Alternative Cosmology?

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.

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.

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.

I grouped them in the sense I could see a paradigm shift happening in both areas, not that they were both interrelated and/or the same.And in what sense are you saying 'half-expected' ? In the sense 'it was predicted' or in the sense 'the theory could accomodate it' ? (or maybe some other sense) Of course, you can hypothezise new undetectable particles to accomodate observation, just as you can add epicyles on a geocentric system to make it fit the observations. And it'll work.But that's the whole idea of a paradigm shift. It attacks the problem from a whole new angle (maybe the sun is at the center ?). Likewise, New physics shouldn't be discarded, especially if they come in the form of complementing General Relativity in the same way it itself complemented Newton's Universal gravity. But of course, this is not what I did. I still consider this problem to be wide-open in the scientific community.