The Progressive Figments Of Cosmological Imagination

The WASP project had discovered a planet that falsifies the nebular hypothesis.  A planet’s orbit is going the wrong way according to what they believe how the universe works.  In order to explain this falsification, they add it to the list of collisions or near collisions with no evidence.   How could an outside force with unbelievable and astronomical gravity be able with precision, slow the planet known as Wasp-17 down and then reverse it’s orbit without ripping it apart?  Not possible!  There is nothing in the known universe that has been observed which fits such a description to verify its existence.

Another rapid process baffles astronomers which is suppose to be slow in evolutionary thinking…

“Planets form out of swirling disks of gas and dust. Spitzer observed infrared light coming from one such disk around a young star, called LRLL 31, over a period of five months. To the astronomers’ surprise, the light varied in unexpected ways, and in as little time as one week. Planets take millions of years to form, so it’s rare to see anything change on time scales we humans can perceive.”

The Universe is not as old as these astronomers claim it is with their faulty speculation on how planets are formed while things in the space are moving much faster indicating it’s youthfulness. Looking forward to see what else Spitzer is able to observe.

A paper called; “Cosmology at a Crossroads” written by Charles L. Bennett (Johns Hopkins) gives us an historical background about what he believes are pivotal discoveries that propelled 20th century cosmology: Hubble’s expansion, Zwicky’s dark matter, Penzias and Wilson’s cosmic microwave background (CMB), and Guth’s inflationary cosmology.

He writes…

“A fundamental question in cosmology is, “How did the universe begin?”  The two pivotal ideas of inflation and cold dark matter (CDM), combined with extensive observational results, including the unpredicted accelerated expansion of the universe, underpin a new standard model of cosmology.”

“However, the big bang theory only describes the expansion and cooling but says nothing about the origin of the universe.  Within the standard model, the beginning of the universe is effectively “inflation,” the rapid expansion of a tiny region of space to astronomical scales.  Inflation is a paradigm that encompasses a wide range of specific implementations that are at the intersection of quantum and gravity theories, the two great but incompatible theories of 20th century physics.  Measurements of inflation not only will probe the origin of the universe but also may help reveal the basic structure of physics itself.”

Here Bennett tries to claim inflation makes predictions, and it can be measured. Let me remind Mr Bennett inflation is not observable data, also he  states; “Inflation is a paradigm that encompasses a wide range of specific implementations that are at the intersection of quantum and gravity theories, the two great but incompatible theories of 20th century physics.”

I will give him credit and the rest, it takes a lot of imagination to come up with this stuff.  The Inflation story is nothing more than trying to rescue the big bang from not one but three observational falsifications, the horizon problem, the flatness problem, and of course, the lumpiness problem.  Eternal energy has been inserted for the problem of the universe being created out of nothing which defies the laws of physics.  All this speculation doesn’t serve the public at large, but rather job security (funding) and story telling.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “The Progressive Figments Of Cosmological Imagination

  1. Michael’s Ghost Writer: “I will give him credit and the rest, it takes a lot of imagination to come up with this stuff. ”

    No. What takes a lot of imagination is ways to explain how the spied of light managed to slow down in exactly the right way to make a 14-billion year old universe look just like a 6,000 year old universe. How sediment deposited at a known rate of cm/year suddenly laid down thousands of feet in a few days of a world-wide flood. How animals that originally ate shoots and leaves evolved meat-eating dentition, digestive tracts, and hunting behaviors instantaneously at the Fall. How, after the Flood, animals were able to populate continents separated from each other by thousands of miles of ocean. How the Earth can be only thousands of years old when we can count annual ice layers in glaciers back for 500,000 years. How daughter isotopes can change their separate radioactive decay rates in perfect synchronization with each other to make millions of years appear to be thousands of years.

    Now THAT takes a lot of imagination!

  2. Michael’s Ghost: “Let me remind Mr Bennett inflation is not observable data,”

    Just as creation is not observable data. Just as a global flood is not observable data. Just as God is not observable.

    Ah, you say, but we infer them from their effects.

    Just as we infer inflation from the configuration of the cosmic background radiation. Just as we infer dark matter from its gravitational effects.

    So, same deal. Except that we have observable evidence to back up our inferences.

  3. NEWS FLASH: Ancient Skeleton Ancient Skeleton May Rewrite Earliest Chapter of Human Evolution (ScienceNOW Daily News, 1 October 2009)

    Lots of new material to sift through. Some bones are crushed. Scientists scratch their heads in puzzlement. Humans qnd chimps didn’t have a common ancestor after all? Apes evolved more than thought since they diverged from humans.

    Since creationists do not allow transitional fossils, it will be interesting to see how they shovel these fossils into one or the other of the two allowable bins: Human and non-human primate. Hurry. Tempus fidgets, as they say.

  4. Michael (the paid ghost writer of this nonsense):

    again you display complete ignorance on the topic of cosmology, but make wild accusations anyway. As a professional cosmologist, I find your conclusions pathetically insulting. If inflation turns out to be a false idea, then fine by me. It would actually generate MORE funding into cosmology, as we would be all very exited and frantically trying to come up with something new !

    And of course inflation makes predictions, just look up any textbook on the topic. But you won’t, as you’ve proven over and over again.

  5. Michael, I am still curious how much you get put all this nonsense on the web on behalve of …. well, who, actually ?

    That’s two questions. I dare you to answer them !

  6. Oops, that first sentence should read “… how much you get paid to put all this …”

  7. And ‘behalve’ should be ‘behalf’.

    Just helping Michael out to increase the comments count a bit … he can do the same by answering the questions !

  8. Eelco,

    Getting a bit snippy there huh? Why are you lowering yourself to the level of name calling? Predictions you say, out of what? Let me quote your buddy, Benett again, “Inflation is a paradigm that encompasses a wide range of specific implementations that are at the intersection of quantum and gravity theories, the two great but incompatible theories of 20th century physics.”

    Note this again, “two incompatible theories” which means inflation is nothing more than a moldable paradigm between two non-intersecting theories. You can’t make predictions out of something that murky and then try and pass that off as science. If that was possible, then one could make predictions with 4 or 5 incompatible theories molded together into one, the sky would be the limit but it’s not true science, it’s imagination running wild.

  9. My ‘buddy’ Bennett ? But you cannot read, can you … Bennett says that gravity and quantum field theory have not been made compatible yet. In other words, there is no quantum gravity theory yet ! THAT is what he is saying, and this does not bear on the theory of inflation. It is not murky at all (whether it is right or wrong is to be seen, of course), and does make testable predictions. I do not know why he wants inflation to be at an ‘intersection’, but it is interesting that you are happy to take seriously straight away what Bennett has to say, without questioning it ! I personally do not see inflation that way. It is a theory in its own right, and not a ‘moldable paradigm’. That is just insulting, and shows your complete ignorance of this theory. Read one of the books by Andrew Liddle, for example, so that you actually know the theory that you insult.

    And where am I calling you names ? You have actually proven to mostly copy-and-paste things from elsewhere, hence the term ‘ghost writer’. This is my conclusion about your writing, not name calling. There are lots of professional ghost writers in the world, which is fine as long as they are up front about it, which you are not. Olorin has shown this quite a few times now.

    But at least you are finally reacting …

  10. Eelco,

    Let’s take something you can observe like the weather, we use pattern recognition to predict the weather but we also have an incomplete understanding of atmospheric processes which means predicting the weather becomes less accurate. To predict the weather more accurately, we use model consensus rather than two incompatible models which are considered “great” by scientists. We also don’t see for our lack of understanding about atmospheric processes another model being embraced with making predictions based or not on two different models which are incompatible. Inflation like dark matter was to fill in a void. Smoothness in the universe puzzled scientists, it would be wrong to say inflation predicted it. Alan Guth invented the concept of inflation 29 years ago. Unlike weather patterns which the scientific method is used, inflation is not observable, it’s based on a story to solve problems of the big bang.

  11. Michael: “To predict the weather more accurately, we use model consensus rather than two incompatible models which are considered ‘great’ by scientists.”

    So you don’t know anything about meteorology either?

    The molecular level of weather prediction uses chemical theories involving discrete entities. High levels use hydrodynamic equations that neither allow nor utilize discrete entities. In the middle, they’re both useful. This is not consensus.

    This is the sort of incompatibility betweeen quantum theory and relativity. It’s not like an incompatibility between, say, one God of Islam and two Gods of Mithraism, where there is no room for compromise

  12. @Michael:
    You keep on displaying a complete ignorance of the theory of inflation, which most certainly does make testable predictions. My own prediction was that you would not look up any textbook about inflation at all, and indeed you haven’t. You still talk nonsense about this topic. You still go on about two “incompatible” models (gravity and quantum field theory, I guess), and you make the point that this “imcompatibility” renders inflation invalid. So again, that is nonsense, or a non-sequitur, if you like to put it politely.

    Inflation is not a story, it is a theory. And of course it was put together to solve some problems in cosmology: that is exactly what science does, and is supposed to do !! Do you actually understand what science is all about ? I do not think so.

  13. Michael: “Let’s take something you can observe like the weather, we use pattern recognition to predict the weather….”

    Pattern recognition to predict weather??? You’re even moire ignorant than your source!

    Don’t you even think about this stuff before you write?

  14. Michael: “Michael: “Let’s take something you can observe like the weather, we use pattern recognition to predict the weather….”

    Michael, thank you for this wonderful line. Two weeks later, I’m still using it for lots of laughs.

    And the one about the small 145 My fossil being lower in the column that the big 60My fossil because the water rose. Still gets the laughs.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s