Evidence-Based Analysis of Space Cooling and Expansion and Reintroduction of Stationary Cosmology

1. Introduction

The CMB has a thermal black body spectrum at a temperature of 2.72548±0.00057 K [1]. CMB has origin in the recombination period that was about 380.000 years after big bang: “About 380,000 years after the Big Bang, the temperature of the Universe had dropped sufficiently for electrons and protons to combine into hydrogen atoms, p + e ⇒ H. From this time onwards, cosmic radiation was effectively unable to interact with the background gas; it has propagated freely ever since, while constantly losing energy because its wavelength is stretched by the expansion of the Universe. Originally, the radiation temperature was about 3000 degrees Kelvin, whereas today it has fallen to only 3K” [2].

“The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) is the cooled remnant of the first light that could ever travel freely throughout the Universe. This ‘fossil’ radiation, the furthest that any telescope can see, was released soon after the Big Bang. Scientists consider it as an echo or ‘shockwave’ of the Big Bang. Over time, this primeval light has cooled and weakened considerably; nowadays we detect it in the microwave domain. It took about 300 000 years for the Universe to cool down to a temperature at which atoms can form (about 3000 °C). Matter then became neutral, and allowed the light to travel freely: the Universe became transparent. The relic of that ‘first light’ is the CMB. Since the time when that radiation was released, the Universe has expanded, becoming at the same time cooler and cooler. The cosmic background has been affected by the same process: it has expanded and cooled down. Space has ‘stretched’ itself, and with it all length scales” [3]. This is the current explanation of CMB fully accepted by the mainstream physics.

2.. Current CMB Radiation Model Contradicts Wien’s Law

The current interpretation of CMB encounters the insoluble contradiction with Wien’s law which tells us the relation between temperature $T$ of a blackbody and wavelength λ of its radiation, see Eq. (1).

$\mathsf{\lambda }={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{0,002897771955}}{T}}$ (1) [4].

This equation is valid when the source of radiation changes temperature. It is not valid when radiation is produced and moves through space where temperature changes, and because of this, its wavelength will increase. The Big Bang model claims that radiation produced in the recombination period is transformed into today’s CMB radiation because the universe has cooled and expanded.

According to Wien’s law, the frequency of light can change only if the temperature of the source has changed. The Big Bang model proposes another solution, namely that the radiation wavelength can increase because the space in which the radiation moves has cooled down. There is no single experiment in physics proving that the cooling of space increases the wavelength of the radiation that moves through it. Big Bang model interpretation of the CMB has no experimental evidence and has also no solid theoretical basis. There is no mathematical description available in the scientific literature that would describe how the cooling and expansion of space increases the wavelength of the light. Big Bang model interpretation of the CMB is an unproven hypothesis and not a scientific fact.

What do we measure in CMB observations? The undeniable fact is that we measure the current radiation of space. The idea that CMB is relic radiation that remains from the ‘first light’ that was generated after a hypothetical Big Bang is a working hypothesis with no experimental evidence and should be abandoned if we want to make progress in cosmology. Misinterpretation of CMB keeps the Big Bang model artificially alive.

3. Cosmological Redshift Contradicts Wien’s Law

The only known experiment in which light changes frequency after leaving a source was carried out by Pound and Rebka; it is known as gravitational redshift and gravitational blueshift [6]. In the case of a cosmological redshift, the situation is the same as with the CMB. In physics, there is no experiment that would prove that, in an expanding space, the wavelengths of light would increase; see Figure 1.

According to Wien’s law, only a decrease in the source temperature can increase the light wavelength. Moreover, there is no convenient mathematical model that would describe the cosmological redshift, which is also an experimentally unproven working hypothesis: “We can read on Hubble site: ‘When space expands, light stretches. Since the big bang, the physical space of the universe has been expanding. Stars and galaxies maintain their size, but the space between them grows’. The idea that when space expands, light stretches, was never experimentally confirmed. It is an unproven working hypothesis” [7]. So-called cosmological redshift is a misinterpretation of gravitational redshift that is actually measured. The misinterpretation of the CMB contradicts Wien’s law. Cosmological redshift is a misinterpretation of gravitational redshift.

In the Big Bang scenario, the cooling of space increases the light wavelengths, and the expansion of space also increases the light wavelengths. In the CMB, the wavelengths increase only because space cools down, and in cosmological redshift, wavelengths increase only because space is expanding. There is no published model available in the scientific literature on how much CMB wavelengths increase because of space expansion, and how much the increase in wavelengths in cosmological redshift is caused by space cooling. This fact proves the theoretical weakness of CMB and cosmological redshift. Moreover, CMB and cosmological redshift are both contrary to Wien’s Law. The result of this rigorous analysis is that the current interpretation of CMB and cosmological redshift is based on misinterpretations of astrophysical data, which means that the universe is not cooling and is not expanding.

4. Cosmological Principle is Time-Invariant

Universal changes take place in a time-invariant space. Time is the numerical order of irreversible changes: change X turns into change X+1, change X+1 changes into change X+2. In the universe, time has only mathematical permanence. Time as duration is the emergent time that enters into existence in the process of measurement [8]. Universe does not exist in some physical time. What happened 13.8 billion years ago happened in the same time-invariant space in which the universe exists today. The fact that time in the universe has only mathematical existence, and that universal changes occur in time-invariant space, suggests that the cosmological principle is time-invariant. There was no physical past, and the universe as we see it today looked the same 13.8 billion years ago. The idea that relic CMB radiation has reached us from some remote physical past lacks scientific evidence. Experimental data confirm that light moves through space, and time is the duration of light’s motion. Sunlight takes about 8 minutes and 16,6 seconds to reach Earth. The geometrization of time as the fourth dimension of space was a historical mistake that allowed the idea that the universe began in some distant physical past, which we see in physics, to be non-existent [6].

5. The Big Bang Model can be Classified as Pseudoscientific

In Chapters 2 and 3, we see that the Big Bang has insurmountable problems. The author suggests that we have to draw a demarcation line between scientific statements and pseudoscientific statements. Science is backed by experiment, and pseudoscience lacks experimental evidence. CMB measurements prove only that the existing space radiates a blackbody radiation at 2,7 K. The statement that the CMB proves that the universe exploded out of nothing in some initial explosion lacks experimental evidence and can be classified as pseudoscience: “The observed cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation provides strong evidence for the big bang model of cosmology and is the best probe we have for determining conditions in the early universe as well as determining many important cosmological parameters” [9].

There is no logical relation between observed CMB and the following idea: “The cosmic microwave background (CMB) is a faint glow of radiation that fills the universe, serving as a remnant from the birth of the cosmos approximately 13.8 billion years ago during the Big Bang. This radiation represents a snapshot of the universe when it first became transparent to light, roughly 380,000 years after the Big Bang, allowing for the formation of atoms” [10]. We know in experimental physics that once light is produced by a source and moves through space, it can change frequency only due to the Doppler effect or the Pound-Rebka effect. That’s why statement [10] can be classified as pseudoscientific. The same applies to the statement that the observed redshift of light from distant galaxies is due to the expansion of space. There is no experiment available to prove this statement. The Hubble tension [11] will be solved by the understanding that the universe is not expanding.

Also, the Big Bang is against the first law of thermodynamics: “Total energy must be conserved. Every student of physics learns this fundamental law. The trouble is, it does not apply to the universe as a whole” [12]. Stationary cosmology respects first law of thermodynamics. For the idea that the universe exploded out of a mathematical point that had infinite temperature, density, and pressure, there is no single experimental data and it can be classified as pseudoscientific.

6. Reintroduction of Stationary Cosmology

Our research results propose that the universe is a non-created system in a dynamic equilibrium [13]. AGNs are self-rejuvenating systems of the universe [14]. Self-rejuvenating universe was conceived in ancient Chinese philosophy: “The first concept is that all states are in flux, in transition to the next state. Ancient Chinese cosmology posits as universe in constant, eternal, ever-refreshing change. There is no entropy in this system” [15]. Isaac Newton advocated a non-created, stationary infinite universe: “Until the 20th century everybody believed that the universe is naturally static: not expanding and not contracting. Even Albert Einstein, after the discovery of general relativity, continued to hold this belief for several years. The Newtonian theory of universal gravity, in which all bodies attract one another, reinforced the growing belief that the universe must be edgeless and therefore infinite. For if the universe were finite and bounded by a cosmic edge, it would have a center of gravity, and the attraction between its parts would cause it, said Newton, to “fall down into the middle of the whole space, and there compose one great spherical mass.” This argument led him finally to abandon the finite Stoic cosmos in favor of the infinite Atomist universe” [16].

The Big Bang view that the universe started in some remote physical time can be classified as pseudoscientific because there is not a single experiment available that proves the existence of physical time. The idea that with the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) we see in some distant physical past is flawed. Yes, the galaxy has changed while its light travelled and reached JSWT, but its changes have only occurred in time-invariant space through which light moved, not in some physical time. Universal changes take place only and always in the same time-invariant space that we experience as NOW [5]. Studying the universe as a system that evolves in some physical time belongs to the history of physics. The universe is self-rejuvenating system; there was no creation and there will be no end [17].

Also, for the Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC) [18] there is no experimental evidence. The idea of the Big Crunch theoretically solves the problem with the first law of thermodynamics; there is no need any more for energy creation in the first moment. CCC is seeing the universe developing in some physical time, which we know is non-existent. The idea of universe began and evolved in some physical time is false. The universe does not evolve; the universe is eternal and self-rejuvenating [19], existing in the time-invariant space where there is no physical past and no physical future [20].

7. Conclusions

We can fool ourselves into thinking that the Big Bang model is backed by experiments and has an inner logical structure, but it won’t bring any progress. The progress of cosmology requires direct reading of astrophysical data without interpretation. When we measure the CMB, we measure the radiation of the existing space. When we measure redshift of the light coming from distant galaxies, we measure gravitational redshift. Any miss-interpretation of this data leads us down the wrong path. The non-created stationary universe that was already proposed by Isaac Newton has inner logical structure and is backed by astrophysical data. The origin of the universe is not a scientific question; it is a religious one. Science searches for how the universe functions. Astrophysical data confirm that AGNs are rejuvenating systems of the universe that are in a permanent dynamic equilibrium.