The Daily Galaxy on May 19th asked, does the large scale structure of the universe nix big bang theory? There is apparently a growing body of evidence which questions whether the universe began with a big bang 14 million years ago. Several cosmologists challenge the theory that has dominated science in recent years – another one of those consensus theories that has become almost a hard fact. The thinking behind the big bang – or the state of existence – is itself a mathematical obscure state, a singular of zero volume that contained infinite density and infinite energy. It is why this might have existed, how it existed, and why it exploded that has always had some scientists at the edge querying the logic and process. One element, red shift, thought to mark movement away from the very beginnings, have been found to display variations to such an extent that estimates of age, time, and distance can vary by up to 3 billion years following repeated measurements of the same star. The big bang is usually presented as a proven fact of life, especially in mainstream media sources such as the BBC. However, there is now a wealth of data that is contrary to the theory – go to www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/05/the-big-bang-theory-fact-or-fiction/
At http://calderup.wordpress.com/2010/05/20/antimatter-dzero/ which is roughly a similar subject and addresses the work of Andrei Sakharov who tried to explain how matter survived the Big Bang. He asked the question – what happened to all the anti-matter? Nigel Calder reviving an old controversy. Good.