The Origin of the 3 K Radiation.

Updated extract from: Apeiron, Vol. 2, Nr. 1 January 1995

Return to List of Papers on the Web

Go to: Frequently Asked Questions

        1 - Usual Interpretation of the 3 K Radiation.
        One of the most frequently used arguments in favor of the Big Bang hypothesis is the observation of the 3 K radiation from space. In this hypothesis it is considered that the universe started as an expanding mass of matter at an extremely high temperature. The density of that very dense matter was originally so high that it was then opaque and light could not pass through it. During the expansion, the temperature and the density of the universe were gradually decreasing, so that the universe became more and more transparent. When the temperature of this young universe reached about 3000 K, about 15 billion years ago the universe became sufficiently transparent so that the radiation emitted could move across cosmological distances without being absorbed significantly. It is said that the radiation became then decoupled with matter. It is that radiation that is still traveling through space today and that we would observe under the "appearance" of 3 K radiation.
        We must further notice that nothing in the description given above has ever been witnessed directly. It is like a tale. The Big Bang hypothesis must be submitted to tests. Many examples of failures of those tests have been shown. For example, if the universe started as a very high concentration of matter, it can be calculated that it was then a Black Hole. However, relativity shows that Black Holes cannot expand. The Big Bang is therefore incompatible with the early expansion of the universe when relativity is taken into account as shown previously. As mentioned previously, the Big Bang hypothesis is another "creationist theory" for which the only difference with the usual "creationist theory" claiming that universe started 4000 B.C. is by changing the number 4000 B.C. by 15 billion years.

2 - a) Structure of Atomic H and Molecular Hydrogen H₂.
        Before understanding the origin of the 3 K radiation observed in space, we need to know the properties of matter filling space. Astronomical observations show that there is a very large quantity of atomic hydrogen (H) in the universe. Atomic hydrogen is composed of an electron electrically bound to a proton forming neutral hydrogen. Protons, just as electrons have a fundamental property called "spin". In a hydrogen atom, those spins are coupled either parallel or anti parallel. The interesting point is that a transition from a parallel to an anti parallel coupling of spins in hydrogen (and vice versa) takes place when hydrogen is emitting (or absorbing) electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength of 21 cm. Consequently, one can determine the amount of atomic hydrogen H in the universe by measuring the amount of radiation absorbed (or emitted) at 21 cm. The actual observation of the 21 cm. line proves that there is a very abundant amount of atomic hydrogen in the universe.
        It is well known in basic physics and chemistry that atomic hydrogen H is quite unstable. Spectroscopy reveals that when one has a given quantity of atomic hydrogen in a given volume, these atoms react between themselves to form molecular hydrogen (H₂). This is unlike helium and other inert gases that remain mono-atomic. Atomic hydrogen reacts so readily, that it is impossible to buy or keep any quantity of stable atomic hydrogen, because atoms of atomic hydrogen combine in pairs, to produce very stable bound H₂ molecules. Molecular H₂ is extremely stable at normal pressure down to the most extreme vacuum. One can expect that, after billions of years, an important fraction of atomic hydrogen H in the universe is already combined to form the extremely stable molecular hydrogen (H₂). The recombination mechanisms will be discussed below. One might then ask why we do not report the detection of a large amount of molecular hydrogen H₂ in space. We are told that it is simply because it does not exist. Such a naive answer requires further study.
        Let us examine how molecular hydrogen H₂ can be detected in space. In molecular hydrogen, there are two protons and two electrons bound together. The bounding of those particles is such that interaction with visible or infrared light cannot break or even excite that bounding. The transition is forbidden for a dipole transition. Molecular H₂ is among the most transparent gases in the universe. Consequently, one cannot hope to detect free H₂ in space by usual spectroscopic means.

        3 - a) Absence of Optical Transitions in H₂.
        Since there are no optically allowed electronic transitions in H₂ in the currently observed range of frequencies, one might argue that one could make H₂ vibrate or rotate using the appropriate frequency of electromagnetic radiation. Those mechanisms do exist in principle, but they are forbidden in practice due to the absence of electric or magnetic dipole. Let us illustrate the extreme insensibility of H₂ to detection.
        Rotational transitions of H₂ are located in the radio range where one has about the maximum sensitivity of detection of E-M radiation. In spectroscopy, we are used to dipole transitions that take place in about 10^-8 sec. However, the lifetime of the first rotational state of hydrogen H₂ is so long that the spontaneous emission is practically nonexistent. A transition from the second rotational state, which is relatively much more probable, would require about 25 billion seconds (1000 years). One must reach the sixth state before the transition time becomes 25 million seconds. This last transition is about 10¹⁵ times less probable that a normal dipole transition. Different values are given on Table 1.

        Transitions in hydrogen are millions of millions of times slower than normal transitions.

      4- Stability of H₂ Due to Ionizing Radiation.
        We will see now, that the presence of ionizing radiation cannot explain a serious decrease of concentration of H₂. It has been claimed that H₂ cannot exist in space, because it would dissociate due to space radiation. Such an assertion is not acceptable prior to a serious evaluation of the probability of reaction of the H₂ molecule with the ionizing radiation of space.
        Astrophysicists argue that not long after the Big Bang, radiation was decoupled with matter and the density of the universe was so low, that E-M radiation could travel through most of the universe without being absorbed. If that radiation is decoupled with matter, there is no reason that this radiation could ionize or dissociate so much H₂. The decoupling of radiation in the universe is contradictory with the hypothesis of dissociation or ionization of matter in space.
        A second argument appears when one compares the probability of ionizing H with H₂ due to the ionizing radiation in space. Ionizing radiation in space, can ionize atomic H, at least as easily as it can ionize molecular hydrogen H₂. In fact, atomic H is somehow easier to ionize than H₂, since it takes only 13.6 eV to ionize H and 15.4 eV to ionize H₂. All the photons in space between 13.6 and 15.4 eV can ionize H without ionizing H₂. This leaves molecular hydrogen without being disturbed.
        One knows that an important amount of atomic hydrogen H is actually observed in space. This proves that the amount of radiation in space is insufficient to ionize a too large proportion of H. This is quite in agreement with the argument that radiation is decoupled with matter as seen above. Since there is not enough radiation to ionize (destroy) atomic hydrogen H in space, one must conclude that the same amount of radiation is insufficient to ionize (or dissociate) H₂.

      5 - Relative Recombining in H and H₂.
        We know that the recombination of a proton and an electron is a two-body recombination just as in the case of binding two atomic hydrogen atoms H forming H₂. In order to evaluate the relative importance between the recombination of a pair of H into H₂, and the recombination of an electron and proton into H, let us compare the two mechanisms. Since H is observed, it means that there is enough two-body recombination of p⁺ + e^- in space to produce H. Even if an electron attracts a proton, a collision does not lead to a recombination unless radiation is emitted. However, one can see that the recombination of a pair of H (into H₂) is using the same two-body recombination mechanism as the electron-proton recombination (forming H).
        We conclude from the above that, not only there is not enough radiation in space to destroy H₂ (since H is submitted to the same radiation and is actually observed) but furthermore H₂ can be recombined by a similar two-body mechanism as for H (from a proton plus an electron).

        6 - Perfect Isotropy of Planck's Radiation.
        Since we are fully surrounded by the matter of the universe, it is well known that Planck's radiation observed from inside our local volume of space at 3 K (during the last billion years) must be perfectly isotropic. This is in perfect agreement with observational data.
        It is inconceivable that the matter in space around us (a billion light year around us) would not emit Planck's radiation. Why should that matter not be emitting Planck's radiation during the last billion years? Where is that radiation?

Figure 1

        Figure 1 shows the region of the heaven around the earth filled with molecular H₂ at 3 K. Such a gas emits 3 K Planck's radiation in all directions. This leads to the 3 K isotropic radiation as observed in space. However, on the contrary, the primeval radiation has been calculated to be non isotropic.

Figure 2

        7 - The 3 K Radiation Explains the Olbers Paradox.
        The astronomer Heinrich Olbers was curious as to why the night sky should be dark. He conceived the following paradox. When an observer is looking in a particular direction toward an unlimited homogeneous universe, a star should always be visible in any direction since there is no limit in the distance of observation and since the volume increases as the third power of the radius. Consequently, Olbers logically concluded that the night sky should be bright. Some excellent books (e.g. Harrison 1987) have discussed various aspects of this paradox.
        If we adopt the view of the universe at 3 K described here, the Olbers paradox vanishes in the following way. We must recall that Olbers did not know Planck's law of radiation. He assumed that only the hottest bodies in the universe were emitting E-M radiation. Olbers did not realize that, at the temperature of the universe, radiation is also emitted at 3 K from all matter.

Figure 3

        8 - Conclusion.
        Since we have seen that the normal chemical reaction in space strongly favors the recombination of H into H₂ (and not the reverse), we must conclude that there has to be a large amount of H₂ in space.
        The high homogeneity of the 3 K radiation, the absolute need of having H₂ in space and the absence of the hypothetical anisotropic radiation expected from the Big Bang, showing the non primeval origin of the background radiation observed from space, constitute an experimental proof that the Big Bang never happened. More complete arguments in favor of the Planck's radiation as the ultimate source of the 3 K radiation in the Universe were recently presented in international meeting. (Marmet 1994).