Cosmology: Latest theories of everything (Introduction)

by John Kalber, Monday, July 17, 2017, 21:09 (2685 days ago) @ David Turell

Hi David: Thanks for the comment on Crazy Cosmology. Though I must admit to a general, rather casual use of terminology, I disagree with the view that atheism is not an ideology. It is a doctrine, an orientation that characterises the thinking of a group or nation, or an Imaginary or visionary theorization of a Universe without a God. That is an ideology!

I was quite appalled to read some very rude and rather nasty remarks made about people who support the modern, fact based standard physics of cosmology, rather than a fevered rhetoric about the sanity of latter day thinkers who question the establishment version/function of redshift. Questioning the professional capability of Halton Arp, a very distinguished astronomer, who was a protégé of Edwin Hubble and a senior observer at the Palomar Telescope for 20 years, is of itself, puerile.

His life was ruined when he displayed a photo of two neighbouring galaxies linked by redshift, thus questioning its interpretation. NASA then engaged in demonstrating that might is right (shades of Hitlerism) and only NASA could be right, by forcing him out of work and consequently out of the USA! Their cohorts, Sagan and others had tried it on with a great and original thinker, Immanuel Velikovsky. They ‘caught a cold’ with that one and made him a millionaire!

More nasty comments were directed at the ideas promoted by the Electric Universe people (very happy to be among them!) that space is far from empty and is composed of the fourth state of matter: plasma. Sadly, for them, even NASA accepts that it is fact!
Dr Dennis Gallagher, a plasma physicist at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, says "Very little material in space is made of rock like the Earth."

Plasma is not a gas, liquid, or solid - it is the fourth state of matter. Plasma often behaves like a gas, except that it conducts electricity and is affected by magnetic fields. On an astronomical scale, plasma is common. The Sun is composed of plasma, fire is plasma, fluorescent and neon light of the Universe is made up of plasma https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/1999/ast07sep99_1

The visible universe is 99.999% plasma. So quite simply, if you don't know how cosmic plasmas behave, you don't know the Universe. And astrophysical plasmas https://www.plasma-universe.com/Astrophysical_plasma may behave differently to terrestrial plasmas.

It is worth noting that all cosmic plasma carries a magnetic field and electric currents. Even plasmas that are less than 1% ionised, may behave as a plasma, as do dusty plasmas (ie. "dust grains can be the dominant current carrier").
https://www.plasma-universe.com/99.999%25_plasma

I ask ‘him’ to answer one question – without calling upon imaginary forces emanating from a totally imaginary pre-existing Universe, God or whatever.

Here it is:
How can the current Universe of millions of huge galaxies have been condensed into a ‘Singularity’? Failure to show how this can be done automatically destroys Big Bang theory.

Calling upon the notion that assumptions are proof, rather than as the subject of discussion, signals the bankruptcy of that whole scenario.

Moving on: Sir Roger Penrose is selling a book. This class of book flourishes by proposing, rather than solving ‘mysteries. His opinions are – I fear – clouded by the equivocation that so often characterises the views of ‘experts’, who are primarily motivated so as not to aggravate their relations with other ‘such experts’.
I have no such impediment!
The mathematical analysis made Stephen Hawking has about the same theoretical as did Ptolemy's model of the solar system! I.E. None.
Penrose avoided the question because he is out touch with reality. Like Hawking, he has no proper answer as to how and why evolution seems so directed by Mother Nature. I do!
He cannot ‘explain’ the Big Bang, primarily because it didn’t happen! For it to have happened, there must first have been a Singularity! More equivocation!
The Universe looked at as Eternal, with Redshift – as suggested by Hubble in his 1936 lectures - as a new principle of Nature and NOT representing utterly incredible speeds of recession would leave a virtually unchanging Universe.
But: in an eternally stationery Universe, none of current ‘theology’ would be even considered! AND no research money from commercial interests!
The many ‘new’ effects that have been claimed as ‘evidence, would be more correctly interpreted only in the light of the already proven physical law. There is page after page of such rational explanation, which also acknowledges that they too are, as yet unproven ideas. That is real science and the ‘Establishment’ are scared stiff of it.
Its acceptance will entail (hopefully) the collapse their current fairy tale cosmology and their replacement by new age science and scientists.