Return to Free Library

Return to Science Menu

Previous Article                                                                         Next Article


In this article we will continue our discussion of creation myths by turning our focus to the scientific side which will include a detailed look at various key scientific aspects of modern day astronomical belief systems.


In the next eight articles we will delve deeper into each aspect.  These include gravitational lensing, cosmic microwave background radiation, black holes, stellar evolution, redshift and quantized redshift, the expanding universe hypothesis and Olber’s paradox.

We will first show how these are used as cornerstones of popular scientific cosmological myths.  We will then show the science that leads to the disproof of certain key aspects of these myths.


These articles will discuss the importance of questioning these mainstream beliefs, and in so doing getting closer to a unification of science and spirituality, creating a far more realistic cosmological model of the universe that is firmly grounded in scientific research, observation and experimentation, but not restricted by scientific dogma.

In this new model the firm foundation of science acts as a springboard to a greater understanding of the universe that allows ample room for a metaphysical, spiritual reality and all that it entails.

“The challenge in the quest for ultimate truth,” Harold Aspden tells us, “is to confront the barrier presented by man himself.”



Scientific Creation Myths

We will begin with the dominant scientific creation myth of our modern times, the Big Bang creation myth.  This model “describes how the universe expanded from a very high density and high temperature state.”1


Big Bang Creation Myth

The prevailing scientific creation myth goes something like this:


In the beginning there was a singularity.  This singularity was a point in space-time where the gravitational field is infinite in a way that does not depend on the coordinate system (that is, outside spatial definitions).  The singularity state had an infinitely high density and temperature. Suddenly, approximately 13.8 billion years ago, there was a giant explosion – a Big Bang – in which the expansion of the universe was put into motion and all matter was created.  As the universe cooled, matter was gradually formed.  First subatomic particles, then atoms.

“Giant clouds of these primordial elements later coalesced through gravity in halos of dark matter, eventually forming the stars and galaxies visible today.”2

“The Big Bang represents the point in history where the universe can be verified to have entered into a regime where the laws of physics as we understand them work.”3


Notice how many of these themes exist in religious creation myths:


  • A singularity that is infinite; that is before time (exists in timelessness); and that does not adhere to the understood laws of physics.
  • A giant explosion or Bang – refers to a Giant Sound. Relates to the idea that vibrations create matter.
  • Elements coalescing through gravity in halos of dark matter relates to the idea that photons coalesced into charged particles; then into atoms, molecules, matter, consciousness and life.


Yet, the Big Bang theory implies it is an ‘accidental’ universe – therefore, without order, or intelligence of a connecting and ordering principle.

Through the vast amounts of data that will be covered in the Cosmic Core series, we will find this to be impossible.  We live in a true cosmos based on intelligible principles.  Life could not exist without an ordering principle and a connected consciousness and a profound harmony between the two.

“No chance encounter of physical elements alone, under any circumstances, could produce consciousness — or the conditions that would then make consciousness possible.  It is somewhat humorous that such a vital consciousness could even suppose itself to be the end product of inert elements that were themselves lifeless, but somehow managed to combine in such a way that your species attained fantasy, logic, vast organizational power, technologies, and civilizations.”4



History of the Big Bang (BB) Myth

The Big Bang Theory was first proposed by a Roman-Catholic priest and astronomer, Georges Henri Joseph Edouard Lemaitre, not by Edwin Hubble as commonly thought.

Lemaitre called it his “hypothesis of the primeval atom” or the “Cosmic Egg”.

He was trying to link up the religious idea of a Creator God creating the universe at one time, with scientific thought and a “creation-like” event that jump-started the universe.

In 1951, Pope Pius XII declared that Lemaitre’s theory provided a scientific validation for Catholicism.


If you thought the Big Bang theory was designed to be a neutral scientific view of cosmology, you are mistaken.  It was designed to prop up the religious status quo.  There is very little of the BB myth that is truly scientific in nature and can stand up to scrutiny.

Conrad Ranzan writes, “LeMaitre, being an ordained member of his religious order, had a strong bias and his chaotic-genesis-by-fire model was an interpretation of his supernatural cosmology.”5



Handicaps of BB Theory

The Big Bang Theory violates one of the most strictly held laws of physics: The law of conservation of mass-energy.  It supposes that all matter and energy of the universe was supposedly created at one instant out of nothing.


It also embraces the unscientific concept of the expansion-of-the-whole universe.  All BB cosmologies are based on the assumption that the universe is expanding…even accelerating as it expands.  This concept has been extensively disproven yet the mainstream scientific establishment, for some bizarre reason, still clings to it.

It is based on an incomplete theory of gravity, Einstein’s general relativity, which implicitly denies the existence of aether-space.

This denial of Aether led to the missing principle of absolute motion and the missing causal effect of gravity.


General relativity (GR) explains that what we perceive as the force of gravity arises from the curvature of space and time, as if space-time is some kind of a flat sheet or fabric that can stretch and warp causing bodies that move through it to zigzag and curve.

According to GR “although Earth appears to be pulled towards the sun by gravity, there is no such force.  It is simply the geometry of space-time around the sun telling the Earth how to move.”6


Yet a major problem of this idea of gravity in BB cosmologies is that only distances between large object are subject to expansion.  “It is generally accepted that any objects smaller than clusters of galaxies which are gravitationally bound do not follow the Hubble flow.”7

This means that though the universe is expanding in an incomprehensibly powerful manner, small galactic bodies are essentially immune to this powerful expansion of the whole Universe because they are gravitationally bound and so do not follow the Hubble flow (the expansion flow that supposedly causes all galaxies to recede from each other).  So what are these smaller objects gravitationally bound to?  One another?  Themselves?  How is their gravitational pull stronger than the expansion of the whole universe?  This does not make logical sense and is one of the many fallacies of the BB theories.  The universe is not expanding.


Wikipedia states regarding the Hubble flow, “Although widely attributed to Edwin Hubble, the law was first derived from the general relativity equations, in 1922, by Alexander Friedmann who published a set of equations, now known as the Friedmann equations, showing that the universe might expand, and presenting the expansion speed if this was the case.  Then Georges Lemaitre, in a 1927 article, proposed the expansion of the universe and suggested an estimated value of the rate of expansion.”

So here we have the Catholic priest Lemaitre proposing an idea of the universe and it getting readily accepted by the supposedly neutral scientific community.


Discussing gravity according to GR, Einstein said, “Gravity is no longer a mysterious force acting at a distance, but [rather is] the result of an object trying to travel in a straight line through space [that is] curved by the presence of material bodies.”


His idea of a ‘curving fabric’ is reductionist.  It neglects gyroscopic effects.  The space-time fabric would not curve smoothly, it would spin like water going down a drain.


Einstein’s 4D fabric theory does not account for 3D gravity of a planet.  All would be pulled to the South Pole, not the center of the planet, as it most obviously is.


This is a huge red-flag!  If Einstein were correct, everything on the entire planet would be pulled to the south pole.  It is not.  Gravity pulls everything on earth towards the center of the earth.  All gravitational flow is towards the center of a massive body.  This should be obvious.

Einstein’s theory does not account for this effect.  His theory does not even account for basic observation of how forces on the planet actually work.


We will discuss gravity in great detail in Articles 116-119.

We will also look at many other reasons why GR cannot possibly be correct in its current form.

It is to be noted that one of the most striking bodies of evidence against the BB cosmology, and one that is all but completely ignored in the field of astronomy, is the fact that all matter and life in physical reality is based upon the same geometric proportions and patterns.  This is the crux of Cosmic Core.  We spend hundreds of articles looking at this evidence, and there is an abundance of it.  In a random chaotic BB universe you would not see such order, harmony and geometric unity on every scale.


GR as a whole is a theory in tatters.  It was published by Einstein in 1916 and supposedly explains the motion of the planets, the history and expansion of the universe, the physics of black holes, and the bending of light from distant stars and galaxies.

We will find as we progress through Cosmic Core that despite Einstein’s obvious brilliance, he was incorrect on every single one of these accounts.  They can all be explained in other ways – not just any other way – they will be unified by one single elegant theory with geometry as the key, one that accounts for our actual reality, not a theoretical reality of the imagination.


To be clear, the new scientific paradigm based upon the esoteric stream of knowledge does not reject all existing theories.  For instance, Einstein’s general relativity remains valid in a restricted mathematical sense.  A theory of absoluteness can embrace relativity and incorporate it into a broader theory.


Einstein was not wrong about everything.  However he was so far from being 100% correct it is highly amusing that he still sits upon such a high pedestal and is thought of as an infallible scientific god.

As an aside, it is to be noted that there is a possibility that Einstein knew this original theory was incorrect.  As he progressed in life he was able to discover his grand unified field theory – and it was based upon Aether.  We know for a fact Einstein realized an Aether was necessary as he wrote and spoke about it many times.  (This is discussed in later articles).  This fully developed theory, however, was suppressed from the public and used in secrecy within the military industrial complex.

As Herbert G. Dorsey III writes, “[Alfred] Bielek also confirmed that Thomas Townsend Brown, Tesla and Einstein, among others, worked on the Philadelphia Experiment.  Einstein had actually completed his unified field theory at this time but since it was being used in Project Rainbow it was classified as a military secret.”8

Could this be true?  It’s certainly possible.



String Theory Creation Myth

String Theory is a theoretical framework designed to explain the nature of the universe on the quantum realm.  String theory, for all its exotic assertions, still subscribes to Big Bang Cosmology, the Accelerating Universe Theory and Einstein’s General Relativity.

The fundamental premise of string theory says that the basic objects in physical reality are not point-like, but string-like.  It denies the existence of an Aether and claims, instead of the point-like harmonic oscillators of traditional quantum mechanics, and instead of a fluid-like medium of Aether science, the fundamental units of reality are extremely tiny one-dimensional strings that oscillate at various frequencies.  In order to vibrate these strings must be string incredibly tight.

In string theory, elementary particles observed in particle accelerators are thought of as ‘musical notes’ or excitation modes of elementary strings.

Note the fundamental idea that keeps showing up in religious and scientific theories alike, that is vibrations/oscillations are the basis of all reality.


These strings can be likened to the fluctuators/oscillators we discuss in Aether science, but the difference is, string theory denies the existence of the Aether medium, claiming the strings oscillate, but are not part of an interconnected greater whole.

Credit: Robert Couse-Baker


String theory does not answer the important questions of: Why are the string vibrating?  What causes the difference in vibrations?  And “What causes the tension of the strings?

In essence, string theory does not describe our actual reality.  It is more of a creative mathematical exploration of infinite possibilities that claims there are six extra spatial dimensions beyond the normal four of Einstein’s 4D space-time.

Calabi-Yau Manifold


In string theory there are ten dimensions total.  There are 11 dimensions in M-theory and 26 dimensions in Bosonic string theory.

Yes, there are many string theories, seven theories to be exact: Bosonic, I, IIA, IIB, HO, HE, and the M-theory – the attempt to collapse them all into one theory – the ‘Mother of all theories’.

The rather bizarre and completely out-of-touch-with-reality dimensions of classical string theory are as follows:


  • First Dimension – length
  • Second Dimension – height
  • Third Dimension – depth
  • Fourth Dimension – time
  • Fifth Dimension – Possible Worlds
  • Sixth Dimension – a plane of all possible worlds with the same start conditions
  • Seventh Dimension – a plane of all possible worlds with different start conditions
  • Eighth Dimension – a plane of all possible worlds, each with different start conditions, each branching out infinitely
  • Ninth Dimension – all possible worlds, staring with all possible start conditions and laws of physics
  • Tenth Dimension – Infinite possibilities

How these 10 dimensions relate to reality and what all this really means is unknown.  No one can visualize this or create experiments to prove it.


Physics must be based in reality.  That is why it is called physics.  String theory is a thought-experiment.  It is an exploration of theoretical ideas.  It has gained in popularity because it supposes the existence of infinite possibilities and multiple worlds and allows for strange phenomenon such as teleportation and time travel.  Subconsciously people are drawn to these ideas since they know, deep down, there is credibility to them.  However, the way string theory explains these ideas alienate people from their actuality, complicating the issue and constructing a fantastic and utterly ridiculous scientific framework that makes absolutely no sense.

There are logical common-sense ways to understand and visualize the actuality of infinite possibilities and multiple planes of existence that can put people in touch with the true nature of reality, but sadly, string theory is not one of them.


The problem of string theory, as Conrad Ranzan relates, is the problem of too many outcomes.  The state of having too many outcomes is the classic sign of a weak theory.


String theory also lacks organization or order.  It is impossible to even begin to visualize and it does not explain or even attempt to explain the connection between all these dimensions, how they are traversed, how they are organized, how they are accessed, and how life, humanity, consciousness and evolution fits within all these extraneous dimensions.

On top of that, it deals solely with the quantum realm and does not even try to unify quantum physics with classical physics.  It attaches itself to the accepted mainstream belief system of general relativity in order to lend credence to its theories, even though there are so many holes in the theory of GR it boggles the mind to think that it is still held as an incontrovertible truth.


Ramanujan & String Theory

Srinivasa Ramanujan (1887-1920) was an Indian mathematical genius who compiled nearly 3900 results during his short life of 33 years.  Nearly all his claims have now been proven correct, although some were already known.  Ramanujan claimed to receive his mathematical information in his dreams from the goddess Namakkal.

Srinivasa Ramanujan, Oberwolfach Photo Collection


“Srinivasa Ramanujan was the strangest man in all of mathematics, probably in the entire history of science. He has been compared to a bursting supernova, illuminating the darkest, most profound corners of mathematics, before being tragically struck down by tuberculosis at the age of 33.  Working in total isolation from the main currents of his field, he was able to re-derive 100 years’ worth of Western mathematics on his own.  The tragedy of his life is that much of his work was wasted rediscovering known mathematics.”9

Ramanujan worked in seclusion for many years until he sent a letter to the highly respected Cambridge mathematician Godfrey H. Hardy, which included 120 theorems, some totally unknown to Western mathematicians.


Dr. Michio Kaku describes in Hyperspace, how Hardy reported, “It seemed ridiculous to worry him about how he had found this or that known theorem, when he was showing me half a dozen new ones almost every day.”

“Interestingly, the number 120 is very fundamental to harmonic theory, as it represents a musical frequency or vibration. It is very possible that all 120 are important for a unified model, such was the way that Ramanujan’s mind worked.”10



Ramanujan and the Number 24 (8 x 3)

“In the work of Ramanujan, [i.e. the modular functions,] the number 24 (8 x 3) appears repeatedly.  Miraculously, Ramanujan‘s function also appears in string theory… In string theory, each of the 24 modes in the Ramanujan function corresponds to a physical vibration of the string…”11

Dr. Kaku tells us that the number 24 is replaced by the number 8 when the Ramanujan function is generalized.  This leads to the origin of the tenth dimension, that is 8 + 2, the critical number for the superstrings.


“Digging into footnote number 13 on page 346 at the back of Hyperspace, Kaku says that the two additional dimensions are added in order to ‘preserve the symmetry of the string.’  He then says, ‘However, two of these vibratory modes can be removed when we break the symmetry of the string, leaving us with 24 vibratory modes, which are the ones that appear in the Ramanujan function.’  What Kaku is telling us is that two extra dimensions were added to Ramanujan‘s equations because the physicists feel that the strings could only vibrate if they are symmetrical.  This is something that was ‘added on’ to Ramanujan‘s data after-the-fact.”12


This is significant, as it teaches in the esoteric stream of knowledge that all growth occurs in Octaves, or seven-step processes with the 8th as the return.

Ramanujan was discovering the mathematical basis for the organization of reality into octaves on all scales.  Sadly his work was modified to appease prejudice and dogma.




Traditional Steady State (SS) Theory

The traditional SS theory was first conjectured by James Hopwood Jeans in 1928.

It states that the density of matter in the expanding universe remains unchanged due to a continuous creation of matter.  This means the universe has no beginning and no end.  It requires that matter is continually created in order to keep the universe’s density from decreasing.


“Astronomers Fred Hoyle, Hermann Bondi, and Thomas Gold postulated a perfect cosmological principle: the universe, in the large, always looks the same to an observer at any time or place.  Yes, distant galaxies are rushing away from us and will eventually become invisible even to our most powerful telescopes, but not to worry.  We will not be left alone with only our own galaxy to look at.  Other galaxies will appear in their place – formed from matter that is being continually created at a rate just sufficient to keep constant the average density of matter in the visible universe.”13


After the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation, which was used as evidence for the Big Bang theory, Hoyle later argued a modified theory “in which finite regions of an infinite universe expand and contract, while the universe as a whole remains in a steady state.”14

This Quasi-steady state cosmology suggests pockets of creation occur over time within the universe, that is, there are mini-bangs – mini-creation events.



Dynamic Steady State Universe (DSSU)

The DSSU, along with Dr. Harold Aspden’s Aether science, Dewey Larson’s Reciprocal Systems Theory, Bucky Fuller’s Synergetics, Cosmometry and the Two-way Universe of Walter Russell are the predominant models of Cosmology studied in Cosmic Core.


The DSSU is currently being developed by Conrad Ranzan and can be extensively studied at his website

Ranzan writes, “I wish to distance myself from the Big Bang model. As a hypothetical, it is a universe designed by mathematicians and for mathematicians. Conceptually, it is little more than creationism and mytho-cosmology propped up by government funding and media hype.

The “creationism” aspect was made official at a 1951 cosmology conference, when the head of the world’s dominant church endorsed the Big Bang model.

As a practical model of The Universe it has long outlived its usefulness. Having studied the vastly superior alternative model I find the BB model —based, as it is, on the grandest unscientific extrapolation ever— an embarrassment. (In a nutshell, the difference is this:  The BB is a universe of expanding space AND a universe for which this expansion is extrapolated into the expansion of the entire universe!! The DSSU is a universe of expanding space but suffers no wild extrapolation.)”15

Credit: Conrad Ranzan

The DSSU claims there is an Infinite, non-expanding, geometrically cellular Universe connected by a fluid-like dynamic “essence medium” called the Aether.

Credit: Wire Sculpture by Roger Ferragallo

The Aether consists of fundamental subquantum essence fluctuators devoid of mass and energy (as we know it).

The Universe as a whole does not expand.  Regional space (aether) does expand and contract.


The Universe = Processes.  There are no “things”.  This implies there is a continual creation in a steady universe – not one ‘Big Bang’ event that started it all.


In the DSSU there are two realms: the realm of existence (the physical universe) and that of non-existence (Source of the Aether and fundamental fluctuators).  The realm of non-existence is invisible but effects from it can be detected.

Cosmic Background Radiation is traditionally interpreted to be the remnant energy of the Big Bang flash, however, in the DSSU model it is extremely distant starlight of ultra-high redshift.

Halton Arp and William Tifft’s research into redshift effectively proves the universe is not expanding, the Big Bang did not happen and a dynamic Steady State Universe seems to be correct.  We will explore this in detail in the next seven articles.


On a side note researchers Ahmed Farag Ali and Saurya Das theorize that the Big Bang singularity did not happen, the universe always existed and is therefore infinite.  This is from 2015.  See: for more information.


David F. Crawford, of the School of Physics at the Sydney Institute for Astronomy published a paper in 2010 entitled Observational evidence favors a static universe.


He writes, “The common attribute of all Big Bang cosmologies is that they are based on the assumption that the universe is expanding.  However examination of the evidence for this expansion clearly favors a static universe.  The major topic considered are: Tolman surface brightness, angular size, type 1a supernovae, gamma ray bursts, galaxy distribution, quasar distribution, X-ray background radiation, cosmic microwave background radiation, radio source counts, quasar variability and the Butcher-Oemler effect.  An analysis of the best raw data for these topics shows that they are consistent with expansion only if there is evolution that cancels the effects of expansion.  An alternate cosmology, curvature cosmology, is a tired-light cosmology that predicts accurate values for the Hubble constant and the temperature of cosmic microwave background radiation but shows good agreement with most of the topics considered.”

See: for more information.



Oscillating (Cyclic) Model

The Oscillating Model is one which claims the universe follows infinite, or indefinite, self-sustaining cycles.

It was briefly theorized by Albert Einstein in 1930.  He envisioned a universe following an eternal series of oscillations, each beginning with a big bang and ending with a big crunch.

He soon after discarded this theory.


It is interesting that this concept follows the Hindu-Vedic tradition that believes there are multiple cycles of creation and destruction, repeating to infinity.  The Law of One teaches this concept as well.


Perhaps physical reality does cycle through the universe over billions or trillions of years then returns to its source only for a new physical reality to come forward again.

This does not necessarily go against the DSSU model and it certainly does not go against the esoteric stream of knowledge.

Perhaps in some way this is correct.  You can contemplate on this theory and come to your own conclusions.





We have examined some of the more popular scientific creation myths and seen, exactly as we saw in religious creation myths, that each one contains truth but none are 100% correct.  There are similar elements that show up in each myth because they speak to a deeper understanding of reality that exists in the unconscious minds of all humans.  These deeper aspects float to the surface of the mind and are then incorporated into scientific theories and religious mythologies in many various ways.


The goal of humanity is to work with existing ideas, testing them against new ideas, discarding what does not work, until a unified, easy-to-understand, elegant system emerges that contains both the physical aspects of reality and the metaphysical aspects of consciousness.

Whether it takes years or generations, the shaping of this new paradigm must continue until the truth is fully revealed.

The goal of humanity is absolutely NOT to find a comfortable theory and cling fanatically to it, even despite evidence to the contrary.  Sadly, this is exactly what has happened in our current social and educational systems.


“Yes, it is unfortunately common today, but there exists a very large set of misconceptions or dirty tricks which can bias the results to accommodate any pre-existing worldview.  The human mind oftentimes looks for shortcuts to avoiding uncertainty.  We oftentimes want to believe *something*, and it might as well be that which we’ve been already taught.”15


The next seven articles will explore many concepts of the mainstream Big Bang/General Relativity theory that need to either be updated or discarded altogether.  This includes gravitational lensing, cosmic microwave background radiation, black holes, stellar creation and evolution, Olber’s paradox, redshift and the expanding universe hypothesis.




  2. ibid.
  3. ibid.
  4. Roberts, Jane, The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events (A Seth Book)
  5. Ranzan, Conrad, The Processes of Gravitation – The Cause and Mechanism of Gravitation
  7. Crawford, David F. Observational evidence favors a static universe, Sydney Institute for Astronomy, 25 November 2010,
  8. Dorsey III, Herbert G., Secret Science and the Secret Space Program, 2015
  9. Kaku, Michio, Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey Through Parallel Universes, Time Warps, and the 10th Dimension
  10. Wilcock, David, Shift of the Ages,
  11. Kaku, Michio, Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey Through Parallel Universes, Time Warps, and the 10th Dimension
  12. Wilcock, David, Shift of the Ages,
  13. Brush, Stephen G. and Ariel Segal, Making 20th Century Science: How Theories Became Knowledge
  14. ibid.
  16. Alfvren, Hannes, commenter on


Return to Free Library

Return to Science Menu

Previous Article                                                                         Next Article