@Tom Storm

My bad then. It just seems that your reluctance to answer me combined with your dismissiveness suggested that. Clearly though you are not willing to continue the conversation, and I will therefore cease to ask you further questions.

So what did we decide?

I think we decided that it is undecidable, although I am not sure what it is we have to decided on.

~~

This thread is a fishing expedition. I'm seeking out those who disagree with this proposition: Science is a good thing, to see what their arguments are. — Banno

Well I disagree. I think we should have stopped at hunter gathering. We'd be way happier.

This thread is a fishing expedition. I'm seeking out those who disagree with this proposition: Science is a good thing, to see what their arguments are.
— Banno

Arguments against science? Okay, try this on for size. The universe is estimated to be around 14 billion years old. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light - yet the universe is estimated to be 93 billion light years across. How is that possible? Further, recently detected light from 250-300 million years after the big bang, is only just reaching us now - but 'we' were there at the time. All of space, time, matter and energy was in close proximity to the location where the first stars emerged, so how can that light only just be reaching us now? Maybe it makes sense in ways I don't understand - even though I consider myself a fairly well versed layman, and at least two standard deviations above stupid, this doesn't make sense to me - and science makes too little effort to explain.

Science is a wholly-owned subsidiary of materialism — Some guy

We're missing half the picture @Banno. Of course the other half (the immaterial) maybe pure fantasy, a figment of our imagination as some might say. It's odd though that the pinnacle of materialism - the brain - should have such thoughts at all. Heresy! Heresy! Sleeping with the enemy! Sacré bleu!

Maybe it makes sense in ways I don't understand — counterpunch

Like inflation theory?

Like inflation theory? — Kenosha Kid

As far as I understand it, cosmic inflation occurred only very early on, shortly after the big bang - and on a small scale, 10 to the power minus 36 seconds after the singularity to 10 to the power minus 32 seconds. It doesn't explain how the universe is 93 light years wide but only 14 ish, billion years old.

As far as I understand it, cosmic inflation occurred only very early on, shortly after the big bang - and on a small scale, 10 to the power minus 36 seconds after the singularity to 10 to the power minus 32 seconds. It doesn't explain how the universe is 93 light years wide but only 14 ish, billion years old. — counterpunch

But it does. Those estimates are themselves based on inflationary cosmological models.

But it does. Those estimates are themselves based on inflationary cosmological models. — Kenosha Kid

That's very helpful. Thank you!

You're welcome. First key thing is that the " inflationary period", while brief, was insanely rapid, with every point pretty much moving at speed c away from its neighbouring points... It didn't require a lot of time to become huge. The second thing is that it never really ended, it just stopped being quite so insane, and we've had a lot of time to get quite a lot bigger. Most important point is that inflation is like gravity: normal rules for inertial frames (including universal speed limits) don't apply.

First key thing is that the " inflationary period", while brief, was insanely rapid, with every point pretty much moving at speed c away from its neighbouring points... — Kenosha Kid

"Insanely rapid" - there's a scientific term! I wasn't accounting for the insanity! My bad!! Because, to a sane person it would seems that two points with diametrically opposite trajectories could not get much further than 28bn light years apart in 14bn years, even with a brief period of faster than light expansion - that surely cannot account for the other 58bn light years of space without reference to insanity!

I feel that the recent development of Science drives people less intelligent and less creative due to their increasing hyper-dependency on the tech gadgets and devices based on A.I. Some say it could the path to the beginning of the end of human civilization.

Yes, it's a matter of mentality switching from the comparable sanity of special relativity, in which an object cannot recede from another faster than c, to the insanity of general relativity, in which an object can recede at c while riding on a space that's also receding at c (making 2c). That no object can recede from another faster than c is a rule about _inertial_ frames, not curved spacetime.

Some say it could the path to the beginning of the end of human civilization. — Corvus

That's Love Island, not science ;)

That's Love Island, not science ;) — Kenosha Kid

Never watched it in my life. Obviously you have been. :)

Yes, it's a matter of mentality switching from the comparable sanity of special relativity, in which an object cannot recede from another faster than c, to the insanity of general relativity, in which an object can recede at c while riding on a space that's also receding at c (making 2c). That no object can recede from another faster than c is a rule about _inertial_ frames, not curved spacetime. — Kenosha Kid

Oh, well then - that explains it. Thanks! 14x2x2=56 - which only leaves 37bn light years accounted for by magic. I mean cosmic expansion. Close enough!

...so the argument against science is that Counterpunch doesn't understand it.

Sure.

so the argument against science is that Counterpunch doesn't understand it. — Banno

No, he assured us he has read this stuff and has a good grasp of it.

Thanks! 14x2x2=56 - which only leaves 37bn light years accounted for by magic. I mean cosmic expansion. Close enough! — counterpunch

Well, much more than 37bn. Part of inflation theory is that the universe must be much, much larger than the observable universe. However, no magic necessary, just counting. 2c for two adjacent points. Next add a third. You have points A, B and C in a row. A is receding from B at almost the speed of light. B is receding from C at roughly the same speed. How fast is A receding from C?

And remember this happened in 0.00000000000000000000000000000001 seconds during which the visible universe acquired most of the size it has now.

The largeness of the unobservable universe is a requirement that the inflation yield the observable, homogeneous cosmos we see now.

...so the argument against science is that Counterpunch doesn't understand it.

Sure. — Banno

Not really, no! I think my original point was about science communication, or lack thereof - and the discussion followed from there. I'm not going to be rude to the Kid - who is doing his best to explain something that doesn't seem to me to make sense. And I'm interested in science stuff. I wouldn't know there was a problem if I didn't know quite a bit about the subject - so, thanks Banno, for your remarks. Swing and a miss though, again!

The largeness of the unobservable universe is a requirement that the inflation yield the observable, homogeneous cosmos we see now. — Kenosha Kid

No, I don't think so. But thanks for trying.

No, I don't think so. But thanks for trying. — counterpunch

Well it is, whether you think so or not. Even Wiki opens with:

Inflation is a mechanism for realizing the cosmological principle, which is the basis of the standard model of physical cosmology: it accounts for the homogeneity and isotropy of the observable universe. In addition, it accounts for the observed flatness and absence of magnetic monopoles. — Even Wiki, how lazy do you have to be to not even Wiki

"Inflation is now a built-in piece of our standard story of cosmic evolution. But it’s still controversial. In 2014, researchers claimed to have seen ripples from inflation imprinted on the cosmic microwave background. But this proved mistaken..."

https://www.newscientist.com/definition/cosmic-inflation/#ixzz6zGCbeACB

Relevance?

Relevance? — Kenosha Kid

All of this is irrelevant. It's not how I thought this discussion would develop. I'll let you talk - but frankly, you know less than I do. I didn't expect anyone to weigh in, claiming that the big bang theory and cosmic inflation are wholly adequate. I assumed it would stand as an unsolved problem in science, I could use as a springboard to discuss science communication and related issues. I can only suggest you write to the astrophysical journal, and tell them - that, controversy over, problem solved by "insanely rapid" cosmic expansion!

Maybe it makes sense in ways I don't understand — counterpunch

:rofl: This maybe the key to unlocking some doors to...the twilight zone! Press on, o philosopher! Lead the way!

...so the argument against science is that Counterpunch doesn't understand it. — Banno

Israeli Intelligence Failure Leads To Creation Of The Devil's Advocate

The Tenth Man is a devil’s advocate. If there are 10 people in a room and nine agree, the role of the tenth is to disagree and point out flaws in whatever decision the group has reached.

I'll let you talk - but frankly, you know less than I do. — counterpunch

:rofl:

I can only suggest you write to the astrophysical journal — counterpunch

The one astrophysical journal. :joke:

controversy over, problem solved by "insanely rapid" cosmic expansion! — counterpunch

It's the current reigning model, I take no credit for it (unless the name "insanely rapid" catches on, in which case I'll take credit for that). It's just the inflationary cosmological model for future reference, in case you ever have the epiphany that it's good to read up on a subject before spouting off about it.

This maybe the key to unlocking some doors to...the twilight zone! Press on, o philosopher! Lead the way! — TheMadFool

The twilight zone - where science is valued above the politics of primitive people, and technology is applied on the basis of scientific merit, to secure a prosperous sustainable future? Spooky!

The one astrophysical journal. :joke: — Kenosha Kid

"The Astrophysical Journal, often abbreviated ApJ (pronounced "ap jay") in references and speech,[1] is a peer-reviewed scientific journal of astrophysics and astronomy, established in 1895 by American astronomers George Ellery Hale and James Edward Keeler."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Astrophysical_Journal

...how lazy do you have to be to not even Wiki — Kenosha Kid