Big Bang theory is not valid.

[Diamond-Deist]

It is in fact moving, but expanding from where? for something to expand it needs a point of origin, there is no suggestion it is expanding, the universe is in constant motion that has been obvious from day one considering our solar system.

frankiej I will use whatever words I want, I find the proposition that there was nothing then a hot dense mist like state to an explosion emanating matter as magical, also I find the primeval atom theory a magical conception also, the universe fitted into an atom? also the idea if this is the case of multiplying matter then it took 13.7 Billion years? ..... I understand the concept excuse me if I find it mythical, we have stars that are that old.

I will share some bits of conversation I have had when I asked these types of questions ......

---

Two points when I asked similar questions .... I'll try to find the others if I still have them, please feel free to refute them I am interested if you have an answer these guy's with careers in the subject have missed, i don't mean that sarcastically either I'm genuinely interested.

Quote
One question I have is, is there any evidence to suggest where the proposed expansion is emanating from within the Universe?

There is no conclusive evidence the universe is expanding. The primary evidence according to the BB model and many other models is the observed galactic redshifts. There is also much evidence to support the assertion that there is a direct correlation between a galaxy's brightness and its redshift. This would mean that we accordingly can calculate galactic distances based upon their observed redshifts. As to determining the expansion of the universe, an assumption must first be made. This assumption is that the redshifts of galaxies are caused by their relative recession velocities away from us and each other. If this assumption is wrong then the observable universe is not necessarily expanding. All of the cosmological models mentioned in the video, along with the Big Bang model, make this same assumption that redshifts indicate a recession velocity and related to the Doppler effect. For my own cosmological model I make a different assumption and otherwise explain galactic redshifts having a different cause, so in my model the observable universe is not expanding.

In the BB model the expansion of the universe is generally associated with the expansion of space. Reasons for this expansion of space seem to be hypothetical since there is no consensus of opinion concerning why space accordingly should expand. In most Steady State models the expansion of the universe is due to the continuous creation of new matter which accordingly would expand the space that encompasses this new-creation process. In the Plasma Cosmology model the universe's expansion is proposed to be created by a continuous matter creation mechanism at the centers of galaxies which result in the creation of both matter and anti-matter which upon their interaction and anti-matter's annihilation, would accordingly cause the expansion of galaxies and ultimately the expansion of the universe.

Is the CRB analysed from the WMAP proof the universe was once condensed or is there other explanations for this?[

Not at all! There is no evidence at all that the universe has ever been more condensed than it presently is. All cosmological models have always asserted that the inter-galactic medium has a temperature to it. This temperature is based upon galactic radiation. Such temperatures have been accurately estimated for more than a hundred years concerning the interstellar medium temperature of our own galaxy. This was also in the video. Some of these estimates are very close to what has been observed concerning the microwave background radiation temperature, what is presently called the CMBR.

Here's two links which give what might be called standard alternative explanations of the observed microwave background radiation.

http://iopscience.io...f/56860.web.pdf
http://www.marmet.or.../mechanisms.pdf