Also Available in:
This article is from
Creation 41(1):18, January 2019

Browse our latest digital issue Subscribe

Physicists’ dark secret: Fast stars have not had time to fly apart

by

dark-secret

First there was dark matter, then came dark energy, then dark photons and now there is talk of dark stars, dark planets and even dark intelligent life, in a whole dark galaxy within our Milky Way galaxy.

However, physicists actually know nothing about dark matter and dark energy. These terms and the nebulous concepts they represent were actually invented by astrophysicists because they assumed materialism (matter and energy is all there is). They then dogmatically insisted on rigorously applying this to the origin and structure of the universe.

When such physicists observe the rotation speeds of stars—not only in our own galaxy but also in thousands of other spiral galaxies—they find that the stars in the spiral disks are moving ‘too fast’. They are moving so fast that in their assumed lifetimes, which is the lifetimes of their galaxies, of the order of 10 billion years, the galaxies should have disintegrated because their stars should have flown away from the galaxies, which could not hold onto them.

Because astrophysicists cannot explain these high rotational velocities with standard tried-and-tested Newtonian physics, they have concocted the notion that galaxies really comprise 80% to 90% ‘dark matter’—stuff that is everywhere but we cannot see or detect it by any method.1

One article2 states that the majority of today’s physicists believe this. That may well be the case, but I don’t and I’m sure I qualify as a real physicist.3 In any event, truth is not determined by majority opinion.4

Beginning about 200 years ago, scientists started to abandon the Word of God as authoritative in such matters as the creation of the universe and so today many believe in materialism—that there is no Creator and the universe just created itself from nothing.5 But when that view encounters data that contradicts it, isn’t it time to abandon their ‘dark’ mythology? They could then instead consider the possibility that the universe is not as old as they imagine, that it was created about 6,000 years ago, as the Bible indicates. That being the case, it is no wonder those fast stars have not had time to fly apart.

References and notes

  1. Hartnett, J.G., Why is dark matter everywhere in the cosmos? creation.com/dark-matter-everywhere, March 2015. Return to text.
  2. Bazilchuk, N., Dark matter: how can we know if it exists? ScienceNordic.com, April 2016. Return to text.
  3. CMI editor: Recently retired as an Associate Professor in Physics at the University of Adelaide (and formerly at the University of Western Australia). After retirement Dr Hartnett has been involved in a small startup company to commercialise his research in the development of ultra-stable clocks. See www.cryoclock.com. He has published more than 100 papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals and more than 100 conference papers, with international honours and awards. See creation.com/hartnett. Return to text.
  4. Howard, G., Can all those scientists be wrong? Creation 36(1):20–22, January 2014; creation.com/scientists-wrong. Return to text.
  5. Hartnett, J.G., On the origin of universes by means of natural selection—or, blinded by big bang blackness, creation.com/origin-of-universes, October 2014. Return to text.

Readers’ comments

King T.
I must confess whenever I hear or read these terms that a little chuckle rises up: How appropriately named!!!
Dark matter, dark energy, dark planets, dark stars and who knows whatever else, all in the kingdom of darkness ruled over by the prince of darkness.
Those who reject the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob continue to live on in darkness, forsaking the light that was given in favour of the enshrouding dark that enables mankind to assume they can hide their shame.
John N.
It makes me wonder if our notions of cosmology are correct. When we see the notions the world has about that subject it starts off with thinking there is no God that did it all. There are lots of problems with every theory that comes to be. The Big Bang has it's troubles. And then I look at scripture and know that it is correct when it touches on the subject. Something about the sky or the heavens rolling up like a scroll. Is that a description of what we could infer from our point of view? Or is it a description that is more general? My undergraduate understanding of Physics is not adequate. But it is fascinating. I just take comfort in knowing that God did indeed create it all. We can determine a good part of the characteristics of that which He did. And probably not all of it. So we go about finding these things. Only by a testing of some sort can we really come to some understanding. Our minds may infer wrongly and sometimes logical reasoning can kind of go off track if it isn't kept in check. It will take some time to sort it out. Thank you for helping us see some of those things that need to be reckoned with. It will be interesting to see how this develops over the years. Praise God for His majesty and glory in it all.
Geoff C. W.
I'm not too clear on this, but don't we say that things are a lot older beyond our solar system - I'm referring to ideas I've read about the distant starlight 'problem'? Thanks.
John Hartnett
Good question. When we consider the age of the universe based on a straightforward reading of Genesis 1, the important thing is that the universe must be no more than about 6000 years old as measured by Earth's clocks. That last phase is very important. So there are a few possibilities. The cosmos may have a lot of processes that have occurred over hundreds of millions of years as measured by local cosmic clocks on those galaxies, but when measured by Earth's clocks those processes must fit within 6000 years. Otherwise your proposed model of the creation of the cosmos is wrong. My article here is simply suggesting that the galaxies with fast stars have not flown apart because they are not that old, in fact, less than 6000 years as measured by Earth's clocks but also by their own local clocks. In this view no time dilation has occurred.
Tim L.
It would seem to me somewhat problematic to propose that dark matter is not necessary because God created the universe in an unstable state. If nothing else, it would seem that you would then need to explain the design advantage obtained by creating an unstable universe. In any case, I don't think it is justified to say that the existence of dark matter is only necessary from a materialistic worldview. It is an effort to explain why, to varying degrees, things do not move the way we would expect on the galactic scale. If that is unnecessary, then why are we doing the work of science in the first place?
John Hartnett
In this article I am offering a possible explanation for the apparent enigma that astrophysicists have been facing for some time. And it gets worse as time progresses. There are others, secular scientists, who have suggested solutions to the dark matter crisis but they have not gotten much traction. Please read Has the dark matter mystery been solved?
Gert P.
Wow! Short but sweet! I always knew about the dark matter thing, but to need 80-90% dark matter to keep a model afloat is ridiculous, it's absurd, absolutely mind blowing how they are clinging to straws!
Howard K.
Thank you, Dr. Hartnett for standing up for biblical creation! I have learned a lot from you, and from your cohorts at CMI. I would like to know if it is possible that the materialists' measurement of distances in the known universe could be as far off as their measurement of time? I do not know how they do it, so I cannot judge for myself. If their distance measurements were wildly exaggerated, wouldn't their measurement of the speed of star revolution also be wrong?
I think that this article is important because, as theoretical physics moves farther and farther into fantasyland, the gap between real physics and "fake physics" will grow ever wider. Perhaps some physicists will realize that theoretical physics leads to wrong conclusions that are not only useless, but potentially disastrous for the discipline. Maybe some of them will convert, like Spike Psarris, who says that the bad science started him on the journey to Christian faith.
John Hartnett
I won't go into details of how distances are measured but at least to our local galactic neighbourhood the methods are reasonable and the distance scales and sizes of galaxies are quite well known. I would not look there for a problem. At most distance scales might be wring by a factor less than about 2. But that would not solve any of these issues. Besides if you are thinking that if the size of the universe was 10 billion times smaller then there would be no starlight travel time problem, you should realise that that argument just would not work. It would mean the density of galaxies was so much more than any reasonable measure would allow.

A far simpler explanation is that we see the stars/galaxies as they are in real time and the universe is only 6000 years old. Then how do you deal with the distances. You don't need to change them if you realise that to know how long it takes light to travel the billions of light-years from distant galaxies to Earth depends on your assumption on the one-way (incoming) speed of light. But because that cannot be measured you cannot say how long it takes. It could take no time at all and hence we are seeing the stars/galaxies in real time. To read my latest thinking on this read the following "Einstein’s physics says there is no biblical creationist starlight travel-time problem, A review of The Physics of Einstein: Black holes, time travel, distant starlight, E=mc2 (Jason Lisle), Book Review by John G. Hartnett" J. Creation 33(2):22-27, 2019, "The effects of the Curse visible in the cosmos present another biblical creationist starlight travel-time problem" J. Creation 33(2):73-76, 2019 and "The conventionality thesis and biblical creation" J. Creation 33(3): 115-121, 2019.
Dan M.
Yes Dr. Hartnett, It's like we are returning to the days of mythological greek science where incorrect geocentrism and elementary science ruled the day. Although the greeks can be forgiven for their ignorance since they did not have the fancy instruments available to scientists, (philosophers) today. Also the greeks made use of scientific observation but came to the wrong conclusions so they can be forgiven. These days secular science just makes stuff up based on, well I don't know what? Can't see it, can't touch it, can't detect it, but just believe them, It's there? Sorry my faith in a thing only goes so far. I need some proof. Like the biblical account that explains what I see, (flood geology, ect.) and why things are what they are, (sin, entropy, death). I am not capable of the kind of faith to believe in a myth like greek gods or dark matter, (may the force be with you). On the other hand the bible has a wonderful track record and is easy to believe! All you have to do is, open your mind and you will see it. It is our, (humanities) stubbornness that got us into this mess and it is stubbornness that prevents us from accepting the cure. I confess my own stubborn streak, LORD, and i've been forgiven.
Martyn M.
John, if time, affected by gravity and perhaps other things during creation week, could be way slower on earth than the time on other galaxies, hence millions or billions of years could pass out there within one earth year as you have explained elsewhere then how how does that fit with the universe being not that old?
John Hartnett
Various creationists have proposed time dilation models for the cosmos where time flowed faster on galaxies than on earth during creation week. I suggest something else here, that we are seeing the stars/galaxies in real time. See my other answers to Comments here. Also have look at "Can we see into the past?" on my own blog site.
Gian Carlo B.
I’ve read Lisle’s entire book of “The Physics of Einstein”, and I believe CMI and biblical creation astrophysicists should embrace the conventionality thesis along with the ASC model. ICC 2018 has published articles that fine tune Lisle’s ASC model and is very promising. I think the ASC model and their fine tuned versions will prove very promising.
Chris M.
Anytime I read on Big Bang stuff all they really comes to mind is the quote:

“Lend us a couple miracles and then we’ll explain the rest.”

Totally insane that these people can believe everything came from nothing. Nuts.
Willem D.
Just as some other readers, I'm confused. You say the reason we see galaxies with their spiral structure still intact is that they simply didn't have time to disintegrate because they're only 6000 years old. And the reason we can see distant stars, and structures like remnants of stellar explosions, colliding galaxies, jets of matter stretching out many light-years and stuff like that, things that must have required a much longer time than 6000 years to form if they really are what they appear to be instead of just being created structures without there ever being an explosion or a collision, is time-dilation, the idea that billions of years of time passed in outer space, while earth experienced just minutes or hours. But both explanations are mutually exclusive: if the first explanation is correct, we wouldn't see the things we see, and if the second explanation is correct, creationists need dark matter too to explain what we see. So I fail to see the point of this article.
John Hartnett
Firstly the point being made is that if we are seeing the galaxies as they are now in real time (no time lag) and that there has only been 6000 years of galactic history we do not need to contend with the entities from the dark sector. Stars are moving fast but that is no concern in that scenario. Secondly the claim you make with the words "things that must have required a much longer time than 6000 years to form" is you imposing your own understanding, by making an assumption not based on the Bible but your own prior belief. That invokes some sort of time dilation in the universe which has been extensively explored by myself and Russ Humphreys. That idea remains a possibility though I no longer think it very plausible. All time dilation cosmologies based on the ESC (Einstein Synchrony convention) have another light-travel time problem. That light-travel time problem is not solvable with the ESC but it is solvable within the ASC (Anisotropic Synchrony convention) which needs no time dilation (though it is no ruled out). See J.G. Hartnett "The effects of the Curse visible in the cosmos present another biblical creationist starlight travel-time problem" J. Creation 33(2): 73–76, 2019.
Michael S.
I suppose since there are various attempts to explain the speed of light within the creation model to some degree the readers are missing the point. Logically Dr H. is saying that there is an answer to the speed of the stars in spiral arms, an inference that would make sense of the facts without invoking begging-the-question baloney in various forms of "dark" rhetoric.

That inference is that if millions/billions of years had not passed, then there is no problem, because the stars simply haven't escaped their galaxies yet. That seems like a more rational conclusion than inventing dark syrup that doesn't exist.

Conclusion: It seems there is now a list of this "dark" stuff, and we all know where philosophies of darkness really stem from! Like Dr H said in the article, the only reason they invoke dark stuff is because their materialist philosophlegm simply does not work. They get to toy with the facts to fit their foolish notion that the universe is the result of a tornado whipping through a junkyard and assembling a 747 jet. I say, forget all of the theorising, because lets face it all such cosmology is a bunch of untestable, speculative gibberish. Isn't it clear that the Lord simply has us foxed? My answer: so what. That's even expected, He is God, for crying out loud.
Vlad S.
Dr. John H., I read your blogs that you recommended here. I understood - a bit - the problem of measuring a one-way speed of light. However, I have a silly question. What happens when Space Agencies like NASA/ESA operate their robots on Mars? Does ASC assume, provided epsilon = 1, that from a NASA operator's perspective X minutes pass till the command reaches the robot, but from the latter's perspective the command will be received instantaneously? Does ASC also mean that we see the sun instantaneously, not after 8 minutes of travel time? Again, provided epsilon = 1? Thanks.
John Hartnett
All that can be measured is the rountrip time from sending a signal from NASA base to the robot on Mars to when the signal is received back. This is the same regardless of the assumed timing convention. So nothing changes on the operational physics. Using ASC you can conclude that the light from the sun or the signal from the robot arrives instantly without any travel time. But using the ASC with the Mars robot you would also then have to say that the outgoing signal travels at 1/2 c. Thus the average rountrip speed is c, which is the only measurable.
David B.
From a number of reports I've read, gravitational lensing examples include some which indicate a greater gravitational effect than the normally-detectable matter in those areas. I don't think it's so much a matter of creationists having a problem with Dark Matter, as it is we don't necessarily NEED it, and the "evidence" for the huge amounts included in cosmological evolution models is simply the assumption that something is holding spinning galaxies together.

Some people object to the notion that God would create an "unstable" universe, but why should God conform the universe to our desire to have it neat and tidy? There are a lot of "messy" things needed on Earth to support life, and many cosmic "disasters" in space, but are these things really bad? Don't we love fireworks? I like the idea of galaxies being made so they would fling stars out across the voids.

Likewise, people don't like the idea of God creating things that "look old," but what "looks old" is an opinion based on assumptions that ignore the full import of Genesis 1:1-2.

Comments are automatically closed 14 days after publication.