Within physics, cosmology and astronomy the ideas of Albert Einstein related to light and gravity and the idea that billions of years ago the universe came into existence by exploding from a very small point are seen as facts for already seventy years. However, a growing number of scientists think that we are at the brink of the biggest paradigm shift in the history of science and that before twenty years the theory of relativity and the big bang are dismissed as fiction.
The basic questions of philosophy and cosmology are the same. Where philosophy searches for the how and why of (human) existence, cosmology searches for the how and why of the existence of the Universe. In essence these questions are the same. The how and why of the existence of an atom, bacterium or human is, in the deepest sense, the same as the how and why of the Universe.
In 1905 Einstein published his theory of special relativity, which describes the behaviour of light and in 1916 he came with an extension, the theory of general relativity, a theory about gravity describing the movement of matter (planets, stars and galaxies) in the universe. In the 1920s the formulas of the theory of general relativity were used to prove mathematically that we live in a shrinking or expanding universe.
Around the same time Edwin Hubble discovered that certain dots at the night sky were no stars but galaxies instead, accumulations of billions of stars, like our Milky Way. In 1929 he added that the light of galaxies is stretched: the further away the galaxy the more stretched the light (stretched light = light with a longer wavelength = light with less energy). With a shrinking or expanding universe because of the theory of relativity in the back of the mind of scientists the stretching of light was explained with a big bang. From a point smaller than an atom once there would have been a big explosion that originated the Universe. Ever since scientists think that we live in an expanding universe that expands like a balloon that gets inflated (a few years back the big bang was calculated to have occurred 13.7 billion years ago). According to science the space within the expanding universe stretches and so light stretches along with space.
In 1948 a group cosmologists calculated that in today's universe there ought to be radiation left over from shortly after the big bang. In 1965 this predicted radiation was measured. Today the radiation is known as the cosmic (microwave) background radiation and is seen as the big confirmation of the big bang theory. (Light is generally known as optical light, which is light our eyes can see. Radiation is generally known as ‘light’ with a different wavelength than optical light, like X-rays and radio waves.)
The three pillars on which the big bang model is built are: the theory of general relativity, the explanation of stretched light and the explanation of the cosmic background radiation. This trinity is the cosmology of the 20th century in a nutshell.
In 1987 I got my MSc chemical engineering at the Technical University of Delft, after which I worked two year as an environmental researcher, after which I started writing novels full time. My first novel brought me into a search for the meaning of life and how this meaning can be related to all kind of sciences. I started thinking about feelings and thoughts and how they relate to the meaning of our life and the meaning of life in general.
In my novel philosophy, psychology, evolution theory, physics and cosmology are combined. The last chapter describes how thoughts may be nothing but feelings with logic and that consciousness may be nothing but the degree in which certain feelings come to the front. The meaning of life is explained with experiencing (fine) feelings and the driving force behind the evolution is explained with desire to experience (fine) feelings. Also it is described how photons (light/radiation) of far away galaxies may loose energy by interaction with gravity particles. (When light looses energy it gets a longer wavelength because it kind of stretches like a spring. Explaining the stretching of light by suggesting that light looses energy while travelling through space already was done in 1929 by Fritz Zwicky, such an explanation is called a tired light theory.) In my novel space and time are being seen as concepts that do not exist physically (like logic does not exist physically), only mass particles, like atoms, photons and gravity particles (gravitons), exist physically, that is, according to the theory in the novel. (Isaac Newton (1642-1726) thought that there ought to be something like ‘absolute space’ and ‘absolute time’ and two centuries later Albert Einstein melted these two together into the concept ‘space-time’. Newton and Einstein thought that space and time do exist physically and for a long time about all scientists think that way too.)
After the publication of my novel in 1995 I worked for five years on a second novel. Until April 2000, when I read a book about the problems scientists had around 1900 with respect to light and how in 1905 Albert Einstein's theory of special relativity offered a way out of the problems. The basic problem with light is that its speed always seems to be constant and the way out offered by the theory of special relativity is: just declare, without any explanation, the problem to be a physical law and the problem is gone. Because of the ideas in my first novel I could explain the apparent constancy of the speed of light in a different way, i.e. by looking at gravity particles as the medium needed by light to propagate itself. (In a way this can be compared with air molecules needed by sound as a medium to propagate itself.) A theory that suggests a medium to explain the propagation of light through space is called an ether theory. Ether theories were famed in the 19th century, but died a quiet death after 1905 with the rise of the theory of relativity. I worked out my gravity-is-the-ether ideas and sent them to a number of magazines. No magazine showed any interest, after which I went on with writing my second novel.
Meanwhile I had found two out of three pillars of the big bang model. My ether theory gave an alternative explanation for the theory of special relativity and because the theory of special relativity is the fundament of the theory of general relativity I could consider both theories as wrong and therefore I too could consider the mathematical deduction from the formulas of the theory of general relativity showing that we ought to live in a shrinking or expanding universe as wrong. With my tired light hypothesis I also had an alternative explanation for the stretching of light from far away galaxies. However, I did not have an explanation for the cosmic (microwave) background radiation that was discovered in 1965.
In May 2001 I realized that if we live in a universe that is infinite in time and space there ought to be many remnants of old cold planets, stars and galaxies in the nonluminous voids between galaxies and clusters of galaxies. Such remnants eventually will get the (equilibrium) temperature (minus 270 °C) of the universe and send out radiation of that temperature. (Not only objects like stars and electric bulbs send out radiation (light), also objects that have room temperature or a temperature of minus 270 °C send out radiation, it is just that our eyes can not see such radiation.) Minus 270 °C is the temperature of the cosmic (microwave) background radiation.
From May 2001, the moment I also could explain the cosmic background radiation, I have been working full time on physics, cosmology and astronomy. In January 2002 I published my ideas on the internet (www.eitgaastra.nl) and shortly after that I got a letter from the late dr. John E. Chappell, chairman and founder of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, an organization of over 150 members all around the world who have joined to replace the theory of relativity and big bang cosmology by alternative ideas (most members support an ether theory and an infinite universe model). John Chappell invited me to become a member, which I did and shortly after that I realized that the explanations I had found for the stretching of light (tired light), the apparent constancy of light (ether) and the cosmic background radiation (equilibrium temperature in an infinite universe) independently had been found by others, under whom professors of physics. It too turned out that before 1948 the cosmic background radiation was predicted with more accuracy (than the result by the group of big bang cosmologists in 1948) by cosmologists who calculated with a suggested cosmic background radiation caused by the equilibrium temperature of the universe. Also it turned out that I was not the only one who thought that space and time did not exist. (Actually, centuries ago the Frenchman René Descartes (1596-1650), the Dutchman Christiaan Huygens (1629-1695), the German Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), the Irishman George Berkeley (1685-1753) and the Austrian Ernst Mach (1838-1916) too announced that space and time do not exist physically.)
Because of my membership of the Natural Philosophy Alliance I read books and websites by ‘dissidents’ (for instance the books by the physics professors Assis en Ghosh) and that is why now I refer to other scientists on my website when it comes to my ideas about physics and cosmology and why I concentrate on working out a new astronomy within an infinite universe model (where about all other ‘dissidents’ concentrate on physics and cosmology).
The self-fulfilling prophecy
Within physics, cosmology and astronomy there are powerful alternatives, but there is more. (Actually, also when it comes to quantum mechanics and gravity as suggested by Newton there are alternatives in the form of respectively an ether model and a so-called pushing gravity concept.) The last decennium the big bang model has come under ever stronger pressure because of cosmological and astronomical observations that were the opposite of what was predicted and which, with a lot of effort, are being explained within big bang cosmology with concepts that makes one rather think of science fiction than science (the inflation theory and the dark energy concept are two good examples of this).
Meanwhile more and more scientists reject the big bang model. Last May the New Scientist published an open letter of 34 respected scientists from 10 different countries. The letter explains what is wrong within cosmology: big amounts of tax money are spend for research, but the people who decide what money goes to what research are all scientists who look at the big bang as a fact. Therefore scientists who want to research alternatives do not get money, for decennia the big bang has been a self-fulfilling prophecy. Within a hundred years this will be seen as the biggest scandal within science ever: in all countries High Courts of Scientists impose the big bang to the people as the Indisputable Truth.
Science has become religion and it is worse than the scandal four centuries ago when the Vatican forced Galileo Galilei to cancel his support for Nicolaus Copernicus’ vision about the movement of the Earth around the Sun. For centuries the Vatican brainwashed disciples to make sure that certain scientific ‘truths’ were not doubted, by penalty of death. However, today the bastion of faith conviction is science itself. Today the high priests of science are the ones that impose rigid dogmatic visions to make sure that human kind is spared from progress. Now physics and astronomy students are being brainwashed so that they won't doubt certain ‘truths’, by penalty of a ruined career. At the University of Groningen I often tried to get astronomers and physicists so far that they would be willing to take notice of the alternatives that have been worked out the last decennium. In vain, they are not willing to take notice of any alternative whatsoever. Centuries ago scientists brought a change despite the Vatican. They made it clear that the movement of the Sun around the Earth was everything but a fact and that the idea eventually had to be dismissed as fiction, the biggest paradigm shift in the history of science. However, who will bring a change now it is science itself who only wants to gaze at the devil's navel? Who brings a change despite the self-sufficient elite club of science who, filled with power, nowadays exploits the tree of knowledge?
Scenarios of doom
Relativity and big bang loving conventional scientists have a stronger grip on the world than we realize.
Today's version of the big bang universe eventually will become very cold and dark so no life will be possible. It brings a prospect of human kind becoming more and more isolated with only one possible future: to extinct without leaving a trace. Without dreams there can't be real and deep happiness, without the prospect of a fine future most of the value of our life is robbed. Only conventional scientists feel good with this future prospect, because they feel power painting their creation. Hell and damnation preaching religious leaders swim in the same feeling of power. It is the happiness of failed people. Apparently successful with money and career, but failed as humans because every doubt has been banished by self-interest.
A second scenario of doom is caused by the theory of relativity, which states that nothing can go faster than light. The most nearby star is four light years away. With light speed it takes four years to bring a message over and four more years to get anything back. If we never can communicate with speeds faster than light then we can not (or hardly) have contact with other intelligent life in the universe. This too creates an image of an isolated human kind, doomed to stay on a planet until the Sun comes to her end.
The third scenario of doom is related to the theory of relativity too. Scientists abuse the theory of relativity by picturing horrid monsters by unrestricted use of its formulas. With premature absolution for the relativity formulas scientists think they can put an almost infinite amount of mass within a cubic meter of space. Thus, unimpeded by any reserve where it comes to the degree of truth of the relativity formulas science has created the biggest monsters of the universe: black holes that kill everything, where even matter stops existing. This way human kind is offered another end than the before mentioned possibilities: perhaps we will be sucked into a black hole one day, hell with light speed squared.
Destruction of creativity, the fourth scenario of doom
Conventional scientists close their eyes for imagining what the future may bring when it comes to measurement techniques. Three hundred years ago we did not know the steam engine and we hardly knew anything about sound or light. What do we know about a billion years and what can we measure by then?
We hear sound because of the movement of air molecules. We see light because light enters our eyes. Air molecules are much bigger and less fast than photons and so it was relatively easy for us to find out how things worked when it comes to sound. Digging up the secrets of photons is much harder. Right now it is difficult to say anything about photons with certainty. Photons belong to the smallest class of particles we know and there is a good reason that we know them, just because we can see them with our eyes. So it is normal that science developed all kind of measuring techniques for photons.
But how are things when it comes to gravity? If we lift up a book we know something pushes the book to the Earth. However, we do not have sense-organs that measure gravity directly as our eyes do with photons. We need our brains to realize that there is something like gravity.
Conventional science has the following point of view: if we do not measure it it is not there. But nobody knows what we can measure within a billion years. First we thought that atoms were the smallest particles, then protons, neutrons, electrons... until smaller particles were found like quarks and bosons. It may make sense to suggest that the smallest particles we know now also consist of smaller particles, which in their turn consist of smaller particles, etc. This is something science does not want to deal with and this has always been the case. Scientists live in a flush of ‘knowing almost everything’, which is needed by their ego. However, ‘knowing almost everything’ destroys creativity. Around 1900 a lot of well respected physicists publicly announced that science had found about all there was to be found. Last decennia the most well known scientist right now, Stephen Hawking, has announced the same thing over and over again. Such announcements are convulsions of people who have lost the creative spark of imagination because their ego needs it too hard to control the tree of knowledge. However, such announcements cast a shadow over every future perspective. The future only sparkles when, like in our childhood, there is very much to discover. Scientists bring death to our inner experience because they torpedo possible future perspectives. In the Dark Ages it was the church that depressed people with horrid stories about hell and damnation, in 2004 it is science that harasses us with scenarios of doom with respect to our future. It is time to eliminate these doom scenarios from our heads and society so they can claim their place in history as relics we can laugh about and enjoy like the paintings by Jeroen Bosch.
Ever smaller and faster particles means that we, as humans, have the possibility to always discover more on every level.
Particles smaller and faster than light means that the theory of relativity and the big bang go down as well as all four described scenarios of doom and that there is space for an ether theory and an infinite universe model. In an infinite universe with smaller and faster particles there is the possibility to dream about communication with other intelligent life billions of years away plus that there can be dreamed about life that always continues and always will leave its traces and therefore always will be meaningful. We can dream about a so high developed human kind that blackening of our Sun does not mean the end of human kind plus that the Universe is a place in which there is always more to be discovered. We can dream about a future that can bring everything that we wish if we do not screw up as human kind. (In the course of the Earth's evolution most animal life became extinct because it developed itself in a way that was harmful to itself. Of course intelligent life can extinct too if it develops itself in a wrong way.) If we leave the theory of relativity and the big bang model, we can welcome a future perspective in which ever continuing bloom belongs to the possibilities.
Perhaps that there are such subtle techniques that you can wake up after your death as a human or that there is intelligent life that can follow us. For a long time I have been thinking, with a very strong feeling of certainty, that this could not happen, because I had our ‘modern’ physics with its primitive concepts so high. I was a believer, an atheist, but now I understand that you can not say anything about these things and that no one on Earth can. It means that every one of us can fantasize about what he or she wants without the limitations that conventional science has imposed on us for more than half a century. The 21th century can bring enormous change in our thinking with respect to ourselves and the planet we live on. This change can start real good when today's conventional science has been overthrown by less rigid ways of thinking. But still, who can bring the change when scientists are so strongly conditioned that they will not study any alternatives as now is the case for more than seventy years?
The big bang model finally twitches black in our souls because of the doom scenarios in which all life gets smothered. With the alternative of an infinite universe we can look at our planet as a place where all dreams may flourish in the future. When an infinite universe breaks through in science, with endless possibilities for intelligent life to develop itself, then without any doubt this will bring new inspiration. We all feel a strong urge to open new ways, to find happiness on new playgrounds, with new experiences, new emotions and new thoughts. However, we do not have to wait for conventional science to put the lights on green. With the here mentioned alternatives and with the career-fear of conventional scientists in the back of our mind every one of us can put the light on green.
When will the world be freed from the rational science-swelling that next year, with the celebration of 100 year relativity, very well possible will reach the pinnacle of its fame? Albert Einstein is the symbol of the victory of the human ratio, but in the end it is feeling which turns on our spirits. Perhaps it is time that we value feeling and give it credit.