The Big Bang Delusion

The standard Big Bang model steams from Hubble‘s interpretation, in 1925-1930,
of the redshift of distant galaxies as being caused by their recession and
from the concept of the 'expansion of the Universe‘. For nearly a century, the
Big Bang model has ruled the roost, by default. Over the years, the model has
become a dogma. Is this model doomed to failure? That is the claim made by a
researcher, Salomon Borensztejn, in his book 'THE BIG BANG DELUSION‘. For
nearly 50 years, Borensztejn has been patiently accumulating arguments and
above all facts that prove that the Big Bang model is wrong. The author
proposes an alternative to the Big Bang model, 'the temporalistic model',
which interprets redshifts as a quantum and temporal phenomenon and not a
cosmological and spatial one, contrary to the reigning dogma. According to the
temporalistic model, redshifts are caused by the asymmetry of time, in other
words by the existence of a 'temporalistic' constant that he discovered and
named To, whose value, established theoretically in 1962, is 4.5546 x 1017
seconds (14.43 billion years). In 1962, the author also established
theoretically a value for the Hubble constant, Ho, of 67.71 km/s/Mpc. This
value has very recently been corroborated by Australian researchers: ''The new
measurement of the Hubble constant is 67.0 ± 3.2 km/s/Mpc. (i.e. within 1% of
the temporalistic value of Ho) - Florian Beutler et al. ICRAR (International
Centre for Radio Astronomy Reasearch) - UWA (University of Western Australia)
25 July 2011''. Since 1962, the values of Ho and To have remained the same. In
the Big Bang model, To is interpreted as being the 'age' of the Universe.
Estimated at around 2 billion years in 1925-1930, the value of To has since
been reassessed through thousands of observations made by numerous research
institutes as well as by NASA. NASA‘s latest data (WMAP 5-Table7-Cosmological
Parameter Summary-2008) gives To a value that is within 2-3% of that of the
temporalistic constant To, in other words, well within the range of
uncertainty of the data. Starting out from false premises, its 'original sin',
the Big Bang model was inevitably bound to accumulate a large number of
problems and speculative concepts that are unverifiable (such as inflationary
theories). After rigorously analyzing the various pieces of 'evidence'
supporting the Big Bang model, the author has been able to show,
unequivocally, that, in the final analysis, these consist either or
hypotheses, or assumptions, or interpretations, but never of genuine evidence.
As for the temporalistic model, the author provides 23 pieces of evidence for
his model, all of which are facts (explanation of the Pionner and Casimir
effects, value of the Hubble contant Ho and of the remporalistic constant, To,
gravitational radii, origin and nature of dark matter, etc). The author
proposes tests that will make it possible to decide, once and for all, between
the two models. For ease of reading, most of the calculations have been
gathered together in the final chapter.