Jump to content

Toward a 21st Century Cosmology


budrap

Recommended Posts

1. Underlying all of modern cosmological theory (The Standard Model) is the assumption that the observed cosmos is part of a singular coherent entity, the Universe. There is no scientific basis for this belief; it is merely an archaic cultural artifact.

 

2. It is a further assumption of modern cosmology that the observed cosmological redshift of light from distant galaxies is a consequence of the expansion of the assumed 'Universe'. This further assumption is also unsupported by any empirical evidence.

 

3. Combining these two scientifically baseless assumptions cosmologists reason backwards to an origin point for the entire 'Universe' at a singularity some 13 billion years ago. A singularity is a physically absurd mathematical concept - an object of zero volume and infinite density. This unsatisfactory result is dismissed as a consequence of our incomplete understanding of physics in extremis rather than a failure of the model.

 

4. The Standard Model required the ad hoc addition of an extra event, Inflation, for it to properly produce a distribution of matter that conforms with observation.

 

5. The Standard Model, in order to conform to observations now posits the existence of unobserved matter and unobserved energy, both of an unknown nature. This invisible (dark) matter and energy are said to comprise more than 90% of the 'Universe'.

 

6. The Standard Model is simplistic, illogical, absurd, unscientific and a failure.

 

7. A truly modern cosmology will start with the cosmos we observe but without the 'Universe' we only imagine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're suggesting a more inductive model with less deviation from direct observed facts, but that is basically what big bang theory does, except it extrapolates origins and causation from observations. If you have a vision for a better, or just another, model why don't you describe how such a model would or could work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Lemur has it right. Budrap, you seem to be calling for a model with no givens, no axiomatic base; all models, all theories, if you dig deep enough, rely on axioms that are not provable. No cosmologist would claim that we have the whole picture or that the current model is without flaws - but it is highly unlikely we will come up with a model that from its genesis is perfect. We model, measure, recalculate, and reappraise - just because it is a bit shonky now does not mean it won't get better. The model we have now does come up with predictable results which have been OK - it also as you point out has the problem of dark matter to balance galactic spin, and dark energy to drive expansion.

 

However, dark matter is beginning to look a pretty cool shout - read up on the bullet cluster collision, pretty much as dark matter theories would have suggested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.