Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Alternative Cosmology?
CosmicAtheist
Member (Idle past 4891 days)
Posts: 31
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 04-07-2010


Message 1 of 25 (559657)
05-10-2010 11:17 PM


Recently I have been taking a small break from Evolution to go back to a topic of strong interest in my past: Cosmology. This is really nothing new but I just wanted to get a discussion going:
Open Letter on Cosmology
What has the scientific community that specializes in cosmology have to say about this or had said? I also recall some conferences that were organized about the issue. One of their arguments are based on how the BBT requires the addition of things like dark matter that have not been observed or w/e and is just speculative. See the article for yourself and tell me what you think.
More info: A Cosmology Group
Do you think the recent results for the XENON100 will stimulate a new pool of ideas on our current cosmological model (BBT) or perhaps seek to formulate a new model/competing model all together?
XEON link: Search for Dark Matter Still Empty-Handed, Scientists Say | Space
I am not arguing against the BBT but out of my lack of understanding in comparison with many people here on the forums, I would like to get familiar with these other concepts.
Edited by CosmicAtheist, : No reason given.
Edited by CosmicAtheist, : No reason given.
Edited by CosmicAtheist, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by tesla, posted 05-11-2010 10:53 AM CosmicAtheist has not replied
 Message 4 by slevesque, posted 05-11-2010 5:16 PM CosmicAtheist has replied
 Message 6 by Taq, posted 05-11-2010 5:58 PM CosmicAtheist has replied
 Message 23 by Bikerman, posted 07-30-2010 10:13 PM CosmicAtheist has not replied

  
AdminSlev
Member (Idle past 4640 days)
Posts: 113
Joined: 03-28-2010


Message 2 of 25 (559670)
05-11-2010 1:23 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Alternative Cosmology? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1593 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 3 of 25 (559733)
05-11-2010 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by CosmicAtheist
05-10-2010 11:17 PM


tag
quote:
Do you think the recent results for the XENON100 will stimulate a new pool of ideas on our current cosmological model (BBT) or perhaps seek to formulate a new model/competing model all together?
I do not believe those results alone will be enough. But i am pleased to see that data is being collected.
One problem that physicists and other scientists are haveing with matter; is that outside the condition of extreme gravitational forces, heavier elements do not have the sufficient environment to remain stable.
trying to create dark matter on earth is like trying to keep a human body alive in space with no spacesuit. the vacuum just rips it apart.
I do not have the sufficient education to further comment, however i will watch the discussion in hopes i might learn something

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-10-2010 11:17 PM CosmicAtheist has not replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4640 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 4 of 25 (559793)
05-11-2010 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by CosmicAtheist
05-10-2010 11:17 PM


I think this is a very interesting topic to look after in the up coming years. I could see a paradigm shift coming in cosmology if enough counter-evidence to the current BBT can pile up to become unavoidable.
Dark matter and energy are areas where I could see the paradigm shifting early. I'm sure cavediver remembers how I once called them fudge factors, and I still think they are.
It's like back when Newton's theory of universal gravity came to explain a lot of incredible things, but failed to explain the precession of the perihelion of the orbit of Mercury. To explain the difference, an ''unknown'' planet named Vulcan was hypothesied to exist.Some looked for that planet for over 50 years. We now know that the answer lied elsewhere, namely new physics with Einstein's relativity.
I think it is a distinct possibility that the same is happening with dark matter. We have been searching for it for what, at least 20-30 years now ? With no concensus on what it is, and only very disputed evidence of it's detection. Maybe then the answer to the discrepencies dark matter is hypothesied to explain will in fact be answered from another direction, maybe new physics once again ?
I'm sure the old-schoolers in physics such as Cavediver will disagree with me. But then again, that's why we need young and naive New-comers on the scene like me
AbE I read a quote on that phenomenon once, something along the liens of ''science progresses with the replacement of the old minds''. (It may be something worded totally differently, but this was the essence of the message)
Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-10-2010 11:17 PM CosmicAtheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 5:45 PM slevesque has replied
 Message 14 by cavediver, posted 05-11-2010 7:08 PM slevesque has replied
 Message 24 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 04-25-2011 6:11 AM slevesque has not replied

  
CosmicAtheist
Member (Idle past 4891 days)
Posts: 31
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 04-07-2010


Message 5 of 25 (559800)
05-11-2010 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by slevesque
05-11-2010 5:16 PM


I wonder what this would mean though? How much changing in our understanding in Cosmology/Astronomy will be required? Will we then have to find new methods of measuring distant objects or throw some theories away? What would this entail?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by slevesque, posted 05-11-2010 5:16 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by slevesque, posted 05-11-2010 6:16 PM CosmicAtheist has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 6 of 25 (559804)
05-11-2010 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by CosmicAtheist
05-10-2010 11:17 PM


Do you think the recent results for the XENON100 will stimulate a new pool of ideas on our current cosmological model (BBT) or perhaps seek to formulate a new model/competing model all together?
I think these results will stimulate a new pool of ideas on how to detect dark matter particles. The gravitational effects of dark matter are accepted by most, and the XENON100 results (or rather non-results) do not cast doubt on this data.
To use an analogy, in the generation after Galileo many were still skeptical of heliocentrism and they had a similar gripe. No one had observed stellar parallax. Surely we should see stars wobbling in the night sky if we were moving about the sun. Well, they were wobbling but not as much as some people expected them too. They had to wait for methodology and technology to catch up. This may very well be the case for dark matter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-10-2010 11:17 PM CosmicAtheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 6:07 PM Taq has replied

  
CosmicAtheist
Member (Idle past 4891 days)
Posts: 31
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 04-07-2010


Message 7 of 25 (559805)
05-11-2010 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Taq
05-11-2010 5:58 PM


Perhaps, which is why I am not completely against the BBT, but I have read some websites with stimulating new ideas as you mentioned. But don't you think after 30 years of failing to detect dark matter that there should be more funding towards alternative explanations like plasma cosmology? I am not saying they should ditch dark matter but open up new possibilities.
Plasma cosmology - Wikipedia Wiki on Plasma Cosmology, interesting stuff.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Taq, posted 05-11-2010 5:58 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Taq, posted 05-11-2010 8:01 PM CosmicAtheist has not replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4640 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 8 of 25 (559809)
05-11-2010 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by CosmicAtheist
05-11-2010 5:45 PM


New physics would probably change a lot of things, but I do think that they would still be compatible with a Big Bang type of cosmology. This is because it would have to be compatible with universal gravity and General relativity. It won't come in and contradict those two.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 5:45 PM CosmicAtheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 6:25 PM slevesque has replied

  
CosmicAtheist
Member (Idle past 4891 days)
Posts: 31
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 04-07-2010


Message 9 of 25 (559814)
05-11-2010 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by slevesque
05-11-2010 6:16 PM


Interestingly enough I was reading on how Einsteins theory could be wrong and need a bigger revamp in New Physics than we thought:
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=was-einstein-wrong-about-relativity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by slevesque, posted 05-11-2010 6:16 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by slevesque, posted 05-11-2010 6:46 PM CosmicAtheist has replied
 Message 11 by cavediver, posted 05-11-2010 6:50 PM CosmicAtheist has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4640 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 10 of 25 (559820)
05-11-2010 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by CosmicAtheist
05-11-2010 6:25 PM


Do you have the whole article ???
Because just that intro didn't inspire me any confidence in the knowledge of the author. radio waves propagate through the air ?? Seriously ?
AbE And as CD said, you should always have a healthy very high level of skepticism when someone claims Relativity could be wrong. It's one of the most verified theory in all of science in my opinion.
Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 6:25 PM CosmicAtheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 7:00 PM slevesque has not replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 11 of 25 (559822)
05-11-2010 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by CosmicAtheist
05-11-2010 6:25 PM


Interestingly enough I was reading on how Einsteins theory could be wrong and need a bigger revamp in New Physics than we thought:
No, just yet another case of idiot layman science writers not having the first clue about what they are writing. We've covered this common misunderstanding several times here at EvC, yet the popular science press can still make money by printing bullshit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 6:25 PM CosmicAtheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 7:00 PM cavediver has replied

  
CosmicAtheist
Member (Idle past 4891 days)
Posts: 31
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 04-07-2010


Message 12 of 25 (559823)
05-11-2010 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by slevesque
05-11-2010 6:46 PM


No you have to pay for that, sorry I was foolish enough to post such. So I will give you another link:
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/44738
Once again I am just asking questions, come from an ignorant perspective and like learning what other people say hence why I post here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by slevesque, posted 05-11-2010 6:46 PM slevesque has not replied

  
CosmicAtheist
Member (Idle past 4891 days)
Posts: 31
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 04-07-2010


Message 13 of 25 (559824)
05-11-2010 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by cavediver
05-11-2010 6:50 PM


Could you link me to some threads for me to read?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by cavediver, posted 05-11-2010 6:50 PM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by cavediver, posted 05-11-2010 7:11 PM CosmicAtheist has replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 14 of 25 (559826)
05-11-2010 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by slevesque
05-11-2010 5:16 PM


Dark matter and energy are areas where I could see the paradigm shifting early. I'm sure cavediver remembers how I once called them fudge factors, and I still think they are.
That's 'cos you still don't understand them Anyone who groups the two together so naively will never be taken seriously. Dark energy has always been half expected by those of us in theoretical phsyics and was no real surprise - though a fantastic discovery. How does that equate to a fudge?
Dark matter on the other hand was a surprise, and requires a much more complex answer. However, the vast majority of observations suggest that cold dark matter (WIMPs) forms the primary component, as opposed to just about every other conceivable way of changing physics to accomodate observation.
Critics seem to have this bizarre notion that we guess an answer that seems cool, and then consider the problem solved. Although a tempting way of working, surprisingly real science does not progress this way...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by slevesque, posted 05-11-2010 5:16 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by slevesque, posted 05-11-2010 7:27 PM cavediver has replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 15 of 25 (559828)
05-11-2010 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by CosmicAtheist
05-11-2010 7:00 PM


Could you link me to some threads for me to read?
I'm crap at linking stuff. Just use search with "entanglement" and "bell's theorem" and you'll find more than enough.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 7:00 PM CosmicAtheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by CosmicAtheist, posted 05-11-2010 7:18 PM cavediver has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024