Inflationary Cosmology is not science?

Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Public House › Inflationary Cosmology is not science?

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • May 29, 2019 at 12:54 pm #101757
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Just thot the article was inter esting.

    pop-goes-the-universe:https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/a-cosmic-controversy/?redirect=1

    “….In “Pop Goes the Universe,” by Anna Ijjas, Paul J. Steinhardt and Abraham Loeb, the authors (hereafter “IS&L”) make the case for a bouncing cosmology, as was proposed by Steinhardt and others in 2001. They close by making the extraordinary claim that inflationary cosmology “cannot be evaluated using the scientific method” and go on to assert that some scientists who accept inflation have proposed “discarding one of [science’s] defining properties: empirical testability,” thereby…”

    May 29, 2019 at 6:35 pm #101765
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator
    wv wrote:

    .In “Pop Goes the Universe,” by Anna Ijjas, Paul J. Steinhardt and Abraham Loeb, the authors (hereafter “IS&L”) make the case for a bouncing cosmology, as was proposed by Steinhardt and others in 2001.

    Near as I can say, the bouncing universe idea (that it expands, contracts, re-explodes) CAN’T be tested. How would you test it? Each new “bounce” would wipe out the traces of the last one.

    BUT if they can refine the data, it IS possible to test the idea of expansion (ie. the idea that the universe expanded at an amazing rate early in the big bang process). That’s because they’re looking at a discrete one-time event that, it is argued, left traces and evidence, IF you can refine your tools to the point of being able to detect it.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.