View Single Post
  #6  
Old November 4th 17, 02:30 AM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default James Webb Space Telescope Impllication

On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 9:28:23 PM UTC-4, Alain Fournier wrote:
On Nov/1/2017 at 8:56 PM, wrote :

Is the red shift the only supportive fact of the expansive
origin of this universe?


There are several other facts supportive of the Big Bang.
Here are a few:

1) Proportions of different elements.
If you start with a soup of quarks extremely dense and
hot, at first nucleons (protons and neutrons) can't form
or more precisely if they do form they hit something at
high velocity and disintegrate like they do when they
collide in particle accelerators. If the quark soup is
cooling by rapid expansion, you can calculate how long
they will have to form nucleons, and then how long
the nucleons will have to form atom nuclei. The atom
nuclei will only have a very short span of time to form.
It turns out that things like oxygen won't have time
to form. There will be very little of anything else
than hydrogen and helium. And the hydrogen should be
about 90% of the outcome, helium about 10% (if I recall
correctly). If you look at very old galaxies you can
see that they contain hydrogen and helium about in
the proportion predicted by theory. In more recent
parts of the universe you have heavier elements
in the proportion that one would expect from stellar
nuclear synthesis.

2) Cosmic background radiation.
If you had a Big Bang about 15 billion years ago, one would
expect to see not the big bang itself because the universe
was to dense to let light go through at the very beginning.
You can evaluate quite precisely at which temperature
the universe becomes transparent to light (it is at the
temperature where atom nuclei can hold on to electrons).
So it is at a very specific temperature that the background
radiation should have been emitted. You then calculate
what that should look like after the expected red-shift.
It is a quite specific wave length and has a quite
specific shape and observations fit perfectly well with
theory on this.


Alain Fournier


Quantum evolution in the soup of the expanding universe is
a speculative answer to the need to diagram all quantum.
It is a cosmological theory. A more reasonable theory is
to observe quanta as now seen. And to inter-relate effects
as seen. The universe origin version is a class of quantum theory
used commonly.

The red shift is a question. Why? I can only answer that
there is a gravitational effect. I can't do math though
so don't read me to seriously.