ICR article image.
Posted on 08/24/2015 7:30:54 AM PDT by fishtank
Giant Galaxy Ring Shouldn't Exist
by Jake Hebert, Ph.D. *
A team of astronomers from Hungary and the United States, led by Professor Lajos Balázs of Konkoly Observatory in Budapest, has announced the discovery of an enormous ring of galaxies. According to the Big Bang model, this ring should not exist.1,2,3
The galaxies were identified from gamma-ray bursts (GRBs)—extremely intense, narrow beams of high-energy electromagnetic radiation which are thought to result from the collapse of high-mass stars. The astronomers estimated that the gamma-ray bursts originated in nine galaxies located approximately seven billion light-years from Earth. These galaxies are thought to be part of a ring of galaxies so large that it spans a very large portion of the sky—an area 70 times greater than the apparent diameter of the full moon. Despite this fact, the astronomers argue that the nine galaxies are almost certainly part of the same giant structure.
If they are correct, then this would imply the existence of a gargantuan ring of galaxies, although Balázs claims that the ring could also be the result of a spherical structure.3 Either way, the apparent structure is enormous—an estimated five billion light-years across.
The possible existence of this giant ring of galaxies is of great interest because it would violate one of the fundamental tenets of the Big Bang model, namely the assumption that matter and energy, on cosmic distance scales, are distributed uniformly in space. But such a uniform, or homogeneous, distribution of matter implies that giant structures, such as this ring of galaxies, should not exist.
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
ICR article image.
A little cosmic engineering, perhaps? Somebody tell those XeeLee to quit messing around with my night sky...
God can do anything he wants.
Maybe the Big Bang had a baby.
If something exists, and shouldn’t according to your physics and math, then your physics and math are incorrect.............
God can do anything he wants.
...
Would that include creation via evolution?
Maybe there wasn’t just one Big Bang, but several smaller bangs.....................
Which were conveniently aimed right at the Milky Way? OK.
These scientists in relation to God is akin to watching a kitten pawing at a hanging piece of yarn.
And their explanation is Inflation which resulted in the infant universe's arrangement of mass and energy to be communicated over vast distances in a very short time span.
If there is anything to this ring it is only suggesting that Inflation might have begun a bit sooner or lasted a bit longer.
I thought now that the Big Bang theory was determined to have too many cosmological holes, and a new theory was emerging to take its place, where universes bounce in and out of existence, or something equivalent.
Figure 2. Dependence of the standardized logarithmic density on the comoving distance. The 0 (mean), 1σ, 2σ lines are marked with black, green and magenta colours, respectively. The GRBs in the Southern Galactic hemisphere and those in the Northern are marked with red and blue colours. Note that a group of red points close to the 2σ line at about 2800 Mpc may correspond to a real density enhancement of GRBs in the Southern Galactic hemisphere. The GRB Great Wall discovered by Horvath et al. appears as a group of blue points between the 1σ and 2σ lines in the 4000–6000 Mpc distance range.
http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/content/452/3/2236/F2.expansion.html
Omigosh. Yet another observation that wasn’t predicted and/or couldn’t happen.
Anything, but He says in His Book that I did not come from monkeys.
I do think so. Sure looks like it from what I perceive.
Just because a few dozen given ages add up to around 10,000 years, and the word “day” was used to describe a time when the daylight/nighttime cycle didn’t exist, was perceived only by an entity which views 1000 years as a day, and was described in a few words to a nearly prehistoric goat-herder who didn’t grok quantum cosmology, doesn’t mean God did things in a way that puny ignoramuses conclude covers a hundred back-to-back lifespans.
The ICR keeps sowing doubt about explanations for what we observe yet it has no explanation, consistent with observation, that is better.
“it would violate one of the fundamental tenets of the Big Bang model, namely the assumption that matter and energy, on cosmic distance scales, are distributed uniformly in space.”
Who says that’s a “fundamental tenet”? I expect it’s understood as “uniform” only insofar as a massive explosion is “uniform” which in no way insists on a perfectly consistent/smooth distribution, but involves randomness which magnifies variations into larger consequences. On a Big Bang scale, there were certainly random anomalies in the explosion which, on cosmic distance scales, manifest as vast “structures”. Small variations over enormous ranges and long time periods, coupled with long-range forces like gravity, makes identifiable groupings happen.
I’m not impressed with “research” that starts with a tenant of “that’s wrong, if I can insult it I must be right.”
Neither does the fossil record.
Well, that “new theory” you reference is just answering the rhetorical question “so where did the Big Bang source material come from then?” and addresses the issue of what exists outside the “light cone”.
“Shouldn’t Exist”
Sorry, scientists, but it DOES exist, and your theories are full of dark matter.
Theories and equations are supposed to represent reality, and when they don’t, they must be thrown out.
I never accepted the “Big Bang Theory” as a sufficient explanation for the origin of the universe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.