Big Bang, Little Bang

Fig. 1 WMAP map of Cosmic Microwave Background

Fig. 1 WMAP map of Cosmic Microwave Background

Big Bang

Hundreds of cosmologists have been studying what is called the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), thought to be the glow from the first light in the universe, a backgound of the entire sky in the form of a near-perfect black-body curve (Physics 101) now red-shifted to a temperature of 2.7255 Kelvins.  Superimposed on this microwave sky they have detected small temperature anisotropies (defined as ΔT/T, which are 0.001 % (mK) or smaller) across the entire sky (Figure 1.), These small angular anisotropies are averaged over the entire sky, in the form of an angular power spectrum, each peak of which has supposedly been linked to a number of cosmological parameters, such as the Hubble Constant, the age of the universe and the mass of normal matter, the most controversial of which is a sudden hyper-fast expansion of the universe just after the Big Bang, called Inflation.  Several cycles (Fig. 2) have been linked to the effects of dark matter and dark energy, but only based on their ‘observed’ actions – clumping and uniform expansion, respectively. Unfortunately science is not even close to determining the true nature of these ‘dark things’.

Fig. 2 Angular power spectrum of Plank CMB map

Fig. 2 Angular power spectrum of Plank CMB map

WMAP and Planck satellites have produced what are published as amazing results shown in Figure 2.  This is the power spectrum of the small angle anisotropies, i.e. the angular sizes of the spots in the sky map in Figure 1.

The Solar System?

Fascinated as they have been in the analyses of these huge data sets, cosmologists have had little interest in the solar system, but recently, other analyses of the CMB data sets have revealed a number of unexpected alignments of large scale anisotropies with the solar system.  This is popularly described as a violation of the ‘Copernican Principle’, that the Earth has no special place in the universe, but this is not strictly true because Copernicus actually claimed that the Earth revolved around the Sun, which is obviously the center of the solar system. Regardless, the quantative investigation of the CMB is based on the assumption, the cosmological principle, that observations made from Earth can be taken to be generally characteristic of what would be seen from any other point in the Universe at the same epoch.


Fig. 3 Quadrupole & Octupole alignments with Solar System

Fig. 3 Quadrupole & Octupole alignments with Solar System

Figure 3 graphically illustrates these troubling alignments with the solar system.  This is not a plot of the actual sky, it is the result of fitting spherical-harmonic-like functions to the data, which reveal hidden ‘multipoles’, e.g. the dipole, the quadrupole and octupoles, The dipole, thought to be the result of the motion of the Earth relative to the ‘universe’ i.e. the measured CMB, has been removed.  Its direction is indicated at the lower left in Figure 3, in which the plane of the ecliptic is the solid line.  The affect of these multipole alignments in Figure 3 shows up as the irregular points in the power spectrum, the shaded area at the lowest l values (largest angles) in Figure 2.

The Axis of Evil

Specifically, the suspect alignments in Figure 3 are: (a) the quadrupole and octupole  are close to one another; (b) they are orthogonal to the ecliptic plane; (c) the normals to the four planes defining the quadrupole (1) and octupole (3) are aligned with the dipole (direction of motion of the Earth) and with the equinox; (d) the ecliptic threads between a hot and a cold spot separating three strong extrema from three weak ones.  From a cosmological perspective, the probabilities that all these alignments could occur is estimated at 0.008% !  These highly improbable alignments have been dubbed “the axis of evil”.

The most obvious implication of these alignments is that a highly energetic event occurred in the solar system in the recent past, and a small amount of the radiated energy is being reflected by ‘local’ dust in the  galaxy. This energy would obscure the true Cosmic Microwave Background, if it exists.  Cosmologists refer to this as a ‘foreground’ event, meaning that its effect lies between the Earth and the CMB. Based on the consistency of the power spectrum resulting from the small anisotropies (< 1 degree) shown in Figure 2, the reflected foreground energy would be expected to be relatively uniform over a broad area but not necessarily over the entire sky, thereby affecting only the large angle portion of the spectrum.  However, in the last decade no cosmologist has suggested a theory of what could have caused such an event .

The Standard Model of the Solar System

One obvious reason for this lack of theories, is that the ‘standard model’ of the solar system accepted today, uniformitarianism, holds that the solar system has been in its current configuration for 4.6 billion years. This paradigm obviously discounts any solar system event of the magnitude required to affect the large scale CMB anisotropies. In contrast to this unprovable assumption that ‘nothing has happened’, cyclic catastrophism, the subject of this blog, is based on ancient texts in every library in the world which, when taken at face value, are observations of cosmic events easily interpreted in terms of modern astrophysics and geophysics. As confident as cosmologists are of being able to look back in time via red shifts and general relativity, their tools focus on extremely distant events, while the differential equations currently used for short-term predictions of the positions of planets in the solar system are of no use in discovering past instances of catastrophic events involving high energy dissipation.

The Little Bang

The 3,000 year period of Cyclic Catastrophism was triggered by an explosive impact on the highly deuterated Jupiter about 6,000 years BP, so powerful that it caused the entire Earth to ‘cry out’, termed herein the Little Bang.  Proto-Venus, born from this great impact became the physical agent by which this enormous energy propagated into the inner solar system.  At that date the solar system comprised only two living planets, Earth and Mars, the latter in a Venus-like orbit inside that of the Earth. The magnitude of the proposed impact explosion on Jupiter suggests that: (a) Jupiter is a low average density, solid planet and; (b) The terrestrial planets were each created by unique high energy impacts on Jupiter and therefore have unique ages. The application of straight-forward astrophysical/geophysical concepts leads to the conclusion that Jupiter and Saturn are giant, solid, frozen, incompressible Methane Gas Hydrate (MGH) planets. These formed cold over 50 to 75 million years by the initial sticking together (‘accretion’) of snowflakes, which formed on the surfaces of dust particles at the radius of Jupiter. In this cosmogony the giant planets comprised the original solar system.

Jupiter Saturn Interior

As suggested by Jupiter’s average density, 1.33, compared to Saturn’s, 0.7, (the density of pure MGH), Jupiter incorporated almost the entire complement of heavy elements in the nascent solar system as it accreted. The currently accepted ‘gas giant’ hypothesis, that Jupiter and Saturn, known to account for 92% of the mass of the planets, comprise primarily H and He, is in direct opposition to the theoretical (published) elemental abundance of the solar system based on stellar nucleogenesis, which demands that oxygen and carbon are the third and fourth most abundant elements. MGH, comprising primarily water and methane molecules, is consistent with these abundances, as is the continued presence of methane gas in their atmospheres, which is continually being released by fusion reactions in the impact crater. Methane Gas Hydrates are common on Earth in niches where high pressure, low temperature and methane are present, consistent with the proposed conditions within the giant planets in the outer solar system. The known clathrate structure of MGH comprises rigid cells of twelve or more water molecules, each encapsulating a methane molecule or other foreign atoms/molecules.

The cosmological implications of the Little Bang  are primarily stated in the Rig Veda and Greek myth. The Rig Veda states that Aditi (proto-Venus) was born from Dyauspitar, the Heaven Father (Jupiter). Greek myth states that Jupiter had such a bad headache that he asked his son Hephaestus to split open his head to release Athena (Venus). The portion of the blast that did not escape Jupiter’s gravity was described as an elephant (mrttnda). This was a description of a huge jet of hot gases resembling an elephant trunk, that shot several million km from the impact site, gradually diminishing over some six millenia. It was said to repeatedly appear and disappear. This was due to the rotation of Jupiter bringing the jet alternately into and out of view.  Even more significant, Greek myth suggests the enormous magnitude of this explosion in unique astrophysical terms: “When Pallas Athene (Young Athena or proto-Venus) was born, the earth round about cried fearfully” – implying that the entire Earth reacted to a gravitational impulse initiated by the impact at a distance > 4 AU, over half an hour later, if gravitational radiation travels at the speed of light. This would have ensured that everyone on Earth at the time would have seen the event.

Fusion-Boosted Impact on Jupiter
The further application of astrophysics to these observations and others (see below), suggests that high kinetic energy impacts on Jupiter momentarily raise local surface temperatures to several 100 million K, triggering enormous nuclear fusion explosions, exponentially magnifying the impact energy beyond any currently conceivable level and thereby have created the terrestrial planets. The fusion explosions are fueled by the enormous compression of already densely packed H, D (p-p), C, N, and O in the form of water, methane and ammonia molecules at the impact site.  in the fusion has been maintained in the crater by the high atmospheric pressure at depths > 600 km below the cloud-tops. The NASA Galileo probe only plunged some 100 miles into Jupiter’s atmosphere and was crushed by the 23 earth-atmosphere pressure.  Since atmospheric pressure increases exponentially with depth, the pressure at the solid surface today is thousands of times greater.  However, this is primarily the result of heavy elements that have been ejected from the Methane Gas Hydrate body of the planet by the continuing nuclear burning. So the burning in the crater is aiding in its own confinement. The Galileo probe did not report a significant enrichment of deuterium in the atmosphere of Jupiter because it is being consumed in the nuclear furnace, however the Rosetta probe has reported a three fold concentration, compared to the Earth, in 67P Churyumov-Gerasimenko, which was blasted from Jupiter in the last 6,000 years.

Fig. 4 A 9th century AD drawing of the planets, with Jupiter and plume at upper left.

Fig. 4 A 9th century AD drawing of the planets, with Jupiter and plume at upper left.

Reinforcing the enormous power and uniqueness of the ‘recent’ impact on Jupiter, a combination of ancient and modern observations further suggest that a significant source of energy, initiated by the primary impact event, is still manifest on Jupiter, indeed, it is the source of every feature of the giant planet to this day. The impact explosion initiated a continuing fusion conflagration in the crater manifested as a great jet of hot gases which continued to shoot millions of km into space, only gradually diminishing over some six millennia. Evidence of the magnitude and longevity of the jet comes in the form of a drawing of the planet Jupiter, the upper left figure in an Arabic epistle dated around the 9th century AD. The purpose of which was to classify comets, given clear planetary charasteristics (1).  The upper left hand figure in annotated ‘bearded’ ‘having the temperment of Jupiter’  The other drawings illustrate the appearances of the other planets, all of which appear to show the lasting effects of cyclic catastriphism, having ended only 1,600 years prior. This epistle, incidentally, suggests that the reknown Arabic culture of Baghdad at that date had astronomical telescopes (Figure 4).

Potential Effect of the Jupiter Explosion on the CMB

The initial orbit of proto-Venus,which rebounded from Jupiter into the inner solar system implies that the impacting body passed through the system and impacted the Sun-facing side of Jupiter instantaneously releasing > 10³³ joules, the binding energy of the Earth. The resulting explosion created a gravitational/heat wave with origin at the impact point 6,000 years BP. The alignment of the quadrupole and octopole moments normal to the kinetic vector suggests that the impact blast was oriented close to the direction of motion of the solar system, indeed, this may have been a factor in the relative velocity of the impacting (galactic?) body. The jet, marked by the location of the Great Red Spot at 22 degrees south latitude is consistent with the greater heat of the measured CMB in the southern ecliptic hemisphere, but the instantaneous expanding gravitational/heat wave would probably been directed opposite to the velocity of the impactor, that is, close to the kinetic vector, the direction of solar system motion relative to the Universe. It would probably not have expanded the the opposite direction, due to the absorption of the wave in that direction by the body of Jupiter. The primary effect of the gravitational/radiation wave in the CMB data measured today would be the heat reflected from cosmic dust, an additive foreground surface, ~ 3000 light years distant with a dipole distribution close to but not exactly aligned with the kinetic vector. Such a large-scale asymmetry might effect the large angle values of many points and thereby influence the power spectrum at low-l values.


The measured dipole temperature anisotropy is currently attributed to the motion of the Earth relative to the CMB radiation, and is thought to produce both an aberration and a modulation, a ‘boosting’ of the CMB temperature anisotropies in the direction of motion. The process of correcting for this slight temperature increase in the direction of motion is called ‘deboosting’. The exact direction of the temperature boost is considered well established over some 30 years, and has been ‘confirmed’ based on the full sky data sets WMAP and Planck (Planck 2013 results. XXVII. Doppler boosting of the CMB: Eppur si muove). However, any foreground effect from the Jupiter explosion, has been present for six millennia.

Assuming the temperature and direction of the proposed blast from the impact on Jupiter was oriented close to, but not exactly aligned with, the kinematic vector, it could be causing an error in the exact direction of β‖ , the CMB dipole direction used for the deboosting correction. Indeed it is the ‘boosting’ paper cited above (XXVII), which states in Section 7. Conclusions: “tests with component separated maps shown in Figure 5. provide a strong indication that our 217 GHz map has slight residual foreground contamination.”

Indeed, the slightly larger ΔH/H currently interpreted as the kinetic vector, may be due to the direction of the expanding wave from the explosion on Jupiter. Although the impact site is marked by the location of the Great Red Spot at 22 ° S. Lat., the direction of the initial blast would have been in the opposite direction from the impactor velocity vector .

NASA Juno Probe Will Confirm Jupiter Explosion

In 2016 Juno will enter a highly eccentric polar orbit which passes between Jupiter’s cloud-tops and its radiation belts around perigee to study its gravitational and radiation fields during 33 orbits as the planet rotates. The coverage of the entire planet will take about a year. The gravity system is designed to use Doppler changes in the probe’s transmissions to determine Jupiter’s internal structure – currently imagined to comprise hydrogen and helium with a ~ 25 earth-mass core deep inside the planet. If, as proposed herein, Jupiter instead comprises a solid frozen methane gas hydrate surface some 600 km below the cloud-tops, three enormous craters associated with the creations of Mars (4.6 by), Earth (3.9 by) and proto-Venus (6,000 y) BP, should be sensed. Although the ancient craters, from the creation of Mars and Earth, may be partially filled with water – the ultimate product of melted MGH, the still active proto-Venus crater will certainly be detected by this experiment at 22 degrees south latitude, some 5,000 km to the east of the Great Red Spot, due to Jupiter’s rapid rotation. Juno also carries a number of microwave radiometer channels to study emissions from different depths in the putative gaseous interior. Several of these channels should detect strong emissions from the fusion furnace coincident with the location of the Venus crater and perhaps the rising plume.

Although some cosmologists might look forward to the Juno data as corroboration of a potential foreground source which is masking large scale CMB anisotropies, a very real possibility exists that, if the ‘ludicrous’ predictions proposed herein are indeed observed, they will be ‘interpreted’ by the Juno team as instrument malfunctions, and discarded. Since both disciplines, essentially all of academia, hold strong ‘evolutionist’ and elitist views not readily or frankly communicated to the public, there remains a strong possibility that the predicted features on Jupiter will be declared irrelevant, or even consistent with the current ‘standard model’ of the solar system.

This is exactly what occurred with the Pioneer Venus (PV) mission, in which radiometer data from all four probes and the orbiter showed that Venus radiates (on both day and night sides) an amazing 20 W/m2 more than it receives from the Sun. However, twenty-six years later the standard (Pollack) model remains that the high surface temperature, 872 F (467 C), is due to a greenhouse effect supplemented by an undefined ‘global dynamics’ – which incidentally constitutes a primary scientific support of the ‘global warming’ scare on Earth.


There are more things in Heaven and Earth than are dreamed of in your philosophy, Horatio.

William Shakespeare

In theory, theory and practice are the same.  In practice, they are not.    Albert Einstein

Eppur Si muove  “And yet it moves.”  Galileo, after being forced to recant his idea that the Eareth moves around the Sun



~ by Angiras on August 27, 2014.

2 Responses to “Big Bang, Little Bang”

  1. Thanks

  2. Very interesting. I’ll post a link on the forum.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: