implications

Contradictions in the Big Bang Theory

Nonsense number 1: The age of the Universe.

Hubble's Law states (velocity, v) = (Hubble constant, H)x(distance, d) or:
                                v = Hd
But, we also have (velocity, v) = (distance, d)/(time,t)
                                         v = d/t
Equating these gives Hd = d/t.
Dividing both sides by d gives us the result:
                                          t = 1/H

The 't' is the age of the Universe or 'Hubble time'. However, Ashmore's paradox tells us that present values of the Hubble constant, H can be expressed in terms of the parameters of the electron (H = hr/m per metre cubed)

So, according to 'Big Bang' Codsmology, the age of the Universe is:
Age of Universe = (mass of electron)/{(planck constant)x(radius of electron)}

As said before, this is silly. What is wrong? H is equal to hr/m - no doubt about that. In the Big bang theory the age of the Universe is definitely 1/H. So it must be the theory that is wrong. The Universe is not expanding

Note: To avoid confusion, Big Bang and the expanding Universe will be termed 'codsmology', whilst tired light will be referred to as cosmology.

Nonsense number 2: The rate of expansion.

The Hubble constant measures the rate at which the Universe expands, sometimes called the 'red shift exapnsion rate'.

In astronomical units Reiss et al's value for the Hubble constant is H = 64 km/s per Mpc.
This means that space is expanding such that each distance of one megaparsec stretches at a rate of 64 km every second.

But lets work in 'proper units' the SI system (metres, seconds etc.) In the SI system, Reiss et al's value is 2.1exp(-18) m/s per metre. This means that space is expanding such that each distance of one metre stretches at a rate of 2.1exp(-18) metres every second.

However, Ashmore's paradox tells us that 2.1exp(-18) m/s per metre is hr/m m/s per metre. So what the 'Big Bang' Codsmologists are telling us is that every metre of space stretches by an amount equal to the (planck constant)x(radius of the electron)/(mass of the electron). Exactly!!!! This is nonesense, the Universe cannot be expanding.

If we are to believe in 'Big Bang' Codsmology then:
i) We must believe:
The age of the Universe is (mass of electron)/{(planck constant)x(radius of the electron)}
ii) We must believe:
A ruler one metre long stretches at such a rate that every second it stretches by an amount equal to {(planck constant)x(radius of electron)}/(mass of electron)
And that both these results are purely by chance.
It cannot be. The Universe is not expanding.
Of course until now, these codsmologists did not realise that the value they had for H was a combination of three very common physical constants. You can take any child's scientific calculator and call up these constants and work out the Hubble constant! It is there - inside the child's calculator.

see press release

For me, I just cannot believe that these results happen by chance.If you have a coincidence of this nature so that two seemingly very different quantities have the same value then their must be a relationship between them.

It is an indisputable fact that the Hubble constant is hr/m per cubic metre.

To say that the Hubble constant is equal to 'this much of the electron in each cubic metre of space' just reeks of tired light. I think I know what the relationship is and I am trying to get the theory published - this is how I came across the paradox!

Is the Expanding Universe too big a stretch of the imagination????