Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?


Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Greg Hansen wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
PD wrote:

but that's irrelevant to whether others feel comfortable
with the evidence for it.


That's religious, there is NO evidence for a BB.
Ken


I'm surprised that you've missed this stuff. Big Bang theories are
based on general relativity. You know, that "greatest blunder" can't
get a static universe stuff? Intuitively, it seems pretty obvious that
if stuff is moving away from us, then it was a lot closer in the past
(cite redshifting versus distance as evidence). Structure of the
background radiation, every once in a while rags like Physics Today
publish new comparisons of measurement with theory. Gravitational
lensing apparantly caused by clumps of the dark matter that some wrote
off as fiction. Theories of Big Bang nucleosynthesis correctly predict
ratios of primordial isotopes.

There's actually quite a bit more than zero evidence there.

Let's be careful, there is no evidence that the
so-called "Red Shift" is of Doppler origin, that's
an assumption. And the idea that CMBR are
radiation remanents of the BB is really pushing
strange assumptions, again without evidence.

And there's no evidence that time dilation of satellites in orbit is a
geometric effect, although it is consistent with geometric theories of
gravity. There's a lot of things we can say that the redshifting is
not, such as an attenuation of bluer wavelengths. Line spectra are
shifted toward the red in the manner expected of the Doppler effect.
That's evidence, Ken. It validates the theory. And the
other-mentioned are also consistent with the theory, and inconsistent
with a lot of alternatives.


IMO BB is a conjecture requiring the suspension
of the laws of physics at some point (as PD said)
without any valid replacement, A.K.A. a MIRACLE,

Who cares? Excluding that point is a mature theory and a rich body of
evidence. Surely you don't want to say, for instance, "We don't have
physics to describe the attosecond after the Big Bang, therefore the
ratios of primordial isotopes tell us nothing about the expansion of
the universe." Between the point that baryons froze out and the point
that neutrons bound into nuclei is well described by the theory. It
looks like the universe was a lot smaller than it is now, and claiming
poor understanding of the physics at the beginning doesn't make the
evidence point to bigger or static.

therefore we have no theory for the MIRACLE and
so BB is NOT a theory, though an interesting
conjecture, and has the same weight as theism,
aka religious.
Ken

Yeah, and people say the same thing about quantum mechanics and special
relativity. E.g. Spaceman shouting for the undiscovered forces and
influences that make it appear that time goes slower for a moving
particle, when we should know it really doesn't. Anybody can wave his
arms around and propose an alternate explanation of varying quality for
the evidence, but an alternate explanation doesn't de-validate a
theory.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Simple answers to so called great mysteries
    ... > Bill Hobba wrote: ... >>> and false extrapolations as a result The origin of the universe and ... > wasn't logical wrt physics to begin with. ... a shred of evidence. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The electron shell model is in challenge
    ... been seen, you are a brain dead idiot, plain and simple. ... understanding of physics. ... Care to present evidence that Maxwell's ... to plainly see that radiation is *not* caused by resonance. ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: The electron shell model is in challenge
    ... been seen, you are a brain dead idiot, plain and simple. ... understanding of physics. ... Care to present evidence that Maxwell's ... to plainly see that radiation is *not* caused by resonance. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Chance or Design
    ... Because we have evidence for the existence of one, ... believe in a closed universe until he didn't. ... It is in general not acceptable, in science, to claim truth for any ... Take some physics classes and find out. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Petersons Death Sentence
    ... >> evidence that such an entity has to have powers that preclude our ... > happens if you try to derive that God is limited, ... You are clearly ill-equipped to apply mathematics to physics. ... > The anti-thesis to this argument is that the universe is chaotic, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
Loading