Rediscovering The Truth About Creation

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem with all of these problems and their respective solutions is that the additions and modifications that have been made to the original Big Bang theory do not have genuine scientific foundation. They cannot and have not been proven, and because of their nature and complexity, they cannot even be observed! In his book, Mr. Lerner brings these scientists to task for their handling, and even mishandling, of the Big Bang theory.

According to many of the big bang critics, who in Mr. Lerner's case are plasma physicists, the problem with the estimated age of the universe is that some clusters and especially superclusters of galaxies are too expansive and too dense to have been formed in only ten to twenty billion years. Two scientists, Dr. Brent Tully and Mr. J. R. Fischer, initially mapped out nearby galaxies in order to construct a three-dimensional atlas of the universe. Having successfully completed that task, they then attempted the same type of analysis again, only the second time with galaxies which were much more distant. As a result of their additional work, Dr. Tully and his associate noted five superclusters of galaxies, each one containing millions of trillions of stars.

In discovering these superclusters, the two scientists found that they were too large and too clumpy, or non-homogeneous, to have been formed in the twenty billion years since the presumed Big Bang [2]. Further analysis on their part, based on the understanding that galaxies probably recede at about one-third the speed of light, indicated that those galaxy superclusters would have required more like eighty to one hundred billion years to form, rather than the Big Bang theory's estimated ten to twenty.

In The Conscious Universe, by Mr. Menas Kafatos and Mr. Robert Nadeau, these authors seem to be agreeing with Mr. Lerner when they write that the time needed for the superclusters to form, if gravity alone is the only force, is much greater than the current age of the universe. The reader should make note of this first mention of gravity, as it will become more important in a few moments. In the meantime, though, the opinion of these latter two authors is that the very existence of the superclusters seems to contradict the theory [3]. According to them, the presence of vast galaxy superclusters in our universe conflicts significantly with one of the Big Bang theory's most basic and most important calculations - the age of the universe! Consequently, these superclusters have become a major stumbling block to a theory which claims that the universe is only ten to twenty billion years old.

In the book Universe, by Mr. William J. Kaufman, a fourth author talks about the problem of correctly estimating the age of the universe. In that work, he writes that current estimates of the universe's age are simply too low! The universe must be older than the stars it contains, and some stars appear to be about fifteen billion years old. He suggests that perhaps astronomers' understanding of the age of stars is not correct. He also indicates that some of the relativistic mathematics used for the various estimates may need rework [4]. But either way, something does not compute! In agreeing with the existence of an age estimation problem, Mr. Kaufman states that one estimate makes the universe's age between 8.7 and thirteen billion years. Using his terminology, this is the "unbounded" or open universe case. In the instance where the universe is bounded, which is the closed system, then its age comes out to be less than 8.7 billion years.

Neither of these estimates, while still showing a basic fallacy in the theory's overall estimation process, are close to the eighty to one hundred billion years suggested by Dr. Tully and Mr. Fischer for the forming of galaxy superclusters. But the point to the layperson is that many qualified cosmologists and physicists have legitimately challenged the validity of the Big Bang theory based entirely on the observation of galaxy superclusters and the apparent time needed for those galactic systems to have formed. As a result of all of these independent forms of analyses, it is clear that no one can really be absolutely certain about either the age of the universe or about how those vast supercluster complexes came into being.

Another part of this supercluster drama, a part which has been called the homogeneity problem, concerns the actual formation of all of those superclusters. Those gigantic structures are, first of all, too big to have been formed in the relatively short ten to twenty billion years since the presumed Big Bang. That observation was just noted! Secondly, they are also too clumpy or non-homogeneous in their present distribution to have come from a universe which appears to have been so smooth or homogeneous in its early state.

For sometime now, cosmologists have puzzled over this difficulty. How could a clumpy, non-uniform universe logically be formed from a universe which was initially so smooth and uniform? At one time, they had considered that much of the ordinary matter in the universe could not be seen. It was there but possessed a non-luminous quality which made it invisible and non-detectable. However, that idea shortly proved to be infeasible [5]. On another occasion, they considered the possibility of a prolonged halt in the normal big bang expansion, that halt or delay being just long enough to allow for the superclusters to form. But that idea, too, was eventually scrapped [6]!

Over the years, cosmologists have continued to look for viable solutions to the various problems which are presented by those massive superclusters. They have attempted to rationalize how very large, very clumpy superclusters of galaxies, which are big enough to be eighty to one hundred billion years of age, can exist in a universe which computes to be only ten to twenty billion years old. More recently, their strategy for explaining away such abnormalities has been to suggest the existence of a new, very special kind of matter.

To comprehend the significance of this special kind of matter, a person needs to understand how matter and gravity interact. The way that a galaxy supercluster forms is through the influence or force of gravity, a fact which was just alluded to above by Misters Kafatos and Nadeau. Gravity and matter are related in that matter has a gravitational pull, and this pull, working just like a magnet, allows the original mass to attract and bring in even more matter. As the attraction of more matter occurs, the overall quantity or size of that matter increases, and then, the growth or expansion rate for the entire mass increases even more, simply because of that greater quantity! Like tumbling dominos knocking each other down, one part of this process leads to the next. Gravity leads to more matter, which leads to more gravity, which leads to even more matter.

Over time, the results are incredible! Stars attract more stars and form galaxies. Galaxies attract more galaxies and form clusters of galaxies. Clusters attract more clusters and form superclusters. Eventually, the work is done, and the superclusters are there! In general, the principle is not all that complicated. Nevertheless, the amount of time needed to actually produce or form a supercluster is, according to the experts, very great!

In their attempt to theoretically reduce the amount of time needed to form a galaxy supercluster, cosmologists have literally invented this new, very special kind of matter. They call it, "dark matter [7]." Note from the discussion above that as the quantity of matter increased, so did its gravitational pull and its rate of growth. In considering the gravitational attraction of matter to matter and the formation of clusters and superclusters, imagine how much more quickly a large mass can be built up if the original mass had actually started out significantly larger than it appeared.

This is where the dark matter comes in! To force such a scenario, that is a scenario where super large galactic structures can be formed in a fraction of the normally required time, cosmologists have literally multiplied their assumptions about the amount of matter which was initially in existence. They have "assumed" that vast quantities of dark matter were out there from the beginning which could have acted in conjunction with the ordinary, visible matter so that those galaxy superclusters could have been formed more quickly.

What this extra matter does for the forming of superclusters is really quite simple! To create an environment that is suitable for quick supercluster formation, cosmologists have assumed that the original mass was in fact much, much larger than what they could have originally seen or detected. That significantly larger mass would have caused a much stronger gravitational pull, and that stronger pull would have, then, meant that a large supercluster complex could have become even larger, even more quickly! To be consistent with this manner of thinking, cosmologists have said that the original composition of a relatively small portion of an infant supercluster would have been normal visible, detectable matter, while the much, much greater part would have been this invisible, non-detectable dark matter!

For cosmologists, with this kind of unscientific, backward logic, the possibilities are endless! By assuming the existence of this mysterious dark matter, superclusters of galaxies can, in theory, be formed in a very small fraction of the normal time, thus solving one of the Big Bang theory's most perplexing problems. In fact, by resorting to this type of reasoning, if the mass is still too large and too clumpy to have been formed in the allotted time, cosmologists can just "theoretically" add more dark matter and force an even faster and more clumpy development.

How convenient it is to solve complex problems with this new brand of science, where theories are easily changed to make them work! Unfortunately, in following that unscientific, cavalier approach, cosmologists have had to go to the next step and assume that the universe is literally cluttered with this so-called dark matter which they cannot see or detect. Their resourcefulness in this instance, though not very scientific, has really been quite extraordinary! What they have suggested, and are still suggesting, is that if the superclusters are there, and they are, then the dark matter must also be there to have combined with the original visible matter and aid in the early, rapid formation of the aforementioned superclusters.

Their reasoning really is incredible, but their argument is not logical. The existence of galaxy superclusters does not prove the existence of dark matter! Much more than that, though, the lengths to which they have carried this idea of dark matter are absurd. According to their own estimates, they have determined from computer simulation models that for every cubic meter of matter which can be seen that there are perhaps as many as ninety to ninety-nine cubic meters which cannot be seen. Imagine that! Dark matter cannot even be seen. Yet, cosmologists have magically estimated that it occupies as much as ninety to ninety-nine percent of all the matter in the universe!