Is there a "Creationist" Cosmology?

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

  1. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,782
    That doesn't follow. Physicists don't think dark matter is an absurd concept. It's their concept.

    All scientific models and/or theories have "flaws" and/or incompletenesses. That doesn't make them absurd. Do you even know what "absurd" means?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,221
    Dark matter isn't absurd. Observation suggests that more gravity is necessary to account for observed astrophysical motions than can be accounted for by the mass of the observed matter present. So it's hypothesized that there may be a whole lot of mass present that isn't observed (that is 'dark' in other words). What it might be, is currently unknown. But the majority of the universe's mass might conceivably consist of it.

    You are going to set Sciforums' atheist knees jerking with that phrase.

    Perhaps one might speculate that whatever physical constant that relates gravity to mass isn't uniform and unchangeable. I'm not a physicist, but I suspect that those kind of moves would have all kinds of other implications that would be easily observable (but apparently aren't observed).

    Dark matter is a mystery, not an absurdity.

    If you are suggesting that new matter might be popping into existence spontaneously out there, wouldn't that new matter be dark matter, if it isn't visible? We would still be faced with determining what kind of matter it is and providing some account of why it's appearing.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Really? Quit making yourself a dumbass crank onestone. Cranks are humans that think their illiterate worldview is the only thing that exists. Avoid any scholarship on what they're complaining about.because they wallow in intellectual dishonesty. So if you don't know much about modern cosmology then shut the fuck up with your crank bullshit opinions. Since you don't know what your talking about, at least you admit that, then your opinions are irrelevant. The absurdity is your crank behavior.
     
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2015
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    An absurdity appears to be anything onestone can't understand. All his posts are arguments from incredulity.
     
    brucep likes this.
  8. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,233
    The way you post led me to believe that you're anti-science.

    I might be a fool, I'm not ruling that out.
    And this little snippet tells me that trying to have a conversation with you will not be worth it.
     
  9. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    He's into stuff like claiming there will be some gravitational influence over the path of particles participating in the two slit experiment. That kind of ignorance means you don't know anything. Especially anything about the domain of this quantum experiment or the Laboratory local proper frame where it's physically conducted.
     
  10. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,233
    Gotta give him a wee tip o' the hat for using al onestone (al einstein) as his forum name. Deluded as can be.

    Have I earned a fuck you?
     
  11. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,916
    True. But in the context the formation of the universe creationism means almost exclusively "God did it". You should try to be more specific in your questions.
     
  12. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,916
    There is no direct evidence of fields? Really?

    Couple of problems here. First you are making up new physics that violates currently known physics without any evidence. Secondly, for your idea to be consistent with observation this magical formation of matter in distant galaxies would always occur on the side of the galaxies farthest from the earth. That coincidence seems absurd!

    Unfortunately, as I and others have pointed out your idea is a bit absurd.
    The free energy idea is not logical, reasonable or empirical.
     
  13. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    What is absurd about dark matter? What absurdities are "in the theories" of cosmology? What did Hawking say about dark matter when he proposed the Big Bang theory? Did he accept it "as an absurdity" or not?

    Please look up "creationist" and, using the most common definition given, explain why you later deny that you introduced God or religion into the thread?

    Not quite correct. The observation is that galaxies are receding in all directions. There is no history.

    Incorrect; no such thing is obvious. The Big Bang is the best explanation of the cause of Hubble's Law according to most experts.

    May I suggest you introduce Hawking's thesis and refer readers to the parts you dispute.

    Cite?

    Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. We don't know because you haven't cited the authority who proposed the theory.

    You have it backwards. The evidence of the expanding universe arises from Hubble's work in the 1930s. Please correct your error and tell us again what you want to know about other theories of the origin of the universe. Please introduce and explain Hubble's empirical evidence. Since you introduced dark matter, you should also cite and explain Oort's contemporaneous empirical evidence as well.

    Then try to explain your complaint against Hubble, Oort, Hawking, plus any other pioneers you wish to attack.
     
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,053
    Imagine a completely dark empty space. Now we introduce an orange (matter) into this darkness. We won't neable to see it, but we can calculate it's mass by the alteration of the properties of the empty room. Dark Matter.

    What is so absurd to imagine such a state in the total darkness od space. There could be lots of "invisible" dark matter in the darkness, but it's presence of mass can be observed and calculated by other means, other than visual observation.
     
  15. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Try to explain the CMBR if the universe isn't expanding. The cranks go after Hubble with the nonsense tired light but it's mums the word about the CMBR.
     
  16. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,174
    Of course not. Have you ever reached out and touched a field? How can there be direct evidence without touchy feely?
    No touchy feely, no field. Kind of like climate change to conservatives...
     
  17. John Connellan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,636
    Actually, you can touch EM fields. The force you feel when you touch anything is caused by an EM field.
     
  18. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,174
    True, but only trivially so. Wasn't my point...
     
  19. John Connellan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,636
    What was your point?
     
  20. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Dark matter has been directly detected. At least that's the claim of the famous Bullitt Cluster lensing experiment.
    http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0608407
    The following is my favorite particle theory of dark matter. Mirror Dark Matter by Robert Foot. There are several experiments to detect mirror dark matter particles. Professor Foot discusses this. Claims exist that this has been empirically confirmed.
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.3965
    This is an early short paper discussing the hypothesis without the need for any math.
    http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0207175
    For sure it's very interesting. This is only one particle theory for dark matter.
     
    Write4U likes this.
  21. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,174
    Really? The point was that some people require extraordinary evidence for ordinary phenomena.
     
  22. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,053
    I recently read that the fabric of space is so small that it can be compared to the ratio of Human scale to Planck scale. (10^-17).
    It is now believed that at 10^-31 is the smallest possible coherent geometric form and is the fundamental stuff of space..
     
  23. John Connellan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,636
    I think we already have extraordinary evidence that EM fields exist. Perhaps the most damning evidence is that we can indeed touch! That was my point

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page