More evidence against the Big Bang
__________________________________

According to the interesting article below, 

"Some astronomers are seeing evidence that the first generation of stars 
and galaxies appeared just a few hundred million years after the start of the universe. 
Star formation in that early period could have occurred at a rate about 
ten times as fast as in the present-day universe."

But why were stars and galaxies created so quickly about 14 billion years ago? 
There is no scientific explanation for such phenomenon.
Instead of believing in a Big Bang, thinking that the universe was created 14 billion 
years ago, it is much more sensible to believe that the universe is isotropic and
homogeneous in space and time. In other words, galaxies were as numerous in the past
as they are to-day. Contrary to the BB theory, this view is perfectly compatible with 
the latest astronomical observations. 

Marcel Luttgens
April 4, 2002  


An Explosion of Light ln the Cosmic Darkness
____________________________________________

(From the International Herald Tribune, Thursday, January 10, 2002)

Scientist Finds Signs of Rapid Star Formation,
By John Noble Wilford NewYork Times Service

WASHINGTON - In the most distant observations yet by the Hubble Space Telescope, 
some astronomers think they are seeing evidence that the universe emerged from its 
initial darkness in a dawn of light that came up like thunder across the cosmos.

The light of the first stars apparently did not wink on gradually here and there, 
like a drowsy village coming awake. That had been the accepted thinking.
Instead, in the new and surprising view, the first starlight burst forth in spectacular 
profusion, a fireworks of creation.
If this proves to be true, many theories of the early history and evolution of 
the universe may have to be revised.
The new interpretation of the dawn of cosmic light - the first generation of stars 
and galaxies just a few hundred million years after the start of the universe - was 
reported here at a news conference at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 
The research was described by Kenneth Lanzetta. an astrophysicist at the State 
University of New York at Stony Brook.
After an innovative anaIysis of Hubble images of deep space, close to the beginning 
of time, Mr. Lanzetta said, "We seem to be finding that star and galaxy formation 
started early and rapidly." 
But by rapidly, astronomers do not mean aIl at once - they mean in just a few million 
years, fast in cosmic terms.
Further details of the findings are to be reported soon in The Astrophysical Journal.
Other astronomers and cosmologists greeted the report that was announced Tuesday with 
excitement and caution.
Bruce Margon, associate director for science at the Space Telescope Science lnstitute 
in Baltimore, said by clever and careful analysis, Mr. Lanzetta had "teased out an 
incredibly subtle result" , about early star formation.
Mr. Margon said the result would be controversial "because it is a very difficult 
measurement," and Mr. Lanzetta himself said his conclusions would require further 
analysis and observations.
"If this can be verified, it will dramatically change our understanding of the 
universe," said Anne Kinney, director of astronomy and physics at NASA. "Because 
stars are the building blocks of galaxies and the birthplace of solar systems, proving 
that countless numbers of stars began forming so early after the birth of the universe 
could cause us to rethink a lot of our theories."  
Lisa Storrie-Lombardi, an astronomer at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena,
said the research appeared indeed to reach back to the first epoch of star formation.
But because the observed objects are so far away and faint, beyond the range of the 
most trusted means of measuring cosmic distances, some scientists were reserving judgment.
Calling the results "very important, if true", Mario Livio, a theorist at the
Space Telescope Science Institute. said:
"There's nothing wrong with what they are doing: it's the best one can do at 
those distances. But il seems to take a necessary leap of faith".
Mr. Lanzetta and his colleagues anaIyzed with different filters the color of infrared 
light from the faint galaxies in the most distant images taken by the Hubble telescope. 
They considered the known relationship of cosmic gas density and star formation in 
near space and the fact that most nearby galaxies are of intermediate or faint brightness, 
the types that could not show up in the most distant images.
From such a study. Mr. Lanzetta concluded that the visible obiects in the most distant 
images were only the "tip of the iceberg." They were only the brightest galaxies, not 
the presumably more numerous intermediate and small ones.
Perhaps 90 percent of the light from the early universe is missing, he estimated.
Mr. Lanzetta said that star formation in that early period could have occurred at a 
rate about 10 times as fast as in the present-day universe." He estimated 
that this dynamic period began as eariy as 500 million years after the Big Bang, 
the theoretical explosive creation of the universe thought to have occurred about 
14 billion years ago.
In the beginning, the Big Bang spewed intense radiation and energy. Within a few 
cooling minutes, protons and neutrons, the building blocks of atoms, formed, then 
joined to create light elements like hydrogen, helium and lithium. Finally, these atomic 
nuclei captured electrons to form atoms. By 300.000 years, the universe was composed 
mostly of clouds of hydrogen and helium atoms.
But aIl was darkness, and astronomers refer to this as the "dark age." Little is 
known or even surmised about conditions then, but at some point, slightly higher 
densities of hydrogen grew larger and clumpier until they presumably collapsed of 
their own gravity and became stars and galaxies of stars. Then there was light.
Even though little has been known of the first epoch of star formation, scientists 
have generally thought that il began slowly and did not reach its most dynamic phase 
until about halfway to the present time. And now il has significantly slowed down.
"But previous measurements had missed the dominant light of the early galaxies," 
Mr. Lanzetta said.
An assessment of his interpretation of the research will probably focus on the 
fact that it is based largely on extrapolations back in time. The preferred way 
of determining cosmic distances is spectroscopic analysis of light from faraway objects, 
but light from the earliest galaxies is too faint to be studied this way.
"When we actually see the missing light," Mr. Lanzetta said, "that would be 
the confirmation we need that this research is absolutely true." 
That may not be possible until NASA's Next Generation Space Telescope is put 
into orbit, perhaps in 2008.