Having been a student of physics for many years, specifically in the arena of sub atomic particles, I find the big bang theory absurd. For this event to have occured, the sheer mass of the 'exploding' particle(s) would have to be so large even Galeleo would have been able to look back through time and see it in his crude lens. Granted, the actions of black holes and collapsed stars can reduce the mass of matter - to an extent. But I cannot logically take the existing big bang theory at face value due to the sheer volume of matter (visible and dark) calculated to exist in this universe.I am postulating a more realistic theory. Nearly anyone with an average intellect understands the equasion E=mc2 Simply enough, the equation of energy to matter. But what if the process were reversed? The slowing down of energy perhaps through distance traveled or another effect, would begin the creation of matter. At first the particles would be as small or smaller than perhaps a muon. Over time, through accretion, particles would begin to amass, eventually creating the diversity in the universe as we witness it. I seriously propose that the beginning of our world is not a particle explosion but is a continous stream of energy being fed into this void from another source, perhaps a grander universe, or perhaps from the flip side of a giant black hole. The source of this energy is not the point of this speculation but fodder for additional thought. The breakdown of this stream and the constant production of matter would most certainly become complicated with time to create the chaos of the universe as we see it today. This line of thought might also explain the fact of this being an expanding universe. In addition, there is no reason to believe this energy stream flows at a constant speed - it could possibly be fluctuating. Please think this out and reply with constructive criticism.
