• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Holes in Big Bang

Singularitarian

Banned
S
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
1,007
I thought this would be interesting to recite. I was just reading this article by Doctor Cramer

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw141.html

It reminded me of this exciting news:

http://www.internationalreporter.co...in-the-universe-billion-light-years-away.html

I remember speaking to a scientist who was just readying to go to the observatory which had this information of the massive hole in spacetime. He said to me that it was unlikely, because he knew hard it was to correctly detect those tiny little photons. Interestingly enough, i do believe most scientists have come to agree that it is actually a large hole in space which is devoid of matter. Could this mean big bang is wrong?

If the hole is real, then big bang certainly is wrong. No big bang model predicts massive holes to that magnitude, so their existence posits a new birth to the universe.
 
Singularitarian said:
I thought this would be interesting to recite. I was just reading this article by Doctor Cramer

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw141.html

It reminded me of this exciting news:

http://www.internationalreporter.co...in-the-universe-billion-light-years-away.html

I remember speaking to a scientist who was just readying to go to the observatory which had this information of the massive hole in spacetime. He said to me that it was unlikely, because he knew hard it was to correctly detect those tiny little photons. Interestingly enough, i do believe most scientists have come to agree that it is actually a large hole in space which is devoid of matter. Could this mean big bang is wrong?

If the hole is real, then big bang certainly is wrong. No big bang model predicts massive holes to that magnitude, so their existence posits a new birth to the universe.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how many holes or "dark flows" you find in their theory, it's dogma and dogma is based on *FAITH*, not on "science". In other words, it won't change their views one iota.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2008/dark_flow.html
 
Do you not however find it remotely inetersting that one major corner of the standard model is that it requires spacetime to be homogeneous? This includes the distrubution of matter and energy due to the inflationary period.
 
Big-bang models that include a feature called inflation offer a possible explanation for the flow. Inflation is a brief hyper-expansion early in the universe's history. If inflation did occur, then the universe we can see is only a small portion of the whole cosmos.
Click to expand...

This statement from the article is actually "false" by the way. Inflation theory "predicts" a homogeneous layout of matter at the largest scales. According to inflation theory, there should be no massive gravity wells located just outside of our visible universe or anywhere else for that matter. All matter should be evenly distributed at the largest scales according to standard inflation theory. Now of course someone will undoubtedly come up with "holy dark flow inflation" to explain these "findings". That's the beauty of dogma and never having to demonstrate anything in controlled experimentation. You can assign all the 'properties' you ever need to magic inflation models to make them do anything and everything. If something doesn't fit right (like those holes), just throw in another "variable" and viola, it all fits again. Mark my words, these holes and flows in inflation theory won't falsify inflation like any ordinary theory. Oh no. Inflation is "super dogma" at this stage of the game and they'll just tweak the variables till they get a "fit" and then they'll talk about how their new and improved dark flow inflation theory "predicted" these observations. :) Dogma is wonderful that way. You never have to demonstrate a thing in a lab so anything goes.
 
Last edited:
Singularitarian said:
Do you not however find it remotely inetersting that one major corner of the standard model is that it requires spacetime to be homogeneous? This includes the distrubution of matter and energy due to the inflationary period.
Click to expand...

Yes I do. In fact that homogeneous layout of matter claim has one been one of the cornerstone claims of astronomers in support of inflation theory. Now that we know it's not homogeneously distributed as claimed, nobody wants to talk about it anymore. Watch how fast inflation proponents run from your thread.
 
Well, this looks it's going to be an interesting discussion.

Michael, do you have an alternative theory that could be used to build a predictive model?
 
Michael Mozina said:
This statement from the article is actually "false" by the way. Inflation theory "predicts" a homogeneous layout of matter at the largest scales. According to inflation theory, there should be no massive gravity wells located just outside of our visible universe or anywhere else for that matter. All matter should be evenly distributed at the largest scales according to standard inflation theory. Now of course someone will undoubtedly come up with "dark flow inflation" to explain these "findings". That's the beauty of dogma and never having to demonstrate anything in controlled experimentation. You can assign all the 'properties' you ever need to magic inflation models to make them do anything and everything. If something doesn't fit right (like those holes), just throw in another "variable" and viola, it all fits again. Mark my words, these holes and flows in inflation theory won't falsify inflation like any ordinary theory. Oh no. Inflation is "super dogma" at this stage of the game and they'll just tweak the variables till they get a "fit" and then they'll talk about how their new and improved dark flow inflation theory "predicted" these observations. :) Dogma is wonderful that way. You never have to demonstrate a thing in a lab so anything goes.
Click to expand...

Seems like i beat you too it ;)
 
Michael Mozina said:
Inflation is "super dogma" at this stage of the game and they'll just tweak the variables till they get a "fit" and then they'll talk about how their new and improved dark flow inflation theory "predicted" these observations. :) Dogma is wonderful that way. You never have to demonstrate a thing in a lab so anything goes.
Click to expand...
But, the revised model might make other predictions for things not discovered, yet. These are other things the old model would not predict. If they find those other things are also true, that is evidence that the new model is better.

Science does not merely tweak variables until it "fits". It takes the tweaked variables, and... makes other, new discoveries with them.

That is what science does. That is what it is good at doing. To call it "dogma" is not productive.
 
Singularitarian said:
I thought this would be interesting to recite. I was just reading this article by Doctor Cramer

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw141.html

It reminded me of this exciting news:

http://www.internationalreporter.co...in-the-universe-billion-light-years-away.html

I remember speaking to a scientist who was just readying to go to the observatory which had this information of the massive hole in spacetime. He said to me that it was unlikely, because he knew hard it was to correctly detect those tiny little photons. Interestingly enough, i do believe most scientists have come to agree that it is actually a large hole in space which is devoid of matter. Could this mean big bang is wrong?

If the hole is real, then big bang certainly is wrong. No big bang model predicts massive holes to that magnitude, so their existence posits a new birth to the universe.
Click to expand...
(bold added)

Why?

Specifically, where does "certainly" come from?
 
Singularitarian said:
I thought this would be interesting to recite. I was just reading this article by Doctor Cramer

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw141.html

It reminded me of this exciting news:

http://www.internationalreporter.co...in-the-universe-billion-light-years-away.html

I remember speaking to a scientist who was just readying to go to the observatory which had this information of the massive hole in spacetime. He said to me that it was unlikely, because he knew hard it was to correctly detect those tiny little photons. Interestingly enough, i do believe most scientists have come to agree that it is actually a large hole in space which is devoid of matter. Could this mean big bang is wrong?

If the hole is real, then big bang certainly is wrong. No big bang model predicts massive holes to that magnitude, so their existence posits a new birth to the universe.[/QUOTE]

Once again, a total mischaracterization of what science does and don't even try to deny that you're doing it intentionally. Science makes testable hypotheses based on observations and/of current data. All findings are subject to revision upon new data being acquired. Religion would never put itself to that sort of test and does not require that sort of test since it is a matter of faith. Get the difference through your head.

You can also drop the pretense that you're some sort of fair-minded objective observer here. You think that by showing science doing what it actually does you've made some sort of profound point. You haven't. You've only succeeded in exposing your utter lack of understanding about what science does and how it does it. If your religiosity feels threatened by the scientific search for truth, that's your problem. Be insecure on your own time but stop drawing false conclusions based on your own biases.
Click to expand...
 
themusicteacher said:
Singularitarian said:
I thought this would be interesting to recite. I was just reading this article by Doctor Cramer

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw141.html

It reminded me of this exciting news:

http://www.internationalreporter.co...in-the-universe-billion-light-years-away.html

I remember speaking to a scientist who was just readying to go to the observatory which had this information of the massive hole in spacetime. He said to me that it was unlikely, because he knew hard it was to correctly detect those tiny little photons. Interestingly enough, i do believe most scientists have come to agree that it is actually a large hole in space which is devoid of matter. Could this mean big bang is wrong?

If the hole is real, then big bang certainly is wrong. No big bang model predicts massive holes to that magnitude, so their existence posits a new birth to the universe.[/QUOTE]

Once again, a total mischaracterization of what science does and don't even try to deny that you're doing it intentionally. Science makes testable hypotheses based on observations and/of current data. All findings are subject to revision upon new data being acquired. Religion would never put itself to that sort of test and does not require that sort of test since it is a matter of faith. Get the difference through your head.

You can also drop the pretense that you're some sort of fair-minded objective observer here. You think that by showing science doing what it actually does you've made some sort of profound point. You haven't. You've only succeeded in exposing your utter lack of understanding about what science does and how it does it. If your religiosity feels threatened by the scientific search for truth, that's your problem. Be insecure on your own time but stop drawing false conclusions based on your own biases.
Click to expand...

Yes exactly. If holes are found, then that is by definition incontrivertible evidence against the big bang theory because it requires inflation, and that would have left matter homogeneous.
Click to expand...
 
Wowbagger said:
But, the revised model might make other predictions for things not discovered, yet. These are other things the old model would not predict. If they find those other things are also true, that is evidence that the new model is better.

Science does not merely tweak variables until it "fits". It takes the tweaked variables, and... makes other, new discoveries with them.

That is what science does. That is what it is good at doing. To call it "dogma" is not productive.
Click to expand...
(bold added)

Worse, it is objectively false (whatever contemporary cosmology is, "dogma" it is not).

Worse squared, to confuse any part of contemporary science with dogma is a failure of epic proportions ....
 
Wowbagger said:
But, the revised model might make other predictions for things not discovered, yet.
Click to expand...

That would be a 'first' for any inflation theory provided it actually ever occurs. So far everything "predicted" by inflation has actually been 'postdicted' from observations, starting with Guth's original 'postdictions'. All it's previous "predictions" were falsified by later observations, including that claim of homogeneous distribution of matter on the largest scales (actually postdicted from previous observations). When do we simply let a falsified theory die a natural death? What value does inflation theory really have at this point in terms of actual "predictive value"?
 
Singularitarian said:
[...]

Yes exactly. If holes are found, then that is by definition incontrivertible evidence against the big bang theory because it requires inflation, and that would have left matter homogeneous.
Click to expand...
You really messed up the [ QUOTE ] tags Sing, and I'm not going to try to sort them out for you.

Would you be so kind as to provide a source - as in a standard text-book and/or paper published in a relevant, peer-reviewed journal - which demands that all big bang models require inflation?

More fundamentally, what is it that - in your mind - is "the big bang theory"? I have formed a tentative conclusion that you are very confused about this topic ...
 
Singularitarian said:
Because holes cannot exist where there is an inflationary period.
Click to expand...

Inflation is one theory that falls under the BBE, until you explain the Hubble relationship the BBe stands. Inflation rises or falls on it's own.

Now there are huge voids already in the universe, what is homogenous in the microwave background.
 
Last edited:
Twiler said:
Do you have a theory that would explain the existing situation and make testable predictions about the future?
Click to expand...

Well, EU theory "predicts" threaded mass flows on virtually all scales due to current flows through space. "Dark flows" are hardly a "surprise". A threaded layout of matter is certainly no surprise either and all "dark matter" studies demonstrate that the universe is threaded. EU theory also "predicts" the existence of "Birkeland currents" in space, and indeed we find them as well. Of course the mainstream refers to such structures as a "slinky" in space.

http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/physics_astronomy/report-53878.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland_current

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/79/Magnetic_rope.png/300px-Magnetic_rope.png

Edited for rule 4. Do not hotlink images.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Michael Mozina said:
Well, EU theory "predicts" threaded mass flows on virtually all scales due to current flows through space. "Dark flows" are hardly a "surprise". A threaded layout of matter is certainly no surprise either and all "dark matter" studies demonstrate that the universe is threaded. EU theory also "predicts" the existence of "Birkeland currents" in space, and indeed we find them as well. Of course the mainstream refers to such structures as a "slinky" in space.

http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/physics_astronomy/report-53878.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland_current

[qimg]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/79/Magnetic_rope.png/300px-Magnetic_rope.png[/qimg]
Click to expand...

What predictions have been derived from this theory and then subsequently proved via evidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom