The Fall of the Big Bang Theory Since its beginnings, the Big Bang Theory has evolved to rely on a growing number of hypotheses required to explain observations: - Nucleosynthesis theory: to explain the colder than expected temperature of the universe, - Luminosity correction for galactic evolution: to explain the failure of the Tolman test, - Inflation: to resolve the flatness problem, the uniformity of the CMBR temperature and the monopole problem, - Dark matter: to explain the problem of galactic rotation curves and the dynamics of clusters and groups of galaxies, - Dark Energy: to explain the acceleration of distant supernovae. The continuous addition of new hypotheses to a theory constantly in disagreement with observations is a strong indication that the underlying assumption, the Big Bang, is invalid. Based on the large number of publications which expose the theory's weaknesses, it is becoming clear that the Big Bang Theory is collapsing under the weight of its own untested assumptions. The arguments against the Big Bang theory are different from those given to reject theories such as relativity or quantum mechanics. While the latter theories have seen some refinements over the years, no major additional hypothesis was added. Both theories have had their predictions confirmed to a very high accuracy. In contrast, the Big Bang theory has failed repeatedly to produce predictions that agreed with observations. However, instead of rejecting the initial assumption of an initial hot, dense state of the universe, a large number of additional hypotheses were used to hide the inconsistencies. "El sueño de la razón Today, more than 95% of the universe is claimed produce monstruos" to be made of a substance which has never been Francisco Goya seen. Many questions remain unanswered by the Big Bang theory: - Why don't Quasars follow the Hubble law? - Quasars appear as small objects yet are very energetic. What is their source of energy? Why don't we see quasars nearby? - What causes the asymmetry in the temperatures of the CMBR on opposite sides of the sky? - Why are mature galaxies seen in the early universe? The absence of reason produces monsters... Here I list several web sites and publications reporting inconsistencies in the Big Bang theory. "The Paradigm Shift is Upon Us!" 2014/6/27 Louis Marmet "UV surface brightness of galaxies from the local Universe to z ~ 5" Eric J. Lerner et al. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 23, 1450058 (2014) DOI: 10.1142/S0218271814500588 The Tolman test for the expansion of the Universe is reexamined by adopting a static Euclidean Universe with a linear Hubble relation at all z. The result is a relation between flux and luminosity that is virtually indistinguishable from the one used for Lambda-CDM models. Based on the analysis of data taken from HUDF and GALEX datasets up to z ~ 5, it is shown that a static model of the universe is compatible with observations. http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0218271814500588 http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.0275 Universe is Not Expanding After All, Controversial Study Suggests: http://www.sci- news.com/astronomy/science-universe-not-expanding-01940.html (2014) "Astronomical redshifts of highly ionized regions" Peter M. Hansen, Astrophysics and Space Science, Vol. 352, Issue 1, pp. 235-244, July 2014 This paper identifies intrinsic redshifts based on an investigation of the so-called Broad Line Region in galaxies. The results suggest that some contribution to the redshift is intrinsic as it is related to plasma properties in highly ionized regions of Active Galactic Nuclei. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10509-014-1910-2 http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.1705 (2014) "A Substantial Population of Massive Quiescent Galaxies at z ~ 4 from ZFOURGE" Caroline M. S. Straatman et al. 2014 ApJ 783 L14, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/783/1/L14 The paper reports the observation of mature galaxies having masses similar to that of the Milky Way but with a very low star formation rates. How did these galaxies form so rapidly and why did they stop forming stars so early, ~1600 Myr after the Big Bang? The authors "report the likely identification of a substantial population of massive M ~ 11 10 M☉ galaxies at z ~ 4 [...] Fitting stellar population models suggests large Balmer/4000 Å breaks, relatively old stellar populations, large stellar masses, and low star formation rates (SFRs)". These galaxies have essentially stopped producing stars: "Assuming all far-IR undetected galaxies are indeed quiescent, [...] they comprise a remarkably high fraction (~35%) of z ~ 4 massive galaxies, suggesting that suppression of star formation was efficient even at very high redshift. [...]the galaxies likely started –1 forming stars before z = 5, with SFRs well in excess of 100 M☉ yr , far exceeding that of similarly abundant UV-bright galaxies at z ≥ 4." –1 It is worth mentioning that if galaxies at z = 5 with SFRs in excess of 100 M☉ yr existed, they could be seen easily. However, very few such monsters have been seen. A press report by the Carnegie Institution for Science states: "It is an enigma that these galaxies seem to come out of nowhere." We see mature galaxies as massive as the Milky Way but with a lower SFR, a sign of galactic maturity. Taking the age of the Milky Way as 13 Gyr, this work implies that these galaxies would have formed 11 Gyr before the Big Bang. This would indeed explain why these galaxies seem to come out of nowhere. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140310213910.htm http://carnegiescience.edu/news/some_galaxies_early_universe_grew_quickly http://arxiv.org/abs/1312.4952 (2014) "The Most Luminous z ~ 9-10 Galaxy Candidates Yet Found: The Luminosity Function, Cosmic Star-Formation Rate, and the First Mass Density Estimate at 500 MYR" P.A. Oesch et al. Draft version January 7, 2014, arXiv:1309.2280v2 [astro-ph.CO] 6 Jan 2014 "Four surprisingly bright galaxy candidates [...] at z ~ 9 − 10 were discovered, doubling the number of z ~ 10 galaxy candidates that are known, just ~500 Myr after the Big Bang. The abundance of such luminous candidates suggests [...] higher number density of bright sources than previously expected." These observations come from many data sets: the HST CANDELS WFC3, the IR GOODS-N, the very deep Spitzer/IRAC 4.5 µm and the GOODS-S. The redshift is not evaluated from spectroscopic observations. The reliability of the redshift based on colour is yet to be determined. However, since the data does not make sense to the authors, they repeatedly write how surprised they are by many aspects of this discovery: - "... the detection of such bright z ~ 9 − 10 galaxy candidates in the GOODS-N dataset is surprising given previous constraints on UV LFs at z > 8." §3.3 - "... the unusual brightness of our GOODS-N sources led us to give particular attention to this aspect." §3.3.3 - "While it is quite unlikely that we have identified sources with very unusual SEDs, the possibility remains, though finding four such undocumented sources seems a remote possibility." §3.3.4 - "While it would be surprising (though very interesting) to see significant AGN activity just a few hundred million years after the formation of the first stars, without spectroscopic observations, it is of course nearly impossible to reliably assess such a contribution." §3.4 - "To see if magnification was contributing to their[two highest-redshift sources] unusual brightness we estimated their possible magnification bias based on the simplified assumption ..." §3.5 - "The detection of four very bright z > 9 galaxy candidates in GOODS-N is quite surprising given the dearth of candidates in the very similar GOODS-S data..." §4 - "...the most plausible outcome is that these galaxy candidates are really at z ~ 9 − 10. Yet we cannot rule out that they constitute very unusual objects at lower redshift." §6 - "...the detection of four such bright sources is surprising given the expected number of only 1 source at H160 < 27 mag in the full search area." §6 - "The unusual brightness of these z ~ 9 − 10 candidates makes them obvious targets for spectroscopy, both from the ground and from space." §6 - "Spectroscopic redshift measurements could show if these surprisingly luminous candidates are really at high redshift as all the photometric tests suggest." §6 http://arxiv.org/abs/1309.2280 (2014) "A galaxy rapidly forming stars 700 million years after the Big Bang at redshift 7.51", S.L. Finkelstein et al., Nature 502, 524–527 (24 October 2013) A new paper published in Nature describes the measurement of the redshift of galaxy z8_GND_5296 identified in the Cosmic Assembly Near-infrared Deep Extragalactic Legacy Survey (CANDELS), which uses the infrared spectrometer on one of the Keck telescopes. The redshift is measured to be z = 7.508, an accurate determination based on Lyman-alpha emission from hydrogen gas. "This new observation of a galaxy that formed about 700 million years after the Big Bang is significant because astronomers have only measured accurate distances for five of them. This galaxy marks the sixth, and it is the farthest of them all." Galaxy z8_GND_5296 is relatively rich in “metals” (elements heavier than helium). These elements are produced by stars rather than the Big Bang, which indicates a very rapid cycle of star birth and death only 700 million years after the Big Bang. While there are dozens of galaxies with redshifts greater than 7 (determined indirectly by the apparent color of the galaxy), the redshifts cannot be checked spectroscopically for most because something appears to be preventing much of the Lyman alpha light from reaching us. At this time there are too few galaxies observed to confirm the hypothesis that intergalactic gas scatters the light.