Is the Big Bang theory really in trouble?

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Post Reply
JoeStrout
Site Admin
Posts: 284
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:40 pm
Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA
Contact:

Is the Big Bang theory really in trouble?

Post by JoeStrout »

I just read through this post: The Big Bang Didn't Happen.

It's by Eric Lerner, who has been beating this drum for years. I know, I know, we don't tend to give Lerner a lot of credence around here. But we should judge an argument on its merits, not on who's saying it.

So what's new? The James Webb space telescope results. Apparently they are causing quite a stir (some say "panic") in the cosmology community. The blog post points out several ways in which the new JWST images are contradicting predictions by a wide margin (e.g. by a factor of 20). I have to admit, it seems like a pretty damning case to me. And if true, that's pretty exciting, because it means we are about to witness a real revolution in cosmology, with implications for general physics (like, what is causing the redshift of light if it's not the expansion of the universe?).

EDIT: A more detailed treatment of Lerner's claims is here, though I don't believe it has been updated with the new JWST results.

But what do you all think? Is there something here or is it all somehow nonsense?
Joe Strout
Talk-Polywell.org site administrator

mvanwink5
Posts: 2143
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Re: Is the Big Bang theory really in trouble?

Post by mvanwink5 »

Science has been corrupted, censorship and thoughtless dismissal is normal. There is hope though, slim as it is, as shown by Lerner piecemeal publishing and some videos on the internet that diverging understanding gets thought through. That said, cosmology and predictions by the Big Bang Theory have had trouble since the beginning. For me, the Big Bang 'Inflation' fix was where my doubts became strong and that was early. Further, Eric Lerner is a brilliant guy and has had success with his fusion efforts.

I find the current theories and extensions of physics such as dark matter, dark energy, string theory to all be math looking for relevance. In addition, the age of the universe being a short 14 billion years seems a huge assertion given the stability of the proton. Finally, I find Lerner's affinity for physics that can be tested to be strongly appealing.

In other words, I find Lerner's arguments compelling, and I admit, I hate dogma, censorship, and closed minded hubris of the big government money bureaucrats.

There is serious rot in government science and cement bound physicists because of the tyranny of publication review. Physics has become root bound bureaucratic, and dogmatic, so I doubt there will be an overturning of the favorite belief of the day any time soon.
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.

Giorgio
Posts: 3061
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Re: Is the Big Bang theory really in trouble?

Post by Giorgio »

I would say more, not only we are finally getting over the puny Big Bang theory, but we will soon get rid of Dark Energy and Dark Matter too.
The problem of the last 50 years has been a blind crusade to twist astronomical observations to make them fit our belief, instead of questioning these belief and try to find a better model that could fit the paradigms raised by the new observations.

And not only the cosmological sector, but also the high energy particle sector is shifting in a total mess.
We still have no understanding of most of the basic fundamental forces that surround us, so maybe a real push should be done to try to come up with a real unified theory of the forces and start to understand the true nature of matter.
Than we can probably start to have some understanding that "might" enable us to view this universe in a little better way, without the need of invoking dogmatic particles, energies and multiple dimensions....

Maybe this cold shower will bring back some humility to the researchers in general and open up their mind to some different ideas and models.
After all we are just in the start of our technological evolution, and the idea that we could already have a perfect understanding of the universe based
on a single observed phenomena is just preposterous.

Sorry for the rant.
A society of dogmas is a dead society.

Giorgio
Posts: 3061
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Re: Is the Big Bang theory really in trouble?

Post by Giorgio »

You beat me to the post, and you raised an interesting point:
mvanwink5 wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 2:20 pm
I find the current theories and extensions of physics such as dark matter, dark energy, string theory to all be math looking for relevance. In addition, the age of the universe being a short 14 billion years seems a huge assertion given the stability of the proton. Finally, I find Lerner's affinity for physics that can be tested to be strongly appealing.
Let's not forget that since the LHCb discovered in 2015 that the proton structure might indeed be a Pentaquark (4 Quark plus an Antiquark) instead of the accepted three quarks, there has been a religious attempt from the general establishment to relegate the whole discovery to a separate class of particles just to maintain the status quo of the existing model.
The main point is that the presence of an Antiquark inside the proton is exactly what is need to explain why the electron gets into stable orbit around a proton instead of colliding with it, and perfectly explain the inherent stability of the proton!

Again, dogmatic assumptions must be held at any cost, even when scientific results are yelling in your face that your model has big, big issues.
A society of dogmas is a dead society.

JoeStrout
Site Admin
Posts: 284
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:40 pm
Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA
Contact:

Re: Is the Big Bang theory really in trouble?

Post by JoeStrout »

Interesting. I agree it does seem like there's a lot of dogma at play. Of course sometimes the dogma is correct. Though it still shouldn't be dogmatic about it.

I believe it will all work out in the end. In this case, I know of at least two ways that current dogma might all come crashing down:

1. More JWST results continue to show results (e.g. galaxy sizes) that can't be explained away, or
2. When we gather enough gravity wave data to detect "redshift" (lengthening) of gravity waves, and utterly fail to see that.

That last one would be especially hard to explain away, I would think. It would pretty well prove that redshift is something specific to photons, and not a result of the expansion of space itself.

At some point the evidence will be undeniable, and then somebody will get a Nobel for pointing it out, and everyone else will claim they thought the new model was a good idea all along. :)
Joe Strout
Talk-Polywell.org site administrator

PolyGirl
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 7:16 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Is the Big Bang theory really in trouble?

Post by PolyGirl »

Sorry I'm late to this discussion. I will add more debunking stuff to this conversation just as Lerner and Miles are bunkum, so is the Big Bang Theory.

Michael Crichton said back in 2003 when he gave a lecture at the California Institute of Technology.

“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”

These people have written about the Big Bang Theory and disagree with it.
  1. ‘Seeing Red’ by Halton Arp
  2. ‘The Big Bang Never Happened’ by Eric J. Lerner
  3. ‘The Big Bang Theory Under Fire’ by William C. Mitchell
  4. ‘Wave Structure of Matter Cosmology’ by Geoff Haselhurst (How our Finite Spherical Observable Universe exists within Infinite Eternal Space.)
  5. ‘The Big Bang NEVER Made Sense’ by Michael Armstrong
  6. ‘The Top 30 Problems of the Big Bang Theory’ by Tom Van Flandern
  7. ‘Top Ten Scientific Flaws In The Big Bang Theory’ by John Watson
Hence Big Bang is just consensus, Not Science Period! It's nice to see a paradigm shift. :lol:

Regards
Polygirl
The more I know, the less I know.

Giorgio
Posts: 3061
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Re: Is the Big Bang theory really in trouble?

Post by Giorgio »

PolyGirl wrote:
Wed Dec 14, 2022 1:03 am
In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”
Could not have been said better.
Big Bang theory is on the same level as flat earth theory. Both based on wrong assumptions of real observations and both frantically rejecting the possibility that those observations might be explained with another more realistic interpretation.

They are really no different than religions.
A society of dogmas is a dead society.

Post Reply