Professor Paris Herouni designed and supervised the construction of the world's most sensitive radio telescope, ROT-54/2.6 He took a measurement of the Cosmos and found no CMB, disproving Big Bang creationism in one stroke. Herouni’s telescope, Big Bang Theory, and Ian Gillan’s only question, Herouni’s telescope, Big Bang Theory, and Ian Gillan’s only question
I think your description of the Big Bang theory being disproven is a little strong. From your source...…. “According to the Big Bang Theory, there must be residual radiation in the universe, but the ROT-54 telescope did not detect it, which he believed proved that there was never a Big Bang,” he explains." The emphasis on "believed" is from the source.
No, you need to study the papers by professor Herouni referred to in the news report. Mr. Gillan has studied them, as mentioned in the news report. You haven't, so you don't know anything about the antenna, so you speak in ignorance. The self-noise of professor Herouni's antenna is ~2.6 K. All other radio telescopes in the world have a self-noise an order of magnitude greater. Also, Herouni's antenna is not affected by microwave diffraction owing to its ingenious design, which is unique. All other radio telescopes are affected by microwave diffraction. If the CMB is Cosmic, Herouni's antenna would have returned ~(2.6 K + 3 K) = ~5.6 K for the monopole signal. The antenna return was 2.6 K. Case closed on the big bang creationism. The COBE, WMAP, Planck satellites did not detect a CMB. COBE detected microwave emissions from Earth (its oceans). It is a scientific fact that no CMB monopole signal has ever been detected beyond ~900 km of Earth, and that's because Earth is the source of the signal. Professor Herouni's antenna measurement is definitive. Let's test your knowledge, or lack thereof, further. At what wavelength did professor Herouni take his measurement? Mr. Gillan knows the answer to this question; you don't. Come back with comments after you have studied professor Herouni's papers.
First, Wikipedia is not a reliable scientific source for anything. Secondly, the Wikipedia article does not even mention ROT-54/2.6. The reason is simple: ROT-54/2.6 is certain proof that all the other measurements of the alleged CMB are false. Not one of them detected microwaves from the Cosmos. It's obvious that you know nothing about ROT-54/2.6. You need to study the papers by professor Herouni referred to in the news report. Mr. Gillan has studied them, as mentioned in the news report. You haven't, so you don't know anything about the antenna, so you speak in ignorance. The self-noise of professor Herouni's antenna is ~2.6 K. All other radio telescopes in the world have a self-noise an order of magnitude greater. Also, Herouni's antenna is not affected by microwave diffraction owing to its ingenious design, which is unique. All other radio telescopes are affected by microwave diffraction. If the CMB is Cosmic, Herouni's antenna would have returned ~(2.6 K + 3 K) = ~5.6 K for the monopole signal. The antenna return was 2.6 K. Case closed on the big bang creationism. The COBE, WMAP, Planck satellites did not detect a CMB. COBE detected microwave emissions from Earth (its oceans). It is a scientific fact that no CMB monopole signal has ever been detected beyond ~900 km of Earth, and that's because Earth is the source of the signal. Professor Herouni's antenna measurement is definitive. Let's test your knowledge too, or lack thereof. At what wavelength did professor Herouni take his measurement? Mr. Gillan knows the answer to this question; you don't. Come back with comments after you have studied professor Herouni's papers.
Your right about the wiki but if you would take more then 3 seconds and actually read it you would realize the work is sited and you can follow links to proper experiments. Not like your fake paid for diploma The guy youre talking about is as cracked as you. Ill keep posting on your threads because you and your ideas are freaking funny. You dont know as much as you think you do. You never will. Fringe crackpot science is just that. No more, no less. If you were rite about any of this stuff then main stream science would say so. But they don't. Because you are wrong and they are right. The. End. Everything you post is a google search away from being disproven, all of it.
"Not like your fake paid for diploma" ajroxit What has this got to do with the price of fish? Present your evidence for your fish "The guy youre talking about is as cracked as you." ajroxit What 'guy' is that? Certainly not Mr. Gillan, and certainly not professor Herouni. Whichever 'guy' you intend, present your proof of claim. Any fool can invoke an epithet as you do, and they do. "Ill keep posting on your threads because you and your ideas are freaking funny. You dont know as much as you think you do. You never will. Fringe crackpot science is just that. No more, no less. If you were rite about any of this stuff then main stream" ajroxit But you have not demonstrated any knowledge of the subject matter whatsoever in any of your posts; and you don't even know orthography: "rite". So your future posts, if true to your word, will never count as a scientific argument and never win a scientific argument.