This brief introduction to the COI universe model focuses on the key assumptions underpinning the model. The aim is to stress the underlying simplicity and to break the model down to three fundamental steps. For each step I show the evidence that confirms these steps and note where more evidence is needed. The issues that radically challenge existing world views are stated clearly because this model will be challenged, and you need to differentiate who is complaining about the maths and physics from those who are unhappy with the impact on their world view.
| Created: 2016/08/28. Updated: 2021/02/05. |
The COI concept was initially floated in my book “Page 1: God’s Timetable” as appendix C4 because I first saw the applicability of the model as I was rounding off the book. That was in 2014. Many of the articles in this COI Overview were developed in the following months to show Biblical consistency and highlight how the physics behind the model worked. All this work was based on what the COI process might be able do ‘in principle’; there was as yet no real physics. Then, in late 2015, I decided that if the universe unfolded as proposed, it would leave a distinctive gravitational signature on the universe. I spent the next two (then another 2) years developing a simulator to predict the evolution of the gravitational field of the COI universe. Beyond anything I ever expected, the simulation was not only accurate, but explained many dilemmas in astronomical observations. This simulation confirms the maths and physics behind Part 1. Part 2 is not proven in any way, but gives exciting conjecture hinting at how the universe structure may have been formed.
First we need to build a universe. There are at least 3 ways to imagine this...
The above options are explained in detail in WTB section 2.1. I need to stress that I don’t know how the initial mass distribution established itself. The goal is to demonstrate that the COI process subsequently establishes the universe that we observe today. However, if you ask an astrophysicist about the ‘visible universe’, namely the universe we can see, I’m pretty sure he will describe a sphere of radius 13.8 Gly in radius, and it looks pretty much the same in every direction. They might tell you what they assume is outside this sphere, but in reality they can see nothing. Basically, this means that they cannot falsify my proposed initial state. Though the appearance of matter seems weird, the BBM has a lot of its own problems in this area, and it does not explain redshift nearly so well.
The outward gravitational force accelerates all galaxies outwards. It turns out that near range galaxies get a linearly increasing recession velocity with distance from the centre. This gives the linearly increasing Doppler redshift observed in nearby galaxies. The far range gravitational force creates a gravitational redshift, and guess what? When you combine the two redshift sources, you get exactly what we observe. Hubble’s observation of increasing redshift of star-light with increasing distance is satisfied. It is even surpassed, because several problems with peculiar redshifts are also explained. Frankly, this is a triumph.
Well, that is the short story. But there are literally dozens of other galactic observations other than just redshift which this model explains. (See COI Feature summary.) Some of these observations are better labelled as dilemmas, but they can be easily explained under the COI model without needing peculiar, dark stuff. And that folks is just Part 1.
When we look out into the universe we see galaxies and clusters of galaxies spread out like filaments around vast voids. It has been likened to bubbles on water. For the COI model, this is probably a natural consequence of a simple process. For the Big Bang theory it is a show-stopper. For images, try a web search for “distribution of matter, universe, bubbles, voids”. A good example is “The Large Scale Organization of Galaxies in Space” at https://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSci102/NatSci102/lectures/galaxydist.htm or https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Sparke/Figures/figure7_3.jpeg.
In Part 1, I hesitated to describe how the initial mass of the universe appeared because one way or another it breaks the Laws of Physics. I also did not want debatable things to draw attention away from the elegance with which the COI model explained existing observations. The BBM makes its predictions but even they are rather suspicious. But for sure no one has any (good) ideas about how the bubbly nature of the universe appeared. How do voids and clusters, walls and filaments develop. How do galaxies evolve?
The BBM seems to fall back on random accretion processes that are not convincing. But you guessed it folks — the COI model has some hints. Chapter 8 of WTB explores how the initial surge of gravitation might contribute to the structure just the way a tsunami wave gathers things up. Chapter 9 of WTB literally pictures a contracting film around the universe that might contribute to structure. I just floated these ideas hoping that someone else with different experiences will find some applicability. The important point is that the COI process gives us this event at the start of time to help explain what we see. That event has now expired, but perhaps we can reconstruct it. Notice how many emphasis marks I put on uncertainties here. Part 1 used real physics. Please don’t let the conjecture of Part 2 detract from the reality of Part 1.
Finally Chapter 10 of WTB focuses on galactic structure and features. The lessons from fluid flow inspire some new proposals.
Essential clarification: The redshift predictions in Part 1 have been mathematically calculated and are predicted by the experimentally proven laws of physics. Physical observations confirm the predictions. All that is tremendous support for the initial assumption of an outside-in process. However, the proposals in Part 2 remain speculative. Please don’t get confused and assume that Part 2 is ‘proven’. None-the-less, man seeks to know how things came to be. It is in our nature to seek these answers, and the outside in process has opened up a new way to look at things. As the first to prove the COI process works, I simply get to be first to speculate how the whole thing may have unfolded. Whether or not we can discover such details, I will always give glory to God who created all things; ordaining the laws of physics so that the universe would unfold just as it has. And for what little my opinion counts, I think He has given man wisdom to comprehend this process so that we can glimpse His majesty.
Eventually you are going to ask the question, “How long has it been since our galaxy materialised?” This ‘time since creation’ or the Age of a galaxy, is a key factor in the equations. It’s like asking how long after a galaxy materialised were the photons we see today emitted. It has taken over four years to develop the COI simulator to the point that it accurately predicts what we observe. The calculations became way too complex for the initial algebraic solutions I started with and several rewrites of the simulator were necessary to solve unique problems associated with time dilation. You see, as you move from the outside of the universe to the centre, you are initially moving up-hill; against gravity. That makes time run faster at the centre, and that makes the central galaxies age faster. This time dilation increases the redshift and the trick becomes picking the point in time when the redshift profile matches current observations. ...It’s all about time!
Here is the really big problem. The COI model can match the current predicted redshift profile, but this profile, distance versus redshift of SNIa supernova events, is wrong! It is based on expanding universe assumptions. In an expanding universe a galaxy might be a certain distance away when it releases a photon, but that photon has to travel even further to get here because space is expanding, and its distance ‘now’ will be even greater still. The COI model needs simple distance estimates based on the distance when the photon was released and that will be the same as the distance travelled, because there is no expansion of space. I suspect this will reduce SNIa distance measurements and that will alter the time/age at which the best match of the redshift profiles occurs. For the sake of discussion I want to suggest that the Milky Way galaxy is 1 to 2 billion years old. (1 billion years is 1 Giga years or 1 Gyr.) Galaxies that we observe at the outer edge of the universe will be of the order of half this age.
This is what the science of the COI model says but it’s a bomb shell to just about everyone. It is way too big for creationist scientists to accept and way too small for secular scientists to believe. But it is stranger still where you find supporting evidence. ...Popular science believes that the wiki/Hubble_Ultra-Deep_Field pictures reveal mature galaxies that are only the order of 800 million years old, pretty much just as predicted by the COI model. And creationists accept that the recession rate of the moon puts an upper limit on its age of 1.3 billion years. See https://creation.com/the-moons-recession-and-age . This younger age of spiral galaxies resolves the galaxy windup dilemma. Creationists, indeed all Christians should read Part 3, Chapter 11 of WTB. There are some things you need to know about God! As for the secular world, well blind Freddy could see that the BBM was in tatters with all sorts of dilemmas and hypothetical dark stuff that is undetectable. The COI model is a rescue package for modern Cosmology. It is actually an assertion of the known laws of physics.
I need to repeat myself a little here. I have just rattled your world view. ...Deep time just got blown away! The universe has not been languishing for 14 billion years. Our solar system is not 4.5 billion years old. You can still have a Precambrian explosion of life some 500 million years ago and you can imagine dinosaurs going extinct 125 million years ago, but you really have to work hard to imagine it all happened by accident. There is little time for life to evolve, if it ever could. To be clear though, if you are sitting in the outer most galaxies, in some snap shot of time, then 14 billion years has expired, but here at the centre, the galaxies are only 1 to 2 billion years old. But we cannot ever see such a snapshot view. The COI process has hinted about mechanisms that might rapidly (in cosmic terms), establish galactic structures. So you don’t have to believe in God, but it remains an excellent choice. Keep that in mind as you re-assemble your world view.
So folks, where do you sit now? I have shown that the simple outside-in assumption of the COI model explains the universe we really see. It’s early days yet, but I don’t think anyone will fault the physics. Has the COI model proposed anything more impossible than the Big Bang Model where everything exploded out of nothing, and then all the laws of physics changed to expand the universe faster than the speed of light and then changed again and then totally failed to explain how galaxies and stars actually formed? The thing is that the COI model is simpler and more self-consistent than the BBM. Just read on and all will be explained.
Up until now I have presented some of the challenges that science will have as it adjusts to a new redshift explanation. At least their paradigm of an expanding universe only goes back 100 years or so and scientists have plenty of precedents for man-made theories failing; then persecuting the radicals who got it right, only to later adopt their work. But Christians and Jews were given a paradigm by their God 3,500 years ago through Moses. It’s page 1 of the Bible and it is non-negotiable.
Well, God has always pointed out to man that His ways are not our ways. His ways are far above our ways. God cannot lie, but He is observed to give simple brief descriptions of key events that become clearer in the light of later revelations in the Bible. That is what Supplement 10: The key to everything is all about.
Actually, Chapter 11 of WTB is my best attempt to summarise everything Biblical.
It seems to me that the COI model would be hard to picture for a nomadic people 3,500 years ago. I think the Genesis 1 account, which contains way more layers of information than we can grasp, has beautifully presented a simplified description, and the COI model helps to see details that were always there. I have heaps more to say in other articles to fully establish biblical support, but to close this section, I propose that God created this magnificent universe from the outside in, so that as soon as everything was ready on this planet for Adam, the full magnificence of the starry heavens would be visible.
I have been very brief on the technical details and the biblical justification. I have made the assumptions very clear and shown the confirmation for those assumptions. If that was all that was needed I could have been very much briefer. However, the barriers to understanding something new comes from the reader’s propensity to filter everything through old paradigms, world views, and philosophical assumptions. Try this out:
Right now (December 2017), the COI Universe model sits between two world views. An all-natural science explanation and an all-supernatural God explanation. But actually it encompasses both. I have stressed that it is testable at many levels and I want secular science to thoroughly test it. I also need other scientists to pick up this ball and run with it. I feel like I have reached the limit of my skill set. I’m not sure how much more I can contribute. There is already a wealth of amazing data about our universe just waiting to be processed under some new assumptions. New explanations of the CMB; Quasars; and stellar formation are waiting to be proposed. Particle physics may well be able to fill in many gaps. ...I’m out of my depth.
A decade ago, the creation of the universe seemed all too much for me—God just did it. But everywhere I look I see predictable laws and processes at work. For example, God established the orbital dynamics that keep the earth rotating around the sun and we understand that. God established the DNA mechanism to control all living processes and we are coming to understand that. And now I feel that the creation process is within our reach.
I believe that God ordained the process and the matter–space universe so that the laws of physics, pretty much hands free, produced this universe. I reserve the right for this planet to be a custom job, after the rest of the universe was created. What you believe is your choice. It’s not about the science. I do not claim that the COI model is perfect. I do claim that it allows us to better picture the universe that God created.
Many articles available at the COI Overview further develop the technical and biblical features introduced here. A tremendous amount of information about a recent creation and failures of the Big Bang theory, can be searched at www.creation.com. One of the best overviews that I have seen of problems with existing universe models is by Spike Psarris, and is available on video at https://www.creationastronomy.com/. Finding problems has never been the problem.