Contrary to popular scientific opinion the Big Bang doesn't say anything about the origin of the universe. BBT can explain how the universe evolved from an incredibly hot, dense volume about 13.7 billion earth-time years ago. But, it is completely silent on the 'origin' of that volume. Doesn't seem like a final cosmological theory of anything to me. It falls at the first hurdle of basic scientific logic: cause and effect. It also does not assert the universe is finite in age or size, merely the observationally accessible slice. Of course, you can always add the riduclous ideas of quantum loop gravity, multiverses, parallel universes, brane theories, etc, to try to resolve the huge problem of the origin of the universe, but these type of approaches will never solve it, they just delay it.
Now, there are very good reasons to presume that what we see may not be all you get, but these theories always falls far short of being a complete theory of existence, which is what they are often presented as. This is simply not true, to get a multiverse you need a universe generating mechanism, something thats got to make all the Big Bangs go BANG, so you need some laws of physics to do that, so then, where have they all come from? So all thats done is shifting the problems of the origin of the universe to the level of multiverse, but you still haven't explained it. The main problem for me is that people seem to be trying to explain the universe as it is by appealing to something outside of it, in this case an infinite number of universes outside of it, which to me is no better than when religion appeals to an unseen unexplained god outside of the universe. All these issues stem form the assumption of a definitive moment of creation. In a universe assumed infinte (the logical position), not so.
Its very easy to use well experimentally tested effects on light to explain redshifts which dont lead to an expanding universe or the Big Bang. Scientists have long believed that only the Doppler effect or Gravity could account for wavelength shifts in the spectrum of light as it travels through space, scientists have always
assumed spectral invariance, ie, the spectrum remains the same no matter how far the light travels.
But experiments have shown that there is are other ways to shift spectral lines. This mechanism involves non-Lambertian sources that emit beamed energy, such as lasers and devices producing synchrotron light. The discoverer of this new effect is physicist Emil Wolf, who along with nobel laureate Max Born, wrote the textbook
Principles of Optics.
Also another alternative mechanism to produce redshifts that imply a non expanding universe is the Coherent Raman Effect on Incoherent Light (CREIL). By using the tensors of polarization and Raman scattering you can derive a coherent radiation transfer function for broadband light. Impulsive Stimulated Raman Scattering (ISRS) has been studied in laboratories since the 1960’s. ISRS effects are observed when differential lasers are trained on tubes containing a gas in the presence of an electric field. In the resulting spectra, the higher frequency is redshifted and the lower frequency is blue shifted.
Such effects, if they turn out to be true, pull the rug from under the Big Bang inflationary hypothesis. So they should be at least noticed and considered by cosmologists. But they seem to be mostly ignored, most cosmologists seem to have made their mind up about the Big Bang and expansion already, despite perfectly valid alternatives like these existing.
