Why the Big-Bang-Theory explains little.

Please Note;

Exciting new science has allowed me to greatly advance this model. All pages will be undated in the near future to coincide with the recent release of the new book, ‘Solving the Unknown Universe’.  


The Big Bang Theory:

The Big-Bang is today commonly accepted by science as the most probable beginning to the universe.

An artist’s concept of the expansion of the universe (NASA / WMAP Science Team).

We really are very fortunate to have the many Scientists who are forever expanding our knowledge and enlightening us all on the many subjects dealing with the amazing mysteries of the night skies. I in truth have only the greatest admiration for these dedicated Scientists. I purchase their books, they are the gurus who have enabled me to so easy ‘click’ on my computer, and gain access to the latest science and knowledge available in these most fascinating subjects. I am indeed indebted to these Scientists. 

Today there are many mysteries hidden within the mystic of theoretical physics, mysteries which are apparently not possible to be rationally revealed to our local world of realism.  

Nevertheless, theoretical physics is indeed a valuable and powerful tool used to explain many of the mechanisms at play within our universe. Science spends many billions of dollars building an array of telescopes, space craft and machines in an endeavor to ‘see’ if their equations are correct. Scientists of course, do not expect to see their equations written in some faraway place deep within space. They hope to observe the universe in a way which matches their mathematical equations. Often, observations do not match mathematical equations, for example, the science of the Big-Bang told scientists that by now 13.7 billion years after the Big-Bang that the expansion of the universe must by now be slowing due to the effect of Gravity.

When science built telescopes which could observe very distant supernovae within far away Galaxies, science discovered that the expansion of the universe was not slowing like their mathematical equations predicted, it was in fact speeding up. Although this came as a totally unexpected surprise this is not bad science; it is the way good science works, where the confirmation is always in the observation. The science, the ideas and the models must in the end match with what is observed, and then ideally, what is observed can be explained in plain words, and in a rational manner in which we all can appreciate. One may say the proof is in the observation and the observation is the evidence. 

The Big-Bang itself, Dark-matter, Dark-energy, Galaxy formation and even the actual source of Gravity all harbor deep mysteries which nobody, including those in science and physics, has been able to unravel and make correlated, rational sense of. The following Big-Stretch model will make use of rational and coherent methods which are able to mirror the ramifications of complex scientific theories to sensibly configure a universe to act as one fully correlated, rational entity which endeavours to match closely with what is observed.


A good theory or model should fully explain the workings of the universe and all of its contents. The Big-Bang-Theory is really a poor theory because it explains scantily little. Today the Big-Bang concept is well over half a century old and science is still unable to explain nearly all of the contents of the universe by way of a Big-Bang. The concept has been unable to explain neither the source of Dark-matter, Dark-energy nor the source of energy which transformed into ordinary Matter.

The Big-Bang-Theory has no explanation for its initial state, it was just ‘there’ at the very beginning. Almost bazaar and truly mind-boggling is that just one moment of time before the Big-Bang there was absolutely zero dimensional nothingness. Actually, one cannot even say “one moment there was nothing and the next moment there was an instant Big-Bang universe” because it is said that there was not even one moment of time or space before the Big-Bang. It is truly unsound to believe there was absolutely nothingness and then for absolutely no reason ‘nothingness’ exploded.

Nothing it seems could have actually caused the Big-Bang. The Big-Bang was like the most astonishing magic trick of all time, similar to ‘Abracadabra’, and a whole universe appeared from absolute, unconditional, non-dimensional, timeless, nothingness. The Big-Bang apparently appeared like a flash from the super-natural and in less than one astounding second there was our expanding universe complete with all matter for all time.

Implausible as an event like this may appear, the Big-Bang is now commonly accepted by science as the most probable beginning to the universe. Corresponding science and associated satellite observations have helped confirm many aspects of the Big-Bang-Theory to be correct. By surviving numerous attacks, the Big-Bang-Theory has surfaced as being the best overall fit to what is observed.

Why is the Big-Bang-Theory actually a poor theory?  

The truth is, there are far too many fundamental observations which the Science of the Big-Bang-Theory cannot explain. For example, every day we all observe Gravity holding us all to the ground, however the very source of Gravity has never been explainable by way of a Big-Bang. Gravity may never be explainable within a Big-Bang universe. As one reads on, one will find that the very source of Gravity can be fully and fairly simply explained, but to do so one will be required to accept a more rational and coherent concept than a instant Big-Bang universe. 

Just a few parts of a second into the life of the Big-Bang universe, an impossible to explain form of energy, from an impossible to explain source, transforms into mandatory equal parts of Matter and Anti-matter. The Big-Bang universe is less than a full second old and it already has a major problem because all the laws of physics say that all Matter and Anti-matter must now, indisputably, completely annihilate each other. The obvious dilemma for obeying this stringent law of physics is that there would be no Matter (no you or me) in the universe today. Consequently there truly should be no Matter within today’s Big-Bang universe.

There is Matter in the universe today so where is all of the ‘missing’ Anti-matter which must mirror all of the matter within the universe?

The Big-Bang-Theory cannot explain why massless particles mostly defy Gravity and speed away at the speed of light while a particle-of-matter falls to the ground with Gravity.

The Big-Bang-Theory has no source for Dark-matter and consequently science today cannot explain what Dark-matter is even though Dark-matter is said to make up 24% of the contents of the universe. Our Big-Stretch Model will actually explain the exact source of Dark-matter. It is known that there are vast amounts of these dark ‘particles’ because of the gravitational effect they have within Galaxies. Despite decades of research, very little is known about the makeup of Dark-matter other than it looks and acts like invisible nothingness and it possesses Gravity.

Another of the numerous unsolvable and crucial ramifications of beginning with an unsolvable event like the Big-Bang is that the formation of Galaxies cannot be explained in a way to match the observed age and momentum of stars within the many different regions of different types of Galaxies. Nor has it been possible to explain how halos of Dark-matter formed to be in place at precisely the right time to provide a gravitational scaffolding to begin Galaxy formation.   

Pie Chart of the contents of Today’s Universe:

A good theory should be able to explain all of the contents of this pie chart. 

Alarmingly, nearly all of the contents of our universe cannot be explained by way of a Big-Bang.

One can plainly see that the Big-Bang-Theory explains very little, which is why science today will readily admit, that almost all of the contents of the universe are not possible to explain with their current beliefs. The Big-Bang-Theory cannot explain Dark-energy or Dark-matter, only partly explaining the remaining 4.6% made of Atoms (ordinary Matter). This Matter transformed from an unknown type of energy which is said to have come from a mysterious, true-nonexistence source. This truly leaves nought contents of the universe, which origins can be fully explained with the current ways of thinking. 

The Big Bang theory is said to explain the properties of our home universe but one can plainly see it explains very little. There have been many proposed alternatives to the Big-Bang, but like the Big-Bang, none have explained the very basic fundamentals such as the source of Gravity, Dark-matter, Dark-energy or the true source of energy which transforms into matter.  

It is so truly alarming that the Big-Bang cannot explain the exact source of Gravity. Gravity could well be termed as being the very lifeblood of our universe, for without Gravity there could be no Galaxies, Stars or Planets and even the very atoms which we are all made from would not have ever existed. 

The simplistic thinking of extrapolating the observed expansion of the universe backwards to the point where Matter transformed from energy has led Science to insurmountable problems. Science soon realized that they had a very real dilemma for just a few parts of a second into the life of the Big-Bang universe, energy is required to transform into mandatory equal parts of Matter and Anti-matter.

Now, at less than a full second old, the Big-Bang universe really has a major problem, because all the laws of physics say that all Anti-matter and Matter must at this time, indisputably, completely annihilate each other. The obvious dilemma for obeying this mandatory law of physics is that there would be no Matter in the universe today. This may have (really should have because the laws of physics say so) told science that the universe could not have began with a Big-Bang, instead, science decided the best approach was to use the magic of mathematics to allow this 100% wrong assumption to become a 100% correct sum, here’s how;

In an attempt to solve this conundrum science has agreed to begin with a super, massive 1000,000,000 times more energy than what is required to account for all of the matter in the universe then allow Anti-matter to annihilate all Matter but for one part in a billion. Now the sum is 99.9999999 % correct which my computer auto rounds off to 100%.

However, the laws of physics do not allow for even this tiny imbalance, to which Science has to date failed to discover an appropriate solution. 

The reality is that Science has not solved this problem at all because whichever way one fiddles with these sums this debt of missing Anti-matter is very large because the debt of missing Anti-matter will always, in some way or another, mirror all of the Matter in the whole universe. The only true solution to this problem is that this missing Anti-matter is in fact somewhere, but as many have already asked, where could it be?

But there is more:

In an attempt to explain why Galaxies are now observed to be accelerating away, science, has attempted to add a new force or energy to the universe. Inserted by science, this colossal, totally mystifying form of energy called Dark-energy is said to now make up a massive 71.4% of the mass/energy of the whole universe. I say “Inserted by science” because, other than within mathematical equations designed for a hypothesized proposal, no one has any idea of where this overwhelming Dark-energy came from, how to detect it or even what it is. Our Big-Stretch universe will not require such a bewildering, impossible to explain form of energy. 

So where did the Big-Bang with all of its energy come from?

Science says there is no ‘outside’ of our Big-Bang universe of Space and time, how can this be?

How did numerous Super-Massive-Black-Holes form so very early in the universe?

Why can’t the Graviton be explained? It is said that all theories containing gravitons suffer from severe problems and so far there is no experimental evidence supporting their existence so what could possibly be at the very source of Gravity?

What other process could have possibly given Particles-of-Matter the property of Gravity?

How is it possible for ‘particles’ to display themselves as ‘waves’ and instantly become particles if simply observed?

How can one rationally explain the mystic of time dilation?

Despite decades of almost continuous attempts by many of the greatest minds in science, why has science been unable to merge the successful theories of Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity and General Relativity? 

I asked myself; is there a possible way to piece together all known and proven Science as well as the known and observed contents of our universe without having these troublesome mysteries?


The contents of this web page are the intellectual property of Richard. S. Freeman. You may not reproduce, translate, edit, publish, distribute, or host this document in any way without the permission of the Author, Richard Freeman.