Home   All members of the Anti Big bang Gang   Previous   Vade Retro Satanas, Einstein, children became crazy,
the more we progress, the less we understand the Univers.
 
Cosmology History for the Worthless Cocorico !

Dr. Francis Sanchez

Recipe for a Copernic-type Historic Plunge.

Dr. Francis M. Sanchez, October 28 2006.
Université Paris 11, Orsay.

 

The more we progress, the less we understand the Univers”, this is the fine conclusion of the pearl of theoricist, Stephen Weinberg. Do not see any connexion with the american congres refusal to finish the Supercollisioner.

Cosmology is governed by the Hilbert General Relativity equations. It suffices to add the adequate terms for matching with a-priori philosophy. Einstein believed in a static univers: his ad-hoc “cosmological constant” acts as a repulsory force preventing the gravitation collapse. This equilibrium is instable, but a genius do not care for such elementary coinsideration.

Neglect the advice of the true discoverer of relativity, Poincaré, that cosmology cannot be governed by differential equations, since, precisely, it generates "free parameters".

Do not see any connexion between the fact that Lemaître was a parish priest with his propension to promote a dramatic begining, the famous Big Bang. Nothing to do with the biblic genesis. In fact, after the pope Pie XII acclaimed the “fiat lux”, Lemaitre publicly tried to calm the game… The indian theoricist Narlikar claims that the Univers is pulsing: of course no relation with hindouism.

Let us come back to the crusty history of modern cosmology. The expansion law is an “observation” of Edwin Hubble, resuting from a comparaison of his galactic distance measurements (in Megaparsec) and the spectral shifts of Slipher (in km/s). No matter this has been published before by Lemaître, following a De Sitter model.

The Lemaître expansion rate, under-estimated by a factor 10, was expressed in « km/s by Megaparsec » : so a distance measurement was presented as a time determination. Very nice to confirm genesis. In fact the theoricists briskly mix the time and space concepts, forgeting another advice of Poincaré, the true author of the space-time concept, (said “of Minkowski”).

But Lemaître had the bad taste to be belgian. In the late english traduction of his article, his dramatic prediction was simply « forgotten », as Luminet reveals in "L’invention du Big Bang".

But had Hubble, the pearl of observors, corrected the value ? Inutil, why boring ?: it was sufficient to « find back » exactly the same grossly approximation of Lemaître, with the same ridiculous unity. It is fair to recall that the experimental points make in fact a confused fog, which is anything but a straight line. But the historic Hubble article was immediatly preceeded, in the same scientific journal, by a Humason’s paper, which confirmed the Lemaître-Hubble value, by a single far galaxy. So, as is revealed by Hoyle et al in "A Different Approach to Cosmology", all the scientific community was embarking in an 10-fold eroneous expansion rate, from a single measurement.

The author od this providentiel measurement, Milton Humason, was the mule-driver of the Hubble observatory…

With modern measurements, the points considered by Lemaître and Hubble always do not make a straight line, for the simple raison that many galaxies are part of the Local Group which… do not participe the expansion. No matter, the factor 10 cannot be anything else than an calibration error.

But, this error maked the Lemaître’s univers younger than the earth. He used the « repulsive constant » for accelerating the expansion, giving so a larger univers age. Of course, as soon as one introduces a repulsive force, the Big Bang pertinence is badly perceived. This is the reason why, when the measurement was corrected, the arbitrary “cosmological constant” was rejected, and all the cosmologie treatises professed that « the expansion is slowing down », untill the damned day… when the expansion acceleration was observed. It was sufficient to come back to this constant, to state that even an Einstein mistake is rich of meaning, and to give it a new name : the black energy.

But, in the interval, our « cosmologists » have made even stronger. This cannot be invented. Noting that the spectral law of the background follow the spectral thermal law, as in any honest oven, one obtains oddities with the Big Bang, because nothing is more different from a thermal equilibrium than an explosion. No matter: it is sufficient to decrete that our nivers is, inside a giant « multivers », nothing but a small thermalized part, which has been amplified with a … superluminal speed. So, one explains why our univers is homogene, isotrope and with « critical density ».

No historian reveals that the concurrent model, the “steady-state” had predicted the expansion acceleration, as well as a thermal background, resulting from the fossil star radiation. With a simlple one line calculus, Thomas Gold had predicted, in 1955, 2,8 Kelvin, the right temperature, starting only with the Helium proportion (25% in masse) and the stellar density 3 x 10-31 g cm-3, see "A Different Approach to Cosmology"  Hoyle et al, p.83.

The second Big Bang stage is called "inflation". In fact, in the present epoch, the repulsive force just becomes stonger than the attraction. The Big Bang has in fact 3 stages. Any comparaison with anti-copernicien epicycles is not welcome, specialy from young researchers which are devoted to check the general consensus, as in the good old time of Middle Age.

But why precisely our epoch is seeing the expansion inversion? Simple : « we are living in a fantastic time ». Any comparaison with the anti-Copernicien dogm « we are living in a fantastic place» would be grotesque and ill-advised, because the intriging correlations between the large cosmological numbers and the electricity/gravitation force ratio are easily explained if one admits there are momentary. Indeed as was finely noticed by Dicke and Carter, since the Big Bang, it was necessary that the stars construct the heavy atoms we are made of, then disperse they by supernovae, to reconcentrate in our planet. And the mean star life is indeed tied to the electricity/gravitation force ratio.

Despise the few people who affirm that these cosmoic correlations are in fact very precise, and claim to come back to the very foundation of science by starting from observation instead of deducting a universe theory. Because this would mean the Universe is nothing but a giant atom. Even Eddington was rejected as foolish, simply because he dared to calculate the univers horizon radius from an atomic mass: h2/Gm3.

Neglegt the fact that one obtains the Eddington’s formula directly by a simple non-local dimensional analysis (without « c »), merely by starting from the essential fondamental constants list, and do not make the first choice of Francis Sanchez which suppose that the cubic mass term is the product of the electron, proton and neutron masses. If one obtains the half of 13,8 billion light-years, while the « so-called » univers age is 13,7 ± 0,1 billion years, and that 2128 electronic time h/mec2 gives 13,9 billion years, this cannot be anything but a double fortious coïncidence. Do not imagine that a simple physicist can ridiculise in his 3 first minutes of cosmology all our famous genies: Lorentz, Planck, Einstein, Bohr, Dirac, Feynman… But it would be fair to supress the fondamental constants list in the Terminale S program, because any student could claim the refutation of the BigBang, which is teached in the Seconde “common program”, that will make disorder...

The fact that the same non-local dimensional analysis (without « c »), starting from the characteristic background energy kT, gives the proton wavelength, with a coefficient 8/3 which matches the above factor 2 with the Sanchez Holophysics, is pure manipulation.
 

Indeed his results are censored by the Sciences Academie, which produced judicious scientific expertises recalling that the Big Bang is proved.
One must salute the fact that scientific expertises are anonymous: so the censor can frankly express. It is far better than the Middle Age where inquisuition was public.
So this is the recipe to prove the Big Bang: censure any contradiction. Especially do not observe normal galaxies aged only several millions years, it would be so hard to to fix that with a fourth Big Bang floor …
It is only time to pray, my brothers… Brother Angel in prayer.
 

Other documents

  1. The Cosmological Coherence Principle.
  2. A "Definitive refutation" of the primordial Big bang and its "associated multiverse".
  3. An holophysic theory which resumes everything under a new way.
 

Creation Date: 02/12/2007
Last release: 04.26.2015

Return to Francis Sanchez

Previous