Ant’s Star Light theory to dispute the Big Bang theory.
From my early teens I became occupied with contemplation of the many mysteries of the universe, such as ‘could it in reality never end?’ If there was an outer ‘shell’ then what was behind that? How did light actually move through the ‘vacuum’ of space? And why did light move at the same speed, whether an intense burst of light from a star like our sun, an immensely powerful exploding supernova, or from a torch or gently lit candle?
My thoughts and Theory about our Non-Expanding universe developed along these lines:
a) Something controls the speed of light as a ‘constant’ in the nothingness of space, in much the way the speed of an electrical charge is determined by the material it flows through in a wire. Does this mean space is at some presently unseen level, an invisible but homogenous ‘solid’ or energy field of some type, that controls the speed through which light passes, no matter the cause and force of the light source, whether candlelight or supernova?
b) Stars (and more distant galaxies of stars) radiate energy out into the universe, equally in all directions, as ever-expanding spheres of light, through which all other spheres of light-emission from every other source, seemingly pass unhindered. We are able to perceive by eye, or with the aid of telescopes, each light source separately, even after its travel across such vast distances.
c) To better understand my next points, and as an example, imagine the expanding sphere of light as a balloon, in a frozen moment in time as it reaches our eyes. When you blow up a large balloon, the skin stretches more and more, until it becomes so thin it can stretch no further without bursting. This is at a radius say of 300 millimeters or 600mm in diameter for a large balloon. If you had a similar thickness rubber skin, hypothetically elastic enough, and you expand it to say a kilometer radius without bursting, the skin of the balloon would be less than an atom thick, so entirely impossible with any known material. But if you were able to see rubber molecules of this hypothetical balloon face, these molecules would be many feet apart i.e., between molecules you could not anything at all to identify that the balloon exists. You would need to move your eye around a great deal to spot a molecule.
d) Imagine the source of this ‘balloon’ sphere of light being Proxima Centauri, our closest star which is 4.25 light years away. That is over 40 trillion kilometers. This is therefore the radius of this sphere of light from the Star to our eyes. Something truly astounding and remarkable happens with light! Somehow ‘gaps’ between the arriving visible ‘photons/waves’ of light from Proxima Centauri do not visually exist, even though the ‘skin’ has theoretically thinned/stretched impossibly, after the ‘ballooning’ sphere of light has expanded a distance of some 40 trillion kilometers, (in all directions) from the star! If you were to move the position of your eyes, looking at this star, whether a millimeter or two or many kilometers apart, you will still perceive the light source, and position of the star, i.e., there are no gaps in the visible light. With reference to the previous example of enormous gaps between rubber molecules in balloon just a mile radius, you can understand why I took great interest in this peculiarity.
Even acknowledging that the radiating sphere’s of light are a constant stream from our sun or any star, it is difficult to explain why there are no obvious gaps in the visible light, after such immense distances. Somehow light constantly expands to fill any such gaps. In much the same way as sound waves move through a homogeneous solid, such as the walls of a large brass bell or solid cube, I theorize that light ‘stretches’ and expands throughout the medium of space, as though space were a solid medium itself, controlling both the speed and expansion of light. This ‘stretching’ of light is not just forward but sideways also, creating a longer wavelength, a little like the doppler effect of a racecar hurtling past an observer. This longer wavelength reads the same as the light source moving away from the observer. The longer the wavelength, the faster the source seems to be moving away. This becomes more obvious with very distant sources.
With reference to Diagram B above please note that the 10 degree angle ‘wedge’ of star-light shown is for visual effect only, to highlight the varied arc widths at points A, B and C. The arc widths are two dimensional on the diagram but equal in diameter to actual three dimensional ‘cones’ of light reaching the eye on Earth or via telescopes in space. The table below highlights the peculiarity of there being no visible gaps in the light
Starting with our Sun, I have shown examples where the angle of this cone or wedge of sunlight is at 1 degree (rather than the 10 degrees shown for diagram clarity), 1/100th of a degree, 1/10,000th of a degree, 1/1,000,000 (millionth), 1/1,000,000,000 (billionth) and finally up to 1/1,000,000,000,000 (trillionth) of a degree (which is the cone width of sunlight reaching Earth with an area suitable to your eye of about 3 millimeters in diameter)
| Wedge or cone angle of light. Diagram shows 10 degrees which is far too large to visualize results | Point A. Sunlight arc width or cone diameter at 1 million kilometers from the Sun | Point C. Earth. Sunlight arc width or cone diameter, 152 million kilometers from the Sun |
| 1 degree | 17,500 kilometers | 2,650,000 kilometers |
| 1/100th of a degree | 175 kilometers | 26,500 kilometers |
| 1/10,000th of a degree | 1.75 kilometers | 265 kilometers |
| 1/millionth of a degree | 17.5 meters | 2.65 kilometers |
| 1/billionth of a degree | 17.5 millimeters | 2.65 meters |
| 1/trillionth of a degree | 0.0175 millimeters | 2.65 (say 3) millimeters to suit the size of an eye |
Looking at the above table, the same volume of sunlight in a millionth of a degree arc at one million kilometers from the Sun, expands from 17.5 meters wide to 2.65 kilometers wide (2,650 meters) by the time it reaches Earth. Neptune is 4.5 billion kilometers from the sun, which means that the same arc will be around 78 kilometers wide. Our closest star, Proxima Centauri, is 40 trillion kilometers away. The same millionth degree arc of starlight from that star would be over 690,000 kilometers wide, and yet along that entire expanding leading face of that ‘ballooning’ sphere of light, one can see the star along every millimeter, with no gaps. A trillionth of a degree of starlight from Proxima Centauri would still create an arc width of 690 kilometers. I.e the segment of it’s light at one million kilometers from it’s surface of only 0.0175 millimeters, expands to 690 kilometers when it reaches us, with no apparent gaps, but ‘stretched’ into the ‘solid’ medium of space and diluted in strength.
- Not only is light speed ruled by the bounds of the ‘solidness’ or field energy of the universe, but also its behavior as it travels over greater and greater distances. As with (for example) heat or sound dissipating within a solid block of metal, I believe that light also dissipates or thins and ‘stretches’ in space (in three dimensions), somehow maintaining its homogeneity, but increasing its perceived wavelength. This increased wavelength, similar to the Doppler effect on sound, makes it look as if the source of light is moving away from the viewer. The further away the light source, the greater the perceived stretch of wavelength, and the faster the source reads as though it’s moving away, even though in reality it is likely completely ‘static’ in position.
- The furthermost galaxies look as though they are moving away at an even greater speed than the galaxies closer to Earth. Because of this perception, the theory of the Big Bang was created as a seemingly logical conclusion. I believe that this is false and that there was no ‘Big Bang’. The galaxies and stars are not all moving away from a single point of ‘singularity’!
- Another considered flaw that I perceive in the Big Bang theory, is that everything seems to be moving away from us, or our point of observation, as though we are the center of the universe, or in the area of this ‘singularity’ or starting point of the creation of the universe we know. If the singularity point of the Big Bang was in another distant area of the universe, which statistically would be a far more likely scenario if true, then logically much of the universe between Earth and this starting point of the Big Bang, would be moving relatively toward us, compared to that on the other side of this theoretical starting point. Everything seems to be moving away from us for a very good reason! It’s because we perceive this effect from Earth and we have misread the longer wavelength as movement away, whereas the sources of light (stars and galaxies) are likely entirely ‘static’ in space, (apart from some local interaction with other celestial bodies).
- I am aware that light moves out from a star as a continuous stream of ever-expanding ‘spheres’, or ‘balloons’ as I’ve mentioned to best illustrate my logic. Some may hypothesize that there are no ‘gaps’ or ‘holes’ in the light we perceive at the constantly arriving face of this sphere, because any gaps would be filled in by other light following behind. However, if light did not homogeneously expand in all directions as I have postulated, at some point there would be obvious breaks or gaps in the arriving face of the ever-expanding spheres of starlight. Even galaxies thought to be billions of light years away are visible by telescope across the scopes surface, so I couldn’t accept this hypothesis.
- I theorise that light ‘stretches’ in line with greater distance, and more notably with vast distance, which in turn mimics movement away. I don’t mean to upset anyone, especially those who have spent a great deal of time on the subject, but I dispute the logic of the Big Bang theory. I postulate that galaxies are generally static in distance to one another in the universe, and that therefore the age of the universe may well be a great deal older and expansive than the 13.8 billion years more recently postulated and mentioned in searches on Google or Wikipedia. I’m sure that greater minds may ponder this issue and use terms and descriptions more in line with the studies of Astronomy and Astrophysics. Hopefully some will agree with my Star Light Expanding-wavelength theory.
Summary Image C
