The Big Bang May Have Never Happened

The new images of the cosmos captured by the James Webb Space Telescope are breathtaking. However, most expert astronomers and cosmologists find them exceedingly shocking and not at all what the theory predicted. 

The authors repeatedly remark in the rush of technical astronomical publications released online since July 12 that the images show a shockingly large number of galaxies, galaxies that are surprisingly smooth, surprisingly faint, and surprisingly ancient. There are many surprises, some of which are not always pleasant. The title of one paper begins with a direct exclamation: "Panic!"

It is not difficult to understand why these too few, too smooth, too ancient, and too many galaxies are incompatible with the Big Bang theory.

But, before we go any further, it's important to note that these discoveries have not yet been peer-reviewed.

Big Bang theorists have known for years that Hubble Space Telescope images indicate the existence of these small, ultra-dense "Mighty Mouse" galaxies. Unfortunately, James Webb has made things worse.

The same theories suggest that small galaxies evolve into modern galaxies by colliding and merging to become more spread out.

James Webb saw disproportionately smooth discs and tidy spiral shapes, similar to what we find in today's galaxies. According to the findings in the "Panic!" article, smooth spiral galaxies were around "ten times" as abundant as theory expected, and this “would challenge our ideas about mergers being a very common process”. In a nutshell, this evidence completely demolishes the merger theory.

With few or no mergers, small galaxies cannot expand to be a hundred times larger. As a result, they were never small, and hence the optical illusion promised by the expanding universe concept does not occur. However, no illusion implies no expansion: the illusion is an essential consequence of expansion. As a result, Big Bang proponents are in a state of fear. Small and smooth galaxies imply no expansion and, as a result, no Big Bang.

And according to the theory, there is nothing that could have been prior to the Big Bang. The existence of these galaxies proves that the Big Bang did not occur at all!

But is this possible? To put it another way, could our universe have no beginning?

The Big Bang is the idea that in the distant past, our universe was hotter, denser, and more uniform. It is not the notion that things became arbitrarily hot and dense to the point that the laws of physics no longer applied.

It is the idea that as the Universe expanded, cooled, and gravitated, we destroyed our excess antimatter, becoming protons, neutrons, light nuclei, atoms, and, eventually, stars, galaxies, and, ultimately, the Universe we know today. It is no longer considered that space and time arose from a singularity 13.8 billion years ago.

In a nutshell; the Big Bang may not be the absolute beginning of the Universe, but it may be the origin of our Universe as we know it. If it is, it won't be "the" beginning of everything, but it would be "our" beginning. It may not be the full tale in and of itself, but it is an important element of the larger cosmic story that binds us all.