Is there a "Creationist" Cosmology?

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by al onestone, Oct 15, 2015.

  1. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,836
    That is true, of course you also cannot observe an electric field you can only see the effect of an electric field.
    Like what?
    What is a free-energy model and what would it have to do with the observed rotation of galaxies for instance?
    I would like to understand why you think dark matter is 'absurd' before we change subjects!
    What is free-energy/matter?
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2015
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,606
    Well, you seem to be coming from an anti-scientific angle, dismissing the science as "absurd".
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,233
    He had me fooled.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,178
    Well you're not the only one that didn't like his idea. It seems to have been superseded entirely by the Big Bang cosmology that he used to ridicule. Reminds me of Bach, who thought the piano would never be as popular as the harpsichord. Great men make errors too.
     
  8. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,836
    Then you must not be aware that 'creationist' describes fundamentalist Christians and their belief in the formation of the universe by God.
     
  9. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325
    Perhaps too much

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    take it easy.
    What you really think is neither here nor there. Why not offer some explanation as to what was observed then?
    It's referred to as DM because we are unable to directly see it, and it only interacts with baryonic matter via gravity.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325
    You see its effects but it is absurd??? How does that work?
    You should also realize that science is not about belief....It's about evidence, observational and experimental, and from the models are constructed that can make successful predictions and explain those observations. eg: Fabricating and believing in some magic pixie in the sky that created all we see is not science at all. We have absolutely no evidence for any such monster/pixie/deity.
    Science on the other hand continues to work to gather evidence to reveal what is unknown....simple as that.
     
  11. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,233

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    doesn't equate irrational or delusional, paddo.
     
  12. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    32,723
    al onestone:

    Which other models are you referring to?

    I don't know about that. Please explain how a free-energy model would work and why it would be superior to the dark matter model.

    In particular, how would you account for the observed rotational curves of galaxies using a model other than dark matter?

    Do you believe in electrons? They aren't observable either, but their effects are observable.

    Why the difference?

    How so? Please explain why it is absurd, from a theoretical physics point of view.

    Actually, a lot of it is fairly dark, but it does interact with light.

    I disagree. Although, having said that, "dark matter" is really just a label for something we don't know a lot about yet.

    Because we want to understand, not just collect stamps.
     
  13. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,462
    That was my first response.
    "In the beginning was the Word, and the word was God". There is the entire creationist cosmological theory and has not changed since the beginning, with one remarkable exception.
    http://www.biblelight.net/darwin.htm
     
  14. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    How about writing another dumbshit paper on your objections with modern cosmology. You could use your opening post as the abstract.
     
  15. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,462
    No.
    However there is a Mathematical Cosmology and it works remarkably well. In a few cenruries we have developed an entire mathematical language to clearly explain the workings of the universe and more is added to this library every so often.
    OTOH, In a few millenia Creationist Cosmology has never been able to find a common language to even express the most fundamental aspects of the universe and all these individual libraries NEVER change (exception noted above) and will remain logically incoherent.
     
  16. al onestone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    223
    And that's why we call it a field, not matter, because there is no direct evidence of it.

    The free energy model of cosmology that I am thinking of would go something like this:

    Galaxies appear to be accelerating away from one another, meaning that when we take spectroscopic data (averaged) of light from the galaxies they indicate an accelerated frame of reference. This is easy to model if you have free energy/matter. If the galaxy is creating matter in a front-loaded way, so that the matter is always created toward the side of the galaxy that is in the direction of its motion, then this would give the appearance of a galaxy that was accelerating. By creating matter on one side, this matter causes a gravitational pull that accelerates the matter that is behind it. By creating in this front-loaded way we expand the galaxy in a way that expands forward in the direction of motion, and this gives the appearance of a galaxy that is on-average accelerating forward.

    And remember, this is a simple cosmological model that humble little me came up with. What if the Hawking's and others were to give this type of thinking a chance? If they tried this free-energy type thinking then they might find an explanation of the history of the universe that is empirically superior to the big bang.
     
  17. al onestone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    223
    Dark matter is an absurd concept. If you still bicker about this then you are not a physicist. Just accept that the big bang model has its flaws as well.

    I know, its the current best model. It has the empirical evidence on its side. Oh-la-salima big bang.

    I'm just asking about other possibilities, that's all.
     
  18. al onestone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    223
    Because you are a fool.
     
  19. al onestone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    223
    One word can have more than one meaning within a given language.
     
  20. al onestone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    223
    Sorry to ruffle your feathers.
     
  21. al onestone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    223
    The free energy model of cosmology that I am thinking of would go something like this:

    Galaxies appear to be accelerating away from one another, meaning that when we take spectroscopic data (averaged) of light from the galaxies they indicate an accelerated frame of reference. This is easy to model if you have free energy/matter. If the galaxy is creating matter in a front-loaded way, so that the matter is always created toward the side of the galaxy that is in the direction of its motion, then this would give the appearance of a galaxy that was accelerating. By creating matter on one side, this matter causes a gravitational pull that accelerates the matter that is behind it. By creating in this front-loaded way we expand the galaxy in a way that expands forward in the direction of motion, and this gives the appearance of a galaxy that is on-average accelerating forward.
     
  22. al onestone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    223
    You can go fuck yourself
     
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,462
    Sorry but he expression "accelerating forward" is unknown to me.
    I have heard of the expression "accelerating expansion" but that would accelerating in all directions, but always forward in time only.
     

Share This Page