The Theory of Relativity will begin to fall apart in 2016/2017

[Bjarne]

the badly edited extract from that interview has an indistinct first word that I heard as "If" even before I heard the "But If" in the full interview.

Either you

• is a liar
• a manipulator
• or you have dirt in your ears.

Try to google......"We see these strange patterns that are not expected in inflationary theory, the simplest inflationary theories. It may be that we've been fooled, that inflation didn't happen."

You can read many quotes exactly like this at the Internet.

NO ONE have ever quote any "if" (except you), -

Furthermore why should George Etstahiou speculate whether he see this or that , - he know what have been seen,. there are no logical "if" , rather there are without any doubt a stange pattern in the WMAP, that not is understood..

So in best case dear RC buy some of these...
[qimg]http://www.entorlando.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/cottonswabs-web.jpg[/qimg]

That your posts contain ignorance, fantasies, delusions and even some lies, Bjarne?
The RR fantasy appearing on 15 October 2009 here, continued ignorance of high school level science and digging a pit of fantasies from Bjarne (82 items of ignorance, fantasy and delusion in this thread alone!).

The evidence that you lied about inflation is linked to in my post.
3 August 2016 Bjarne: A lie based on ignorance of the evidence that is the basis for inflation and its confirmed prediction.

Now you have the option, fall on you knee every Friday and keep praying that the inflation speculation never will die

Or

Do like George Etstahiou encourage everyone to, - which mean try to solve the HUGE problem we in fact have here.

But the problem is I am not sure you is so good to theoretical physic.’ Sorry RC but you know from children and drunk people (and sometimes from idiotic village cranks) you shall hear the truth..


“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”
Albert Einstein

 

[Paul]

children and drunk people (and sometimes from idiotic village cranks)

I miss the old days when I could reply to that.

 

[The Man]

The universe is a limit size.

So your "The universe is most likely infinity, - infinity cannot expand" assertion is just invalid.

Towards the barycenter, space is stretching..

So space is expanding in a particular direction.

If gravity (and the strong force) is lost (due to many huge BB) space-tension will everywhere be released.

So your old space-tension is gone.

If the radius is lets say 1000 billion LY it takes 1000 billion to release that space from the center, inside the sphere of the universe.' And it takes 2000 years from the one side of the periphery to the other (diameter)..
This process will continue, until it is completed nothing can stop it.

First off you've already asserted your old tension was released "everywhere". Second even if that weren't the case and there was some centered "release" propagating at the speed of light it would produce a cosmological gradient which means emitted EM radiation would be red-shifted in one direction and blue shifted in the other. Why don't we find such a cosmological gravitational gradient. You still don't seem to have thought any of this through.

Now lets say 380.000 years later the strong force and gravity is reborn. This will start the oppesite effect.. But because space is still not tension free at that time, its not a simple situation to deal with.

You said it was tension free 380,000 years ago. Here it is again in case you just didn't read what you just wrote.

If gravity (and the strong force) is lost (due to many huge BB) space-tension will everywhere be released.

What "oppesite effect"? Just more new tension isn't an opposite effect. Do you even pay attention to just your own assertions?

I don't think you understand how tension or stress actually work. So here is an experiment for you..


Get a hanging scale like this...

https://www.grainger.com/product/3N...8237!&ef_id=V4PU6AAAAcnB3JKm:20160804155336:s

Tie a length of rope or string to each end. Tie the other end of one of the lengths to an anchor point and pull on the other free length. Note the tension and response of the scale.

Reverse the scale so the other end is anchored and the opposite free. Again note the tension and response of the scale as you pull on the free end.

Now just leave both ends free and pull on them both at the same time. Again note the tension and response of the scale as you pull on both ends. In this case you can even pull with more force in one direction than the other. Which in this configuration would cause the the set up to move in the direction of the greater force.

What you will find is that it doesn't make any difference to the scale, the tension or the stress whether you pull on one end, the other or both (even unbalanced), there is just a total tension.

The remaining tension effect how effective matter again can pull space tension.

Again you already said it was released "everywhere" before and even if it wasn't we don't find the gradient your centered release over time would produce. In asserting a "remaining tension effect" you clearly haven't considered the results of, well, your assertions.

A certain amount of matter only have a certain force / energy . No one have said that such calculation have to be easy.

Well then you certainly have a lot of work to do. I would suggest though that you at least first find the motivation to just try to keep your malarkey straight.

 

[The Man]

First off you've already asserted your old tension was released "everywhere". Second even if that weren't the case and there was some centered "release" propagating at the speed of light it would produce a cosmological gradient which means emitted EM radiation would be red-shifted in one direction and blue shifted in the other. Why don't we find such a cosmological gravitational gradient. You still don't seem to have thought any of this through.

Come to think of it if the background change is propagating with (in the same direction and same speed as) the emitted EM radiation then there would be no background difference between the source and the receiver. There would be no shift in that direction so this propagating change at the speed of light can't even result in just red-shift in that direction. EM radiation emitted the other way would always be blue shifted as it would be always going from a higher potential to a lower.

 

[JeanTate]

<snip>

Try to google......"We see these strange patterns that are not expected in inflationary theory, the simplest inflationary theories. It may be that we've been fooled, that inflation didn't happen."

<snip>

Furthermore why should George Etstahiou speculate whether he see this or that , - he know what have been seen,. there are no logical "if" , rather there are without any doubt a stange pattern in the WMAP, that not is understood..

So in best case dear RC buy some of these...
[qimg]http://www.entorlando.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/cottonswabs-web.jpg[/qimg]

Now you have the option, fall on you knee every Friday and keep praying that the inflation speculation never will die

Or

Do like George Etstahiou encourage everyone to, - which mean try to solve the HUGE problem we in fact have here.

Here is George Etstahiou's CV: http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/~gpe/cv.pdf

Bjarne, in which of his papers, reviews, etc is there anything which is consistent with your ideas?

I'm almost certain there are none, and certain that there are none of a quantitative nature, if only because your ideas have not yet been published, in any medium, with a quantitative foundation.

When may we expect to see something from you that even remotely approaches any of George's publications?

 

[Bjarne]

So your "The universe is most likely infinity, - infinity cannot expand" assertion is just invalid.

I did not get the point

So space is expanding in a particular direction.

No, not expanding at all

So your old space-tension is gone.

No, if the universe is infinite it will never be gone
It will be "inside the sphere" of the universe , as you can read from my last post.

First off you've already asserted your old tension was released "everywhere".

Right and in all directions.

Second even if that weren't the case and there was some centered "release" propagating at the speed of light it would produce a cosmological gradient which means emitted EM radiation would be red-shifted in one direction and blue shifted in the other.

No, everywhere , everything will shrink, also the time rate.

Why don't we find such a cosmological gravitational gradient. You still don't seem to have thought any of this through.

Its no motion, hence also no doppler effect
It is the property of space that is changing, it will in no way change EM spectra of photos already emitted.

You said it was tension free 380,000 years ago.

No, I did not say that, read agian

Here it is again in case you just didn't read what you just wrote.

Here it is again, you don't read what I write, instead you read what I not write.

What "oppesite effect"? Just more new tension isn't an opposite effect. Do you even pay attention to just your own assertions?

I don't think you understand how tension or stress actually work. So here is an experiment for you..
Get a hanging scale like this...

https://www.grainger.com/product/3N...8237!&ef_id=V4PU6AAAAcnB3JKm:20160804155336:s

Tie a length of rope or string to each end. Tie the other end of one of the lengths to an anchor point and pull on the other free length. Note the tension and response of the scale.

Reverse the scale so the other end is anchored and the opposite free. Again note the tension and response of the scale as you pull on the free end.

Now just leave both ends free and pull on them both at the same time. Again note the tension and response of the scale as you pull on both ends. In this case you can even pull with more force in one direction than the other. Which in this configuration would cause the the set up to move in the direction of the greater force.

What you will find is that it doesn't make any difference to the scale, the tension or the stress whether you pull on one end, the other or both (even unbalanced), there is just a total tension.

I don't think you understand that matter pulls the tension of space.

Again you already said it was released "everywhere" before and even if it wasn't we don't find the gradient your centered release over time would produce. In asserting a "remaining tension effect" you clearly haven't considered the results of, well, your assertions.

No, I wrote that release of tension (inside the sphere of the universe) will never be completed, - because before that happen new born gravity ( tension will start the oppesite effect.
Right now release of tension still dominate
One day will new tension dominate, and the Z value to light from distance stars will decrease during billion of years. After that you will not see this light redshiftet anymore but blueshifted. Both these 2 oppesite effect means that the background gravity now is increasing.

Well then you certainly have a lot of work to do. I would suggest though that you at least first find the motivation to just try to keep your malarkey straight.

The first step is that you begin to read and understand what I write.

 

[Bjarne]

Here is George Etstahiou's CV: http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/~gpe/cv.pdf

Bjarne, in which of his papers, reviews, etc is there anything which is consistent with your ideas?

I'm almost certain there are none, and certain that there are none of a quantitative nature, if only because your ideas have not yet been published, in any medium, with a quantitative foundation.

When may we expect to see something from you that even remotely approaches any of George's publications?

It is not my mission to read everything he has written.
The problem right now is that not many dare to propose an alternative to inflation. Only a little wrong step and a person is considered as a crank.
Those that does typically have nothing to lose.

The world is not ready to understand how fatal the inflation theory really is.

But what we now see comes from Cambridge is not possible to misunderstand.
Here on the forum I have in 7-8 years, criticized the inflation idea.
Today we see that there is scientific reason to be very critical.

 

[JeanTate]

It is not my mission to read everything he has written.
The problem right now is that not many dare to propose an alternative to inflation. Only a little wrong step and a person is considered as a crank.
Those that does typically have nothing to lose.

The world is not ready to understand how fatal the inflation theory really is.

But what we now see comes from Cambridge is not possible to misunderstand.
Here on the forum I have in 7-8 years, criticized the inflation idea.
Today we see that there is scientific reason to be very critical.

You claim he supports your ideas, but cannot cite anything.

Got it.

Bjarne, this is the Science section of ISF. If you can't back your claims with actual papers by the real scientist, why are you posting here? Aren't you wasting everyone's time, most especially yours?

 

[Bjarne]

You claim he supports your ideas, but cannot cite anything.

Got it.

Bjarne, this is the Science section of ISF. If you can't back your claims with actual papers by the real scientist, why are you posting here? Aren't you wasting everyone's time, most especially yours?

I am surprised that you cannot see it yourself.

1. GR is misunderstood
2. GR is not the cause of gravity
3. The nature of space is elastic rather than "curved"
4. That elasticity of space is also what so called Dark Energy really is, as well as how matter and space connect (the cause of gravity).
5. Therefore there are no need for any inflation.
6. The inflation speculation (on the big scale) is now conflicting with objective Scientific Measurement..
7. The new WMAP point to new physic.

All that new physic is what I have try to teach all of you..

There are no alternative that can replace the inflation paradigm, except the thought I had already many years before the new WMAP catastrophe was known.

 

[The Man]

I did not get the point

If the universe is "a limit size." then it is not "most likely infinity", correct?

No, not expanding at all

Stretching something is expanding it. Your assertion before was that the universe was "most likely infinity" and thus could not expand. You have since claimed the universe is "a limit size." so you no longer have that restriction. Not that it did you any good anyway.

No, if the universe is infinite it will never be gone
It will be "inside the sphere" of the universe , as you can read from my last post.

Well, again then it would not be lost yet. So if you don't want to claim it is lost or released "everywhere" at a unification epoch then don't say or imply that. Simply say what you mean that it isn't lost everywhere yet. However, this does create other problems for you as you have to explain how your old gravity survives that unification epoch.

Right and in all directions.

Well then again it didn't survive that epoch in any direction or anywhere. Once again please get back to us when you can at least agree with just yourself.

No, everywhere , everything will shrink, also the time rate.

That's not stretching that's compressing. Once again please get back to us when you can at least agree with just yourself.

Its no motion, hence also no doppler effect
It is the property of space that is changing, it will in no way change EM spectra of photos already emitted.

Who said Doppler shift? You said yourself it was a gravitational shift. Now you are saying there is no shift? Once again please get back to us when you can at least agree with just yourself.

No, I did not say that, read agian

Yes you did, you said it was released "everywhere" when "gravity (and the strong force) is lost" which was "lets say 380.000 years" prior. You need to start applying what to say to, well, what you say.

Here it is again, you don't read what I write, instead you read what I not write.

You simply don't apply what you write to what you write. If you don't like the results of what you write being applied to what you write then you certainly have some motivation to try to write more coherently.

Again, I understand that English is not your first language and expect some misspeaking but you don't get to just shrug off blatant contradictions.

I don't think you understand that matter pulls the tension of space.

I know you don't understand "the tension of space". By all means please get back to us when you do understand.

No, I wrote that release of tension (inside the sphere of the universe) will never be completed, - because before that happen new born gravity ( tension will start the oppesite effect.

Great so the old gravity is not lost "everywhere" when "gravity (and the strong force) is lost". Stop writing that if you don't want to assert that.

Right now release of tension still dominate
One day will new tension dominate, and the Z value to light from distance stars will decrease during billion of years. After that you will not see this light redshiftet anymore but blueshifted. Both these 2 oppesite effect means that the background gravity now is increasing.

Did you try the experiment? If you did you would find that total tension 'dominates', doesn't matter if it is old or new. Again releasing tension is not the opposite of tension it is just less total tension. The opposite of tension is compression. Again your propagating at the speed of light decrease in tension doesn't result in any red shift as your change in tension travels at the same speed. However it would result in a general blue shift in the other direction that we do not find.

The first step is that you begin to read and understand what I write.

No, the first step is that you have to have the intent and motivation to make what you write at least consistent (internally and externally). Until you do you won't even agree with just yourself (internal consistency) let alone agree with observations (external consistency). It is not incumbent on anyone to imbue your assertions with any sort of consistency that you just can't seem to be able or willing to do yourself.

 

[JeanTate]

I am surprised that you cannot see it yourself.

1. GR is misunderstood
2. GR is not the cause of gravity
3. The nature of space is elastic rather than "curved"
4. That elasticity is also what so called Dark Energy really is
5. Therefore there are no need for any inflation.
6. The inflation speculation (on the big scale) is now conflicting with objective Scientific Measurement..
7. The new WMAP point to new physic.

All that new physic is what I have try to teach all of you..

There are no alternative that can replace the inflation paradigm..

Bjarne,

For the n-th time, all I see from your posts is subjective, confused, misunderstanding (or misrepresention), repetition.

As others have pointed out, many times, what's in your posts is often self-contradiction. Further, your attempts to clarify nearly always only make your ideas seem even more disjointed, incoherent even.

Why not take a break, of several months, and work on turning your ideas into something objective, and above all, quantitative?

 

[The Man]

I am surprised that you cannot see it yourself.

1. GR is misunderstood

Most predominantly here just by you

2. GR is not the cause of gravity

Again general relativity is just a generalization of special relativity. The cause of gravity is matter/energy distribution.

3. The nature of space is elastic rather than "curved"

Again elasticity doesn't preclude curvature. Not only that but some level elasticity actually provides the capability for something to be more easily curved. Fact of the matter is you haven't even bothered to work out the details and properties of your elastic space so you don't know if it is or can be curved or not.

4. That elasticity of space is also what so called Dark Energy really is, as well as how matter and space connect (the cause of gravity).

Elasticity is a property of something not a method to "connect" nor energy (dark or otherwise). You are just conflating things and stringing words together. Often referred to as word salad.

5. Therefore there are no need for any inflation.

That doesn't follow from your previous assertions. In fact your assertions in other posts indicate there must be something other than just your assertions to explain red shift.

6. The inflation speculation (on the big scale) is now conflicting with objective Scientific Measurement..
7. The new WMAP point to new physic.

All that new physic is what I have try to teach all of you..

There are no alternative that can replace the inflation paradigm, except the thought I had already many years before the new WMAP catastrophe was known.

Excellent, then you should be able to show quantitatively how your "thought" of "many years before" result in that "objective Scientific Measurement". If you can't do that then you still have quite a lot of work to do.

 

[The Man]

Bjarne,...


Why not take a break, of several months, and work on turning your ideas into something objective, and above all, quantitative?

I sincerely and emphatically concur.

 

[Daylightstar]

Liar
39 seconds into the video, Professor George Etstahiou states the following
Quote..
“As we see this strange pattern that not is expected in i inflation theory, it may be we have been failed that inflation didn’t happen. “
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eavab9siYg

This is a HUGE POSSIBLE TRURNAROUND Amigo Hans..
...

In the actual full interview George Efstathiou states:
https://youtu.be/YcdrdybMbyU?t=316
"05:16... suggest that it doesn't look the same whichever way you look? It's it's quite difficult to statistically quantify eh large scale differences eh between theory and observation, because we w w we only have one shot eh l eh our universe, we just have one picture of our universe. Ehm but, the you know we see eh these strange patterns that are not expected you know in inlationary theory, the simplest inflationary theories, and so there's a real possibiliy that we have an incomplete picture. Ehm it may be that eh we've been fooled, that inflation ehm didn't happen."

In addition to not being able to write and understand properly, apparently you have difficulty with listening as well.

 

[Daylightstar]

Bjarne may in principle have a lot of work to do but he will never do it. Too difficult.

 

[Reality Check]

Bjarne: Repeats the lie about Etstahiou's quote by cutting the first word

Either you ...

Confirming that you are wrote a lie by writing the lie again is bad, Bjarne.
5 August 2016 Bjarne: Repeats the lie about Etstahiou's quote by cutting the first word that he stated before was "As" !

A dumb request to Google for what we already have - Planck maps the dawn of time - George Efstathiou full interview!
He starts with a description of the inflationary phase (a patch of spacetime expanding rapidly).
He goes on to Planck being "designed to give use some experimental information which can tell us what happened at these very early times".
At 1:20 "The results, our first results from Planck agree spectacularly well with this idea", i.e. inflation.
At 3:09 he states that Planck data confirms inflation and that the data is good enough to look at what drove inflation.
At 3:39 he starts on the puzzles in the data.
At 5:10 He is asked a question and his reply starts with the difficulty of statistically quantify large scale differences between theory and observation with our one universe..
At 5:40 he says "Umm. But the if we see um these strange patterns that are not expected you know in inflationary theory, the simplest inflationary theories, and so there's a real possibility that we have an incomplete picture. Ehm it may be that eh we've been fooled, that inflation ehm didn't happen".
At 7:00 he is asked "Do you think that these Planck results will blow open the theory". His reply is "Its a possibility. There were hints of problems from the WMAP satellite..."
At 7:21 "With Planck we have so much precision that the small scale picture is really very, very secure. And there the theory agrees brilliantly well but when you get precise information on small scales, you can quantify better, much more securely, you can quantify the anomalies on large scales and that is where we have got a, you know, potential problem with the Planck results."

I had thought that the extract in the short video was just badly edited but now I suspect that it mislead on purpose by cutting out the middle of the statement:
"Umm. But the if we see um these strange patterns that are not expected you know in inflationary theory, the simplest inflationary theories, and so there's a real possibility that we have an incomplete picture. Ehm it may be that eh we've been fooled, that inflation ehm didn't happen".

The RR fantasy appearing on 15 October 2009 here, continued ignorance of high school level science and digging a pit of fantasies from Bjarne (82 items of ignorance, fantasy and delusion in this thread alone!).
2 August 2016 Bjarne: A delusion that evidence that the inflationary model is invalid would be announced in a YouTube video.
2 August 2016 Bjarne: A lie by quote mining Professor George Etstahiou - cutting out a word he knows was spoken.
2 August 2016 Bjarne: Ignorance about inflation which is not "that the universe started with a singularity".
3 August 2016 Bjarne: A lie based on ignorance of the evidence that is the basis for [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)"]inflation and its confirmed prediction.[/URL]

 

[Reality Check]

Bjarne: Writing ignorance about inflation for 7-8 years is not criticizing inflation

But what we now see comes from Cambridge is not possible to misunderstand.
Here on the forum I have in 7-8 years, criticized the inflation idea.

5 August 2016 Bjarne: Writing ignorance about inflation for the 7-8 years is not criticizing inflation.

No one has interviewed the town or university of Cambridge ! George Efstathiou happens to currently to work in Cambridge

George Petros Efstathiou FRS is a British astrophysicist who is Professor of Astrophysics and Director of the Kavli Institute for Cosmology at the University of Cambridge. He was previously Savilian Professor of Astronomy at the University of Oxford.

You have shown that it is possible to misunderstand Planck maps the dawn of time - George Efstathiou full interview by totally ignoring the contents of the full interview and only looking at another video with a misleadingly edited minute of that 25 minute interview.

 

[Bjarne]

If the universe is "a limit size." then it is not "most likely infinity", correct?

Mass distribution of our universe is limit
Most likely we live in a multiverse, such must logical be without limit.

Stretching something is expanding it.

No because then it will be longer, the universe is not "longer" when mass is stretching space.

Well, again then it would not be lost yet.

In depend on the context where "lost" is used.

Well then again it didn't survive that epoch in any direction or anywhere.

A gravitational wave (release of space tension) is in its nature unstoppable.
But an opposite effect (reborn of gravity) can counteract such process of space-tension release.
I am sure this too will confuse you, too, -- so let’s better stop , you don’t want to understand anything and that’s fine.
This is last time I try to help you, next time I will ignore you pretending of seeing contradiction everywhere, that doesn’t exist, except in your head.

That's not stretching that's compressing.

Matter = absorbed space, or compressed space.
Near matter space is stretching towards matter, due to the "lose" /absorption.
I am sure this too will confuse you, too, -- so let’s better stop , you don’t want to understand anything and that’s fine.
This is last time I try to help you, next time I will ignore you pretending of seeing contradiction everywhere, that doesn’t exist, except in your head.

You said yourself it was a gravitational shift.

No I explained you the cause of cosmological gravitational shift

Now you are saying there is no shift?

I never said that..

Great so the old gravity is not lost "everywhere" when "gravity (and the strong force) is lost". Stop writing that if you don't want to assert that.

When you will lose a penny, falling into a sewer, you have lost the penny, but not the city you live, the country you live in, and the earth or the universe did not lost that penny, either did the multi universe.
So our universe can lose gravity, but a multi universe that most likely is infinite, will not lose it..
I am sure this too will confuse you, too, -- so let’s better stop , you don’t want to understand anything and that’s fine.
This is last time I try to help you, next time I will ignore you pretending of seeing contradiction everywhere, that doesn’t exist, except in your head

Again releasing tension is not the opposite of tension it is just less total tension. The opposite of tension is compression.

I have explained this above.
And I am sure that even though I would explain it to you 1272535 times, you will still not want to understand it
I am sure this too will confuse you, too, -- so let’s better stop , you don’t want to understand underthings and that’s fine.
This is last time I try to help you, next time I will ignore you pretending of seeing contradiction everywhere, that doesn’t exist, except in your head

Great so the old gravity is not lost "everywhere" when "gravity (and the strong force) is lost".

Remember what I wrote about the penny you lost...
I am sure this too will confuse you, too, -- so let’s better stop , you don’t want to understand anything and that’s fine.
This is last time I try to help you, next time I will ignore you pretending of seeing contradiction everywhere, that doesn’t exist, except in your head

Did you try the experiment?

You mean whether I had the universe into a laboratory ?
I am sure this too will confuse you, too, -- so let’s better stop , you don’t want to understand anything and that’s fine.
This is last time I try to help you, next time I will ignore you pretending of seeing contradiction everywhere, that doesn’t exist, except in your head

 

[Bjarne]

Bjarne,

For the n-th time, all I see from your posts is subjective, confused, misunderstanding (or misrepresention), repetition.

For more than 100 years you and the rest of the brainwashed world have accepted in a paradigm that is subjective, confused, misunderstanding (or misrepresention), repetition

As others have pointed out, many times, what's in your posts is often self-contradiction.

No there are no self-contradiction, but rather a lot of fools that don't want to accept a new paradigm..

Further, your attempts to clarify nearly always only make your ideas seem even more disjointed, incoherent even.

Maybe it is because you not serious really trying to understand..

Why not take a break, of several months, and work on turning your ideas into something objective, and above all, quantitative?

Our understand of the universe have never been so, but always only hypothetical.

Yeh yeh yeh

You have so and so much dark energy and so and so much dark matter.

You can compare this to if you like to eat 2 kiló ersplitten ladenburmer, with a cup of of ½ liter of rabundus citon limiónade.

 

[Bjarne]

In the actual full interview George Efstathiou states:
https://youtu.be/YcdrdybMbyU?t=316
"05:16... suggest that it doesn't look the same whichever way you look? It's it's quite difficult to statistically quantify eh large scale differences eh between theory and observation, because we w w we only have one shot eh l eh our universe, we just have one picture of our universe. Ehm but, the you know we see eh these strange patterns that are not expected you know in inlationary theory, the simplest inflationary theories, and so there's a real possibiliy that we have an incomplete picture. Ehm it may be that eh we've been fooled, that inflation ehm didn't happen."

In addition to not being able to write and understand properly, apparently you have difficulty with listening as well.

I think you too would errr ehhh øhhh very much if it was yours responsibility to explain the world that the inflation speculation could be nothing but crap.."

George Efstathiou deserves respect because he dare to speak the trutht.