Aireal writes:
"So you do not see any problems with the Big Bang Theory?"
What I see is that you don't believe in using google to provide references. Nor apparently do you have a book on astronomy or physics or a copy of Scientific American, Space and Telescope, or Astronomy magazine. Because if you did you'd have found that you are incorrect.
Has the big bang theory stand up to all experimental challenges? Yes! Is it perfect? Of course not. But a theory is intended to be a map, an analogy, and it is an extremely accurate one.
To claim that it is losing support among astrophysicists who are searching for a replacement is wholesale nonsense. There is a search for minor improvements not a replacement. The theory is remarkably capable of predicting everything down to the level of the most minor fluctuations in the microwave background.
And while we are on the subject my step-daughter just completed her work at ESO:
http://www.macalester.edu/astronomy/courses/physics440/anneandmaggie/wuma.htm And I've good reason to believe she IS a subject matter expert.
In the future please verify your "facts." The job at SAGG of posting psuedoscience has already been filled.
Sorry to be harsh ... but if anyone believed what you wrote you could have found a supporting reference. And if not then you should have just said "Oops" and acknowledged your error.
