Chapter 3 -
Problems with the birth of galaxies and stars
If and when the big bang took place, the next thing to
explain is how the galaxies and stars came into existence.
Usually, it has been thought that after the explosion (in other words
the big bang), hydrogen gas which was created in this explosion spread into
the space. Then the same gas that had spread into the space because of the
explosion suddenly started to condense into galaxies and stars - although in a
slow process. It was possible because of small condensations that are believed
to have evenly existed after the big bang. It has been estimated that this
process of condensation of gas and dust took place over millions of years,
until the current kinds of galaxies and stars were born.
IS THE THEORY
SATISFACTORY?
When thinking about the birth
of galaxies and stars, we may get an impression from some publications that
also this issue has been solved, in the same way as when reading about the big
bang. It has been implied that it is a question of a proven fact that we should
not doubt, only believe. Many people really think that the celestial bodies
came into being in the above-mentioned way.
But is the theory of the birth of galaxies and stars
satisfactory? Is it really a proven fact?
The best people to answer the previous questions are the
scientist themselves: as they have examined the structure and motions of the
universe, they have comments also on this issue. These comments indicate that the
birth of these bodies is still a mystery. The birth of galaxies is deemed
especially problematic:
I do not want to claim that
we really understand the process that created the galaxies. The theory on the
birth of the galaxies is one of the major unsolved problems in astrophysics and
we still seem to be far from the actual solution even today. (Steven Weinberg, Kolme ensimmäistä minuuttia
/ The First Three Minutes, p. 88)
It is almost certainly true
that this is exactly how stars are created from the sparse condensations of gas
between the stars. We can hope that the same would take place in the whole
universe and thus, the formation of galaxies would begin. However, there is a
huge problem here - this does not take place. (…) We need better evidence based
on observations regarding how galaxies and large structures of the universe
were born. At this point, it is not yet possible to make such observations
regarding ordinary galaxies. ( Malcolm S. Longair, Räjähtävä
maailmankaikkeus / The Origins of Our Universe, p. 99,109)
Properties of gas. When studying the
problems with how the galaxies and stars came into being, the first problem is
that if gas has spread into the space as a consequence of the big bang, it is
unlikely that it would suddenly have started to condense into galaxies and
stars: through physics, we know that gas has the characteristic of always
filling up any given space, meaning that it would have continued to spread
further into the outer space. It would have made its way deeper and deeper into
the space, and no orb could have been formed. This would have been impossible,
and all the material should have been evenly spread into the space instead.
Some researchers have tried to solve this
problem by proposing that material condensations and disturbances have taken
place at some point after the big bang. However, there is one major problem
with this idea: nobody has been able to properly explain how the material
condensations were formed.
A major problem, however, is
how did everything come into being? How did the gas from which galaxies were
born initially accumulate to start the birth process of stars and the large
cosmic cycle? (…) Therefore, we must find physical mechanisms that bring about
condensations within the homogenous material of the universe. This seems quite
easy but as a matter of fact leads to problems of a very profound nature.
(Malcolm S. Longair, Räjähtävä maailmankaikkeus / The Origins of Our
Universe, p. 93)
Slim evidence of the birth of
galaxies and stars. As comes to the birth of galaxies and stars, it has
been implied that only enough gas in one place is needed for the galaxies and
stars to come into being by themselves. It has also been suggested that in some
fog clouds, such as in the constellation of Orion, stars are born all the
time.
However, as an answer to the above-mentioned claim one can state
that generally speaking, we cannot be sure whether some fog clouds are
accumulating or dispersing. A person's lifetime is usually not enough to observe
these issues. Therefore, it is possible that when we see a new star, it may
simply be that the said star has been out of sight behind fog clouds all the
time, and is now visible because of the revolving motion of the orbs or because
the fog has settled and exposed it. Therefore, it is not necessary question of
a new star, but the star may merely be "coming into view."
On the other hand, if the birth of galaxies and stars is so
simple, where is the evidence? Since it has been estimated that there are a
hundred billion galaxies in the sky, and a hundred billion stars in each, and
if we divide this by 10 billion (the estimated age of the universe is 10-15
billion years), it would mean that 10 new galaxies and 1,000 billions new
stars would have to be born every year! This huge amount of new stars and
galaxies should be detectable somehow, but why can we not detect it?
Detecting should not
even be difficult, because scientists believe that they can only see the past
of the outer space. Thus, we would only need do look at different distances
between one light year and 10-15 billion light years - so there would be many
alternatives - and we would surely see orbs forming. Why can we not detect
this?
The birth of revolving and
rotary movements is also a mystery. If in the beginning there was only
centrifugal motion caused by the big bang, how could this motion suddenly
change into revolving and rotary movements that can be observed everywhere in
space? In other words, what brought about these new directions of movement,
since no revolving or rotary movement can start unless there is another force
driving it?
Therefore, assuming that the big bang really happened, it would
have caused motion only into one direction, in other words, movement away from the
place where the explosion occurred. No revolving and rotary movement could have
been created: instead, everything would have moved directly away from the
starting point. A good question is, therefore, how these motions have come into
existence, because they could not have been started by themselves: this goes
against all the laws of physics. Why then are these movements found and
observed everywhere in space?