Figure 1
Updated extract from: Apeiron, Vol. 2, Nr. 1 January 1995
Abstract.Return to List of Papers on the Web
1
-
Usual
Interpretation
of
the 3 K Radiation.
One of the most frequently used arguments in
favor of the Big Bang hypothesis is the observation of the 3 K
radiation from space. In this hypothesis it is considered that
the universe started as an expanding mass of matter at an
extremely high temperature. The density of that very dense
matter was originally so high that it was then opaque and
light could not pass through it. During the expansion, the
temperature and the density of the universe were gradually
decreasing, so that the universe became more and more
transparent. When the temperature of this young universe
reached about 3000 K, about 15 billion years ago the universe
became sufficiently transparent so that the radiation emitted
could move across cosmological distances without being
absorbed significantly. It is said that the radiation became
then decoupled with matter. It is that radiation that is still
traveling through space today and that we would observe under
the "appearance" of 3 K radiation.
We
must
further
notice
that
nothing in the description given above has ever been witnessed
directly. It is like a tale. The Big Bang hypothesis must be
submitted to tests. Many examples of failures of those tests
have been shown. For example, if the universe started as a
very high concentration of matter, it can be calculated that
it was then a Black Hole. However, relativity shows that Black
Holes cannot expand. The Big Bang is therefore incompatible
with the early expansion of the universe when relativity is
taken into account as shown previously. As mentioned
previously, the Big Bang hypothesis is another "creationist
theory" for which the only difference with the usual "creationist
theory" claiming that universe started 4000 B.C. is by
changing the number 4000 B.C. by 15 billion years.
2 - a) Structure of
Atomic H and Molecular Hydrogen H2.
Before understanding the origin of the 3 K
radiation observed in space, we need to know the properties of
matter filling space. Astronomical observations show that
there is a very large quantity of atomic hydrogen (H) in the
universe. Atomic hydrogen is composed of an electron
electrically bound to a proton forming neutral hydrogen.
Protons, just as electrons have a fundamental property called
"spin". In a hydrogen atom, those spins are coupled either
parallel or anti parallel. The interesting point is that a
transition from a parallel to an anti parallel coupling of
spins in hydrogen (and vice versa) takes place when hydrogen
is emitting (or absorbing) electromagnetic radiation at a
wavelength of 21 cm. Consequently, one can determine the
amount of atomic hydrogen H in the universe by measuring the
amount of radiation absorbed (or emitted) at 21 cm. The actual
observation of the 21 cm. line proves that there is a very
abundant amount of atomic hydrogen in the universe.
It
is
well
known
in
basic physics and chemistry that atomic hydrogen H is quite
unstable. Spectroscopy reveals that when one has a given
quantity of atomic hydrogen in a given volume, these atoms
react between themselves to form molecular hydrogen (H2). This is unlike helium and other inert gases that
remain mono-atomic. Atomic hydrogen reacts so readily, that it
is impossible to buy or keep any quantity of stable atomic
hydrogen, because atoms of atomic hydrogen combine in pairs,
to produce very stable bound H2 molecules. Molecular H2 is extremely stable at normal pressure down to the
most extreme vacuum. One can expect that, after billions of
years, an important fraction of atomic hydrogen H in the
universe is already combined to form the extremely stable
molecular hydrogen (H2). The
recombination mechanisms will be discussed below. One might
then ask why we do not report the detection of a large amount
of molecular hydrogen H2 in
space. We are told that it is simply because it does not
exist. Such a naive answer requires further study.
Let
us
examine
how
molecular
hydrogen H2 can be detected
in space. In molecular hydrogen, there are two protons and two
electrons bound together. The bounding of those particles is
such that interaction with visible or infrared light cannot
break or even excite that bounding. The transition is
forbidden for a dipole transition. Molecular H2 is among the most transparent gases in the
universe. Consequently, one cannot hope to detect free H2 in space by usual spectroscopic means.
3
-
a)
Absence
of
Optical Transitions in H2.
Since there are no optically allowed
electronic transitions in H2 in the currently observed range of frequencies, one
might argue that one could make H2 vibrate or rotate using the appropriate frequency
of electromagnetic radiation. Those mechanisms do exist in
principle, but they are forbidden in practice due to the
absence of electric or magnetic dipole. Let us illustrate the
extreme insensibility of H2
to detection.
Rotational transitions of H2
are located in the radio range where one has about the maximum
sensitivity of detection of E-M radiation. In spectroscopy, we
are used to dipole transitions that take place in about 10-8 sec. However, the lifetime of the first rotational
state of hydrogen H2 is so
long that the spontaneous emission is practically nonexistent.
A transition from the second rotational state, which is
relatively much more probable, would require about 25 billion
seconds (1000 years). One must reach the sixth state before
the transition time becomes 25 million seconds. This last
transition is about 1015
times less probable that a normal dipole transition. Different
values are given on Table 1.
Lifetimes of Transitions in Molecular H2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 1
Transitions in hydrogen are millions of millions of times slower than normal transitions.
4- Stability of H2 Due to Ionizing Radiation.
We will see now, that the presence of
ionizing radiation cannot explain a serious decrease of
concentration of H2. It has been claimed that H2 cannot exist in space, because it would dissociate
due to space radiation. Such an assertion is not acceptable
prior to a serious evaluation of the probability of reaction
of the H2 molecule with the
ionizing radiation of space.
Astrophysicists
argue
that
not
long
after the Big Bang, radiation was decoupled with matter and
the density of the universe was so low, that E-M radiation
could travel through most of the universe without being
absorbed. If that radiation is decoupled with matter, there is
no reason that this radiation could ionize or dissociate so
much H2. The decoupling of
radiation in the universe is contradictory with the hypothesis
of dissociation or ionization of matter in space.
A
second
argument
appears
when
one compares the probability of ionizing H with H2 due to the ionizing radiation in space. Ionizing
radiation in space, can ionize atomic H, at least as easily as
it can ionize molecular hydrogen H2. In fact, atomic H is somehow easier to ionize than
H2, since it takes only 13.6
eV to ionize H and 15.4 eV to ionize H2. All the photons in space between 13.6 and 15.4 eV
can ionize H without ionizing H2. This leaves molecular hydrogen without being
disturbed.
One
knows
that
an
important
amount of atomic hydrogen H is actually observed in space.
This proves that the amount of radiation in space is
insufficient to ionize a too large proportion of H. This is
quite in agreement with the argument that radiation is
decoupled with matter as seen above. Since there is not enough
radiation to ionize (destroy) atomic hydrogen H in space, one
must conclude that the same amount of radiation is
insufficient to ionize (or dissociate) H2.
5 - Relative Recombining in H and H2.
We know that the recombination of a proton and
an electron is a two-body recombination just as in the case of
binding two atomic hydrogen atoms H forming H2. In order to
evaluate the relative importance between the recombination of
a pair of H into H2, and the
recombination of an electron and proton into H, let us compare
the two mechanisms. Since H is observed, it means that there
is enough two-body recombination of p+ + e- in space to produce H. Even if an
electron attracts a proton, a collision does not lead to a
recombination unless radiation is emitted. However, one can
see that the recombination of a pair of H (into H2) is using the same two-body recombination mechanism
as the electron-proton recombination (forming H).
We
conclude
from
the
above
that, not only there is not enough radiation in space to
destroy H2 (since H is
submitted to the same radiation and is actually observed) but
furthermore H2 can be
recombined by a similar two-body mechanism as for H (from a
proton plus an electron).
6
-
Perfect
Isotropy
of
Planck's Radiation.
Since we are fully surrounded by the matter of
the universe, it is well known that Planck's radiation
observed from inside our local volume of space at 3 K (during
the last billion years) must be perfectly isotropic. This is
in perfect agreement with observational data.
It
is
inconceivable
that
the
matter in space around us (a billion light year around us)
would not emit Planck's radiation. Why should that matter not
be emitting Planck's radiation during the last billion years?
Where is that radiation?
Figure 1 shows the region of the heaven around the earth filled with molecular H2 at 3 K. Such a gas emits 3 K Planck's radiation in all directions. This leads to the 3 K isotropic radiation as observed in space. However, on the contrary, the primeval radiation has been calculated to be non isotropic.
7
-
The
3
K
Radiation Explains the Olbers Paradox.
The astronomer Heinrich Olbers was curious as
to why the night sky should be dark. He conceived the
following paradox. When an observer is looking in a particular
direction toward an unlimited homogeneous universe, a star
should always be visible in any direction since there is no
limit in the distance of observation and since the volume
increases as the third power of the radius. Consequently,
Olbers logically concluded that the night sky should be
bright. Some excellent books (e.g. Harrison 1987) have
discussed various aspects of this paradox.
If
we
adopt
the
view
of the universe at 3 K described here, the Olbers paradox
vanishes in the following way. We must recall that Olbers did
not know Planck's law of radiation. He assumed that only the
hottest bodies in the universe were emitting E-M radiation.
Olbers did not realize that, at the temperature of the
universe, radiation is also emitted at 3 K from all matter.
8 - Conclusion.
Since we have seen that the normal chemical
reaction in space strongly favors the recombination of H into
H2 (and not the reverse), we must conclude that there
has to be a large amount of H2 in space.
The
high
homogeneity
of
the
3 K radiation, the absolute need of having H2 in space and the absence of the hypothetical
anisotropic radiation expected from the Big Bang, showing the
non primeval origin of the background radiation observed from
space, constitute an experimental proof that the Big Bang
never happened. More complete arguments in favor of the
Planck's radiation as the ultimate source of the 3 K radiation
in the Universe were recently presented in international
meeting. (Marmet 1994).
<><><><><><><><><><><><>