The Evidence
Slowly Spinning Sun. Our Sun spins slowly, about once every 25 days (depending to some extent on latitude). If, as evolutionists teach, our Sun and planets formed from a large spinning dust and gas cloud, the Sun would spin hundreds of times faster, as required by the law of the conservation of angular momentum. Figure 84, on page 158, is a well-known demonstration of this law. [Also see “Angular Momentum” on page 31, and “Star Births? Stellar Evolution?” on pages 38 and 101.]
As a result of this effect [the law of the conservation of angular momentum], the Sun should now be spinning on its axis at the rate of once every few hours. Actually, it turns at a far slower rate, 100 times less rapid. What has slowed the Sun down? A thoroughly satisfactory answer has never been provided.8
However, if the Sun formed before space was stretched out, its slow spin rate today would not be unusual.
Star Formation. Astronomers recognize that the densest gas cloud seen in the universe today would have to be thousands of times more compact to form stars by gravitational collapse. [See “Star Births? Stellar Evolution?” on page 101.] According to the big bang theory, stars began to form by the gravitational collapse of spinning dust and gas clouds 420 million years after the big bang’s sudden inflation. Astronomer Martin Harwit, former director of the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D. C., points out that if this were true, the vast energy, angular momentum, and magnetic fields generated by each collapse would be visible—but they are not. [See “Interstellar Gas” on page 100.]
The stretching explanation states that the volume of the universe was much smaller when stars formed. Then the stretching of space gave stars the large orbital energy and angular momentum we see today. After stretching, we would not expect to see vast amounts of heat, extreme rotational velocities, or gigantic magnetic fields that a collapse of a giant spinning dust cloud would produce.
Binary Stars. “At least half of the stars like the Sun are found in tight groupings. And yet the origin of such groupings is mysterious” 9—unless one considers the stretching explanation. For example, only 4.37 light-years from our Sun are members of the Alpha Centauri system—three stars that tightly orbit their common center of mass: Alpha Centauri (the brightest of the three), Beta Centuri (the second brightest), and Proxima Centuri (the closest star to our Sun). Four-star systems are also common.10
The stretching explanation easily explains this, because all stars were initially concentrated within a much smaller volume before the stretching. Their close proximity to each other allowed the closest pairs, triplets, and quadruplets to become gravitationally coupled—tightly enough to remain coupled during the stretching—days later. Had stars formed from a large spinning dust and gas cloud, as the big bang theory proposes, pairs could only have formed if one star captured another. Considering the vast distances separating stars today (which the stretching of space also explains), such captures would be highly improbable.
Planet Formation. Astronomers have discovered so many planets outside our solar system that there appear to be about as many planets as stars. Many orbits of these planets show that they could not have evolved in any conceivable way.
With so little in common with the familiar Solar System planets, these newcomers [extrasolar planets] spell the end for established theories of planet formation.11
For example, more than 30 sets of binary stars (two stars orbiting their common center of mass) have one or more planets orbiting each star.12 Rapidly changing gravity fields produced by each binary star would prevent any orbiting dust and gas cloud from collapsing into one planet. This was recognized before Astronomers discovered extrasolar planets.
The environment around a pair of stars, [researchers] argued, would be too chaotic for planets to form.13
If planets formed around binary stars millions of years ago, they would have been so unstable that we would never see them today. But we do!
Even if a planet could form in such a dynamic environment, its long-term stability would not be assured—the planet would wind up being ejected into deep space or crashing into one of the stars.13
But planets, which often orbit binary stars would, in a few thousand years, be ejected far out into space, so they must be young and must have formed at about the same time as their binary stars. This contradicts the big-bang explanation that claims stars and planets formed over millions of years from large rotating clouds of dust and gas.
However, in a much smaller universe, both planets and stars could have come into existence at about the same time. First, large clusters of mass would have formed stars, and smaller clusters would have formed planets, each moving, because gravity was pulling all matter together. Therefore each would have small amounts of rotational angular momentum. Then, before all matter in this smaller universe collapsed into one massive black hole, the space between these bodies was stretched out, giving each body the great rotational angular momentum we see today.
Hot Jupiters. Leslie Sage, an authority on exoplanets (planets outside our Solar System), was perplexed when he learned about hot Jupiters—Jupiter-size planets orbiting so close to their stars that they complete an orbit every few days. Sage explained:
How could a planet be so close to its parent star—it seemed very unlikely that it could form there—and was such a planet stable against evaporation by stellar radiation? 14
From Sage’s way of thinking, hundreds of millions of years after the big bang, stars formed in swirling and contracting disks of gas and dust. Millions of years later, the remaining gas and dust orbiting the new star contracted to form planets. However, Sage knew that dust orbiting too close to a star could not merge to become a planet. (Particles trying to merge on the side of a growing planet closest to the star would feel a much greater gravitational pull from the star than merging particles on the far side of the planet. Those tidal forces would pull a growing planet apart. Sage also knew that dust swirling that near the star would absorb so much heat over those millions of years that the dust would vaporize into the vacuum of space, so no planet would form, especially a Jupiter-size planet.15
Unlike all the planets in our Solar System, many hot Jupiters are orbiting retrograde,16and their spin axes are not aligned with the star’s spin axis.17 How can that be?
What are astronomers (and Leslie Sage) missing? The early universe was much smaller and contained solid bodies, not a superhot plasma that might become dust millions of years later. Therefore, the gravitational sphere of influence of each solid body encompassed many more solid bodies. [See “Sphere of Influence” on page 314.] As stars and planets grew, their spheres’ of influence grew rapidly, so run-away merging occurred simultaneously for both growing stars and nearby planets. A planet’s amount of dust orbiting a star absorbs billions of times more heat than a solid planet having the same mass and at the same distance from the star, because the dust has a total surface area that is billions of times greater. Since a star and its planets were never part of a single swirling gas and dust cloud spinning around the same axis, there is no reason for hot Jupiters to have their spin axes aligned with the star’s spin axis, or for all their orbits to be prograde.
If a big bang occurred, a large spinning disk or cloud must precede the formation of solid or large orbiting bodies. But as we saw with the “Slowly Spinning Sun” and “Star Formation” on page 450, going through that spinning-disk stage would not have produced many features we see today. From the stretching perspective, both large and solid orbiting bodies formed within days—but not from a large spinning cloud. No contradictions arise.
Intergalactic Medium (IGM). Outer space is nearly a perfect vacuum. The IGM (the vast space between galaxies) contains about 10–100 hydrogen atoms per cubic meter. However, almost every hydrogen atom in the IGM, out to the farthest galaxies telescopes can see (13 billion light-years away), has been ionized—has lost its electron.
According to the big bang theory, for the first 380,000 years after the big bang, the expanding universe was so hot that all matter was ionized. Only after the universe had expanded (and cooled) enough, could a proton (positively charged) hang on to an electron (negatively charged) and become neutral hydrogen (no electrical charge). Then, with matter no longer ionized, positive hydrogen ions would not repel each other, so stars and galaxies began to evolve, and light was no longer scattered. Pages 36– 39 refute these big-bang stories and explain why stars and galaxies could not evolve.
This presents a major problem for the big bang theory that does not explain what reionized the hydrogen that today pervades the IGM.18 Most big bang theorists assumed that after the universe expanded for hundreds of millions of years, stars formed and emitted light powerful enough to reionize the IGM. Current models refute this.19
According to the stretching explanation, the universe was extremely compact at creation, so the intense light of Day 1 (explained on page 453) ionized the surrounding gases. Then, the heavens were stretched out. Therefore, hydrogen in the IGM has always been ionized, just as it is today.
PREDICTION 54: Billion-dollar telescopes, now being built, will be able to see further back in time—much closer to the beginning of the universe. They will not see the reionization of the IGM, because it has been ionized since the creation.
Black Holes. Black holes come in two varieties: massive black holes (MBHs) and stellar black holes (SBHs). MBHs are millions to 21 billion times more massive than the Sun. They lie at the center of every large galaxy near enough to be studied—and perhaps every galaxy.20 (Soon, you will see how the stretching explanation explains this.) SBHs are only a few tens of times heavier than the Sun. If our Milky Way Galaxy is as old as evolutionists believe, tens of millions of stars heavier than ten solar masses should have collapsed into SBHs.21 However, our galaxy has only about 50 known SBHs—so our galaxy may be young. In both types of black holes,
Figure 6: Stretching Out Light. Vast amounts of energy were required to stretch out the heavens—in effect, to lift massive gravitational bodies and move them billions of light-years away from other gravitational bodies. The same energy source that stretched out space (represented above by the blue springs) also stretched out—redshifted—light (represented by the yellow arrows). The law of conservation of energy says that energy cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system. According to the big bang theory, the universe is an isolated system, so that energy could not have come from within the universe, as the big bang theory claims. Instead, it came from outside the universe. Thus, we can see distant stars and galaxies in a young universe.
“The horizon problem” has perplexed advocates of the big bang theory for decades, because they see no way that opposite sides of the universe, which are so far apart today, could ever have interacted with each other—even at the speed of light. Nevertheless, they do have the same temperature and other physical properties. Stretching explains this, because all matter was initially in a much smaller universe— a volume only a few light-days in diameter—before God stretched it out. Therefore, temperatures throughout that small volume reached equilibrium before the stretching began on Day 4 of the creation week.
Astronomers admit that galaxies22 and black holes23 must have existed very soon after the universe began, but the big bang theory says that 380,000 years after the big bang (before stars formed), all matter was spread out with almost perfect uniformity. [See Figure 7.] That uniformity would prevent gravity from forming galaxies and black holes, even over the supposed age of the universe.24 However, in a much smaller, lumpier universe, black holes would form soon after the creation of all matter. Then, before all mass collapsed into one huge black hole, space was stretched out.
Standard cosmological models [the big bang and its variations] implied that matter in the universe was not concentrated tightly enough to have formed black holes so early on. Clearly, the models were wrong.28
Jets are often seen traveling away from black holes along their spin axis—some at “up to 99.98 percent of the velocity of light. These amazing outflows traverse distances larger than galaxies”34 and are powered by the gigantic magnetic field generated by the spinning disk of matter spiraling in toward the event horizon.
Colliding Galaxies. Galaxies frequently contain two distinct rotating systems, as if a galaxy rotating one way collided with another rotating the opposite way. Because distances between galaxies are so vast today, such mergers were thought to be rare.35 But the Hubble telescope, in its furthest look back in time, has photographed dozens of galaxies in the process of colliding.36 Obviously, galaxies formed quickly in the early, much more compact universe.
Also, some massive black holes (MBHs) orbit each other inside a galaxy, and four galaxies contain triple MBHs.37 Astronomers believe galaxy mergings produced these systems, but are baffled, because today galaxies are so far apart they rarely merge. The problem disappears when one realizes that the universe was initially quite compact, but later was stretched out.
Does this mean that the universe is billions of years old? No. For one thing, if some galaxies merged billions of years ago, why haven’t the different rotations within merged galaxies become uniform rotations by now? Clearly, those mergings did not happen billions of years ago.38
In fact, before the heavens were stretched out, galaxies were closer to each other, resulting in much greater speeds and frequent collisions. Likewise, much of the expansion of supernova remnants over great distances may be due to the stretching, not the passage of millions of years.
Galaxies and Their Black Holes. The masses of MBHs are positively correlated with several characteristics of each MBH’s galaxy: the galaxy’s mass, luminosity, the number of associated globular clusters, and especially the mass of the galactic bulge. Typically, the larger the galaxy, the larger its black hole. According to standard explanations for galaxy formation, this should not be, because black holes are so small compared to the volume of galaxies today.
For reasons not fully understood, it appears that the sizes of central black holes and the masses of their galaxies, especially the central bulges, are almost perfectly in step [perfectly correlated].39
Here’s the problem for those who believe a big bang preceded the formation of black holes, stars, and galaxies: black holes are too small to affect something as huge as a galaxy that formed long after the universe expanded, and there is no reason a galaxy should create a large central black hole. Therefore, “the correlation means that the black hole and galaxy had to form together.” 40 But how?
Before the universe was stretched out, the densest concentrations of matter began forming MBHs; less dense concentrations formed stars. But before all those stars surrounding the growing MBHs collapsed into the MBHs, space was stretched out, so the surrounding concentration of stars became galaxies—all which appear to contain a central MBH. This is inconsistent with the big bang theory, but is consistent with the stretching theory.
The black holes that power quasars probably started their lives in miniature and grew exponentially by accretion—whereby matter close to a black hole cannot escape the strong gravitational field and is ultimately pulled into the black hole. To have assembled such a huge mass so quickly, the bright quasars discovered in the early universe are thought to have resided in regions that had a very high density of matter. Such an environment not only would have fueled the rapid growth of the black holes powering these quasars, but also would have spurred the growth of galaxies in the quasars’ immediate vicinity.41
Why would the correlation of the black hole’s mass be even stronger for the mass of the galaxy’s central bulge than the mass of the entire galaxy? The force of gravity diminishes as the square of the distance between gravitating masses. Therefore, as the galaxy was stretched out, gravity’s strength dropped faster for the outer portion of the galaxy than the inner portion, which produced the central bulge. (Without this understanding, central bulges are a mystery.42)
A few small galaxies have a huge MBH.43 Possibly the largest black hole known to be in the center of a small galaxy is 21 million times the mass of our Sun! It lies in the compact galaxy NGC 1277, but has an event horizon five times the radius of our solar system! 44 What can explain this monster? Did enough time pass for a normal MBH to devour most of the stars in its galaxy? If so, we should see many examples of extremely large MBHs in small galaxies. Did multiple galaxies collide, merging several of their MBHs? As discussed above, galaxy collisions are statistically improbable in today’s immense, stretched-out universe. However, in the smaller, early universe, some growing black holes and nearby stars might have merged before God stretched out the heavens, leaving extremely large MBHs in small galaxies.45
Central Stars. About 40 stars orbit within a few dozen light-hours of the black hole at the center of our Milky Way Galaxy. Those stars could never have evolved that close to a black hole, which has the mass of 4,300,000 suns, because the black hole’s gravity would have prevented gas from collapsing to become a star.46 However, those stars could have formed in a much denser environment, before space was stretched out during creation week.
In principle, this [collapse] could have occurred if the density of the gases in the center of the galaxy was much higher in the past. Higher density would allow clumps in the clouds to collapse to form stars, even in the presence of a [black hole’s] strong gravitational field.47
Some astronomers say that these stars evolved far from the black hole and then migrated great distances toward the black hole. Such a migration, which seemingly violates laws of physics,48 must have been fast, because the stars are so massive that their lifetimes are very short in astronomical terms. Also, matter migrating toward black holes must radiate vast amounts of energy as happens with quasars, but that energy is not observed in any wavelength for these central stars.
Spiral Galaxies. If spiral galaxies formed billions of years ago, their arms should be wrapped more tightly around their centers than they are. Also, nearer galaxies should show much more “wrap” than more distant spiral galaxies. [See Figure 10 on page 466.] But, if space was recently stretched out, spiral galaxies could appear as they do.
Figure 7: No Gravitational Waves. In 2001, the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), a NASA spacecraft, began measuring the extremely uniform temperatures of the Microwave Background (CMB) radiation from deep space. The hot spots, shown in yellow and orange, are only 1 part in 100,000 hotter than the dark blue spots. Two interpretations are possible:
1. Big Bang Interpretation: For 13.7 billion years, all the matter in the universe has moved rapidly away from the primordial “egg” (the point where the bang began). Gravitational waves filled the early universe, distorting space and time—distortions that should be easily detected today in the CMB. But they are not found!
2. Stretching Interpretation: These are early gravity-driven concentrations of matter (stars and even quasars54) soon after the creation. All matter in the universe was created in a much smaller universe. Then gravity waves dissipated as the universe was stretched out on Day 4. However, during the stretching, matter—embedded in and carried along by the expanding space—did not move relative to the expanding space. Therefore, we should not expect to see gravity waves in the CMB. But we do see other particles produced before the stretching by the many impacts in the smaller universe: neutrinos, cosmic rays, and radiations at practically every possible wavelength. Those who believe in the big bang, see these products in the CMB but do not know how they were produced.55
Why are some galaxies spirals and other elliptical? Astronomers don’t know. “It’s hard, for example, to tell why one [galaxy] turns into a graceful spiral, but another evolves into a blob.”49
Answer: The galaxy became a spiral if the stretching occurred before a large group of stars collapsed and became an elliptical.
Strings of Galaxies. Astronomers have discovered long strings of hundreds of thousands of massive galaxies.50 Obviously, gravity would collapse matter into spherical globs, not long strings. Long strings of galaxies would develop if the universe was stretched out as galaxies began to form—much like pulling taffy into long strings. Many of these galaxies appear connected or aligned with other galaxies or quasars. [See “Connected Galaxies” on page 46.]
Dwarf Galaxies. Sometimes, dwarf galaxies are inside a smoothly rotating disk of hydrogen gas that is much larger than the dwarf galaxy. [See Figure 8.] The small mass of each dwarf galaxy is unable to pull the gas into its disk shape,51 but those characteristics would be explained if highly concentrated matter was recently stretched out. [See Figure 6 on page 452.]
Figure 8: Dwarf Galaxy. An enormous hydrogen disk (blue) surrounds the dwarf galaxy UGC 5288 (bright white). This isolated galaxy, 16 million light-years from Earth, contains about 100,000 stars and is 1/25 the diameter of our Milky Way Galaxy, which has at least 100,000,000,000 stars. The dwarf’s mass is about 30 times too small to hold onto the most distant hydrogen gas gravitationally, so gravity could not have pulled the distant hydrogen gas into its disk. Because the gas is too evenly distributed and rotates so smoothly, it was not expelled from the galaxy or pulled out by a close encounter with another galaxy.
Before space was stretched out, gravitational forces and rotational velocities would have been much greater, so after the stretching, the hydrogen gas would have assumed this smooth, rapidly rotating pattern, even though the galaxy did not have the gravitational strength to hold the gas. This stretching must have occurred recently, because the gaseous disk has not dispersed into the vacuum of space. (We see the galaxy in visible light; a fleet of 27 radio telescopes shows the hydrogen disk.)
Distant Galaxies. Some Massive galaxies and galaxy clusters are at such great distances that they must have formed soon after the universe began—precisely as the stretching explanation maintains. The big bang theory cannot explain how such distant and massive galaxy concentrations could have formed so quickly that their light had over 13.0-billion years to travel t o planet Earth.5, 56, 57
Furthermore, stars in the most distant galaxies contain heavy chemical elements.57 Therefore, according to the big bang theory, several generations of stars must have preceded those stars. That makes it even less likely all those time-consuming events could have been completed and still have over 13,000,000,000 years for light to travel to Earth.
The stretching explanation says that during creation week, galaxies, galaxy clusters, and stars with heavy elements formed in a much smaller universe. Then the heavens were stretched out, producing today’s immense universe.
Figure 9: Why are Galaxies Spinning?
Notice how the stretching of space spread the stars in spiral galaxies into the same pattern as a spinning lawn sprinkler spreads water droplets.
Both spiral galaxies and lawn sprinklers spin, but for different reasons. Spiral galaxies spin because gravity causes bodies in space to orbit more massive bodies that are nearby. A lawn sprinkler spins because of the jetting action of water squirting out of nozzles. In both spiral galaxies and lawn sprinklers, the spiral arms trail behind the direction of rotation.
As space was stretched out, light’s velocity remained unchanged, even though light’s wavelengths were stretched and, therefore, redshifted. Likewise, as space was stretched out, each star’s velocity (relative to space) remained unchanged while space’s expansion transported the stars radially outward.
Astronomers don’t understand this. Since the 1980s, they have imagined that these galaxies must contain some invisible substance (they call “dark matter”), which might explain why the outer stars travel faster than the laws of physics would allow with the observed galaxy’s mass. Millions of dollars have been wasted in experiments trying to discover “dark matter.” “Dark matter” simply reflects ignorance.60, 61
Their frustration will increase, until they understand how the universe began.
Starburst Galaxies. While we frequently see stars die, individual stars have never been seen forming. [See “Star Births? Stellar Evolution?” on page 38 and corresponding endnotes on page 101.] Therefore, evolutionist astronomers believe that star formation rates in our galaxy and nearby galaxies are too slow to observe, but that amazingly high star formation rates occur in “starburst galaxies”—the brightest galaxies with the greatest redshifts. To achieve such ultrafast rates, those astronomers imagine 10-trillion solar masses of dark (invisible) matter were present.58 Because those galaxies have high redshifts, they are extremely far away, so we see them far back in time, as they looked soon after the universe began. Because they are so bright, their stars must have all formed quickly.
Actually, there is nothing unusual about those galaxies; we are just seeing them as they appeared, far back in time, soon after the universe was stretched out. According to the big bang theory, stars could not form until after 420,000,000 years, because all matter in the universe would have been spread out too uniformly—and dark matter would be needed (matter that doesn’t exist, except in some people’s minds).
Stellar Generations. According to the big bang theory, there are three generations of stars, each with increasing amounts of heavy elements. The first generation should contain only hydrogen, helium, and a trace of lithium—the only chemical elements a big bang could produce. Millions of years later, second-generation stars would begin forming with heavier elements supposedly made inside first-generation stars that finally exploded. If so, some first-generation stars should still be visible, but not one has ever been found. [See Endnote 56 n on page 98.] Actually, the most distant stars, galaxies, and quasars that can be analyzed contain some of these heavy chemical elements.26
Matter and Antimatter. Albert Einstein explained why matter and energy are interchangeable. For example, energy can produce matter, but when it does, it always produces equal amounts of antimatter. If the big bang produced the universe, half the matter in the universe should be antimatter. However, the universe has almost no antimatter. Therefore, the big bang did not produce the universe—or half the universe disappeared. [See “Antimatter” on page 36 and related endnotes.]
Helium-2 Nebulas. Clouds of glowing, blue gas, called helium-2 nebulas, have been set aglow by something hot enough to strip two electrons from each helium atom. No known star—young or old—is hot enough to do that,63 but the compressed, “pre-stretched” universe, filled with blazing quasars, would be.
Stellar Velocities. Stars in the outer parts of spiral galaxies travel much faster than they would if they were in equilibrium. Therefore, these galaxies are flying apart. We cannot see that directly, because they are so far away and have been flying apart for only a few thousand years—since the stretching during creation week. [See Figure 9.]
Those stars got their higher velocities before space was stretched out—when they were nearer the center of their galaxy, where the galaxy’s gravity was much more powerful. Stretching did not remove those speeds. Appeals to so-called dark matter, which has never been seen or measured, is not needed to explain those high velocities. Dark matter is a fiction, created by astronomers wedded to the big bang theory.
Speeding Galaxies. Galaxies in galaxy clusters are also traveling much faster than they should, based on their distances from their clusters’ centers of mass. They too are flying apart, because the volume of space containing those clusters was stretched out.
The Flatness Problem. R. H. Dicke first explained the flatness problem in his 1969 Jayne Lecture, which was later published in “Gravitation and the Universe” for the American Philosophical Society of Philadelphia in 1970. The density of the universe, as shown in Equation (4) on page 458, had to be fine tuned to one part in 1062. Had the universe been slightly denser by one part in 1062, the expansion would have slowed and collapsed back on itself in a “big crunch” after 13.7-billion years (today’s age of the universe according to the big bang theory).64 Had the universe been slightly less dense by one part in 1062, “the universe would have expanded “so quickly and become so sparse it would soon seem essentially empty, and gravity would not be strong enough by comparison to cause matter to collapse and form galaxies.65 The stretching explanation does not have this problem.
Dark “Science.” The big bang theory must invoke unscientific concepts, such as “dark matter” and “dark energy,” to try to explain the “stretched out heavens.” What is dark matter? What is dark energy? Even believers in those ideas don’t know, and some admit that those phrases are “expressions of ignorance [by those who accept the big bang theory].”
No one knows what dark matter is, but they know what it is not. It’s not part of the “standard model” of physics that weaves together everything that is known about ordinary matter and its interactions.61
We know little about that sea [of dark matter and dark energy]. The terms we use to describe its components, “dark matter” and “dark energy,” serve mainly as expressions of our ignorance.60