Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Researcher: Finding helium hydride today confirms its presence from within 100,000 years of the Big Bang

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email
This image represents the evolution of the Universe, starting with the Big Bang. The red arrow marks the flow of time.
Big Bang/NASA

Helium hydride had been theorized to emerge within 100,000 years of the Big Bang but had not been detected outside the lab:

The helium hydride ions seen in NGC 7027 were created in the planetary nebula, rather than being leftover from the early universe. But their existence confirms that helium hydride ions can exist outside the lab, which means that theoretical simulations of the primordial cosmos aren’t in serious need of revision.

Adam Perry, who studied helium hydride while at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, likens the new find to unearthing a fossil that fills a missing link in animal evolution. “Everybody knew [helium hydride] had to be out there,” says Perry, who wasn’t involved in the study. But “where before there wasn’t any hard evidence, now there is.… People who do astrochemistry are going to be very excited about this.” Maria Temming, “The first type of molecule to form in the universe has been seen in space” at Science News

Compared to evidence-free claims about the multiverse, news about the filling in of the missing pieces of Big Bang cosmology attracts little attention. Could that be because, however well-attested, the Big Bang is unpopular among cosmologists? (Due, we are told, to its apparent theistic implications.)

See also: Researchers: Universe’s proposed first chemical detected for the first time Researcher: “‘The lack of evidence of HeH+ caused some doubts whether we do understand the formation and destruction of this special molecule as well as we thought,’ Güsten tells Chemistry World. ‘This concern is gone now.’”

Hugh Ross: How recent measurements support the Big Bang theory Maybe the cosmologists who don’t like the theistic implications of the Big Bang can overthrow the current universe and appoint another one?

and

The Big Bang: Put simply,the facts are wrong.

Comments
Could that be because, however well-attested, the Big Bang is unpopular among cosmologists? (Due, we are told, to its apparent theistic implications.)
Not really, no. The big bang is pretty much universally accepted among cosmologists (and astronomers and physicists and...). (Its alleged theistic implications, on the other hand, are not generally taken seriously.) That's why this isn't big news; it doesn't tell us anything we didn't pretty much already know.Gordon Davisson
April 23, 2019
April
04
Apr
23
23
2019
08:33 PM
8
08
33
PM
PDT
relatively speaking 100k is to 13.8B years as x days is to 5,779 years. so w/in the first few days of creation is w/in statistical margin.. reference the Moshe Emes series for understanding science outside the deep-time dependent current consensus box..Pearlman
April 18, 2019
April
04
Apr
18
18
2019
02:04 PM
2
02
04
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply