stage of matter formation produces both the ‘ Antimatter ‘ ‘ Dark Matter ‘, and ‘ Dark Energy ‘. The ‘ Antimatter ‘, is the newly combined positively charged monopole particles encompassed with negatively charged monopole particles. This is the embryonic form of Hydrogen, prior to further combinations until enough positive and negatively charged particles cluster together to form a hydrogen atom. At this point the antimatter ceases to exist. This easily explains phenomena such as the Muonium. This is just what I have described above, and is likely to be just one of many clusters of the two particles that I propose starting to form nuclear matter, before they are big enough to have enough charge to allow them to eject a photon, and thus have an electron as described in the standard model associated with them. Dark Matter. The ‘ Dark Matter ‘ is the negatively charged monopole particles on mass in a cloud filling every available empty space throughout the universe trying to repel each other in every direction. Once all of the positively charged monopole particles have been absorbed following further cooling, there will only exist the negatively charged monopole ‘ Harveytron ‘ particles free, in the ‘ Dark Matter ‘ ‘ Harveytron Cloud ‘. The different elements being defined by the amount of positively charged particles contained in the nucleus of each atom. The light elements being formed prior to star formation, the heavier elements being produced within stars over time. Dark Energy. The ‘ Dark Energy ‘, is the repulsive force created by the negatively charged monopole ‘ Harveytron ‘ particles trying to repel each other in every direction. Electromagnetic radiation saturation. Another possibility, which may have equal merit, is this. If we consider how many rays of electromagnetic radiation we see when we look back through space, emanating from the vast number of stars and galaxies over that distance and time, there may come a point where the saturation is so great, that they merge into one. This could easily explain why we see the phenomenon we call the CMB. This would make sense why it is the same in every direction, no matter where we exist in the universe. It would also explain why the universe has been found to be homogenous in every direction. The distance we can see, may be proportional to the receptive area of the instruments we use to detect the radiation. This fact , may explain why the ‘ James Webb ‘ telescope, can see further back than the ‘ Hubble’, due it’s larger mirror, however, it may be that this is the ultimate distance we will ever be able to see. We also have to consider the fact that because the radiation is not coming from one direction, but from every direction, there will be a mass of radiation passing each other in every direction, which must have some influence on what we measure. Thermal equilibrium. Since the big bang never happened, there won’t have been a massive amount of heat to dissipate throughout the universe. This explains why the universe is a constant temperature throughout, with only minor hot spots due to supernova and the like. This completely eliminates the ‘ Horizon ‘ problem . Conclusion. Apart from the absurdity of everything that exists in the universe emerging from a singularity smaller than an atom, and this singularity inflating to the size of the universe in a fraction of a billionth of a second, the standard model still can’t explain ‘ Dark Matter ‘, ‘ Dark Energy ‘, what is the repulsive force field in the universe that stays at a constant pressure despite the supposed expansion, or ‘ Gravity ‘. It also can’t reconcile the conflict between quantum mechanics, classical physics, and cosmology. The fact that the CMB can be seen in every direction, casts serious doubts on the validity of this theory, even though it is explained by the ‘ Relativistic cosmological model ‘. However, The whole ‘ Big Bang theory is based on assumptions that are either wholly illogical or impossible. The ‘ Big Bang ‘ theory, and the ‘ Relativistic Cosmological Model ‘, can only be justified by the ridiculous idea of ‘ Cosmic Inflation ‘, which defies logic, and violates all the laws of physics, including matter travelling through the universe at multiple times the speed of light. I contend that these facts, renders this theory disproved. The two above hypotheses can explain logically many of the outstanding problems in physics and cosmology. Hypothesis proffered by, Tony Marsh.
I'm a patreon member and it feels really good to know I'm contributing to high quality space news.
Good call this is good stuff. Even the dark matter big bang unicorn hunt😆
Glorified RSS feed
Virtue signalling.
Thank you! I cannot afford to be anybody's patreon right now, so I'm immensely grateful for people who actively support value content creators, so they can keep on creating and adding value! Them being able to reduce the adds is a magnificent bonus!
Thank you!❤🙏
I hope I can eventually add to this as well.
@@Berlynic this
I never even got to see Hale Bopp from really dark skies but I still have a memory of seeing it as a kid from our house and being amazed how bright it was.
Hi Fraser, how feasible is it for private companies to have their own telescopes? How much do they need charge for telescope time to recover the costs?
8:21 “…this rocket hasn’t been launched yet…so…”
A big grain of salt that should also be applied to StarShip and Super Heavy. All too often commentators go on breathlessly about StarShip like all of its aspirational performance was already a given. An enormous number of chicks have been counted long before anything has hatched.
Absolutely, they're all suspect until they actually fly... twice.
Hale Bopp was amazing. One of the few things that got me into astronomy
Good to hear you're making enough off of Patreon to remove TH-cam ads. This channel for awhile has been a major source of space news for me and I'm glad to see its doing well.
Bright comets are very nice. You just don't want them to be *too* bright, as dinosaurs can testify.
Thanks. Now I know the weather will be cloudy in October of 2024.
Hi Fraser, I have a question: since the SLS boosters are basically the same as in the 70s, how come there was so much ground damage? Was it like that in the 70s as well?
"Watch 2 Stars Impact Together" has been added to the Bucket List. :D
Very excited for this bright comet! Fingers are crossed!
Hey Fraser! Thanks to you I discovered the "Revelation Space" series and I am stunned by the storytelling, characters and creativity these books bring. Now, I have always had a bad hand in choosing Sci-Fi literature but you seem to know the really good stuff! Could you recommend some books in your Q&A sometime? Thanks in advance.
Dope discovery, kids. That's great.
I love the smoked tint, so sleek!
And that powerboard looks so sick. May just be one of the most favorite builds I've ever seen, drool worthy.
Simply the best space news TH-cam channel.
Thanks!
10:50 What bathroom? That 2 meter sphere is pretty typical of what I have seen.
❓Could there be ways to get a signal through the superheated plasma upon a spacecraft’s atmospheric reentry?
Question, why did the moon ring like a bell when nasa smashed something into it? Do you think the hollow moon theory has any truth to it?
It was just an unfortunate turn of phrase, just like "black hole" leads us to think there's something "on the other side" of the "hole". Had NASA said the moon "resonated in an unexpected manner" then the hollow moon theory would likely not exist.
Degradation of epipen strikes me as odd that it happened so quickly. Maybe could be stabilized with antioxidant like ascorbate
Boosting the Hubble telescope is really cool. I love the JWST. But Hubble was the game changer.
Nice to see they're putting up another. Hubble too was originally a spy satellite modified for NASA iirc.
Heck yeah! JWST = Amazing! Hubble = OG helped kickstart this cool stuff and might be aging, but just like older folks, provides a different perspective you simply cannot get anywhere else... Let them work together and grab some popcorn 🍿 because you are about to have your mind blown into oblivion, reassembled and then do it again! ❤️🌎👽
For the Epi-pen, did they keep it under pressure and at safe storage temperatures?
Good point I don’t know if that would have an affect on it but it could
Unlikely. He said they're planning to repeat the test with shielding.
Thanks for all the news, Fraser! 😊
About the Hubble, I hope they boost it or capture it and bring it back. In the words of Dr Jones (Indiana Jones), it belongs in a museum!
Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
Q&A what would happen if you had 2 objects one going 50% the speed of light and another going 51%the speed of light each object is going exactly on a line apart from each other would it immediately red shift or would something else happen assuming you are on one of the objects
"Would it immediatly redshift"
Edit out the "it" and just use the name of whatever you are talking about. Your question does not make sense, he will not be able to answer.
I vote for the 🇨🇦 Kids. Poisonous epi pen is actually a big deal if you need one.
The link for the bright comet is the same with juno's io flyby
Is strapping 2 more boosters to a Falcon heavy rocket with a larger faring a viable option until Starship is ready?
These are gold to come back and reabsorb few days/week later.
Question? What is the theoretical size of a planet, I've heard that planets will start to shrink if they get to massive. So what the limit in size before they turn into a star?
Thanks for the news, Fraser!
Is the distinction between planets and dwarf planets also done with exoplanets?
Hey Fraser, I’ve been wondering lately, what would it take for aliens on titan, or whatever planet it is, that is an icy world, and we think that it’s has an ocean underneath the ice. I can’t remember the name right now, and I don’t wanna go look, to escape from their planet, like us? I’m imagining in this scenario that there are squid like people or something, I am wondering what it would take for them to get through the ice, and then be able to escape their gravity well? Do you think there’s anything on the planet that they could use for energy to actually do that, from underwater?
A simple metal container or even a faraday cage should be adequate shielding to preserve the epinephrine and prevent it being decomposed into benzoic acid by cosmic rays…
Hi Fraser, can you help me understand the oberth effect? It seems backwards to me, when the spacecraft is at periapsis the velocity is greatest, therefore a change velocity will be relatively small compared to the total velocity so it seems that this should be the least efficient way to use fuel. What am I missing?
Did you see my recent interview. th-cam.com/video/PxYecl2QvT0/w-d-xo.html
We talked about exactly that. Orbits are ellipses, so you get a multiplying effect when you burn at the closest point.
I'm not gonna hold my breath for this comet... I remember hale bopp being amazing, and Halley being disappointing.. I tracked ISON from Jupiter to here thinking that was going to be the Millenium Comet... o more getting excited 😄
That's the right response.
@@frasercain You put the wrong link for the comet article. It leads to Io article instead.😊
10:56 how do they come back to Earth?
So long as The Universe doesn't deliver that comet directly to our doorstep. :D
Toxicity of benzoic acid may be a bit overstated. It's a pretty common preservative. There's something like half a gram in a liter of mountain dew
14:20 Could SpaceX launch upgrade hardware for Hubble and someone to install it before boosting the orbit???
I Love your show and your personality so much... wonderful high sparkling quality presentation so grateful to get to watch and enjoy! Just wonderful content thank you....🤩
Wow, thank you!
Very good program. Every one I watch as something new.
I'm no scientist but I have been wondering if dark matter and anti-matter should interact in the same way as dark matter and regular matter. There are so many mysteries tied to both.
Hale-Bopp was an awesome comet. Hyakutake was pretty good, too.
Now that's what a comet is supposed to look like!
As opposed to everything moving away from each other and the space in between things expanding could we all just be shrinking
Hey Fraser. Could a human survive the g-forces of landing on a Falcon rocket? Do you think this will ever happen?
As for the starlink problems could it one day be feasible to creat a “halo” like ring around Earth for satellites and space stations. Also it would be perfectly set to harvest electricity from the earth’s magnetic field for its own use and more power could be sent back to ground stations via radio/microwave transmitters.
I would prefer a heat engine to power this. There quite a diferencial of heat at high atmosphere levels. This along with both wind and solar(both are better up there) will generate enough power to both keep the ring charged and able to radiate power down.
@@fanOmry at the altitude I’m thinking it’d need to be, in some kinda equilibrium of orbit so it stays put with minimal adjustments, and won’t crash. There shouldn’t be wind, unless your meaning solar winds? But the heat differential yes for sure.
Also NASA did a test of a simple wire copper I think, for seeing power readings from it and it was way more then they thought. So a single loop around earth would be, a lot, but yes adding more options would be better, redundancy, plus more for ion thrusters to maintain stabile orbit and for ships other remote objects and back to earth. Plus it’d have to be an amazing antenna and telescope possibly, if used as an array.
@@mattduncil
I was thinking of tethered rings, they can be as low as 10-20 K in the air, at those hights, you can actually still have wind both fast and thick enough to carry power
@@fanOmry ok, can you explain or share a link to a video on that. Thanks
What would the Earth's weather be like if there were no plants, but you still had all this water? And would that difference be detectable in exoplanets?
ten times size of Moon is 5 degrees field of view. Moon is .5 degree or 30 minutes of arc. Mars overhead right now is a magnitude of 0.5, so pretty bright. In Taurus and looks like the Taurus alpha star Aldebaran.
I kind of wish they would give Hubble a hall effect tug so we can get it well up the gravity well
saturn v was 10 metres wide and N1 17 metres a the base(not sure about tanks which were spherical
It should be noted that Roman's Wide Field Instrument will have a 300 megapixel focal plane sensor, compared to 16 Mpx in Hubble's Wide Field Channel on Advanced Camera for Surveys. Wide field of view is of little use without extremely high resolution sensor.
BTW, the planned Chinese Xuntian survey telescope designed to be able to dock with their space station for maintenance and upgrades will have a bit smaller primary mirror but even wider field of view, and _2.5 gigapixel_ sensor.
30 years of optics and hardware improvements over Hubble. 😀
@@frasercain Less optics than electronics - 30 years ago Hubble's 16 Mpx was bleeding edge. AFAIK, it was sufficient to take advantage of Hubble's ~0,1 arcsecond narrow field resolution.
isn't ESA's Euclid designed to do pretty much the same thing as roman? and up there NOW!
@jrw9985 Umm, good point. Field of view, spectral bands and sensor resolution overlap almost completely. Even the stated goals are similar, except for Roman also carrying a coronagraph for direct imaging of exoplanets.
So VERY cool that they've named the new telescope after Nancy Grace Roman! One of my heroes! Hurray!!
Hey Fraser thanks as usual. But c’mon. Ballon ride? First question from ALL friends will be “what was it like being weightless?” Long boring explanation follows. People quietly departing to get a drink. Yeah thanks but I’m all in for ORBIT not just a height ride!
Maybe normal mater big bang was happened before the dark big bang that's why the oldest galaxies are very large in size
Besides it's ethical qualities, Space-X's "give and take" approach seems to be a very good model for preventing political tensions among space going nations, impacting space flight and science. Especially since Russia's pull out of ISS showed the first crack! If it was possible to have an Apollo Sojus docking in the cold war we should be able to achieve good working relationships and from time to time cooperations. Those won't stop the militarisation of space, but that makes opportunities for talking to one another all the more important!
Jeeez, and I thought my Scania V8 had a big fuel tank.
Awesome video, as always. In one of your previous videos, you had said something about a flux-tube or whatever of electrical current that connected the magnetic poles of Jupiter and Io. Assuming that there was some way that we could actually tap into that power and use some or all of that electricity, would it do anything to Jupiter or Io? Like, would it mess with their magnetic fields or alter Io's orbit?
The energy stolen from the system that you are referring to is taken from the dynamos that create the magnetic field. It wouldn't change orbits. Now if you stole momentum from a body in the form of a slingshot of a craft, this does change the orbit.
@@robertnewhart3547 That does make sense, but the part that keeps popping up in my head, is that changing electromagnetic fields induce or change currents in the conductors that carry/generate them. Like, if you had a circuit that was a big loop of wire which had two inductors in it on opposite sides, and you messed with the magnetic fields of those inductors, it would change the magnetic fields/currents in the other inductor. (I get that a planet/moon EM field is a lot more complicated, bu still.) If you were drawing enough electromagnetic energy from a dynamo the size of a moon (or bigger) would it change or modify the movement of said dynamo?
Crazy to think that those distant colliding stars probably have planetary systems that could support life...
That is mind blowing that epinephrine mutates so readily under the duress of cosmic radiation.
To save energy and make it possible to have more payload, I would change the technique to send material into space. Anyway, there are so much junk out there so ...
If the universe stopped expanding what would happen to the vacuum ???
Epinephrine is also common in the human body. Is 30% of it there destroyed too?
@4:31 "If you run the clock backward the entire observable Universe... was once the size of a grapefruit." I prefer to think of it as a mango. Sweet vs. tart... that's just me. 🤓
I prefer potato. Modest and versatile and much more common and relatable.
When it was that size it wasnt observable. :p
@@deltalima6703 Ah, but it was consumable. 😋
You would swear that with all the testing prior to a manned moon launches that we had NEVER been to the moon before, even once! ROFL
Keep up the good work.
Thanks 👍
That student thing was amazing . Nasa would be in right trouble in the future with civilian space flight wouldnt they? Lucky these students worked that out at a SUPER budget cost.
All the best space telescopes point at the ground.
True. Actually, they don't get much bigger than Hubble. There's a limit to how big you can make a surveillance telescope.
the 90s spoiled me for comets, but having a 400 yr drought for visible supernovas... thats the sky event ill greedily say the universe owes me... i mean us... US!! :)
Fraser, can any planets survive in the center of our galaxy?
If anything, smaller and solid bodies are less subject to tidal disruption. Any planets that attended stars that are now at the center of the galaxy probably got thrown out of their orbits by the numerous close passes with the BH and other stars, so they would take up independent orbits just like those of the stars. We just would not see them.
That neglects the question of whether there _are_ any planets there. The oldest stars formed from material without elements from which rocks and water can form.
There is Trantor, of course. The newer novels mentioned it being some distance from the true center of the galaxy, if memory serves. I've not seen the new series on Apple TV. But, I think a fine up-to-date interpretation would be for it to be a "rogue planet" without a true sun, but the Imperial Palace (the only open ground remaining) is lit by numerous nearby stars.
@@JohnDlugosz Thank you, Sir.
The idea of dark big bang sounds interesting, but it also sounds like quite a reach. One thing I never understood about dark energy causing the universe to expand, and galaxies to fly away from each other, is the fact that in the far distant future the Milky way is set to collide with Andromeda. Confusing
Hi Fraser great video. ok ok epi pen thing, cool, China's fuel tank yeah that's exciting and you know you should be blaming the lazy Oort cloud for your lack of comet joy 😆not the universe at large but the dark matter big bang. 🙄 Yeah you see that eyeroll, in fact my eyes are still rolling. I mean seriously. How about we all just repeat " we don't understand gravity over large distances yet" a hundred times. I mean this is really taking the unicorn hunt to a whole new level 🤦 dark matter big bang 🙄 that's cute.
I didnt know you were an expert on the topic. How come I never heard of you?
@@deltalima6703 you don't have to be a professional astro to have an opinion on BB theory in fact some of the greatest insights in astronomy and astrophysics have come from so called amateurs, who are passionate about the subject matter. I'm busy writing a sci-fi book not papers right now that's why you haven't heard of me 😆 I'm hiding in my little book cupboard scribbling away
Dark Bang!
10:20
Flat earthers don't have 175,000 dollars...
They can pool their money.
the whole world "size of grapefruit" , how can it be compared when nothing else existed, not meters, millimeters or inches?
If you look out in one direction to the very edge of the observable Universe, and then in the opposite direction, those two points are 92 billion light-years apart. If you could then hop in a time machine back to end of inflation, and then measures those two points again, they'd only be a few centimeters apart. Distances still existed at that point in the Universe since it was after the Big Bang.
Sooo..If traveling near the speed of light...when u sing a song and when the transition reaches earth does it sound like the chipmunks since time slower on earth?
Hah, yeah. It would get very hard to communicate at high speeds
I have a question for Q & A.
Why Russia is so advanced in the Rocket technology compared to the NASA or even military rockets are way more advanced?
(Explanation, you don't need to read this) Is it possible that the US cannot catch them for so long? This is happening for years now and especially when we know that Russia had financial difficulties compared to the US.
Even if we are looking what they developed for their military, they are so advanced, much more than the west.
Can you please explain why is that? And what NASA is doing to surpass them?
Russia was advanced 10+ years ago. Not anymore. 10-20 more years under current conditions - and nobody will even remember that Russia "could into Space".
I had a nightmare where I got pulled over by a gay cop and I refused to hand over my license & registration. I guess because he was wearing a rainbow pin & tight shorts I should try that stupid "sovereign citizen" crap. Instead of shooting me like a normal cop, he came over to the passenger side and started pleading with me through the slight crack I'd left in the window. He was trying to calm me down, and started talking about normal stuff like black holes & dark matter. In fact he kinda looked like... You. That's when I realised I had fallen asleep listening to this show. I woke up so terrified I just had to type it out. Me? "sovereign citizens?" GAAAAHHHH
11:00 Or you could be mistaken for a Chinese spy balloon and shot down by an F-22. Lol
I am too young to remember hale-bopp and I have kids if my own.
don't know about dark big bang. My computer sim implies something akin to early dark energy condition phase transitioned into a condensed form and initiated inflation leaving dark matter as a non quantum information relic.
the order ou read the t nes titles in the intro lead me to believe that kids discovered thr dark big bang oops.
4:45 inflation how is it possible, that inflation came to be? not just economists need to rub their eyes and gasp in astonishment!
for the cosmic one, the explanation is in rocket science and electro-tec, maybe.
in an electric conducting circuit, there is the internal resistance of the battery and the external resistance of the loop. the max power flow in Watts is attained if R_int = R_external; it is called "power adaption".
in rocketry, the photonic(impulse transfer)rocket is the one with the highest ISP and speed!
in the early blinks of the Big Bang, the electromagnetic and the weak force were still united. When a state/condition was reached so that "power adaption" between particles with inertia and quanta without inertia happened then a 3D-Photon rocket ignited and a short time later fizzled out again. it could have happened more than once. Another way to try to explain it is to say that in the early times, there were short peaks in opacity ( opacity = 1/transparency ).
Fraser every day 🥰
Just clarifying. Once, the universe, through the process of inflation rapidly expanded to the size of a grapefruit.
Just clarifying: The universe was always of infinite size, even at the big bang. But the visible part was once the size of a grapefruit.
My doctor said I shouldn't eat grapefruit. Is this an argument against the big bang?
Dark Matter is where physics dump the unknown so their equations work.
..Big Bang or Big Suck?...Suck would remove the confusion over Dark Matter/Energy..
Some billionaire out there should get his name plastered all over Hubble and get that telescope boosted right out to the edge of the solar system, imagine the pictures of the minor planets it could take...and of course all the fly by ones on the way out there !
Why is there so much time between launches of Artemis 1 and 2? I understand that they want time to react to what they learned, but two years seems excessive.
By the way, as these 6 red dots (old galaxies) recently discovered in the James Webb space telescope imagery point out, cosmology might have to be revised fundamentally. I bet on the demise of the universally accepted Big Bang theory which depends very simplistically on reversing "mechanically" the expansion of the universe to a ridiculously small initial point of matter that are supposed to have contained all the matter and energy of the universe that exists currently.
Nope, the universe is not a giant mechanical structure, with gear like watch-precision sequence of events that can be just rewind anticlockwise to its initial state! What a childish perception/analysis of a very sophisticated/complex and fine tuned universe! Time for some grown-up, more scientific cosmology thanks to the James Webb space telescope.
Nature will reveal the truths about itself, we just have to keep searching. But what alternative theory do you think better matches the observations so far, like the ratios of hydrogen/helium/lithium, the cosmic background radiation and the speed that galaxies are moving away from us? Any other theory has to explain that equally well and make new predictions that are testable.
@@frasercain Similar to Relativity and Quantum mechanics theories, both of which we know are at least incomplete, more data/observations are needed to replace them, so is the Big Bang theory.
James Webb telescope has just started to give us very promising hints in the right direction but there is still, at the very least, 10 years worth of very valuable and quite possibly unexpected numerous future observations, measurements and data that I am confident will revolutionize our knowledge of the universe not just replace the Big Bang theory.
Hm
Water for the epiepen...
From the big bang, all that information or material/matter probably spewed from a black hole from another universe. and still is spewing. The other universe must be very old.
Thank - you . ( 2023 / Mar / 11 )
Could you please avoid illustrating the Big Bang with animations like the one starting at 4:05? This enhances the popular misconception that the Big Bang was an explosion happening at a specific point in an already existing space.
Hello Fraser, I like your videos, for the tongue in ckeek way you present them.
I suspect you like me, find no merit in a ' Dark Big Bang ' theory. I have bee working on an hypothesis, the last part of which is a logical alternative to the ' Big Bang ', ' Inflation ', the ' CMB ', and ' Redshift '. I will stick my neck out and proffer my ' Logical ' ( not mathematical )alternative for scrutiny. If you are interested, I can send you a copy of the whole, which is a logical alternative to the standard model. Kind regards,
Tony Marsh.
The Big Bang Death.
Abstract.
An hypothesis to challenge the idea of the ‘ Big Bang ‘, being how our universe began, and the idea that the universe is expanding. It is further proposed an alternative explanation for why it is thought that the ‘ Hubble ‘ Red Shift is proof that the universe is expanding. It is also hypothesized that the ‘ Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation ‘, is not proof of the big bang, being the radiation from the leftover heat from the big bang.
It is proposed that light and all electromagnetic radiation may have a limit to how far it can travel through space. It is also proposed that the universe did not emerge from nothing, but is a dynamic system, in which matter is constantly being created and consumed in a cycle over billions of years. It is proposed that the universe as we observe it has always existed much as it is today, and extends to infinity.
It is further proposed that the so-called ‘ Big Bang ‘ was not some kind of massive explosion, but is a misconception of what is being interpreted as the ‘ Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation ‘. The ‘ CMB ‘ is the only proof offered for the ‘ Big Bang theory ‘, and this can only be held up by an even more preposterous idea of ‘ Cosmic inflation ‘, inflating the universe from a point of singularity to fill the whole of space in a minute fraction of a billionth of a second.
I believe that the CMB is not evidence of the big bang, but is due to some other phenomena.
Background.
Big Bang Theory.
The current widely accepted view of how the universe came into being, is the ‘ Big Bang ‘ theory, where from a sub-atomic singularity, an immensely hot dense plasma emerged. It is said that this tiny speck of plasma, then inflated to fill the whole of the universe in less than a fraction of a billionth of a second. From then on, the universe is said to have expanded at an exponential rate over 13.8 billion years to the present date.
It is estimated that the universe now extends to around 46 billion light years across, but the accepted view of the cosmological community is that the ‘ Big Bang ‘ was at 13.8 billion years ago, which is as far back as we can see. This means that there are 9.2 billion light years of the universe beyond what we can see.
Even though this is the accepted view, there are many problems with this model, in that observations do not match up with predictions.
It is a mystery why early galaxies are smoother than predicted.
It is a mystery why the universe is so homogenous.
It is a mystery why there is thermal equilibrium throughout the universe without causal contact, which is referred to as the ‘ Horizon ‘ problem. The way that the thermal equilibrium is explained, is by the theory of cosmic inflation, which logically, is an impossibility.
The theory has no answer to Dark Matter, Dark Energy, or gravity.
Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation.
According to the standard model of cosmology, the ‘ CMB ‘ is the background radiation that was emitted at the ‘ Big Bang ‘ and is the heat left over which was spread out throughout the universe.
This is a contradiction in terms, as inflation is said to have to have happen to dissipate the heat evenly throughout the universe. If the hypothetical phenomenal heat of this unbelievably small singularity was spread out throughout the universe in a fraction of a billionth of a second, there would be no heat left over, because it had all been dissipated to produce the thermal equilibrium that is observed today.
In the relativistic cosmological model, it is explained that the reason why the CMB can be viewed at the same distance in every direction, is because the ‘ Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation ‘, is said to exist throughout the universe, due to the heat of the plasma that existed at the ‘ Big Bang ‘, being distributed evenly during the fraction of a second inflationary period following the ‘ Big Bang ‘.
Looking at it logically, it is impossible for the ‘ Big Bang theory ‘ to be correct, for the following reasons.
The theory is based on two very unlikely if not impossible assumptions, first is that it is possible for all of the billions of tons of matter that makes up all of the matter in the universe being able to emerge from a singularity smaller than an atom. The second is that it is possible for this tiny hot dense singularity could inflate to the size of the universe in a fraction of a billionth of a second.
This led me to look at the problem from another perspective logically, and to propose the following hypothesis, that simply and logically describes how the universe works , an alternative to the ‘ Big Bang ‘, and why the universe may be static and not expanding.
Alternative hypothesis.
The Big Bang.
It is hypothesized that the ‘ Big Bang theory ‘ is fundamentally wrong, and can be disproved conclusively by the following observations.
The cornerstone of the big bang theory, is the phenomenon referred to as the ’ Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation ’. This is said to be the afterglow of the heat left over from the big bang, which is claimed to prove it happened.
However, the fact that the phenomenon called the ‘ CMB ‘ can be viewed at the same distance in every direction, leads to the following. The first conclusion that this would suggest is the only way that this could be true, is if we were at the centre of the universe, which is unbelievably unlikely.
For the theory to have any credibility, our galaxy should exist at a point anywhere other than the centre. As such, if our galaxy were to exist near the edge of the universe the distance to the CMB should be different in every direction, and not the same.
The Relativistic cosmological model.
The counter explanation to this view is the relativistic cosmological model. In this model, it is stated that because the hot dense plasma that emerged from the singularity at the moment of the big bang inflated to fill the whole of the universe, we see back to it now at the same distance, no matter where we are in the universe.
This explanation when examined closely has major flaws. In the first place, this theory is totally dependent on cosmic inflation, which itself goes totally against all of the known laws of physics. In particular, all the matter that exists in the universe, would have had to travel, not just faster than light, but many times faster than the speed of light.
If inflation and further expansion has caused the big bang universe to now be at 46 billion light years across, this could mean that earth could be situated anywhere in this area.
As such, if our earth was situated right at the edge of this universe, there would have to be a different view towards the edge than towards the middle.
This leads me to postulate that what is being observed, must be due to some other phenomena related to electromagnetic radiation that produces the picture that is termed the CMB, at a distance 13-14 billion light years away.
I hypothesize, that wherever you are in the universe, even beyond our visible universe, the same view will show the phenomena we call the CMB in every direction, over the same distance, using the same equipment.
This presents us with a dilemma, in that we need to find an answer to what is causing what we have been observing and calling the CMB. From what I have described, the CMB can’t be the afterglow of any form of big bang, so new research will be needed to find a solution. Two possibilities come to mind as follows.
It has always been assumed, that light and all electromagnetic radiation, can travel to infinity, and at a constant speed. This has always been my understanding, but now that may need to be reconsidered.`
Distance and speed of light.
One possibility is that light, and all electromagnetic radiation, has a finite limit to the distance it can travel, and when it reaches that limit, it diminishes into what we think of as the CMB. This is very possible as we can only measure the speed of electromagnetic radiation over relatively short distances, but when it comes to this radiation that has travelled billions of years, we can only calculate based on perceived parameters, that is to say, all calculations to do with distance, temperature, time and the like are based on the assumption that all electromagnetic radiation travels at a constant speed, which is accepted as being 186,000 miles per second, to infinity.
I hypothesize that in fact, electromagnetic radiation loses energy and speed proportional to distance and time, and as such would impact on our perceptions of what we see and calculate.
It would only take a very small drop in energy and speed, to make the calculations we make wildly wrong, and our perception of what we see.
This would provide a very good argument to support the idea that the universe is not expanding, as it could explain the ‘ Hubble Red Shift ‘, where the light was losing its energy. Depending on how fast energy is lost from electromagnetic radiation, could explain what we see as the CMB, without the need for cosmic expansion. However, this would be for future research.
Alternative explanation for Red-Shift.
Red-Shift is said to be the stretching of the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation, due to the expansion of the universe.
I hypothesize that the universe is not expanding, and the explanation why the electromagnetic radiation moves to the red end of the spectrum over distance and time, is the speed of electromagnetic radiation drops proportional to the distance it travels.
As electromagnetic radiation consists of pulses ( quanta ), the frequency is the number of these quanta that pass a given point in a given time, and the time we use is one second. This number is proportional to the distance travelled in one second of time, and it is universally accepted that this is around 186,000 miles per second.
I propose that over millions of years, energy is lost from this radiation, and the speed at which it travels, decreases proportionally. This means that the number of quanta passing a given point in a given time reduces proportional to the distance travelled and the reduction in speed. Although the distance between each quanta remains the same as when the radiation was originally emitted, its position in the spectrum moves to the lower end because the number of quanta passing a given point in a given time, matches a lower frequency radiation emitted in a more recent period of time.
Eventually, the frequency would fall to such a low level, the radiation would be absorbed into the fabric of space.
This would explain the CMB, and would make far more sense of a static universe without any expansion or a big bang with inflation.
Fabric of Space.
I will just give a very brief description of this, as it may help to make sense of this hypothesis. It is explained more fully in an hypothesis I have for the composition of the atom.
It is proposed that there exists, just two incredibly small monopole particles that make up everything that exists in the universe. One is a negatively charged monopole particle called a ‘ Harveytron ‘, which fills every available empty space throughout the universe in a cloud, the ‘ Harveytron Cloud ‘. This cloud is the medium in which electromagnetic radiation is able to travel through space.
It is also the ‘ Dark matter ‘, and the negative force of repulsion it produces, is the ‘ Dark energy ‘.
This dark energy is also one of the two components of gravity, which I propose is a force of both attraction, and repulsion.
The other is a corresponding positively charged monopole particle called a ‘ Dannytron ‘, which in combination with the ‘ Harveytrons ‘, make up all of the atomic nuclei in the universe, and as such, all of the physical nuclear matter throughout the universe.
Creation of matter.
It is hypothesized that the matter that makes up all of the nuclear matter in the universe such as the planets etc, is produced by the combination of the two monopole particles I describe.
It is universally agreed that matter is formed as plasma cools. It is proposed that the early process of matter formation, is the emergence of the two monopole particles that I propose, with an overall massive excess of the negatively charged monopole ‘ Harveytron ‘ particles. It is possible, that this process may be an endothermic reaction.
As soon as a positively charged monopole ‘ Dannytron ‘ particle forms, it is immediately encompassed by the negatively charged monopole ‘ Harveytron particles. It will be realized that it is not possible for the positively charged particles to exist on their own, whereas the negatively charged particles do.
If the process of matter formation is endothermic, absorbing heat in the process, thermal equilibrium is explained throughout the universe, without the need for ‘ Causal contact ‘, and solves the ‘ Horizon problem ‘. Also, as I contend that the universe has always existed, thermal equilibrium is a constant with only minor hotspots, in relative terms, due to local events such as supernova and the like
Cosmic Nucleosynthesis.
It is claimed that the creation of deuterium and helium, along with trace amounts of lithium and beryllium, in the first 225 seconds after the big bang is proof of the big bang, because in the first moments of the universe, the temperature was billions of degrees. This was so hot that atoms were entirely ionized.
However, I claim that in a nonexpanding infinite universe, violent events such as supernova and the like, happen regularly throughout the universe creating the conditions for cosmic nucleosynthesis to occur, without the need for the big bang.
If it is accepted that the universe has always existed, and was not born all at once in the big bang, most of the problems explaining things such as the ‘ Horizon problem ‘ and the like cease to be a problem. What has caused most of the problems in understanding cosmology, has come from a misconception of the ‘ CMB ‘, and believing that beyond around 13-14 billion light years, there only existed hot plasma.
We know that throughout the universe, violent events, such as supernova exists, and matter is transformed into a plasma, also it is consumed by black holes, only to be born again in stellar nurseries. This is a perpetual cyclic process, where all matter is not formed in one big event, rather evenly throughout the existing universe.
Antimatter.
I believe that this first stage of matter formation produces both the ‘ Antimatter ‘ ‘ Dark Matter ‘, and ‘ Dark Energy ‘.
The ‘ Antimatter ‘, is the newly combined positively charged monopole particles encompassed with negatively charged monopole particles. This is the embryonic form of Hydrogen, prior to further combinations until enough positive and negatively charged particles cluster together to form a hydrogen atom. At this point the antimatter ceases to exist.
This easily explains phenomena such as the Muonium. This is just what I have described above, and is likely to be just one of many clusters of the two particles that I propose starting to form nuclear matter, before they are big enough to have enough charge to allow them to eject a photon, and thus have an electron as described in the standard model associated with them.
Dark Matter.
The ‘ Dark Matter ‘ is the negatively charged monopole particles on mass in a cloud filling every available empty space throughout the universe trying to repel each other in every direction. Once all of the positively charged monopole particles have been absorbed following further cooling, there will only exist the negatively charged monopole ‘ Harveytron ‘ particles free, in the ‘ Dark Matter ‘ ‘ Harveytron Cloud ‘. The different elements being defined by the amount of positively charged particles contained in the nucleus of each atom. The light elements being formed prior to star formation, the heavier elements being produced within stars over time.
Dark Energy.
The ‘ Dark Energy ‘, is the repulsive force created by the negatively charged monopole ‘ Harveytron ‘ particles trying to repel each other in every direction.
Electromagnetic radiation saturation.
Another possibility, which may have equal merit, is this. If we consider how many rays of electromagnetic radiation we see when we look back through space, emanating from the vast number of stars and galaxies over that distance and time, there may come a point where the saturation is so great, that they merge into one.
This could easily explain why we see the phenomenon we call the CMB. This would make sense why it is the same in every direction, no matter where we exist in the universe. It would also explain why the universe has been found to be homogenous in every direction. The distance we can see, may be proportional to the receptive area of the instruments we use to detect the radiation.
This fact , may explain why the ‘ James Webb ‘ telescope, can see further back than the ‘ Hubble’, due it’s larger mirror, however, it may be that this is the ultimate distance we will ever be able to see. We also have to consider the fact that because the radiation is not coming from one direction, but from every direction, there will be a mass of radiation passing each other in every direction, which must have some influence on what we measure.
Thermal equilibrium.
Since the big bang never happened, there won’t have been a massive amount of heat to dissipate throughout the universe. This explains why the universe is a constant temperature throughout, with only minor hot spots due to supernova and the like.
This completely eliminates the ‘ Horizon ‘ problem .
Conclusion.
Apart from the absurdity of everything that exists in the universe emerging from a singularity smaller than an atom, and this singularity inflating to the size of the universe in a fraction of a billionth of a second, the standard model still can’t explain ‘ Dark Matter ‘, ‘ Dark Energy ‘, what is the repulsive force field in the universe that stays at a constant pressure despite the supposed expansion, or ‘ Gravity ‘. It also can’t reconcile the conflict between quantum mechanics, classical physics, and cosmology.
The fact that the CMB can be seen in every direction, casts serious doubts on the validity of this theory, even though it is explained by the ‘ Relativistic cosmological model ‘. However, The whole ‘ Big Bang theory is based on assumptions that are either wholly illogical or impossible.
The ‘ Big Bang ‘ theory, and the ‘ Relativistic Cosmological Model ‘, can only be justified by the ridiculous idea of ‘ Cosmic Inflation ‘, which defies logic, and violates all the laws of physics, including matter travelling through the universe at multiple times the speed of light. I contend that these facts, renders this theory disproved.
The two above hypotheses can explain logically many of the outstanding problems in physics and cosmology.
Hypothesis proffered by,
Tony Marsh.
Like
A wooden case.
How strange. I compare that to God and the devil, dark and light, good and evil 😅