Flaws in the Big Bang Point to GENESIS, a New
Millennium Model of the Cosmos: Part 9
Disproof of Big-Bang Cosmology Points to Seven
Smoking Gun Signatures of GENESIS'
(arXiv:physics/0102100 28 Feb 2001)
by Robert V. Gentry
Earlier papers in this series have exposed major
flaws in big bang's spacetime expansion hypothesis, effectively
falsifying all aspects of big bang cosmology and its explanations
of the Hubble relation, the 2.7K Cosmic Blackbody Radiation (CBR),
the Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect, and Olber's paradox, to name a few.
The fictitious nature of big bang's explanations of these phenomena
requires a major revision in our perception of the cosmos, one that
would bring order and a new understanding of these phenomena out of
the chaos of big bang's collapse. A new model of the cosmos is at
hand to do just that. Indeed, the fit to the new model is so
unequivocal that all the aforementioned phenomena; namely, (i)
Galactic recession from a nearby universal Center, as evidenced by
the Hubble redshift relation, (ii) the 2.7K CBR, its temperature
variation with redshift, and (iii) its proof of the existence of an
absolute reference frame, (iv) the Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect, (v)
Olber's paradox, (vi) SNe Ia confirmation of GENESIS' vacuum
gravity universe, and (vii) the (1 + z)−1 time
dilation of SNe and GRB light curves, are all Smoking Gun
Signatures of GENESIS' astrophysical framework of the universe.
Previous papers in this series have analyzed
big-bang cosmology's three cornerstone postulates, which are :
(i) the Cosmological Principle, the assumption that the universe is
everywhere homogeneous and isotropic, (ii) the universe is governed
by the Friedmann-Lemaitre spacetime expansion hypothesis, and (iii)
the Hubble relation and the 2.7K CBR are the result of expansion
redshifts, wherein spacetime expansion, theorized to be a general
relativistic effect, presumably acts to cause photon wavelengths to
increase in-flight in proportion to the increase in the expansion
factor between the times of emission and observation . Results
presented earlier in this series have demonstrated contradictions
in all these postulates, in particular showing that the universe is
not governed by Friedmann-Lemaitre spacetime expansion, and that
there is unambiguous evidence for a nearby universal Center. Part 1
of this series summarized the New Redshift Interpretation (NRI) and
documented why it operates as a valid astrophysical framework of
the cosmos  without big bang's spacetime expansion postulate.
Part 5 substantiated the relativistic basis for GENESIS'
astrophysical framework, and Part 7 documented astronomical proof
of its basic postulate of a nearby universal Center. Additional
support for its validity is provided in this paper.
1. Seven Smoking Gun Signatures and Other
Affirmations of GENESIS
Ref.  showed how the NRI, which is GENESIS'
astrophysical framework, accounts for the Hubble redshifts solely
in terms of relativistic Doppler and Einstein gravitational
redshifts, all cast within the framework of a finite,
nonhomogeneous, vacuum-gravity universe with cosmic Center (C)
somewhere astronomically near the Galaxy . In this framework
cosmic repulsion from vacuum gravity causes Hubble-type recession
of the galaxies away from the cosmic Center. This orderly expansion
of the galaxies away from C shows that this framework truly
represents a new cosmic perspective on the universe. Prior to the
formulation of the NRI it was generally assumed the universe had to
be governed by the Friedmann-Lemaitre spacetime expansion
hypothesis in order to account for the astronomical data supporting
an expanding universe . The discovery of the NRI has shown,
however, this assumption is incorrect because this new framework
can account for an "expanding universe" independent of
Friedmann-Lemaitre spacetime expansion.
1.1 The Hubble magnitude-redshift relation — A
smoking gun signature of GENESIS
The NRI is strongly affirmed because it has already
been shown to account for the Hubble redshift relation in terms of
relativistic Doppler and Einstein gravitational redshifts, all cast
within the framework of a finite, inhomogeneous, vacuum-gravity
universe with a nearby cosmic Center. Reference is made to Part 8
of this series for details on how this astrophysical framework is
capable of accounting for the Hubble (m, z) relation,
m = M + 5 log cz.
1.2 Identifying the Cosmic Blackbody Radiation
as gravitationally redshifted blackbody cavity radiation from an
outer galactic shell is another smoking gun signature of
As additionally discussed in Part 1 of this series,
this new framework assumes the widely dispersed galaxies of the
visible universe are enclosed by a thin, outer shell of closely
spaced galaxies at a distance R from the Galaxy . Since
this outer galactic shell is assumed to have an essentially uniform
temperature, the blackbody cavity radiation filling the space
enclosed by it would be isotropic when seen by an observer at C.
The radial variation of gravitational potential within this volume
requires the cavity radiation temperature measured at any interior
point to depend on the magnitude of the Einstein gravitational
redshift between that point and the outer shell — or,
alternatively, between that point and the Center, C. By including
vacuum energy density, ρv, and pressure,
pv, into the gravitational structure of the
cosmos, it is possible to show how the radiation emitted from this
outer shell is gravitationally redshifted to become the 2.7K
blackbody cavity radiation here at the Galaxy .
In particular, if the vacuum pressure,
pv, is negative, then the vacuum density,
ρv, will be positive, and the summed
vacuum pressure/energy contributions to vacuum gravity will be
-2ρv. So, excluding the outer galactic
shell at R, the net density throughout the cosmos from C to
R would be
ρ − 2ρv, where
ρ is the average mass/energy density of ordinary
matter. Beyond R both densities are assumed to either cancel
or diminish to negligible values, which effectively achieves for
the NRI framework what Birkhoff's theorem did for standard
cosmology. This framework is sufficient to compute the
gravitational potentials needed to account for both the Hubble
redshift relation and the 2.7K CBR in the NRI .
Almost thirty years ago Misner, Thorne and Wheeler
 noted that the 2.7K CBR had the form expected if the Earth were
enclosed in a box ("black-body cavity") with temperature 2.7K. But
there is no record where they or any other cosmologist took this
suggestion seriously. Indeed, this was never an option for
cosmologists because a cavity-within-a-box scenario could not exist
within big bang's homogeneous universe.
Thus the NRI, which does account for the 2.7K CBR
as gravitationally redshifted cavity radiation from a distant,
outer spherical shell of galaxies, remained undiscovered until
recently . The initial version of this model assumed the shell's
temperature was uniformly about 5400K . But a lower uniform
average temperature of 3000K can be postulated equally well
because, within certain limits, this is a free parameter. In this
instance the gravitational redshift would then be 3000 / 2.726 =
1100, instead of 2000 for the 5400K shell. Also, the distance from
C to the outer shell is reduced from 14.24 × 109 ly to
14.13 × 109 ly.
A second important assumption concerning this outer
shell is that its galaxies contain only trace amounts of heavier
elements. The somewhat recently discovered Extremely Red
Objects [3,4] appear to be in this category. This assures the
virtual absence of heavy element emission lines and, with the
assumption of a lower average temperature, provides the conditions
for these galaxies to function as blackbody radiators. Light from
these stars, or galaxies, is considered to be the source of the
blackbody radiation for the 2.7K CBR. The collective radiation is
still subject to the gravitational redshift to become the presently
observed 2.7K CBR.
1.3 Accounting for the Cosmic Blackbody Radiation
temperature variation with redshift via the expression, T(z)
= 2.73(1 + z), is another smoking gun signature of
Another most significant consequence of this new
framework concerns the recent CBR temperature measurement at
z = 2.34, reported  to be between 6.0K and 14K. As noted
in Part 1, Bahcall extolled the big bang is "bang on"  because
this result fits big bang's prediction of 9.1K. His enthusiasm was
based of course on the assumption that big bang's cornerstone
postulates were correct. Now that these have been disproven it is
obvious that a new explanation is needed. Indeed, in Part 1 it has
already been shown that the NRI is equally "bang on" because its
T(z) = 2.73(1 + z) equation exactly duplicates big
bang's 2.73K at z = 0 and its 9.1K CBR at z = 2.34.
In the big bang this equation represented a temporal
difference in redshift conditions. In the NRI it results from a
spatial difference in redshift conditions; more
specifically, the temperature dependence on redshift arises because
of the latter's dependence on the universal gravitational
potential, which in turn exhibits a dependence on the radial
distance from the Center . The end result is same equation as
predicted by big bang's temporal dependence.
1.4 The Cosmic Blackbody Radiation acting as an
absolute reference frame for the universe is another smoking gun
signature of GENESIS
Another notable difference between big bang
cosmology and GENESIS concerns the existence of a fixed, universal
reference frame. In the big bang there could be no fixed reference
frame, and none was ever recognized as such. But in the GENESIS
framework there is a fixed universal Center, and a fixed Center
absolutely demands the existence of a universal reference frame. It
is significant therefore to note that Smoot  and Weisskopf 
have characterized the 2.7K CBR as a universal frame of reference.
Weisskopf in particular focused on this fact when he stated
"It is remarkable that we now are justified in
talking about an absolute motion, and that we can measure it. The
great dream of Michelson and Morley is realized. . . . It makes
sense to say that an observer is at rest in an absolute sense when
the 3K radiation appears to have the same frequencies in all
directions. Nature has provided an absolute frame of reference. The
deeper significance of this concept is not yet clear."
The discovery of GENESIS' astrophysical framework
has successfully unveiled the deeper significance of which
Weisskopf spoke, for it provides a unique scientific understanding
of why the 2.7K CBR does function as an absolute frame of reference
of the cosmos. Since the proof is certain, the denial must be of a
philosophical nature. Actually it appears to be in the same
category as Hubble's ill-founded denial that the galactic redshift
relation points to a nearby universal Center (see Part 7 for
details). Hubble said cosmological theory — meaning the
Cosmological Principle — denied the existence of a Center;
therefore it must be excluded. And what Hubble said, others
followed unquestioningly. It seems that modern cosmologists have
done much the same with this proof of an absolute reference frame
in that they have failed to recognize that it also contradicts the
1.5 The Sunyaev-Zeldovich Effect is another
smoking gun signature of GENESIS
As just noted, the evidence for a universal Center
near the Galaxy and the evidence supporting GENESIS' interpretation
of the 2.7K CBR as being gravitationally redshifted cavity
radiation is substantial. These characteristics are precisely those
needed to account for the Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect, which has been
thought to be explainable only within the context of big-bang
When Sunyaev and Zeldovich proposed their idea,
they did so in the context of big-bang cosmology, assuming the
reason CBR photons would backlight even the outermost galaxies is
that photons presumed to have originated in big bang's primeval
fireball would have originated before galaxies formed . In this
scenario hot gases surrounding very distant clusters of galaxies
should scatter photons that originated from even earlier times,
thus causing the CBR photon temperature to be slightly diminished
in the shadow cast on Earth by those gases. The effect has been
confirmed in observations of galactic clusters . However, since
big bang's expansion hypothesis has been disproven, it is evident
the big-bang fireball never existed. Thus, there must be another
source of CBR photons which backlights the galaxies of the visible
The GENESIS framework identifies that source as the
light emanating from the NRI's outer galactic shell . Since the
Center may lie within the Galaxy, it follows that CBR photons
arriving locally from the outer galactic shell must have followed
trajectories directed almost radially inward to the Earth, Thus all
galactic clusters in the visible universe — meaning all inside the
outer shell — will cast a shadow in local measurements of the 2.7K
CBR. This explains why the S-Z effect is a logical consequence of
the GENESIS model.
1.6 Olber's Paradox is another smoking gun
signature of GENESIS
Olber's paradox concerns why the night sky is dark.
Harrison  has shown that a static, infinite universe, with a
constant volume density of stars with about the sun's temperature,
would eventually produce a brilliant night sky of the same
temperature, instead of the dark night sky that is seen. Harrison
has discussed several different resolutions of this paradox both
within the context of an infinite, static, Newtonian universe, as
well as within the framework of Friedmann-Lemaitre spacetime
expansion . In the latter case, he assumed the effects of
spacetime expansion would eventually cause galaxies to disappear
from our range of sight and that their disappearance would in
itself account for the dark night sky. In essence a dark night sky
will result whenever there are only a finite number of sources to
consider. This result is applicable to GENESIS' astrophysical
framework because its finite, constant density universe leads to a
finite number of galaxies . Additionally, as Part 8 in this
series has shown, in the GENESIS framework the apparent brightness
of distant galaxies is diminished by a factor of (1 +
z)−3 due to Doppler and gravitational effects.
So, in GENESIS the night sky is dark because of a finite number of
galaxies and because light from those at increasingly higher
redshifts is diminished by the (1 + z)−3 redshift
1.7 GENESIS' prediction that ours is a vacuum
gravity universe is confirmed by the discovery of astronomical
evidence of cosmic repulsion and the cosmological constant
The cosmological constant, Λ =
8πρvG, originally conceived by Einstein as
a way to stabilize the universe , but subsequently almost
completely dismissed by big-bang cosmologists after Hubble's 1929
discovery of evidence of an expanding universe. Now, over seventy
years later, the cosmological constant has again gained credence
among cosmologists, but only because of the very unexpected 1998
discovery that Type Ia SNe exhibit characteristics that are strong
evidence for cosmic repulsion due to a finite energy density,
ρv, of the vacuum. At
this writing the best estimate for ΩΛ
= 8vG / 3Ho2
derived from supernovae observations appears to be
ΩΛ ~ 0.7 [13-16].
In contrast to big bang cosmology's long aversion
to the cosmological constant, I reported in late 1997, before
the astronomical evidence for cosmic repulsion was published in
early 1998 [13-16], that a necessary feature of the New Redshift
Interpretation's (NRI's) astrophysical framework — which is also
that of GENESIS — was that the universe should be characterized by
a vacuum energy density, ρv,
that exceeded the ordinary mass density, ρ. Moreover, not only was its existence
predicted but also its approximate value,
8.9 × 10−30 g-cm−3. Substituting this value, together with
Ho = 68 km s−1 Mpc−1 =
2.2 × 10−18 s−1 — the value used in ref.  —
into the expression for ΩΛ
(ΩΛ)NRI ~ 1, which
approximates the astronomical value. Thus it seems reasonably clear
that GENESIS' prediction of ours being a universe dominated by
vacuum gravity has been confirmed by the Type Ia SNe
1.8 Another smoking gun signature of GENESIS is
that its astrophysical framework exactly predicts the observed
(1 + z)−1 time dilation for Type Ia supernovae and
GRB light curves
Goldhaber et al. , Perlmutter et
al. [16(a,b)] and Filippenko and Riess  have all reported
observations supporting the 1 + z broadening of Type Ia SNe
light curves, and have attributed this to cosmological time
dilation from spacetime expansion. While Parts 2 through 6 of this
series has shown the expansion explanation for this effect is no
longer viable, refs. ,  and , plus this paper and Part 8
of this series, collectively provide the basis for a new one. In
particular, ref.  and Part 8 of this series reveal that the
NRI's combined gravitational and relativistic Doppler shifts
require that the clock rate at the point of emission is diminished
by (1 + z)−1 compared to local terrestrial clocks.
Relativistically speaking, this time dilation prediction exactly
agrees with what refs. ,  and  have reported for Type
Ia SNe. Additional evidence for the same relativistic time dilation
has also been obtained for a distant Gamma-Ray Burster . Here
then is another instance where GENESIS exactly accounts for
specific observational data previously thought to be explainable
only by the expansion hypothesis, and as such it qualifies as
another smoking gun signature of this model.
1.9 Microkelvin-range variations in the CBR
noted in the MAXIMA observations are accounted for by
millikelvin-range variations in the NRI's outer galactic
Big-bang cosmology assumes that weak temperature
anomalies were produced in the CBR soon after the big bang, as
large scale structures began to form. According to this theory
these tiny variations should now be observable in the present 2.7K
CBR. Indeed, last year's Boomerang balloon experiments in
Antarctica , and the more recent MAXIMA-1 Balloon experiments
, have both yielded anisotropies in the 2.7K CBR that have been
attributed to big bang's predicted temperature anomalies. However,
the falsification of big-bang cosmology shows this interpretation
of the results cannot be correct. So there must be another
Again we turn to the GENESIS framework, and again
we find an alternate explanation of results previously thought to
be explainable only by big-bang cosmology. There is another way to
account for the spatial and microtemperature variations in the CBR
[22,23]; namely, GENESIS' outer galactic shell has a near perfect,
rather than absolutely perfect, uniform temperature; moreover, the
clusters of galaxies comprising the outer shell almost, but not
perfectly, overlap. On this basis, the spatial/ microtemperature
variations observed in the MAXIMA map would actually be the result
of galactic cluster separation plus gravitationally redshifted
millikelvin-range temperature variations in different parts of the
outer galactic shell. In this scenario the MAXIMA map would be
interpreted as approximately reflective of galactic cluster
separation in the outer shell, thus being reffective of the present
state of the cosmos instead of a relic of its distant past
 C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne, and J. A. Wheeler,
Gravitation, (W. H. Freeman & Company, 1973) pp.
 Robert V. Gentry, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 12, 2919
(1997); arXiv:astroph/ 9806280.
 M. Stiavelli, arXiv:astro-ph/0010100.
 P. Martini, arXiv:astro-ph/0009287.
 R. Srinand, P. Pettijean and C. Ledoux, Nature
408, 931 (2000).
 John Bahcall, Nature 408, 916 (2000).
 George Smoot and Keay Davidson, Wrinkles in Time (Avon
Books, Division of the Hearst Corp., New York, 1993) p. 117.
 V. F. Weisskopf, American Scientist, 71, No. 5,
 John A. Peacock, Cosmological Physics (Cambridge
University Press, 1999) pp. 145.
 L. Grego et al., arXiv:astro-ph/0003085.
 E. R. Harrison, Cosmology, The Science of the Universe
(Cambridge University Press, 1981) pp. 251-262.
 A. Einstein, Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, Sitsber.
142 (1917). English reprint in The Principle of
Relativity, (Dover Publications), pp. 177-198.
 P. M. Garnavich et al., Ap. J. 493, L53, (1998);
 B. P. Schmidt et al., Ap. J. 507, 46 (1998);
 A. G. Riess et al., Astronom. J. 116, 1009
(1998); arXiv:astroph/ 9805201.
 (a) S. Perlmutter et al., Nature 391, 51
(1998); arXiv:astro-ph/9712212; (b) S. Perlmutter et al.,
 G. Goldhaber et al., arXiv:astro-ph/9602124.
 A. V. Fillipenko and A. G. Riess, arXiv:astro-ph/0008057.
 Robert V. Gentry, arXiv:astro-ph/9810051.
 Robert V. Gentry and David W. Gentry, arXiv:gr-qc/9086061.
 Ming Deng and Bradley Schaefer, arXiv:astro-ph/9806010.
 P. de Bernardis et al., Nature 404, 955 (2000).
 S. Hanany et al., Ap. J. 545, L5 (2000).
 Many thanks to Dave Gentry for useful discussions.