Big Bang and Alternatives

Yes, 400,000 Ly is pretty close to touching. Of course when we enter a higher number, the orbital speed would be even less. The influance of the propagation speed of gravity on the orbit would be smaller too.

A friend of mine told me the CMB is an absolute reference frame where galaxies it is clear that globular clusters and galaxies are at rest with respect to it. He says that this proves space is expanding but not matter.

What do you think? Any references where I could check if cosmologist really do this and how they verify that globular clusters and galaxies are at rest?

Thank you all.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cindy</i>
<br />"The big bang (BB) theory is widely accepted because redshift in distant objects is seen as evidence for an expanding universe. But how strong are the cases for and against the BB? Are we even sure that redshift corresponds to expansion velocity?"
Are there any else convinced explanation about the redshift ?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

As far as I am concerned, it is not the question *if* there is an alternative explanation but *what* it is. An expansion of the universe as a whole is simply not acceptable as a scientific explanation as it would imply a finite universe (otherwise you could not define an 'expansion') which in turn would mean that the universe would be part of something larger (in contradiction to the notion 'universe').

On my page www.physicsmyths.org.uk/redshift.htm I have suggested that the intergalactic plasma may be responsible for the redshift.

---

www.physicsmyths.org.uk
www.plasmaphysics.org.uk

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cindy</i>
If BB is not a right answer, then what is preventing galaxies from getting closer each other under effect of gavity ?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
What gravity? In a homogeneous universe the mass distribution is the same in all directions and the force of gravity cancels to zero overall.

---

www.physicsmyths.org.uk
www.plasmaphysics.org.uk

The fact is the alternative to the BB theory is another bad model that needs to be throttled what ever it is. These models absorb way more time and energy than they are worth. Why do we need a model? I know TVF says without a model data is useless numbers. Is that true?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Thomas</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cindy</i>
If BB is not a right answer, then what is preventing galaxies from getting closer each other under effect of gavity ?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
What gravity? In a homogeneous universe the mass distribution is the same in all directions and the force of gravity cancels to zero overall.

---

www.physicsmyths.org.uk
www.plasmaphysics.org.uk
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hi Thomas,

We know that in the univer, there are zones in which density of galaxies is high. Now we consider galaxies in such a zone. Are these galaxies getting closer under the effect of gravity ?