Posted: Nov 18, 2019 9:29 am
by Scott Mayers
@ Macdoc

I find the utility of asserting the CMBR as sufficient to prove the Big Bang over the (or any) Steady State model lacking conclusion. That is, many take the radiation as meaning it IS proof of a 'hot' origin, whereas the Steady State simply "lacked" an explanation.

I am begging others to expand upon this as it only raises more questions than answers.

First off, we cannot actually reach 0 Kelvin. As such, it is reasonable that the ambient temperature in the dark regions of space SHOULD be of a temperature slightly above 0 K regardless. For us to even see through space, requires each point in space to have at least the energy of at least light from any perspective around such points.

One technical aspect of this regards the spectra of energy of this energy as being a 'black body'.

Given you just posted this as though it obviously speaks for itself to you, can you defend the progress of the evidence that leads to the unique conclusion that the phenomena is actually representing a hot origin personally? Or are you just trusting the scientific authority without actually knowing?

I'm asking anyone finding faith in this to clarify their own trust of this. Other prior logical issues regarding expansion also needs to be addressed but this particular observation is uniquely claimed as "driving the nail in the coffin of the Steady State Model".

Thank you.