What is the current scientific explanation of the big bang theory?

If there had been a big bang, the first mass would have boiled off slowly be cause of the gravitational pull of the remaining mass. So the stars would have proceeded out in a ring as inner stars caught up with the first ones, something like a supernova. The way astrophysicists get around this is by saying that the stars are not moving out through the ether or aether, but that the ether or space time itself is expanding.

This is a safe hypothesis because there is no way to disprove it The big bang depends on the assumption that the cosmological red shift is a Doppler shift of light losing frequency by virtue of its source moving away from us. I think that the red shift is actually from gravitational intersection of the photons with masses passed in space. To see this developed access geocities.com/isoptera.geo/redaw.html .

If this is so, there was no big bang, just an infinite Universe.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.