THE INFINITE UNIVERSE (Part 4, Chapter 4-2)
© Eit Gaastra
CONTENTS of this website (bottom of this webpage)
PART 4 THE BIG BANG PARADIGM
Part 4 (chapters 4-1 –› 4-4) presents an infinite universe as an alternative for big bang cosmology.
CHAPTER 4-2: COSMIC BACKGROUND RADIATION
A dark matter object (4-1) in space will cool down strongly (the molecular cloud Barnard 68 in our Galaxy is already only 10 K33, in intergalactic space the temperature will be lower) and will act as a black body radiator. Radiation with lower, higher and the same temperature of the dark matter object will fall on the dark matter and will be absorbed by the dark matter. The radiation gets radiated away from the dark matter at the wavelength that corresponds with the temperature of the dark matter object.
If there is a lot of dark matter in the universe and if the universe has a certain equilibrium temperature then dark matter objects in galactic and, especially, intergalactic space may cool down to that equilibrium temperature and thus dark matter may be the main component that acts as the intermediate that sends out the photons of that equilibrium temperature, which may be the cosmic background radiation (CBR, where I write cosmic background radiation I mean the cosmic microwave background radiation). Thus energy may be transferred from high energy photons to low energy photons.
The cosmic background radiation spectrum in the wavelength interval 2.5 mm - 0.5 mm is a perfect black body with a radiation temperature of 2.73 K. The extremely smooth curve may be caused by very much dark matter cooled down to a precisely set equilibrium temperature.
Higher than 2.73 K light waves thus may give energy (indirect) to the cosmic background radiation, which would explain why CBR has a minimum temperature: perhaps we don't see an abundance of CBR-radiation below 2 Kelvin because of heating of CBR's low energy photons by at least one kind of energy transducer, like dark matter objects.
There may be a whole bunch of energy transducers.
Dark matter like planets or old cooled down stars may turn into blackbody radiators.
But dust is even much smaller and may play an even big(ger) part than the debris. [May 2004: Dust grains can shine “stolen” starlight back out at a low temperature very effectively97. End May 2004]
And: perhaps gravity particles may be the intermediate through which the equilibrium temperature of the universe settles down itself. If the redshift of far away galaxies is caused by gravity/ether particles (1-2) then: while a light wave is cooled down by gravity/ether particles the gravity/ether particles are being heated by the light wave. The heated gravity/ether particles in their turn may give energy to cooler light waves. Thus gravity/ether particles may act as energy transducer (too).
Of course all mentioned energy transducers may have their part in settling down the equilibrium temperature of the Universe (i.e. the CBR), they don't have to exclude each other.
[May 2003: Big bang cosmologists' big hit is Gamow's anticipation of the CBR temperature. But before Gamow there had been many others who predicted CBR with an infinite universe model.
A literature study36 by Assis and Neves points out that models based on an infinite universe predicted the 2.7 K temperature better than Gamow. End May 2003]
Radiation of a certain wavelength may pass energy to radiation with a cooler wavelength with dark matter, dust, hydrogen, electrons, gravity particles or some other substance as the intermediate. Perhaps there is even a possibility that photons of high energy can give energy to photons of low energy directly.
The question may be: How much from which energy transducer and where then do we find those transducers?
The differences in the CBR temperature are 10-4 K.
If dark matter is a good candidate then these temperature differences may be caused by:
The temperature differences of the CBR may correspond with peculiar velocities of dark matter or peculiar temperatures of dark matter in the neighborhood of our Sun or in the halo of our Galaxy or in other parts (much further away) in the universe.
[May 2003: The last one I give most chance, since William Tifft27 has found redshift periodicities in he CBR too (5-3). End May 2003]
[October 2003: William Mitchell75 on the other hand argues that the thermalization of all kinds of radiation in the Universe into CBR (observed by us) should be quite close to our Galaxy. [May 2004: Also professor Wright argues this way (1-2). End May 2004] [June 2004: Though, lower temperatures of cosmic microwave background radiation photons passing through relatively strong gravity fields may hint towards CBR coming from dark matter that is far away, 1-2. Also: CBR may both come from far away and nearby. End June 2004]
In fact the CBR is the answer to the dark-sky-at-night problem (4-2). Or, in the words of Paul Marmet11: “If our eyes could detect that 3 K radiation, the night sky will then be quite bright. There is no paradox when we observe the sky at the correct wavelength.” End October 2003]
[May 2004: When the CBR is caused by dark matter in, for instance the halo of our Milky Way then the solution of the dark-sky-at-night problem is not solved by the CBR. The dark-sky-at-night problem then may be solved by a combination of reasons: dark matter absorbing visible starlight, photons turning back into baryonic matter and tired light redshift (4-2). End May 2004]
[June 2004: When CBR indeed does not come from very far away objects then another wavelength may be the answer that brings us a not/never-dark-sky in a certain way. A study by big bang astronomers confirmed that the hard X-ray background is mainly due to Active Galactic Nuclei (AGNs). Observations revealed that a large fraction of them are of comparatively low brightness (referred to as low-luminosity AGNs), heavily enshrouded by dust and located at distances of 8,000 - 9,000 million (big bang) light-years (corresponding to a redshift of about 1)180. (A redshift z=1 may rather stand for a distance of about 20 billion light years, 5-3.) [September 1 2005: Recent observations seem to confirm that the glowing X-ray sky is caused by AGNs346. End September 1 2005] [March 15 2006: Lately astronomers observed that the diffuse glow of background X-ray radiation isn't really a background glow, but rather the X-ray radiation from hundreds of millions of AGNs404. However, if the Universe is infinite there may still be a dilute X-ray background glow by much more AGNs that are further away but which are too faint to be spotted (so far) by the researchers as single AGNs. End March 15 2006]
[May 2003: Perhaps that only when there is much more (cold) dark matter than luminous matter the CBR can be very dominating relative to visual radiation. Thus it can be that there is even much more baryonic dark matter than suggested, i.e. calculated by the virial theorem, so far (4-1). End May 2003]
There are about 50 stars within 5 pc from our Sun. If those 50 stars, on average, have the same mass as our Sun and if within 5 pc there is 50% dark matter (versus 50% luminous matter in the form of stars) and the average mass of the dark matter objects is the mass of our Earth, then we would have a number of dark “earths” of: 50 x MSun / MEarth = 1.7 x 107. This would be a high number within 5 pc and further away in the disk of our Galaxy very much more dark matter would be around.
It is estimated that 90% of the dark matter of our Galaxy is in the halo6. Still: the concentration of dark matter in the disk of our Galaxy may be much higher, because the volume of the disk is small relative to the volume of the halo. So the dark matter that dominated the CBR-COBE-picture may be found close to our Sun.
The dark matter in our halo may be 2 x 1011 solar masses8. If this dark matter would be around in only Earth-dark-mass-magnitudes then there would be 2 x 1011 x MSun / MEarth = 3.3 x 1016 dark “earths” in the halo behaving as a black body radiator and turning all kind of radiation in CBR radiation.
(The quantities of dark matter that are supposed to be in our Galaxy or in superclusters of galaxies is calculated by the virial theorem, which states that galaxies and superclusters do not expand nor contract, which is, I think, not the case, I think they shrink (4-1, 4-3). So corrections may have to be made, which eventually may lead to different outcomes of dark matter quantities.)
[May 2003: As mentioned in 4-1: Newton's law of universal gravitation may have to be modified, so there may be no (or less) necessity for dark matter in our halo anymore.
Many dissidents, like Assis2, Ghosh3 and Hatch4 think that there is a “preferred frame of reference” (some kind of “average position” of all the mass in the universe) which they link to the cosmic microwave background radiation.
This may be very true indeed, but it may also become the next paradigm that holds up scientific progress. If it turns out that there is always a bigger supercluster to be found (4-1) then there may be no such thing as “preferred frame of reference” and then gravity particles can't be linked to all the mass in the universe and have to be linked to a smaller amount of mass of the universe.
Especially the 10-4 K temperature dipole difference in the CBR brings a general agreement among dissidents about this preferred reverence frame linked with CBR. (Perhaps the dipole difference can also be caused by shrinking of our Galaxy, 4-1, 4-3).
[April 27 2005: The accuracy of the big bang formulas with respect to the cosmic microwave background radiation seems to be thin thread by which the big bang model is still hanging. However, many models wil be able to describe the cosmic background radiation with accuracy. The accurate description of the cosmic background radiation is not the miracle of the big bang model, but the miracle of the very smooth curve of the cosmic background radiation, which is able to make mathematical models shine brightly because of its smoothness. End April 27 2005]
[September 1 2005: A new analysis of cool spots in the cosmic microwave background may cast new doubts on a key piece of evidence supporting the big bang theory of how the universe was formed. Two scientists at the University of Alabama in Huntsville looked for but couldn't find evidence of gravitational lensing where you might expect to find it, in the most distant light source in the universe, the cosmic microwave background. If the cool spots are too uniform to have traveled to Earth from near the beginning of time, cosmologists are left with several alternative explanations, the astronomers say. The most contentious possibility is that the background radiation itself isn't a remnant of the big bang but was created by a different process, a ‘local’ process so close to Earth that the radiation wouldn't go near any gravitational lenses before reaching our telescopes345.
Dark matter may cause gravitational microlensing.
Microlensing light curves have shown changes in light magnitude of stars, this has been measured with the Hubble Space Telescope by Sahu and co-workers37.
Sahu and co-workers explain the large changes in light magnitude by relative large dark matter objects in the magnitude of our Solar planets.
But Sahu and co-workers measured, beside the large changes in light magnitude, also very many very small deviations that were a little larger than the photometric error, which they did not explain in the article37. These small deviations may be due to many small dark matter masses (for example with mass-magnitude of our Moon or smaller) that pass in front of the observed object, thus causing small microlensing effects.
[May 2004: In 2001 also another microlensing event was reported110. This microlensing event was one of the very first seen in an external galaxy. It was situated far from the centre of the Andromeda galaxy, outside the stellar bulge. It had a very short duration, under two days. The interpretation of the event raised 2 possibilities according to the team of astronomers. First, the dark object could be a brown dwarf in the outer parts of the Milky Way Galaxy or in the Andromeda Galaxy. The other possibility is that the dark object could be a low mass star in the disk of the Andromeda galaxy. End May 2004]
The flickering of some of the flickering stars may be due to old dark matter (of a very strong shrunk dark galaxy or g-galaxy) moving in front of the star. This would explain why the flickering sometimes corresponds with the orbit of the Earth38.
The dark sky at night riddle often has been considered as a serious problem in cosmology6, but it is not likely to raise problems in an infinite universe as described on this website.
The dark sky riddle may be explained by dark matter radiating its mass and energy away in the form of cosmic microwave background radiation (4-2).
Another way of explaining the dark sky at night riddle is: radiation may be transformed back into hydrogen somehow (4-1).
Another solution of the dark sky at night riddle may be: tired light redshift gradually changing visible light into CBR (4-1). [May 2004: Though tired light may be part of the solution to the dark sky at night riddle indeed, tired light may not be likely to explain the CBR, for professor Wright argues that starlight can not turn into CBR94. End May 2004]
In the early twentieth century Carl Charlier in Sweden received wide publicity by adopting Kant's idea (4-1) of a hierarchy of clusters of increasing size. Clusters of progressively larger size have progressively lower average density, and the lookout limit therefore progressively increases. By arranging that the density of the clusters decreases sufficiently rapidly with increasing size, the lookout limit can be made indefinitely large. In this way the sky at night becomes dark6.
[October 16 2006: A new view from the Hubble Space Telescope made in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field shows objects “all over the place”438. So perhaps the sky at night may not be so dark after all in an infinite universe. End October 16 2006]
Polarization of the CBR
Very recently Carlstrom et al have found that the CBR is polarized: “hot” and (more) cold spots show strong polarization of light39.
As mentioned (4-2): those “hot” and cold spots in the CBR may be related to huge amounts of old cold dark matter in space which may contain a lot of dust (by clashing of dark matter objects or by attracting dust). This dust then may account for the polarization of the CBR.
Part 1 The expansion redshift paradigm
Part 2 The relativity paradigm
Part 3 The quantum mechanics and Newtonian gravity paradigms
Part 4 The big bang paradigm
Part 5 The black hole paradigm
Part 6 The neutron star and degenerate gas paradigms
Part 7 The star formation and solar system formation paradigms