asdasd asdasd













Scientific Facts

Summary by Claudio Rousselon A. *

Based on the book "The origin of the Universe, Eternity and Infinity".

By Luis Oscar

(Translated from Spanish)

The seven biggest mysteries of the Universe solved at last under the same cosmological model; seven astronomical issues considered as "problems" since it has not been possible to demonstrate their causes yet, but also, because they don´t seem to match inside the Big Bang Theory. Now, it is likely to understand each one of those "mysteries" if we study them from a completely different point of view: The Big Ray Theory. Let´s enumerate them:

1. The Cosmic Filaments enigma.

2. The Differential Rotation problem.

3. The Galactic Halo riddle.

4. The incongruent age of the Universe. (The expansion)

5. The unexplainable Galactic collisions.

6. The dissimilar Galaxies´ speed.

7. The Solar System formation.


To give us an idea of the subject we are going to face, let´s start by taking a look to the second phenomenon in the list, known in astronomical circles as "the Differential Rotation problem", which occurs in Spiral Galaxies (photo 1); the approach to it is as follows:

The stars closer to the galactic nucleus, orbit around it practically at the same velocity than those in the perimeter of the disk; the difference between them is that the first ones describe a much shorter circular path and the second ones have to perform a longer trajectory; in consequence, if all of them go at the same speed, the stars near to the center will do more orbits than those in a more distant position. Well, then, if most of all stars are set along those filaments that look like two curled arms, it is easy to conjecture that they could be winding in. Therefore.....

a) Mathematical calculations done on this matter show that an open spiral galaxy could end up as a tight disk after few rotations and that it could happen in "just" 1000 million years. (Photo 2)

b) But on the other side, it is also demonstrated that a spiral system may be as old as 15,000 million years, according to the bright and color of its stars.

(This amount of years is approximately and it only serves the purpose of simplifying our calculations)

If we become devoted to a rigorist logic and hold the A and B premises, we must conclude that the spiral shape only lasts the 14th part of its entire life.

What does this mean?

If we ask ourselves the previous question with the naivety of someone who is not contaminated by astronomical preconceived ideas, the answer does not seem to be too complicated: the simplest supposition is that the spiral shape ought to be recent for those systems, relatively speaking; It means that about 14/15´s of their earlier lives, Spiral Galaxies must have had a complete different outline, simply because their curled silhouette can´t last more than 1,000 million years (in case the arms are positively coiling up).

However, all those who defend the Big Bang theory, point out that the preceding conjecture has to be a mistake; they argue the arms can not be winding in because, precisely, it would be impossible to understand the existence of spiral systems during their previous 14,000 million years. The problem can be enlightened as follows:

If the stars of those galaxies are more than 15,000 million years old, their arms must have a similar age. It is proven that most of the stars are born mainly along where the highest density of gases and cosmic dust is concentrated and that particular condition belongs to the galactic arms (apart the nuclei), hence.

The galactic arms ought to be as old as the stars that integrate them.

But then, how come they have not coiled up, if they only need 1,000 million years to do it. (Why if they are more than 15,000 million years old)

This question was one of the biggest head aches for astronomers; a dark alley which offered only two possible ways out:

a) To find out evidence to prove that the galactic arms are not winding in, and therefore, that they have been like that since very remote times, just as we see them nowadays.

b) To imagine a different figure in which the arms would have remained their first 14,000 million years without coiling up, until finally they would have acquired the spiral shape, about 1,000 million years ago. In that way it would not represent a problem to accept that they are really winding in now.

We believe that it would have been easier to try the second option, but astronomers didn´t even dare to think about it because, by then, there already existed a popular theory which had become almost a religion (it is defended in a dogmatic manner by its promoters), of course, we are talking about the Big Bang Theory.

The Great Explosion, supposedly, spread matter with no order at all in the pre-galactic space, so the first concentrations of matter should had been spherical type conglomerations only (in accordance with the gravitational law). Supported on this premise, astronomers decided that such spheres -as huge balls of cosmic dust- started to rotate, flattening from the poles, until they became disk shaped, as we can observe them in present times. (The Circummestelar theory)

The idea was happily accepted for many years until the Differential Rotation was discovered and the real problems started. Let´s approach to the subject again, but now from a reverse angle:

If the Circummestelar theory was correct, a Galaxy should rotate just as any disc would do, that is, the stars far away from the nucleus on the edge- should travel faster than those that remain near because, supposedly, a galactic system is a whole piece since the beginning, but it isn´t so though: the fact is that the outer stars can not complete an orbit at the same time the inner stars do (because they all go at the same speed, as we saw before). The Spiral Galaxy´s rotation is differential and such a detail cancels the idea that a Galaxy should have been formed with a spherical figure; consequently, it puts the Big Bang theory under serious doubt.

In spite of the previous difficulty, some scientists decided to prove that the galactic arms are not winding in as they seem to, just to make the pieces of the puzzle fit in. It was an urgent mission because the Great Explosion was dangerously stumbling in and there was no other substitute theory at hand. The Big Bang promoters needed a solution, and, of course, when there are buyers, immediately the sellers show up.

And the intricate and fantastic Density Wave theory emerged to claim out that it could solve the inconvenience. There´s nothing to worry about! The density waves neutralize that villain called "Differential Rotation". More over, everything we are able to observe is practically an optical illusion; the galactic arms are not consolidated gravitational structures, so they don´t move as a whole as all appearances suggest, even though those filaments concentrate the highest amount of matter of all the Universe (besides the nuclei). In theory, the majestic arms are formed by "time-vary" density waves that depart from the nucleus -as waves produced in a still water surface when an object is dropped in- and somehow, the waves get momentarily stuck in those filaments, concentrating matter in there. Final result: The galactic arms are not winding in, period. The Galaxies were formed from spherical conglomerations -as the Big Bang forces us to think- and they can stay with their open arms forever. That´s what they believe.

We have to take into account that the Density Wave solution is just a theory and that it is full of problems, by the way. But even so, it is quite stressing to find out several professional astronomers speak about those density waves filled of self-sufficiency, as if it was an absolute proven fact. We don´t think it is the right attitude to solve the riddle.

Well then, fortunately, not everybody agrees with such a "solution", for that reason, let´s explore together the road the established science never even tried to look at. Let´s consider the dilemma for the last time, to make sure there won´t be any misunderstandings about it.

a) It is demonstrated that Spiral Galaxies´ stars might be more than 15,000 million years of age.

b) The stars grow mainly in the spiral´s arms, which can be interpreted that the second ones may be as old as the first ones.

c) Differential Rotation is irrefutable and, therefore, the Spiral Galaxies could end with their arms tightened

d) The arms could coil up in about 1,000 million years, so that figure can not be older than such amount of time.

CONCLUSION: On the first 14,000 million years of their existence, the Spiral Galaxies should have had a complete different disposition than they actually do; one in which the arms didn´t have to wind in during that period.

It sounds very interesting, but which shape?

This elucidation requires a little bit of imagination: what we have to do is to follow the supposed evolutionary sequence of a Spiral Galaxy backwards in time, in other words, "if we play the movie in reverse mode", we could watch the galactic appendices wind off from the nucleus until they become as one immense extended galactic string. Try it...

The result is almost obvious and unavoidable. We have a galactic nucleus that seems to be working as a reel to wind up two great, huge opposite filaments, made out of cosmic substance. The difficulty with this idea -as we saw before- is that the Big Bang could not have given this shape to Galaxies, due to the idea that the Great Explosion would have left matter spread all over the space with no order at all, therefore, the first concentrations of matter would had been spherical type and never, under any circumstance, they could had been extended filaments (in accordance with gravitational laws).

So it is clear that we need a complete new model.

At this length, the reader must be making a connection between the Galactic Filaments shown in the previous graphic and the title of the cosmogonic theory that we are offering. Yes, indeed, the idea is founded on the conviction that primal matter was the result of heat produced by something like a huge, colossal, Cosmic Ray. Otherwise, it would be impossible to explain how matter would´ve ended in a string figure.


Not much really, especially if we compare this proposal with some other conjectures created before, like that one which suggests this whole immense Universe " was once enclosed in a space as brief as a tiny atom". If we actually want to hear about an imaginative and fantastic idea, there´s nothing better than the Big Bang theory.

The Big Ray hypothetic model, on the contrary, is the first and only which resolves with reasonable arguments those "Seven great mysteries of the Universe" enlisted before; and moreover, it contains profound metaphysical and philosophical bases that justify and strengthen the idea as no other theory has had before. The Big Bang theory, for example, does not have any philosophical background, and the best its defenders can do on that field is to say that the Great Explosion was caused by a "singularity". Wonderful, it is a very comforting answer.

Now, let us elaborate about the main arguments that sustain the Big Ray Theory. We´ll see how those "Seven great mysteries", which represent equal number of problems for the Big Bang theory, are precisely the facts that back up this new Cosmology.





Barely a few years ago, it was discovered that Galaxies are connected by something which appears to be extremely hot gas "filaments"; they are invisible to human sight, but it has been possible to detect them with the help of special instruments. This new discovery encourages us to believe the Big Ray hypothesis is not that wild, because these same strings reveal that many galaxies are formed in line, one after another, as if they were the remnant of a single great original cosmic cord. The idea of something like a ray -or a hank of rays /web of rays to be more specific- that created matter in a filament/string shape, is consistent with this Universe´s reality.

Cosmic Filaments! We are talking about a demonstrated fact which represents an enormous challenge for science. There are interesting mathematical calculations that show the formation of those filaments is quite impossible under the Big Bang model.

How come?

As huge as it is, the age of the Universe is not enough for the filaments to get integrated by gravitational forces, in the extreme case that such forces would be capable to agglutinate substance in that way. Hence, matter must´ve been originated in a filament outline since its origins! It does not seem to be any other way. This problem, by itself, should be strong enough to discard the Big Bang model and replace it for the new, Cosmic-friendly, Big Ray Theory.

The great query is if those invisible strings are really made out of hot gas, as scientists suppose, or if they are only the radiation of an intangible ancient heat leftover by the Big Ray

Let´s check over the idea: once the incredible calorific force of our Big Ray was extinguished, the new matter remained at the largeness of the trail of the ray, as if it was the skeleton of it. Now we have filaments made out of substance, but they are immense, formidable and it is necessary to split them in a lot of fragments -as a jet contrail does in the sky- to figure out how they became into so many distinct Galactic systems.

Note: In page 72 of his book, Luis Oscar presents an astonishing mathematical calculation in which he intends to demonstrate that the Andromeda Galaxy and our own Milky Way were once joined together as the same Galactic String; he also explains how they got separated at the beginning and then how they started a voyage that will get them together again.

You didn´t get it wrong: we are talking about a single Filament divided in two different Galaxies (or many). Further on, we´ll see it is perfectly feasible under the Big Ray Theory.


Next, it is time to finally solve the Differential Rotation issue in Spiral Galaxies. Let´s get back to the graphics that show the hypothetical evolution of a Galactic Filament; let´s take a good look at it and let´s try to reconstruct the whole story as a detective would do it. This sequence illustrates physical processes that astronomical science has never considered before. Step by step, in theory, this is what happened:


1.- If galaxies were like a huge string in their early days, it is reasonable to think that primal substance would've remained very dispersed at the length and width of that string, nevertheless, if we base this premise on the gravitational attraction law, it is likely that the scarce gas and cosmic dust created by the Ray started to move on to the marrow of it (A in the graphic above). If we use an electric cable as an analogy, the matter attracted to the marrow would play the role of the "cooper line", because at the end, it became the most dense place of the Galactic Filament; and a wider circumference around it would do the part of the "plastic coating" since it retained an extremely limited amount of matter. As million of years went by, the cooper line acquired enough consistency to tighten gravitational links and then, it began to retreat.(B)

2.- The nucleus was conformed due to a contraction of the Galactic Filament, in accordance with attraction forces; the two halves of the string pulled each other accumulating substance in the middle. This attraction process must have been the original force that moved the stars from the beginning.

3.- The rotation of the nucleus was caused by the same two opposite inertial forces (the two halves of the string crashing at the same point). There might be some other options, though.

4.- The arms of the system suffer a fracture because of the nucleus' rotation; it occurs near the base when a rigid small part of the arms -attached or fitted into the galactic center- begin to rotate with it. These short, resistant pillars, move as sails of a windmill; hence, as they turn with the nucleus to the opposite side, they pull the rest of the arm along causing the fracture. The arms stay together just like a broken extremity of a human does -because there are powerful gravitational links- but the result is that they experience a deviation of their original path to form a spiral silhouette (by this time the nucleus has grown heavier and denser because it has devoured most of the string and, in consequence, the arms result much shorter and lighter, and that circumstance makes it easier for the "sails" to haul the arms).

It is probable that an important percentage of filaments retreated directly all the way until they ended as Elliptic Systems (spherical), without having to go through a detour to take the spiral shape. It is likely to believe that, in some circumstances,
the nuclei of a retreating filament never got to spin to "fracture" the arms in order to form Spiral Galaxies, as described above.



5.- When the arms fracture they don´t go directly to the nucleus anymore, they begin drawing a detour, therefore, the nucleus won´t exert attracting influence in the stars of the arms as it used to do; this is very important because this particular circumstance produces the speed stabilization of them. In other words, the stars keep advancing -as a crowd together walking in an avenue- thanks to the inertia they already had due to the gravitational attraction force that started their motion originally, hence, the arms keep moving as a whole. So, consequently, the stars ahead -near the nucleus- move as fast as those located on the tail  portion of the string. The speed of the stars does not change much when all of them get into the spiral curve (when they get trapped by the nucleus´s gravitational field).

 Note: it is clear the arms stay always fitted to the center of a galaxy, so the nucleus is just like a cowboy playing with a rope, that is to say, the arms twist around moved by their inertial speed, while they are pulled by the nuclei to take them in.

When a Galaxy spins, a whip effect makes the arm's tail end go wider as the stars enter into the nuclei orbit. But let´s take into account that, by then, practically all of the stars are traveling almost at the same speed, it doesn't matter if they are near or distant from the nucleus; that would explain why the Galaxies have a differential rotation.

These five points would resolve very easily the Differential Rotation problem, without complex theories of density waves, neither impossible circummestelar hypotheses (not even the fictitious "dark matter") it is, in fact, an idea that works just fine with classic physics, from the genesis to these days.



The amount of stars surrounding the galactic nucleus is called “Halo”; here, the enigma is that all of them keep completely different orbits, even in opposite ways. This phenomenon is considered a “problem” because it does not fit into the Circumestelar theory either. As we have seen, as a result of that concept, Galaxies were like spheres in their origins, and then, when they started to spin, necessarily all of the stars should’ve moved in the same direction, but, apparently, it isn’t so because the Halo breaks the rule (just as the Differential Rotation also does). Certainly, the stars that belong to the arms do orbit in the same direction but the stars located in the Halo have chaotic orbits.


In addition to the “unexplainable” contradictory orbit described by the Halo’s stars, there is a peculiar detail that makes the puzzle even more interesting: all of them are invariably old ones.

The model we propose resolves the Halo enigma in an easy and logical manner. If we take again the “electric cable” analogy we used in order to describe a Cosmic Filament in it origins, we would see that there’s no more gas left in the “plastic coating”, because most of it has gone to the “cooper line”, therefore, in that place cannot occur any more star births. The small amount of stars that were able to materialize in the “plastic coating” did it when the filament was young, so it would explain how come they are so old now. Anyhow, when the galactic string retreats, the stars of the “plastic coating” keep advancing towards the nucleus direction because they are still part of the same gravitational structure, no matter if they are very far away from the “cooper line”. Then, the center of the Galaxy begins to grow, devouring all the substance congregated in the marrow of the string and, when the scarce stars of the “plastic coating” arrive to the nucleus’s axis, they are still at a very long distance (above or aside), but even so they are captured by its gravitational field so, consequently, they begin to orbit around it.

Evidently, here we have a particular circumstance we must consider: when the stars of one arm advance towards the nucleus, all those of the other arm do the same but in an opposite way; when both groups of stars meet in the nucleus’s axis, obviously the first group is going to orbit in one direction and the other will do the contrary. This may explain why the Halo’s stars travel in opposite directions.

Besides the previous explanation, it happens that the stars that belong to the same arm can also get into opposite orbiting when they get captured by the nucleus’s gravitational field: the “upper” ones go downwards, and vice versa. Equally, those of the “right” side of the string’s periphery turn around counterclockwise, and the stars in the “left” side will rotate clockwise.

So, as we have seen, the Halo’s stars have to be the same stars that were formed in the “plastic coating”, and that would explain how come they are so old now and why there’s no more gas in the Halo to give birth to new ones.



Here is important to mention that the spheroid Elliptic galaxies contain stars that also have chaotic orbiting, just like the stars in the halo of the Spiral Systems described, and this particular fact straightens the idea that an original filament could retreat all the way until it ends forming an Elliptic galaxy without having to go through a Spiral shape. In both instances, the chaotic orbiting of the stars may be the result of the same filament phenomenon. It seems that somehow the nuclei of certain amount of filaments never got to spin to "fracture" the arms -in order to form Spirals- so they ended as Elliptic Systems.



Concerning to Spiral Galaxies, they may evolve to tighten their arms until they become closed discs and later on, it is likely to believe that, anyway, they should finally end as a sphere (Elliptic Galaxies), if the nuclei finish devouring the arms completely. Nevertheless, the later hypothesis leads us to a contradiction since it would not match with the fact that the stars of Elliptical galaxies have a chaotic orbiting. Let’s recall that the stars of the Spiral’s arms orbit orderly in the same direction so, in consequence, if all those stars would end integrated to the nucleus -until the system turns to be an sphere- then, the logical result would be that an Elliptic galaxy should contain stars orbiting systematically around its equator. In summary, if the speculation we are proposing is right, then, we should find two types of Elliptic galaxies: those derived directly from an original filament, with stars describing chaotic orbiting only, and those derived from a Spiral system, containing a belt of stars orbiting around their equator. If we never get to find in the Universe the later type of Elliptical galaxy described, it would only mean that Spirals finish their evolving process as a tightened disk, getting stuck as such figure forever (that possibility should not be odd at all since there’s the chance stars can get trapped by the nuclei gravitational field, making them orbit permanently around it).

So, anyhow, as we have seen, the conclusion is that the evolution of galaxies under the Big Ray theory is completely opposite to the one described by Edwin Hubble (and still supported by the astronomical community). When a galactic filament retreats it can turn out to be either a Spiral or an Elliptical, and concerning to the different types of Spiral galaxies, they only differ between each other by the spot where the "fracture" occurred; if it happened very close to the nuclei, then it derived in the form of what we know as a classic Spiral, and if the fracture was at some distance from the nuclei, the original filament took the shape of those galaxies classified nowadays as "Barred spirals"


CLASIC SPIRAL00000000000000000000000000BARRED SPIRAL


The other type of galactic systems are the Lenticular Galaxies; their shape looks just like a bicycle wheel because there is a ring of stars that surround a massive nuclei; a simple observation reveals that this kind of systems have to be an atypical evolution of an opened Barred Spiral galaxy –after spinning many times- producing the fusion of both arms at the edge of the system, creating the named ring. It is possible to infer that the stars of the ring get captured by the gravitational field of the nuclei, so they keep orbiting permanently just as a planet does around a star. Obviously, the arms connecting the nuclei and the surrounding ring ("the rays of the bicycle wheel") finally disappear because they have a perpendicular disposition to the nuclei, so they keep being attracted by it until there’s not an arm left to be seen.


A possible evolution of a Lenticular Galaxy:



Hubble’s classification diagram

 On the left, we can see four different types of Elliptical galaxies.

Upper right, Spirals going from closed to open systems.

Lower right, Barred Spirals, again, in a closed to open sequence.

Lenticular galaxies are not included, but Hubble supposed they were derivatives of the same Elliptical systems, just as Spirals and Barred Spirals were, in accordance with the graphic.



When astronomers use the Hubble Constant to measure the Universe´s age, in accordance with the inflationary event, this method reveals it is 13,700 million years old; nevertheless, there are stars that seem to be more than 15,000 million years old, based on the bright and color they emit.

Why some stars seem to be older than the same Universe?

 This is a problem that turns astronomers up side down.

We don´t have to be surprised for such a bizarre result. The measurements and calculations must be correct but the only problem might be that they led to an erroneous interpretation because they have been contrasted with a false premise. In other words, some stars appear to be "older than the Universe" because the real story is that they were indeed formed much before the inflationary force started. The false premise is that the Hubble Constant is based on the idea that all substance comes right from the very heart of the Universe, but it is a mistake.

The Galaxies were already there and very distant from the

Cosmic center when the Universe started to grow.

But let´s slow down and take this bit by bit. let´s remember that the primal substance hypothetically appeared due to the powerful heat produced by a colossal ray, consequently, it left over immeasurable filaments full of subatomic particles. The appearing of this hank of rays -which later became a Cosmic Web-, must have caused something similar to a gravitational wave (a space-time perturbation) precisely in the "place" where the main ray's stem emerged directly from nothingness, (for obvious reasons, it had to be in a point that immediately became the center of this new-founded Universe)

"I can not imagine a better occasion for a space-time perturbation to occur, than the very same instant the space opened and the time began; the violent and sudden incursion of this Big Ray into the Nothingness -to create a new dimension- must have provoked a majestic gravitational expansive wave of Cosmic proportions, literarily speaking."

Luis Oscar

This gravitational perturbation would have been the responsible of the growth of the Universe, but here is something important to point out: Our ray goes way faster than this hypothetical expansive wave, so all the primal matter (gases) must had had enough time to become stars -in absolute calmness- before they were reached and hit by the wave, millions of years later. There are several facts that suggest that this wave had to travel at about 1% of the speed of the ray, so when the ray accomplished 100 % of its length at the speed of light, the wave was scarcely getting out from the center of the Universe. For example, if the ray got to a distance of 100 million light years, the "cosmic wind" would´ve taken 1,000 million years to travel just the 10 % of the distance made by the ray and that´s enough time to see stars get born. We believe many of these filaments had time to develop a nucleus and even get the shape of spiral before being hit by the expansive wave (because they were very far away from the Cosmic center).

But anyhow, it is inevitable to think that the fragmented galactic filaments should´ve got extremely separated from each other as they contracted and became shorter, and then, when the expansive wave set in outgoing motion the young galactic systems -many millions of years later- its obvious they got even much more separated from each other.




The present summary serves for the purpose of bringing to your attention some astronomical data that supports the Big Ray Theory. All the Seven enigmas will be fully explained in Luis Oscar´s book. I will merely say that the solution of the last three topics is also related to the "late Cosmic Wind"; as a matter of fact, they are evidence themselves of its violent passage across the Universe (as well as the elongated elliptic galactic systems and some of the deformed spirals known as "irregulars").


In astronomical circles they say that a cosmologic theory should always come out with a prediction, otherwise it wouldn´t be a theory at all; well then, next I will enlist the main predictions and statements generated by the Big Ray Theory:

  1. The arms of all spiral systems are consolidated gravitational structures and they are winding in around the galactic nuclei.
  2. All big galaxies most have a black hole in their nuclei.
  3. Many, or almost all of the very elongated Elliptic Systems should point as arrows to the center of the Universe. The later should straighten the idea of a "Late Cosmic Wind".
  4. The stars of one galactic arm should have planets orbiting around them in certain direction, and planets of stars situated in the other arm of the same galaxy should orbit in the opposite way. The full explanation for this prediction comes in the book we are offering, and it has to do with the planet formation. If this prediction proves to be right, it would definitively confirm that a "Late Cosmic Wind" happened.



Certainly, such a fundamental inquiry cannot be answered by astronomical science, because everything it could have happened then -just one second before the appearance of the Big Ray- is exclusively of a philosophical concern. If you think the scientific arguments we have offered so far are quite reasonable, I must state that all of them does not compare a bit with the metaphysical basis we have to show.

Contact Us


Copyright © 2008. The Big Ray Theory Foundation  |  powered by: Caribesoft, Updated by: BeeNet