The Big
Bang Theory is the most widely accepted explanation for how the universe came to be.
Simply defined, it states that the universe as we know it began with an unimaginably hot
and dense single point that expanded and stretched — at first at unimaginable rates, then at
a more quantifiable rate — over the next 13.8 billion years to form the still-expanding
cosmos we see today.
Because current technology does not allow astronomers to directly peek back into the
universe's birth, much of what we know about the Big Bang is based on mathematical calculations
and models.
Astronomers, on the other hand, can witness the "echo" of the expansion via a phenomenon
known as the cosmic microwave background.
The problem is that everything prior to the Big Bang is incomprehensible.
However, with the recent rise of preprint papers and popular science articles on the
first images from the James Webb Space Telescope, old assertions that the Big Bang did not occur
have been circulating on social media and in the media.
According to one researcher, the JWST images are causing "panic among cosmologists," or
those who study the beginnings of the universe.
What are the latest JWST images?
How do the graphics show that the Big Bang Theory was factually incorrect?
To discover out, let's look at the information provided by the James Webb space telescope.
Last year's launch of the James Webb space telescope sparked a lot of interest.
The most advanced and expensive telescope ever built, the JWST, is currently operational
and has the ability to completely and fundamentally revolutionize astronomy with a single discovery.
The JWST's potential benefits far outweigh the risks connected with its launch.
No other scientific equipment has shown such promise in terms of advancing humanity's understanding
of the universe.
As a result, scientists from all over the world have been lining up to use the telescope
since it became operational.
None of them, however, were prepared for one of the most astounding findings made by the
telescope.
The JWST has captured photographs that challenge the big bang theory after only a few weeks
of operation.
While the majority of the astronomical community accepts the theory, some theorists propose
alternate explanations, such as everlasting inflation or an oscillating universe, in addition
to the Big Bang.
When cosmic inflation abruptly and mysteriously ended, the more traditional Big Bang theories
took root.
A torrent of matter and radiation, known as "reheating," began populating our universe
with the things we know today: particles, atoms, matter that would form stars and galaxies,
and so on.
According to NASA, this all happened during the first second after the universe began,
when the temperature of everything was still incredibly hot, at around 10 billion degrees
Fahrenheit (5.5 billion Celsius).
The universe now included a broad array of fundamental particles including neutrons,
electrons, and protons — the raw ingredients that would become the building blocks for
everything we know today.
Because it couldn't hold visible light, this early "soup" would have been difficult to
perceive.
According to NASA, "The free electrons would have caused light (photons) to scatter the
way sunlight scatters from the water droplets in clouds," However, over time, these liberated
electrons collided with nuclei, resulting in neutral atoms, or atoms with equal positive
and negative electric charges.
Around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, this allowed light to eventually shine through.
This light is more properly known as the cosmic microwave background, and it is sometimes
referred to as the "afterglow" of the Big Bang (CMB).
It was predicted by Ralph Alpher and other scientists in 1948, but it was discovered
by chance approximately 20 years later.
Scientists have been trying to figure out how to "see" the Big Bang through other means
because we can't view it directly.
In one scenario, cosmologists are using a large supercomputer to simulate 4,000 versions
of the current universe in order to reach the first instant after the Big Bang.
Although the Big Bang is sometimes described as an "explosion" this is an inaccurate depiction.
An explosion occurs when fragments are blasted out from a central point into an already existent
space.
If you were in the center, you'd see that all of the bits were going away from you at
roughly the same speed.
But that was not the case with the Big Bang.
It was an expansion of space itself, a term derived from Einstein's equations of general
relativity but lacking in conventional classical physics.
It signifies that all of the universe's distances are stretching out at the same rate.
Any two galaxies separated by distance X recede from each other at the same rate, whereas
a galaxy separated by distance 2X recedes at twice the rate.
Millions of people's imaginations are profoundly implanted with the idea that the universe
began with a big bang.
However, the so-called "science" isn't as reliable as most people believe.
Many scientists, including atheists and naturalists, acknowledge that the hypothesis has major
faults.
And the most recent James Webb Space Telescope images haven't assisted believers in the big
bang idea.
The JWST is designed to "see" electromagnetic infrared frequencies.
Because light from very distant galaxies is redshifted to this part of the spectrum, the
JWST should be able to take more detailed images of them.
Indeed, an online comparison shows that Webb's deep-field images are superior to Hubble's
spectacular images.
Long have creationists recognized that the Big Bang suffers from the mature faraway galaxy
conundrum.
Light from the most distant galaxies takes more than 13 billion years to reach Earth,
according to the Big Bang theory.
As per Big Bang theory, we should look at these extraordinarily distant galaxies as
they were more than 13 billion years ago, not as they are now.
As a result, these galaxies should appear "unevolved" and "immature."
but this expectation is repeatedly rejected, and preliminary Webb evidence confirms the
trend.
The preliminary results of the James Webb Space Telescope appear to indicate that large,
dazzling galaxies formed during the first 250 million years after the Big Bang.
If this is verified, it will severely undermine current cosmological views....
Many of these galaxies appear to be more massive than the classic cosmological model, which
describes the universe's composition and evolution.
To be fair, these are preliminary findings that have yet to be confirmed.
They are, however, clearly causing concern among Big Bang theorists.
"It worries me slightly that we find these monsters [galaxies] in the first few images,"
said University College London cosmologist Richard Ellis.
"This is way outside the box of what models were predicting," said Garth Illingworth of
the University of California, Santa Cruz.
The JWST photos contain a flaw in that they show an exceptionally large number of smooth,
compact, and ancient galaxies.
Why does this appear to contradict the big bang theory?
Imagine the overly restricted perspective.
We are witnessing a bizarre optical illusion if the universe is expanding.
In reality, galaxies and other naturally occurring space objects do not appear to shrink as one
moves away from them.
They should grow in size exponentially after a certain point.
Think about this: They got closer as their apparent brightness faded.
This is in contrast to how things seem in non-expanding space, where distance has the
reverse effect and objects appear smaller as they get further away.
The discovery of small galaxies by astronomers analyzing JWST photos cannot be denied.
When compared to Hubble photos, galaxies with brightness and mass greater than the Milky
Way appear two to three times smaller.
It's no surprise that the redshifts of the new galaxies are twice or three times those
of the old ones.
This type of action from an expanding cosmos is quite surprising.
If the universe is not expanding, the JWST-observed galaxies are the same size as the nearest
galaxy, and redshift is proportional to distance.
To account for the apparent optical illusion, these incredibly distant galaxies must be
essentially abnormally small, according to the Big Bang hypothesis.
The GHZ-2 shines far brighter than the Milky Way.
However, estimates indicate that its estimated radius is only 300 light years, or 150 times
that of the Milky Way.
If luminosity were measured by surface area, it would be 600 times brighter than the next
galaxy.
Its density would be many orders of magnitude greater than that of the galaxies seen now.
What about the galaxies' smoothness?
How does this affect the Big Bang Theory?
There must be "mighty mouse galaxies," which are small, dense galaxies, for the big bang
idea to be correct.
The JWST has made the situation even worse than it was before.
According to the hypothesis, small galaxies grow into current galaxies by colliding and
merging as they stretch out.
As a result, many supporters of the big bang theory believe we would find galaxies with
apparent scars or rough edges from the collision they experienced or survived.
The JWST's unexpected discovery of very smooth discs and beautiful spiral patterns, on the
other hand, took them by surprise.
They appear in the same way that galaxies do today.
According to the statistics, the number of smooth spiral galaxies in the photos was around
ten times more than predicted by theory.
As a result, the pervasive nature of galaxy mergers is called into question.
These findings refute the merging concept.
So, what happens when galaxies rarely merge?
Individual galaxies cannot accumulate this much mass; only mergers can result in such
huge structures.
As a result, we can assume that larger galaxies were never in the intermediate size range.
It also means that the expanding universe hypothesis was mistaken in its prediction
of an optical illusion, because the absence of an illusion proves that the universe is
not growing.
The illusion is a necessary outcome of expansion.
The JWST photographs depict the furthest galaxies as they should have been 400-500 million years
after the big bang.
The star populations of several of these galaxies, on the other hand, are more than a billion
years old.
Nothing could have existed prior to the birth of these galaxies for a big bang to occur.
If the big bang theory is right, the JWST should identify fewer galaxies as it searches
further back in time.
It would either stop monitoring distant galaxies or enter a cosmic dark phase.
Scientists, on the other hand, are showing that massive galaxies such as the Milky Way
continue to exist hundreds of millions of years after the alleged great bang.
Scientists estimate that the number of galaxies in the latest JWST images is at least 100,000
times greater than what theory predicted for redshifts greater than 10, indicating that
many massive galaxies originated quickly.
If that's the case, it's hard to believe there was no big bang.
Let us know what you think about the validity of the big bang theory in the comments area
below.