Fons Wils 0302
Currently we presuppose that the universe emerged from a Big Bang, that this Big Bang at a certain time started from a point zero, that this point represents a desequilibrium or a fluctuation in the vacuum, and that from this fluctuation the properties necessary to cause a Big Bang emerged. When we make the calculations of how mach mass there is in the cosmos today, the conclusions of today’s cosmologists is that this (4% radiating matter + 23% dark matter) is what we can see, or at least interpret that it should be there, and that this energy (73% of dark energy has to pull at the universe to expand it.But these are all intrerpretations! Interpretations of what?
In 1925 Hubble discovered a certain law. And in this law he states that if this is our point of view on earth (see blackboard) and this is a galaxy 1, 2, or nr. 20, that light when it comes to us - and we have seen the formula of light - that the frequency of light is going down. That we have a so-called red shift.
Now, there are two explanations for red shift: either light meets supergravitation (along its way), or the source of light is moving away from us. And the faster it moves away from us, the lower the frequency will be, or the bigger the red shift is. In the case of supergravitation inbetween the galaxy and us, there had to be also - and that is what Einstein said - a bending of the light. But when we look at the universe as we see it it is however not diffused. So this means that the light is not always bentding, and which leads us to conclude that the cause of the law of Hubble is not supergravity, but rather that the galaxies are moving away from us. And the further they are away from us the faster they move. And that leas us also to presuppose (the existence of) the Big Bang. So, this means, that when we calculate back, that we arrive at a single point from which everything emerged. That is the reason why we suppose that there was a Big Bang.