Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 0/65 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What got into Hoyle?
aristarchus
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 31
Joined: 01-11-2005


Message 11 of 38 (398486)
05-01-2007 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Brad McFall
04-26-2007 8:32 PM


Re: Polkinghorne on Hoyle's reasoning process
Brad, since this is the first time I've been able to interpret one of your posts, I feel compelled to break my lurker status and respond.
Your account is accurate. But it refers to the "five nucleon problem". Hoyle reasoned that for us to exist the universe had to provide a way for carbon to be formed, and since we exist, there was a way. He found that if helium had a particular energy level, the problem would be solved. He contacted Willy Fowler at Cal Tech, to have him look for helium at that energy level. Fowler was skeptical, but gave in. Sure enough, he found what Hoyle predicted.
For those curious, I got this story from Simon Singh's "Big Bang".
Edited by barfly, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Brad McFall, posted 04-26-2007 8:32 PM Brad McFall has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Brad McFall, posted 05-01-2007 5:07 PM aristarchus has not replied

  
aristarchus
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 31
Joined: 01-11-2005


Message 12 of 38 (398488)
05-01-2007 12:25 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Percy
04-26-2007 3:59 PM


From what I've read about him, there are a few reasons for his position on the Big Bang Theory.
First,from his childhood, he had a defiant nature that made him prone to defying authority and convention.
Second, I think his atheism made a theory that came from a priest that and postulated a defnite beginning to the universe anathema.
Third, he had a problem with fact that the BBT apparently violated relativity.
Edited by barfly, : No reason given.
Edited by barfly, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Percy, posted 04-26-2007 3:59 PM Percy has not replied

  
aristarchus
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 31
Joined: 01-11-2005


Message 19 of 38 (398603)
05-01-2007 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by PaulK
05-01-2007 4:33 PM


Re: The Reasons....
The incident with the Nobel committee is something that could be to his credit. Pissing them off to expose what he felt was an injustice to another person is commendable.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by PaulK, posted 05-01-2007 4:33 PM PaulK has not replied

  
aristarchus
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 31
Joined: 01-11-2005


Message 23 of 38 (398609)
05-01-2007 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by JustinC
05-01-2007 5:24 PM


Re: Polkinghorne on Hoyle's reasoning process
I originally posted from memory. I just checked my source and it was carbon.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by JustinC, posted 05-01-2007 5:24 PM JustinC has not replied

  
aristarchus
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 31
Joined: 01-11-2005


Message 25 of 38 (398611)
05-01-2007 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Hyroglyphx
05-01-2007 5:30 PM


Re: The Reasons....
As for his Steady State theory, his reasons for not believing in an expanding universe may have had more to do with some personal philosophical dilemmas than they did with actual data that countered the Red Shift.
Actually, I don't think Hoyle questioned the expansion of the universe, he just came up with a different explanation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Hyroglyphx, posted 05-01-2007 5:30 PM Hyroglyphx 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