Big Bang Rebuttal
Written by Joseph A Olson PE
Tool making and communication skills are easily distinguishing features between human beings and other species on this planet. When coupled with a natural curiosity and the ability learn from our mistakes, we have lifted most humans from the vulgar realities of our ancestor’s existence. For those bent on controlling others, tools and communication must be controlled and manipulated.
The ‘great humanitarian’, Vladimir Lenin said “the way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation”. The great philosopher, Bertrand Russell said “western populations would gladly accept serfdom if it was packaged as saving the Earth”.
Hubble and the Big Bang
In 1929, when spectral analysis revealed a ‘red shift’ in distant galaxies, astronomer Edwin Hubble speculated that this might be due to acceleration away from Earth and a possible expanding universe. Before he could reflect on other possible explanations, a radio interview stumbled onto the phrase “Big Bang” and a run-away train left the station. Dr Hubble was uncomfortable with both the concept and the catchy nick-name, but he had a ‘conflict of interest’ on this issue.
In a Times magazine interview, on December 14, 1936, titled “Science: Shift on Shift”, Dr Hubble makes his opposition clear. One reason that he was not more forceful was because he was begging the government for funding of the Mount Palomar telescope. Public interest was necessary during the tight depression era federal budgets to complete this project.
The Hooker 100 inch telescope was then showing farthest light sources to be moving at 25,000 miles per second. Dr Hubble, during his 1936 interview, stated that he was “willing to abandon the expanding universe to mathematical cosmologists”…pending erection of the 200 inch Palomar telescope…”which may finally settle the question”.
What Dr Hubble meant was that with four times the light gathering power and four times the distance of past light sources, the anticipated light speed would exceed half the speed of light. At that point it would easy to discredit ‘Big Bang’ and develop another model. That never happened for a multitude of reasons, some to do with Dr Hubble.
In addition to building a giant government funded telescope during a depression, the dear doctor also very much coveted a Nobel Prize. The problem was that at that time, astronomy was not considered a branch of any science that could receive the award. It is hard to speak out against your ‘signature’ science and simultaneously promote that science as worthy of the world’s highest honor. Hubble was prevented from speaking against the ‘Big Bang’ due to his vested interest in Palomar and HIS potential Nobel Prize. He was to be given the award in 1953, but a sudden heart attack and untimely death prevented that.
Einstein and the Big Bang
Another renowned scientist with objections to the ‘Big Bang’ had additional problems in the 1930’s. Einstein won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1921 for the ’photoelectric effect’ . He was a marked man in his Nazi occupied homeland and luckily fled to America in 1933. Einstein was in the unfortunate position of begging for funds to develop an ‘atomic’ weapon. His begging letters to FDR are available on-line.
Meanwhile, Einstein worked under the strictest security to develop the refining methods and the first sustained nuclear reaction using Uranium at the University of Chicago. His correspondence with the Robert Oppenheimer who headed actual weapons team are still classified. It is doubtless that Einstein had many involvements which prohibited his free discussion of the ‘Big Bang’.
Einstein’s theory did state that the universe could not be static, that it must be expanding or contracting. It is very doubtful that he could accept the outer limits of this possible expansion to be approaching the velocity of light. If you do accept the expanding Big Bang theory, then you must also recognize that the distant light indicates the possible position at the distant time of that lights origin. Light with its position distorted by half the speed of light, would have then originated at half the projected distance. All projections from data that is this distorted should be viewed as very suspect.
Darwin and the Big Bang
Darwin, say what? How could Charles Darwin, whose On the Origin of Species was published in 1859, and who died in 1882, have anything to do with the 1929 science of the ‘Big Bang Theory’? Well, in 1925 a high school science teacher, John Scopes was tried by the State of Tennessee for violation of the states, Butler Act. Yes, John had dared to teach evolution to his students. He was acquitted in a nationally publicized trial.
There were many in the established science community that embraced the ‘Big Bang’ thinking that this disproved the existence of God, or at least Biblical prophesies. It is not an endorsement of Creationism to state the obvious. We live in the Milky Way Galaxy with between 200 and 400 billion other stars, many capable of having life supporting planets. Our galaxy is just one of at least 80 billion similar galaxies.
If you chose to believe that our life is just a random accident, then the same probability is that there MUST be many equal locations, with equal, and probably MANY locations with superior life forms. So much for the ‘No Superior Being’ debate, something ‘superior’ must exist.
Whether that ‘Being’ has any interest or involvement in humans or our Earth is the religious and philosophic question for others to discuss.