Prior to the LGC discovery I took countless hours to study the history of modern cosmology with its ideas in service to my Genesis One interpretation. I took the time to understand all the principles. I can still explain to you their weird ideas starting from their conceptual beginning. I knew the current modern cosmological scientific world was cutthroat: full of greed, ambition, and insane schemes such as burrowing oneself in a pit of the Earth in search for dark matter (see the 4% Universe by Richard Panek). Some of these are baby-men in search for glory. But I took them more or less at their word, thinking they were serving mankind. After all this is science right? I was taught to put my head down and believe what the scientists told me.
Prior to LQG I had shadows of doubt concerning modern cosmology. Subsequent to LQG I had serious doubts about the Big Bang Theory and all of modern cosmology. I thought what variables will they now add to the already bloated equation? I could start to see that they were contradicting themselves, and simply shrugging their shoulders in the wake.
I feel I got played the fool. Now I think they are out of their depth.
Fortunately, I took some time off and now I clearly see that they have built an artifice on false assumptions. Modern cosmology is a string of false assumptions. It uses false assumptions to create laws. The laws are treated as infallible. It uses these laws to explain the incoming data provided by observation. It relies too heavily on math, proofs and prediction.
To a limited degree modern cosmology is a circle which begins and ends with Olber's Paradox: a flawed argument which leads to no conclusion. This unsolvable Paradox was posited by Olber and perhaps others such as Diggs and Kepler.
There are many approaches one can take to Olber's so called Paradox. Olber's Paradox concludes the whole night sky should be lit like the Sun. Little did he know that the whole night sky is lit up only our sensory systems do not detect the light signal even though they stimulate all the atoms of our bodies and all atoms of Earth even the atoms of our T.V. sets. The light signals do not come from the mythical Big-Bang but from all galaxies now in existence.
Olber predicates that the night sky should be lit up on the assumptions that 1. space is boundless, 2. stars are uniformly distributed, and 3. the population of stars extends forever into limitless space, so every possible line of sight (i.e. pixel) in the sky ends on a star.
1. Space is boundless. It lacks shape. It has no substance. It is nothing. It is neither limitless or limited. God did not create it. It is purely conceptual. Olber was right in this assumption. Unfortunately, modern cosmology has posited that space is a mystical substance which can behave and produce concepts as well as real objects. It also has the universe posited as an object with shape when in fact it is a conceptual system relating space and matter. This has led it to countless errors in interpreting data. And it has helped lead to an arrogant explanation of the universe.
2. Stars are uniformly distributed. Olber lived prior to the discovery of galaxies. He did not realize that stars are not uniformly distributed since he had no concept of a galaxy or a clustered group of 73 quasars. God shaped the matter he created asymmetrically. There is no such thing as an isotropic, homogeneous universe. The Copernican principle is outdated. The law of universality has failed. There are so called preferred directions as in the case of LGC. A center of the universe is irrelevant since the universe is a concept.
3. The population of stars extends forever. This argument implies that matter is infinite. Any Jew or Christian knows that matter is not infinite. Any philosopher worth his weight knows that matter cannot be infinite otherwise there would be one block of continuous matter.
Olber's Paradox is ridiculous. The fact that modern cosmology is in part built on solving this paradox (as well as innumerable other things) leaves me no choice but to abandon the model of modern cosmology embodied by the Big-Bang. They have built an artifice, a wondrous dream. The Big-Bang is NOT a part of science, it falls in the category of myth.
Modern cosmology's failure to rethink their fundamentals has led them to some ridiculous concepts such as an accelerating universe, dark matter, dark energy, inflation, Big-Bang shock waves, oscillating plasma coupled to photons, and a 0D mathematical singularity which is the god behind it all. The next step is that this 0D singularity cycled out of the death of a prior universe. A prior universe which compressed into a dot much smaller than an atom! At least the person who made up this idea thinks that this universe had to come from some other source! It is counter intuitive to think a 0D singularity could produce things. God simply makes a knowing choice. There is no trace of this choice other than the teachings of Divine Revelation. One could reason to the truth that there is a God and that God created all things, but one cannot scientifically predict, prove or compute this choice. One cannot mathematically compute, prove or predict the miracle of the beginning of matter.
To put things into a Christian perspective could anyone imagine Jesus teaching these things? It is a tradition that he taught astronomy in the Temple when he was twelve. Do you think he taught an expanding universe, a 0D singularity, dark matter, dark energy, etc.? I could envision myself explaining DNA or cells to an ancient Jew or Christian but if I tried explaining to them a primeval mathematical singularity which produces galaxies I rather think they would laugh. The so called father of the Big Bang, the priest George Lemaitre was out of his Catholic mind.
To frame my Genesis One interpretation I will posit my own cosmological model:
Prior to the existence of atoms I AM: God.
God makes a knowing choice
All atoms which ever were miraculously appear interconnected to all other atoms via intertwined 3D threads intrinsic to the atoms.
The atomic threads have unique properties consistent with light phenomenon.
Twined threads mediate light, gravity, magnetism, electricity from all atoms to all other atoms.
The threads separate at the atomic shells forming the electrons and protons.
The atoms and EM ropes are the two fundamental units of matter.
There are no discrete particles. At the fundamental level there is only a network of atoms.
The atoms are finite.
The atoms neither increase or decrease. They simply recycle through structure development.
Space is a conceptual nothing which can only be discovered or thought of with the presence of atoms.
The atoms arrive stimulated and shape into structures.
In the process atoms are configured into the elements and molecules.
New structures spring up from the dissolution of old structures.
The universe is a conceptual system relating space and matter.
The only way to determine the age of the universe is to determine the age of the first atoms which miraculously appear.
This is impossible.
Atoms could be trillions of years old and they will last forever.
Subsequent to their miraculous appearance the atoms are eternal.
At the consummation; the fire will dissolve all the structures with elements to the most simple form of the atoms (see Saint Peter's prediction 2 Pet 3:10-12).
Beyond the dissolution God will miraculously shape the atoms
into new stars, galaxies and a New Earth. These will be made of new elements.
Science cannot predict the age of the universe.
And science cannot prove or predict that God created all things and that God will make all things new. These are empirical matters out of science's depth. These are matters of faith and this is why we proclaim we believe in God the Creator at the beginning of our Creeds.
Lemaitre resented Pope Pius XII for adopting his primeval atom idea to validate the Catholic Faith and Creation. He was right to do this. Faith and science can support one another but the beginning of the universe is out of science's depth to discover, prove, predict, compute, demonstrate, observe, etc. The beginning can only be discovered through faith and reason. It was a miracle. And the beginning can only be explained using a mingling of theology, philosophy and physics. Science has been arrogant in trying to predict and compute the age of the universe and to describe the beginning before it has figured out light, gravity, the structure of an atom, magnetism and electricity.
The Genesis One narrative begins with the Earth at some phase of her development.