read the headline and skipped over it at first.
It has to be something crazy extraordinary
to get me to read anything
about cosmology/astro-physics etc anymore.
It's all just the same old same old after a while.
Except this,
Euclid mission reveals “page 1” of our cosmic story
that's pretty cool,
but that's for some other day maybe.
Anyway(s) lol.
Nah saw this and passed it up:
did the early cosmos balloon in size?
A mirror universe going backwards in time
Saw it a few more times and opened it up
but never got around to reading it.
Then finally I did.
And I was glad I did.
I was ready to go in all guns a blazing, attack mode etc.
(I still kinda did lol
at the start anyway)
But I came away pleasantly surprised.
Guy is basically saying:
"Hey yall
we might wanna think about
going in a different direction."
And he's 100% correct.
Lil background.
Inflation just doesn't hold up under closer scrutiny.
There are just to many models
that predict to many things.
So it's bound to catch some real world evidence
along the way somewhere.
Throw enough spaghetti at the wall?
And some of it is going to stick.
And that's a big part of the problem
with cosmic inflation.
The other big part of the problem is saying these "problems" need to be accounted for without ever explaining why are they problems to begin with.
Making problems out of things that aren't
gives you something to do I guess
but its kinda boring honestly.
"Hey we cant figure out this problem
thats not really a problem to start with."
"Really?
Okay
get back
with me then."
Anyway,
interesting read.
did the early cosmos balloon in size?
A mirror universe going backwards in time
"We live in a golden age for learning about the universe. Our most powerful telescopes have revealed that the cosmos is surprisingly simple on the largest visible scales. Likewise, our most powerful “microscope”, the Large Hadron Collider, has found no deviations from known physics on the tiniest scales."
(That second point is kinda important.)
"These findings were not what most theorists expected..."
Job 38:11
And said,
Hitherto shalt thou come,
but no further:
and
here shall
thy proud waves
be stayed
Thats god talking BTW.
You only get to come so far.
Reference:
Ecclesiastes 3:11
He hath made every thing beautiful in his time:
also he hath set the world in their heart,
so that no man can find out
the work that God maketh
from the beginning to the end.
"Today, the dominant theoretical approach combines string theory, a powerful mathematical framework with no successful physical predictions as yet, and “cosmic inflation” – the idea that, at a very early stage, the universe ballooned wildly in size. In combination, string theory and inflation predict the cosmos to be incredibly complex on tiny scales and completely chaotic on very large scales."
"The nature of the expected complexity could take a bewildering variety of forms. On this basis, and despite the absence of observational evidence, many theorists promote the idea of a “multiverse”: an uncontrolled and unpredictable cosmos consisting of many universes, each with totally different physical properties and laws.
(NO EVIDENCE OF IT WHATSOEVER
Thats pushing an ideology.
Thats a faith-based belief system.
THAT IS NOT SCIENCE
IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM
Thats the magicians in Pharos court
telling you what you want to hear.
2 Timothy 3:8
Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses,
so also these teachers oppose the truth.
They are men of depraved minds,
who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected.
Its not just:
"the absence of observational evidence"
Its the fact that these types
KNOW
they will never have any.
And its all because
they don't like
just how perfectly this universe
is designed for the life
You know,
the very same life
that they still cant tell you
how it managed
to come into existence.
Thats 0 for 2 guys.)
"So far, the observations indicate exactly the opposite."
(Thats the whole reason they came up with this stupid shit in the first place. This is the exact opposite of science. This is just explaining away what you have observed that you just don't like, even though you have no observable evidence for how you wish things to be. (Multiverse) Its a problem yo.)
"So far, the observations indicate exactly the opposite. What should we make of the discrepancy? One possibility is that the apparent simplicity of the universe is merely an accident of the limited range of scales we can probe today, and that when observations and experiments reach small enough or large enough scales, the asserted complexity will be revealed."
(Good luck wit that:
Job 38:11
And said,
Hitherto shalt thou come,
but no further:
and
here shall
thy proud waves
be stayed
Ecclesiastes 3:11
He hath made every thing beautiful in his time:
also he hath set the world in their heart,
so that no man can find out
the work that God maketh
from the beginning to the end.
The Second Most Powerful Cosmic Ray in History Came from—Nowhere?
"Amaterasu particle"
"According to study leader, Associate Professor Toshihiro Fujii from Osaka Metropolitan University, "No promising astronomical object matching the direction from which the cosmic ray arrived has been identified, suggesting possibilities of unknown astronomical phenomena and novel physical origins beyond the Standard Model
"Amaterasu struck Earth in the early hours of May 27, 2021, sending an air shower of muons, gluons and other secondary particles into 23 of the more than 500 detectors of the Telescope Array, a project that sprawls across 700 square kilometers of desert in Utah.
Most curiously, it seems to have come from what amounts to nowhere—a vast region of cosmic emptiness bereft of stars, galaxies and most everything else that could be an obvious astrophysical source."
"...and millions of times more energetic than particles crashed together in the Large Hadron Collider, the world’s most powerful physics experiment. “I thought it must be a mistake,” says Toshihiro Fujii of Osaka Metropolitan University in Japan, who found the particle in the array’s data. Yet it wasn’t."
"millions of times more energetic than particles crashed together in the Large Hadron Collider"
You are never going to reach those scales.
EVER.
"Well how do you know?"
Because the book of truth says your not.
Thats how I know.
Meanwhile:
Joel 2:30-32
I will show wonders in the heavens
and on the earth,
There have been plenty.
This is but one.
So?
"One possibility is that the apparent simplicity of the universe is merely an accident of the limited range of scales we can probe today, and that when observations and experiments reach small enough or large enough scales, the asserted complexity will be revealed."
That possibility just got eliminated.
NEXT!
Sure am glad Im not in attack mode BTW lol.
Nah, he is explaining the problems first
then he gets into some novel (new) things.)
"The other possibility is that the universe really is very simple and predictable on both the largest and smallest scales. I believe this possibility should be taken far more seriously.
(Yeah, me and a lot of others as well yo.)
"For, if it is true, we may be closer than we imagined to understanding the universe’s most basic puzzles. And some of the answers may already be staring us in the face."
(Like, they weren't
really problems to start with?
:-).
Really?
Hum...interesting.)
"The trouble with string theory and inflation"
(Now were getting somewhere :-).
"The current orthodoxy is the culmination of decades of effort by thousands of serious theorists."
(This is a faith based belief system.
This is their dogma.)
"According to string theory, the basic building blocks of the universe are miniscule, vibrating loops and pieces of sub-atomic string. As currently understood, the theory only works if there are more dimensions of space than the three we experience. So, string theorists assume that the reason we don’t detect them is that they are tiny and curled up."
"Unfortunately, this makes string theory hard to test, since there are an almost unimaginable number of ways in which the small dimensions can be curled up, with each giving a different set of physical laws in the remaining, large dimensions."
(There most certainly are:
"more dimensions of space than the three we experience"
But you will only experience them if the almighty God allows you to.
My feelings on the Fiery stones in Rev 21 and Ezekiel 28
being other dimensions has pretty well been established at this point.
As is the fact they they still exist we just dont have access to them.
Genesis 3:24
So he drove out the man;
and he placed at
the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims,
and a flaming sword
which turned every way,
to keep the way of the tree of life.
Eden is still there.
We just cant get to it any more.)
"Meanwhile, cosmic inflation is a scenario proposed in the 1980s to explain why the universe is so smooth and flat on the largest scales we can see. The idea is that the infant universe was small and lumpy, but an extreme burst of ultra-rapid expansion blew it up vastly in size, smoothing it out and flattening it to be consistent with what we see today."
(Why does it need an explanation?
"The universe is flat"
"Okay,
trees are round"
Why is there the need to explain
wat so obviously is?
I got a better explanation,
goes like this:
Isaiah 34:4
4 And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.
(Thats why its flat.
Its creator made it that away.
Problem solved.
Like there ever was one.)
"Inflation is also popular because it potentially explains why the energy density in the early universe varied slightly from place to place. This is important because the denser regions would have later collapsed under their own gravity, seeding the formation of galaxies."
(Yup, true dat.)
"Over the past three decades, the density variations have been measured more and more accurately both by mapping the cosmic microwave background – the radiation from the big bang – and by mapping the three-dimensional distribution of galaxies."
"In most models of inflation,
(They never ever tell you how many there are. Ever. They don't even know I don't think how many there are. Everybody and their cousin got an inflationary model it seems like. Its a fucking catch all, it aint science. Some spaghetti is bound to stick to the wall. And what better way to write a paper, than to write what everybody else (and their cousin apparently) has already written about? What better way to get peer-reviewed "junk" basically, in order to keep your funding going? Its a lil cottage industry all to itself, its bogus and its bull shit and its unnecessary.)
"the early extreme burst of expansion which smoothed and flattened the universe also generated long-wavelength gravitational waves –– ripples in the fabric of space-time. Such waves, if observed, would be a “smoking gun” signal confirming that inflation actually took place. However, so far the observations have failed to detect any such signal. Instead, as the experiments have steadily improved, more and more models of inflation have been ruled out."
"Furthermore, during inflation, different regions of space can experience very different amounts of expansion. On very large scales, this produces a multiverse of post-inflationary universes, each with different physical properties."
"The inflation scenario is based on assumptions about the forms of energy present and the initial conditions."
(There is your infinite wisdom
they don't wanna admit exist right there.
They never wanna talk about
"the initial conditions".
EVER.
THOSE COULDNT HAVE BEEN THERE
WITHOUT PRIOR PLANNING.
THAT?
TAKES AN INTELLECT.
SO HOW DID THAT HAPPEN HUH?)
"While these assumptions solve some puzzles, they create others. String and inflation theorists hope
(TS A FAITH BASED BELIEF SYSTEM WITH
ZERO
OBSERVATIONS AVAIABLE.
2 Timothy 3:8
Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses,
so also these teachers oppose the truth.
They are men of depraved minds,
who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected.)
"that somewhere in the vast inflationary multiverse, a region of space and time exists with just the right properties to match the universe we see."
(Well?
No Kiddin?
Were here arent we?
Why make it so hard?
CAUSE THEY DONT LIKE
WHAT THEY SEE.
Hey guys and Gals?
Tough Shit.)
"However, even if this is true (and not one such model has yet been found), a fair comparison of theories should include an “Occam factor”, quantifying Occam’s razor, which penalises theories with many parameters and possibilities over simpler and more predictive ones.
(Sound familiar?
Well hallelujah!
Somebody is finally
talking rationally.
Logically even.
"Occam’s razor"
Interesting.
I wonder why?
Like I don't know.
Please...)
"Ignoring the Occam factor amounts to assuming that there is no alternative to the complex, unpredictive hypothesis – a claim I believe has little foundation."
(IT"S ALSO
EXTREMELY ILLOGICAL.
So Kudos to the author!)
"Over the past several decades, there have been many opportunities for experiments and observations to reveal specific signals of string theory or inflation. But none have been seen. Again and again, the observations turned out simpler and more minimal than anticipated."
(If it was any other endeavor?
Other than to prove
there isnt a designer?
After:
"the past several decades"
They would have already given up
and moved on to something else.
They are trying to put
a round peg in a square hole,
and they cant figure out
why they cant get it to work.)
"It is high time, I believe, to acknowledge and learn from these failures, and to start looking seriously for better alternatives."
(AMEN!
I about fell out...
You go homey...)
"A simpler alternative
Recently, my colleague Latham Boyle and I have tried to build simpler and more testable theories that do away with inflation
(Yup)
and string theory.
(Nope Ezekiel 28
and Revelation 21 fiery stones
but you will never prove it.)
"Taking our cue from the observations,"
(Oh you mean like real science is supposed to?
Holy shit what a revolution.)
"we have attempted to tackle some of the most profound cosmic puzzles with a bare minimum of theoretical assumptions."
(Oh, you mean like should have been done all along?)
"Our first attempts succeeded beyond our most optimistic hopes. Time will tell whether they survive further scrutiny. However, the progress we have already made convinces me that, in all likelihood, there are alternatives to the standard orthodoxy – which has become a straitjacket we need to break out of."
(Righton, glad to hear it.)
"I hope our experience encourages others, especially younger researchers, to explore novel approaches guided strongly by the simplicity of the observations – and to be more sceptical about their elders’ preconceptions.
("There is a simple principal
which is a bar against all information,
which is proof against all argument
and which cannot fail
to keep a man or woman
in everlasting ignorance.
This principal is
contempt prior to investigation.")
"Ultimately, we must learn from the universe and adapt our theories to it rather than vice versa."
(Preach brother preach!
This lil club needs to be shook up some
by one of its own!
"guided strongly by the simplicity
of the observations"
Its how men of faith
developed science to start with.)
"One of the most basic puzzles about the universe is that it appears to [violate CPT symmetry] because time always runs forward and there are more particles than anti-particles."
(You can time travel.
Ask me sometime and
I'll tell you how I know.
My preacher and a few others
have already heard the story.
But you can only move forwards in time.
Never backwards.
Eliminates paradoxes.
Simple, easy.)
"Our mirror hypothesis restores the symmetry of the universe. When you look in a mirror, you see your mirror image behind it: if you are left-handed, the image is right-handed and vice versa. The combination of you and your mirror image are more symmetrical than you are alone."
(Right, gotcha)
"Likewise, when Boyle and I extrapolated our universe back through the big bang, we found its mirror image, a pre-bang universe in which (relative to us) time runs backward and antiparticles outnumber particles. For this picture to be true, we don’t need the mirror universe to be real in the classical sense (just as your image in a mirror isn’t real). Quantum theory, which rules the microcosmos of atoms and particles, challenges our intuition so at this point the best we can do is think of the mirror universe as a mathematical device which ensures that the initial condition for the universe does not violate CPT symmetry."
(Hebrews 11:3
By faith
we understand
that the universe
was created
by the word of God,
so that what is seen
(Matter)
was not made
out of things
that are visible.
(And now you are smack dab
in the middle of
Atoms and particles.
"Quantum theory")
"By the word of God"
The language he spoke?
Was mathematics.
If it exist?
It has a mathematical property to it.
Height, width, depth, weight, speed, velocity, frequency, mass, density, oscillation intervals, you name it.
If it physically exist?
It has a mathematical component to it.
"a mathematical device
which ensures
that the initial condition
for the universe
does not violate CPT symmetry."
Well I just wonder what that could be?
Or how that came into exitance?
even when
there is no matter around
to apply it to.
So how did that happen exactly?
Hum?
Guy got pretty close to describing God.
He really did.
Plus?
Something outside of the universe
had to have created it.
Because you can not physically exist
in something that hasn't been created yet.
This is why God isn't affected by events in his creation.
HE EXIST OUTSIDE OF IT.
(Permeates it and flows through it as well.
Think perforated laundry bag for delicates
and you are kinda getting the idea.)
"The entropy of universes
Encouraged by this result, we set about tackling another big puzzle: why is the universe so uniform and spatially flat, not curved, on the largest visible scales? The cosmic inflation scenario was, after all, invented by theorists to solve this problem."
(Who says its a problem?
Yall do!
Are trees being round a problem?
Is that a "problem"
that needs solved?
Why were/are a lot of yall happy
to be creating problems
that simply don't really exist?
Thats my question.
Tell you one thing,
yall
sure wrote a bunch of papers about it)
"To our surprise, the universe with the highest entropy (meaning it is the most likely, just like the atoms spread out in the box) is flat and expands at an accelerated rate, just like the real one. So statistical arguments explain why the universe is flat and smooth and has a small positive accelerated expansion, with no need for cosmic inflation."
(Well no kiddin
Would have never thought it.
"Hey you know that round tree?
"Yeah"
"Its round yo."
"Oh, okay, thanks, never knew.")
"How would the primordial density variations, usually attributed to inflation, have been generated in our symmetrical mirror universe? Recently, we showed that a specific type of quantum field (a dimension zero field) generates exactly the type of density variations we observe, without inflation. Importantly, these density variations aren’t accompanied by the long wavelength gravitational waves which inflation predicts – and which haven’t been seen."
(This faith based belief system is crumbling)
"These results are very encouraging. But more work is needed to show that our new theory is both mathematically sound and physically realistic."
"Even if our new theory fails, it has taught us a valuable lesson. There may well be simpler, more powerful and more testable explanations for the basic properties of the universe than those the standard orthodoxy provides."
(Newsflash
There has to be.
Because inflation is
absolutely unnecessary.)
"By facing up to cosmology’s deep puzzles, guided by the observations and exploring directions as yet unexplored, we may be able to lay more secure foundations for both fundamental physics and our understanding of the universe."
(Lets hope so.)
"a fair comparison of theories should include an “Occam factor”, quantifying Occam’s razor, which penalises theories with many parameters and possibilities over simpler and more predictive ones"
(Good to know somebody is listening,
I'll just put it that away.)
No comments:
Post a Comment