Cyrek1

BB Summation

The BB was originally based on just one observation and that was the Hubble redshift data. This obviously implied that the universe appeared to be expanding. Since all galaxies were receding from our point of view, this also implied that we were in the center of this universe.
Why the Doppler redshift implication was replaced by the ‘space expansion’ redshift currently being accepted is a question mark? Is it used to get around the limitation of the speed of light according to the Einstein velocity law? The Doppler redshift interpretation would have implied that the extremely distant galaxies would have exceeded the velocity of light as the distant redshifts increased?

The above implications of an expanding universe and our apparent central location should have immediately been suspect because of the probability factor. Especially the central location.
A more probable interpretation at that time would be the expansion of the light waves. The tired light hypothesis was suggested but that was refuted.
So now, I will supply the three most important reasons why the BB is illogical.

1 - The beginning. From a start up time of zero and zero space dimension, the BB originated out of ‘nothing’. This is not science since the ‘laws of conservation’ are violated here.

2 – The CMBR. This radiation supposedly is a remnant of the past evolution which occurred at a period of transformation from a plasma to the coupling of matter to allow the free flow of energy through space. Since this is a perfect BBRC of energy, this cannot be a remnant of the BB because at that time during this period of formation, there would have to be a partial mix of plasma radiation with the matter radiation.

3 – The Arp redshift anomaly. There are two excellent examples that are irrefutable to prove that the redshift cannot be the result of space expansion. They are NGC 7603 and AM 2054-2210. There are other good examples to give further support.

Any comments?

__________________
aka Michael Cyrek