The Bible declares in Psalm 19:1, “The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows His handiwork.”
In the late 20th Century Astrophysicist Carl Sagan declared, “We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.”
Could there be a better example of conflicting worldviews? Only one can be true. It strikes me as absurd that God would put His created children on an insignificant planet. No, Earth is specially placed and science is starting to confirm that fact through observation. The following will present a number of discoveries made in the last 30-years that provide clear evidence in support of the neo-Tychonic model described in Part I. A model that has the Earth at rest at or near the center of the universe. Or stated another way, the center of the universe’s mass is the Earth. The dynamic impact is more fully discussed in Part II of this series.
First, I need to provide some historical context for recent observations. At the start of the 20th Century scientists started to abandon the “steady-state” theory relative to the universe. Under steady-state the universe is infinite and eternal, without a beginning. It didn’t need to be created since it always existed. The problem was that an eternal universe conflicted with the 2nd Law or Thermodynamics which in part states that systems will devolve over time moving from order to disorder. In addition, scientists like Edwin Hubble observed that the universe appeared to be expanding which suggested that it expanded from a central point. The Big Bang theory was born. Please see the following articles for additional information. 1) Cosmology, In Search of Occam’s Razor, concerning the Big Bang’s many flaws as well as recent observations indicating a special orientation of the universe. 2) Then Nothing Went Bang!, Hubble’s dilemma, an expanding universe.
The following recent observations undermine various aspects of the Big Bang theory and furthermore suggest a preferred direction within the universe and a special orientation in that preferred direction.
Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) –
The CMBR was first measured by Andrew McKellar in 1941 at an effective temperature of 2.3 K (kelvin) using stellar absorption lines. Theoretical work around 1950 showed the need for a CMBR for consistency with the simplest Big Bang models. In 1964, US physicist Arno Penzias and radio-astronomer Robert Woodrow Wilson rediscovered the CMB, estimating its temperature as 3.5 K. The new measurements were accepted as important evidence for a hot early universe (Big Bang) and as evidence against the rival steady-state theory. Now that scientists discovered the CMBR it was time to measure it more precisely. Starting in 1989, scientists started sending explorers into space to take temperature readings in all direction, in affect creating a map of heat distribution. The first explorer was named COBE (Cosmic Background Explorer). The second explorer was named WMAC (Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe) and launched in 2001. The third and last explorer was named Planck and was launched in 2011. Please see my article Cosmology, In Search of Occam’s Razor for information on the results achieved. I will summarize here. The results obtained indicated that the distribution of heat was not homogenous, which was a critical prediction of the Big Bang theory. There appeared to be large scale hot and cold spots dispersed throughout the universe? More startling was the fact that the hot and cold areas appeared to have a hemispherical orientation. An orientation that was dubbed the “Axis of Evil” by researchers. Why, because the orientation of the universe appeared to be aligned with the Earth’s axis. In other words, there appeared to be a preferred direction with Earth at its center.
Theoretical physicist Dr. Lawrence Krauss, a leading atheist apologist had this to say about the Axis of Evil. “But when you look at the CMB map, you also see that the structure that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. Is it Copernicus coming back to haunt us? That’s crazy. We’re looking out at the whole universe. There’s no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun, the plane of the earth around the sun, the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe.”
Large-scale alignments from WMAP and Planck
Craig J. Copi, Dragan Huterery, Dominik J. Schwarzz and Glenn D. Starkman;4x CERCA/Department of Physics/ISO, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
Department of Physics, University of Michigan, 450 Church St, Ann Arbor, MI
Fakult¨at fur Physik, University at Bielefeld, Postfach Bielefeld, Germany
Physics Department, Theory Unit, CERN, Geneve 23, Switzerland
ABSTRACT – arXiv:1311.4562v3
“We revisit the alignments of the largest structures observed in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) using the seven and nine-year WMAP and first-year Planck data releases. The observed alignments – the quadrupole with the octopole and their joint alignment with the direction of our motion with respect to the CMB (the dipole direction) and the geometry of the Solar System (defined by the Ecliptic plane) – are generally in good agreement with results from the previous WMAP data releases. However, a closer look at full-sky data on the largest scales reveals discrepancies between the earlier WMAP data releases (three to seven-year) and the final, nine-year release. There are also discrepancies between all the WMAP data releases and the first-year Planck release. Nevertheless, both the WMAP and Planck data confirm the alignments of the largest observable CMB modes in the Universe. In particular, the p-values for the mutual alignment between the quadrupole and octopole, and the alignment of the plane defined by the two with the dipole direction, are both at the greater than 3-sigma level for all three Planck maps studied. We also calculate conditional statistics on the various alignments and find that it is currently difficult to unambiguously identify a leading anomaly that causes the others or even to distinguish correlation from causation.”
And what is the “anomaly” referred to in the last sentence? The anomaly is that the alignments identified indicate a preferred direction within the universe. Based on secular cosmology that is an anomaly that must have a materialistic answer. The results from these space explorers should have falsified the Big Bang theory. The research papers which followed and which reviewed different phenomena presented results which also falsified the Big Bang theory. You see, a key prediction of the Big Bang is that the universe is homogenous and isotropic. Wherever you are in the universe, it looks the same in whichever direction look. Like being in a boat in the middle of the ocean. Whichever direction you look the ocean would all look the same. For Big Bang cosmology to be true this prediction must be true. It isn’t!
Evidence for a Preferred Handedness of Spiral Galaxies
Michael J. Longo
Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Abstract – arXiv:0904.2529
“In this article, I extend an earlier study of spiral galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) to investigate whether the universe has an overall handedness. A preference for spiral galaxies in one sector of the sky to be left- handed or right-handed spirals would indicate a parity-violating asymmetry in the overall universe and a preferred axis. The previous study used 2616 spiral galaxies with redshifts <0.04 and identified handedness. The new study uses 15158 with redshifts <0.085 and obtains very similar results to the first with a signal exceeding 5 σ, corresponding to a probability ~2.5×10-7 for occurring by chance. A similar asymmetry is seen in the Southern Galaxy spin catalog of Iye and Sugai. The axis of the dipole asymmetry lies at approx. (l, b) =(52°, 68.5°), roughly along that of our Galaxy and close to alignments observed in the WMAP cosmic microwave background distributions.”
Recent article appearing in Physics.Org, June 1, 2020 – A study finds that patterns formed by spiral galaxies show that the universe may have a defined structure
“An analysis of more than 200,000 spiral galaxies has revealed unexpected links between spin directions of galaxies, and the structure formed by these links might suggest that the early universe could have been spinning, according to a Kansas State University study. But the patterns do not just show that the universe is not symmetric, but also that the asymmetry changes in different parts of the universe, and the differences exhibit a unique pattern of multipoles.”
The gist of this research is that there is a distribution of spiral galaxies with a preponderance of left spinning galaxies in one direction and right spinning galaxies in the other. It is also interesting to note that the study found evidence that the early universe may have been spinning. That begs the question, spinning around what? Physics suggests that it would be spinning around its center of mass, which I believe is the Earth. This violates the Big Bang’s isotropic prediction and also suggests a preferred direction. This should have falsified the Big Bang theory.
Dipole anisotropy in sky brightness and source count distribution in radio NVSS data
Prabhakar Tiwari, Rahul Kothari, Abhishek Naskar, Sharvari Nadkarni-Ghosh
and Pankaj Jain
Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India
Abstract – arXiv:1307.1947v4
“We study the dipole anisotropy in number counts and flux density weighted number counts or sky brightness in the NRAO VLA Sky Survey (NVSS) data. The dipole anisotropy is expected due to our local motion with respect to the CMBR rest frame. We analyse data with an improved fit to the number density, n(S), as a function of the flux density S, which allows deviation from a pure power law behaviour. We also impose more stringent cuts to remove the contribution due to clustering dipole. In agreement with earlier results, we find that the amplitude of anisotropy is significantly larger in comparison to the prediction based on CMBR measurements. The extracted speed is found to be roughly 3 times the speed corresponding to CMBR. The significance of deviation is smaller, roughly 2 σ, in comparison to earlier estimates. For the cut, S > 30 mJy, the speed is found to be 1110 ± 370 Km/s using the source count analysis. The direction of the dipole anisotropy is found to be approximately in agreement with CMBR. We find that the results are relatively insensitive to the lower as well as upper limit imposed on the flux density. Our results suggest that the Universe is intrinsically anisotropic with the axis of anisotropy axis pointing roughly towards the CMBR dipole direction. Finally we present a method which may allow an independent extraction of the local speed and an intrinsic dipole anisotropy, provided a larger data set becomes available in future.”
This study confirmed earlier CMBR analysis and refuted the argument that the special direction was the result of the Earth’s movement through the universe. This should have falsified the Big Bang theory.
The following research paper significantly expanded the data sample used in the previous research.
Cosmic radio dipole from NVSS and WENSS
Matthias Rubart, Dominik J. Schwarz
Fakult¨at f¨ur Physik, Universit¨at Bielefeld, Postfach 100131, 33501 Bielefeld, Germany
ABSTRACT – arXiv:1301.5559v3
“We use linear estimators to determine the magnitude and direction of the cosmic radio dipole from the NRAO VLA Sky Survey (NVSS) and the Westerbork Northern Sky Survey (WENSS). We show that special attention has to be given to the issues of bias due to shot noise, incomplete sky coverage and masking of the Milky Way. We compare several different estimators and show that conflicting claims in the literature can be attributed to the use of different estimators. We find that the NVSS and WENSS estimates of the cosmic radio dipole are consistent with each other and with the direction of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) dipole. We find from the NVSS a dipole amplitude of (1:8 _ 0:6) _ 102 in direction (RA; dec) = (154_ _ 19_; 2_ _ 19_). This amplitude exceeds the one expected from the CMB by a factor of about 4 and is inconsistent with the assumption of a pure kinetic origin of the radio dipole at 99:6% CL.”
Note that this research paper addresses previous scientific explanations for the lack of isotropic results in the CMB data (WMAP, COBE, Planck). The anomalies were not the result of pure kinetic factors such as the earth/solar system/Milky Way moving through the universe. This was nothing more than an attempt to use the Earth’s unproven movement to explain why the CMB indicated a preferred direction. This research paper and the one that preceded it (arXiv:1307.1947v4), said that kinetic factors were insufficient to explain the CMB dipole orientation. This should have falsified the Big Bang theory.
By all reasonable measurements, the Big Bang theory stands falsified, yet secular science remains committed to it, although increasingly uncomfortable doing so. I want to close out with excerpts from an article which appeared in Motherboard Tech by Vice, May 26, 2020.
Unexplained Phenomena Keep Suggesting the Universe Isn’t What We Thought
Robert Caldwell, a professor of physics and astronomy at Dartmouth College, in a call said, “Are the laws of physics the same everywhere? Or is there a preferred location in the universe?” Even weirder, this new research bolsters past studies sketching out a “directionality” to these variations. In other words, they conjure up a possible model of the universe where physical laws shift in certain directions as if they are on a mysterious cosmic gradient. These findings don’t match other tests of isotropy, or the homogeneity of the universe, that suggest that the universe has no preferred direction.
John Webb, a cosmologist at the University of New South Wales in Sydney (in a call) said they found signs of possible variation along a spatial axis: Stronger measurements came from the direction facing toward the Milky Way’s galactic center, and weaker measurements were found in the opposite direction. This conjures up a model of a “dipole” universe, which might have something resembling a North and South pole. “The fascinating scientific situation is that there are all these strange effects, hints of anisotropy and directionality in the universe, and many of them do line up on the sky,” said Webb. “Perhaps there is some kind of relationship between these things that we don’t yet fully understand, and it’s interesting to note this alignment.”
Physicists led by Konstantinos Migkas, a PhD researcher at the University of Bonn in Germany, developed a new technique to “investigate the directional behavior” of X-rays emitted by the hot gas surrounding galaxy clusters, according to the study. Their findings line up with some of the results from other teams, pointing to more possible kinks in the cosmological principle. Clusters in one specific direction were systematically fainter than expected, and clusters in another direction were systematically brighter than expected. Even weirder, the directions of these X-ray luminosities roughly match patterns identified by another team that has been hunting for potential cosmic anisotropies, which were published in Astronomy & Astrophysics in 2019. “The brighter direction is suspiciously close to the galactic center,” Migkas said. “If I had to bet, I would say that the bright region is a result of some unknown X-ray issues that we haven’t yet discovered in our galaxy.”
This is very technical information and I’ll admit that I do not fully understand it from a technical perspective. But I do understand the importance of these scientific findings. And I also understand that secular science will defend the cosmological principle (Big Bang) until an alternative materialistic explanation can be found. You see they must control the dialog regarding the origin of the universe and the origin of life. If the Big Bang is abandoned out goes the basis for a 14 billion-year-old universe. Why not a billion, a million, or maybe even 6,000 years?