Part 2 of 2
Text Box: Reviewed 22 November 2007
   Requests for further clarifications, to eugenesittampalam (at) gmail.com – most welcome!
Text Box: Those of us who have been around long enough know that peer review and the refereeing of papers have become a form of censorship. It is extraordinarily difficult to get financial support or viewing time on a telescope unless one writes a proposal that follows the party line. A few years back Halton C. Arp was denied telescope time at Mount Wilson and Palomar observatories because his observing program had found and continued to find evidence contrary to standard cosmology. ...
This situation is particularly worrisome because there are good reasons to think the big bang model is seriously flawed. One sign that something is amiss is the time-scale problem. ...
Within the framework of the hot big bang, there is no satisfactory theory of how galaxies and larger structures formed. Galaxies cannot form by gravitational collapse in an expanding universe unless one assumes without explanation that large density fluctuations were present in the early universe. ...
The inflationary model, a pet idea of the past decade, holds that a period of extremely rapid expansion in the early universe accounts both for the smoothness of the cosmic microwave background and for the amount of matter present in the universe. But again, inflation is an untestable addition to the lore of the big bang.
This form of inflation is arbitrary, and our successors will wonder when it goes out of favor, as the history of science suggests it will, why it was so popular. The inflationary idea occurs quite naturally in the steady state cosmology. I believe there is con-siderable merit in a variant of this that was recently described by Arp, Fred Hoyle, Jayant V. Narlikar, N. C. Wickramasinghe and me. In it, continuous creation takes place in a series of little big bangs, and in such a model the cosmic microwaves are generated by the galaxies and never coupled to them. This model is at least one viable alternative that can explain all that we can see. There may be others. ... 
WHY ONLY ONE BIG BANG? Geoffrey Burbidge (Professor of Physics, UCSD; and former director of the Kitt Peak National Observatory and Scientific Editor of the Astrophysical Journal), Scientific American, February 1992, p 120
Text Box: Margaret Geller first met the stickman in the fall of 1986. ... John Huchra, who was Geller's collaborator at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CFA), says he took one look at the stickman and assumed he had botched his observations. It took Geller's eyes to recognize the stickman as something real and important. ...
Indeed, when Geller later wrote up the results of the CFA galaxy survey, she described the distribution of galaxies in the universe as looking like a slice through suds in the kitchen sink. Her metaphor implied that astronomers were mightily confused about how the universe had formed. ...
Perhaps the most awe-inspiring is one that Geller and Huchra discovered in 1989, known as the Great Wall: a sheet of galaxies extending for at least 500 million light-years, stretching across the entire northern sky. It may indeed be bigger than 500 million light-years, but no one can yet tell.
The confusion comes about because astronomers can see the huge structures at the very limits of their vision, which means when the universe was considerably younger than it is today. When we look out into space, we're looking back in time; the light from a galaxy a billion light-years away, for instance, will take a billion years to reach us. "It's an amazing thing," says Geller. "The history is there for us to see. It's not mushed up like the geologic record of Earth. You can just see it exactly as it was."
So what happened? The universe is full of these prodigious two-dimensional structures as far out as we can see, and thus was full of them as far back as we can see. In the 10 or 15 billion years the universe has taken to grow up, it has evolved from something unimaginably smooth into this sink suds of a structure, and no one yet knows how or why. ...
"I realized almost nothing was known about anything outside our galaxy," she says. Galactic surveys had been done, but they were small and useless for drawing firm conclusions about how galaxies were distributed in the universe. ...
The survey had detected the great void in the constellation Boötes, but few astronomers believed the void was real. "Everybody was skeptical," says Geller. "I thought there was something wrong with the survey, because the void was much larger than any structure anybody thought existed." ...
And when she and Huchra completed four more slices of the redshift survey, she wrote a paper for Science on the Great Wall and the art of universe mapping. ...
"It's the grandeur and the aesthetics of the problem," she says. "I've seen these beautiful patterns that the universe makes, and I'd like to know how it does it." 
Beyond the Soapsuds Universe, Gary Taubes, Discover, August 1997, pp 52-59
Text Box: Again, the single quasar, moving through the thinning region away from the Cosmic Core, successively bifurcates to form a group of galactic cores. The group of galactic cores goes to form – the galaxy cluster. 

Each galactic core, in turn, spews out matter periodically, spawning the stellar cores. 

Each of the larger stellar cores bifurcates successively to form – the star cluster. The last of these separations that fell just short of escape velocity are what we now see as binaries, ternaries, and so on, in the mature star cluster.
Text Box: Astronomers thought starbirth subsided at great distances, but new observations suggest that stars were forming and exploding as far as telescopes can see. ... 
Posted just last week was a paper by Charles Steidel of the California Institute of Technology and four colleagues describing star formation rates far out in space and back into the cosmic past. ... "We were surprised by what we found," says Steidel. The rate did not decline for as far back as they could see...
Starbirth, Gamma Blast Hint At Active Early Universe, James Glanz, Science 282, 1806 (4 December 1998)
Text Box: Washington, D.C. – The beginnings of the great clusters and walls of galaxies seen in today’s universe may date back practically to the big bang. By searching the neighborhood of distant quasars – galaxylike objects so bright they can be seen shining from a time when the universe was less than a billion years old, or 10% of its current age – astronomers have found that nearly every one has a fuzzy companion galaxy or two. These small gatherings in the infant universe, says team leader George Djorgovski of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, are "the possible cores of future rich clusters of galaxies." 
They are also a challenge the notion that the clumpiness of today’s universe emerged fairly recently. If the universe contains as much mass as some theorists believe, the formation of dense clusters would have been retarded by the gravity of the surrounding universe. But the belief in a dense universe has already taken a blow from the discovery of great walls of galaxies when the universe was just 2 billion years old (Science, 4 April 1997, p. 36). Now, Djorgovski thinks he can discern large-scale structures even earlier in cosmic history. ... "This is very much work in progress," says Djorgovski, who presented the preliminary results early this month at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society here. ... Djorgovski points out that the quasar companions found by his team are not yet full-fledged galaxies. ...
Did Galaxies Bloom in Clumps? Govert Schilling, Science 279, 479 (23 January 1998)
Text Box: A mature galaxy has been discovered in an early phase of the Universe apparently too young to contain it. Is this the end of the theorists' favourite cosmology, the Einstein-de Sitter model?... The problem, if conventional cosmological models are correct, is that galaxies that old and that far away simply should not be there. ... 
An old galaxy in a young Universe, Robert C. Kennicutt Jr. (University of Arizona), Nature 381, 555-556 (13 June 1996) 

One of the most direct methods of constraining the epoch at which the first galaxies formed – and thereby to constrain the age of the Universe – is to identify and date the oldest galaxies at high redshift. But most distant galaxies have been identified on the basis of their abnormal brightness in some spectral region [McCarthy, P.J.A. Rev. Astr. Astrophys. 31, 639-688 (1993); Steidel C.C. et al. Astr. J. 110, 2519-2536 (1995); Steidel C.C. et al. Astrophys. J. 462, L17-L20 (1996); Petitjean, P. et al. Nature 380, 411-413 (1996)]; such selection criteria are biased towards objects with pronounced nuclear activity or young star-forming systems, in which the spectral signature of older stellar populations will be concealed. Here we report the discovery of a weak and extremely red radio galaxy (53W091) at z = 1.55, and present spectroscopic evidence that its red colour results from a population of old stars. Comparing our spectral data with models of the evolution of stellar populations, we estimate that we are observing this galaxy at least 3.5 Gyr after star-formation activity ceased. This implies an extremely high formation redshift (z > 4) for 53W091 and, by inference, other elliptical galaxies. Moreover, the age of 53W091 is greater than the predicted age of the Universe at z = 1.55, under the assumption of a standard Einstein-de Sitter cosmology (for any Hubble constant greater than 50 km s-1 Mpc-1), indicating that this cosmological model can be formally excluded. ... 
A 3.5-Gyr-old galaxy at redshift 1.55, James Dunlop (University of Edinburgh) et al., Nature 381, 581-584 (13 June 1996)
Text Box: ...every civilization, almost every generation, has put together such meagre observations as it possesses, has interpreted them in the light of currently fashionable theories, and has called the subject cosmology. There can be no doubt as to the significance of cosmology. There can be grave doubts as to its status as a science. ...The time frame of  human science is so short, in cosmic terms, that we have in effect only a single still shot of a dynamical Universe. ...If we don't find a reasonable balance then we could waste enormous effort on futile pseudoscience, or halt progress altogether. ...But progress in no way matches the hullabaloo, often orchestrated by self-interested scientists, that gets into the media, for instance the ante-scientific way the recent results from the Cosmic Background Explorer were released at NASA's press circus. 
Our Universe in the balance, M Disney (University of Wales College of Cardiff), Nature 365, 117-118 (9 September 1993)
     Go back to Part 1 of 2
THE UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS ILLUSTRATIONS
A Synopsis The Cosmos The Spin
ADDENDA The Cosmological Redshift The Neutrino
Two-Slit Tests The Galaxy Nuclear Reactions
NASA Tests Gravity The Sun
KamLAND Test Anti-Gravity The Pulsar
UCLA Test Relativity Superconductivity
Q and A Mass-Energy Fusion Energy
 Eugene Sittampalam
 22 November 2007