Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Michael, you seem to have a whole lot to lose if this pans out.
Will it be so disconcerting to find the Creator worked longer than you thought?
It is so terrifying Bishop Ussher really isn't Divinely Inspired Scripture?
Will your faith survive My Lord being more than what you thought?
The announcement was made, the gravity waves were detected according to the predictions. Now the whole experiment will be reviewed by other physicists to check on data collection and evaluation; to see if the data was collected as claimed and if the data bears out the conclusions announced.
Just for the tally books, nothing can be discovered to discredit God. Perhaps traditional Bible understanding will take a hit, but that's happened before; God and Christianity are still valid and alive.
Perhaps traditional Bible understanding will take a hit, but that's happened before; God and Christianity are still valid and alive.
It is so terrifying Bishop Ussher really isn't Divinely Inspired Scripture?
Remind me to add a few more unsupported claims to the list of unsupported claims from the Lambda-CDM doctrine of supernatural dogma:
1) Space expansion 'causes' photon redshift
2) Inflation 'causes' space expansion
3) Inflation 'causes' B-mode polarization of photons.
4) Dark energy 'causes' space acceleration
5) exotic matter exists
6) exotic matter emits gamma rays
7) exotic matter emits x-rays
Each of these claims have been made by astronomers in the media over the past month.
Not one is supported by empirical laboratory evidence
and every single claim is based upon an affirming the consequent fallacy run amok.
Had to stop back in to see how Michael explained some of the findings of the last week. I was at the UCLA symposium for Prof Cline's announcements, and couldn't but suppress a chuckle a few times. Then to read the BICEP paper...just awesome.
Predicted? Based on *what* empirical laboratory evidence did inflation ever *predict* anything?!?!? When was the first "prediction" of this observation made, and based on *what empirically demonstrated physics* was this prediction made?Michael, can you summarize briefly your objections to the excess in the BB spectrum, right where inflationary theories predicted, 5.2 sigma significance with numerous bootstraps done?
It's pure baloney you can rule out *anything* that way! You have *no idea* how those signals got there, and *no* demonstrated relationship between those signals and your dead inflation deity. You can't rule out all other process in plasma that might produce such signals, particularly Birkeland currents. You guys rule things in and out with nothing more than handwave and 10 cents of math.Extragalactic point sources can be ruled out via the cross reference with PLANCK, and BICEP1 and BICEP2 show the same correlation.
What *solid* evidence could you possibly be talking about? Your exotic matter claims completely blew up in your face over the past 18 months at LHC, at LUX and in those electron roundness experiments. I'd call your so called "strong evidence" more like "strong denial" and 10 cents of utterly falsified math!Or could you give your explanation of the data showing quite solid evidence for a 30 billion electron volt particle strongly consistent with both axion or WIMP models?
Except space doesn't do any magical expansion tricks in the lab, and your sky deities are collectively and individually more impotent on Earth than your average concept of God! Your claims about "cause/effect' are all nothing more than affirming the consequent fallacies. In fact the whole "dark energy" fiasco was a feeble attempt to save your *otherwise falsified* claims about the *cause* of photon redshift!Given that "dark energy" is the name we give for whatever causes the acceleration of the expansion of space-time, if indeed that is the correct explanation of the redshift data...it kind of does by definition. Again, it's kind of like finding a murder scene...you know there was a 'murderer'. Your objection still amounts to quibbling over why the word "murderer" is brought up at a murder scene.
We know that since you 2006 lensing study that supposedly "proved' the existence of 'dark matter' that your galaxy mass estimates used in that study were *hopelessly flawed*. First we found out that you *botched* the mass estimates of the largest stars we could actually observe because you *underestimated* the amount of inelastic scattering going on in plasma. Then we found out you guys miscounted the number of average sized stars in a galaxy by a whopping factor of four. The following year we found out you miscounted the number of dwarf stars in the stellar infrastructure by a factor of 5-20.How 'exotic' it is is debatable, given if it does exist, there's vastly more of it than 'regular matter'. Maybe we're the 'exotic' part. Anyhow, the vast preponderance of evidence is in favor of there being unseen matter, since modifying our understanding of gravity has proved so fruitless. We just don't know what that exotic matter is.
Blah, blah, pure speculation, blah! Show me one *real experiment* where exotic matter even showed up, let alone emitted light of *any* wavelength. Every single one of your claims is based upon a pure affirming the consequent fallacy run amok.It might - and the likelihood is actually pretty strong that it would. The Steuckelberg mechanism or kinetic mixing have both been proposed, and both instances would quite obviously have the effect of a dark matter particle emitting a measurable gamma ray line.
What? You admit *any* of your claims might be 'wrong'? I"m almost impressed.That's yet to be confirmed and possibly wrong.
Why oh way do you make stuff up like that? Talk about taking the low road in debate....Why, oh why, do you only read the media as your source of scientific information,
More strawmen I see. Your debate style is pretty much geared at the individual, particularly since your claims keep exploding in your face in the lab.given your oh-so-awesome talent in physics and knowledge superior to all other cosmologists?
Oh, I understand you cheap debate tactics all to well.Oh right, that's because it's the only thing you actually understand....dumbed down press releases. Nothing changes.
False. There is no 'empirical evidence" linking inflation to *any photon behavior at all*. You *imagine* that you dead sky deity had some tangible effect on a photon, but alas he's more impotent in the lab than your average concept of God.Actually, the point is that in the last month a great DEAL of support was just shown for each of these ideas, from empirical evidence.
False. There was never a demonstrated cause/effect justification of your claim to start with! You never provided any real mechanism to "rule out" anything as a cause. You just magically *handwaved in* your claim without so much a single demonstration with a single photon.I'm not sure you quite understand what affirming the consequent is and how you show a particular case to be false in logical reasoning. To do this, you have to show that there are reasonable, known alternative explanations for the second step, which you have not done, or even attempted to do.
Do you see the point? These findings are examples of b2). Once you've got a mountain of b2), then c) becomes more and more likely. Sure, you can say that this morning's earthquake in California was caused by big space aliens jumping up and down in the Mojave desert, it's just unreasonable.
I also got a good laugh at the "WIMPS did it *in spite of LUX findings*" paper.
That was a riot! I haven't (and probably won't till after work) yet had time to get through the "The inflation deity gave us B-modes" paper yet, but I'm sure I'll have a few choice comments to make once I've finished it.
Predicted?
Based on *what* empirical laboratory evidence did inflation ever *predict* anything?!?!?
When was the first "prediction" of this observation made and based on *what empirically demonstrated physics* was this prediction made?
I'm kind of astounded at that last bit. I just reread and yeah...you're actually asking why inflationary theories predict gravitational waves. You're actually asking what empirically demonstrated physics that prediction is based on.
Speechless.
Because the LUX findings aren't incompatible.
Ya, the primary one being that no exotic forms of stable matter exist in nature. That's the one you *won't* accept.There's entirely rational reasons why nulls could be found at LUX.
Translation: There's just enough wiggle room for a gap in there so I can sneak in my invisible friend.The data sets aren't mutually exclusive, only restrictive (which is great, because it narrows the rather enormous electron volt field down).
No, that's not what I asked you. I didn't ask you about GR, I asked you to demonstrate that your *invisible friends* are even needed to explain an expanding universe.Er....don't you know why gravitational waves are predicted in an expanding universe? Are you serious?
Let me give you a clue too. Quit trying to ride the coattails of GR theory, and show me that inflation isn't a figment of your overactive imagination in terms of it's *tangible* (in the lab preferably) effect on a photon.I'll give you a clue. 1918.
Do you not realize that your verbal abuse and strawmen won't work with me yet david?Do you not realize what an idiot you now look?
Because the LUX findings aren't incompatible. There's entirely rational reasons why nulls could be found at LUX. The data sets aren't mutually exclusive, only restrictive (which is great, because it narrows the rather enormous electron volt field down).
Given that "dark energy" is the name we give for whatever causes the acceleration of the expansion of space-time, if indeed that is the correct explanation of the redshift data...it kind of does by definition. Again, it's kind of like finding a murder scene...you know there was a 'murderer'. Your objection still amounts to quibbling over why the word "murderer" is brought up at a murder scene.
lol @ Micheal... Dude I quite like you and respect your right to believe what you wish, but just skimming through this thread and seeing your huge posts, one after another... I'm pretty sure any psychologist would layterm your reaction as "Scrambling" You're defending too hard
You are showing fear, calm down dude
I haven't had time to look deeply into this discovery, but from what I gather it's been confirmed and is arguably one of the greatest scientific discoveries of all... I feel I'm right in saying that instead of saying that we have models and mathematics that predict... we can now say we actually have something that came directly from the Beginning of the Universe... I'm excited
Anyone wishing to debunk it, please do, I'm quite certain those in the know would love to hear it because as we know... Scientists kind of want to be wrong because they love questions over answers.... the only good answers are the ones that lead to more questions
Fear of what exactly? Fear of impotent on Earth sky deities? Hardly.
Michael, the fear is that your pride will be hurt because it means you may have to admit you are wrong.
If they actually discovered gravitational waves, that's great. It's no skin off my nose one way or the other. It still has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with inflation theory. GR theory *predicts* gravitational waves with or without inflation, and with or without dark energy. The fact they even "market" gravitational waves as a "successful prediction" of inflation theory is pure nonsense. It's a successful prediction of *GR theory*, not *inflation theory*. Me? I'm just disgusted that they simply swept all that falsification of CDM under the rug, and they are again trying to ride the coattails of GR theory.As for the rest, dude I'm not getting into it with you, why do you not make your points to those who have the power and knowledge and equipment to test these things... you are currently arguing against some of the greatest minds on Earth... I'm sure they would love to hear what you have to say.
Me?... I'm just excited at a great discovery
lol @ Micheal... Dude I quite like you and respect your right to believe what you wish, but just skimming through this thread and seeing your huge posts, one after another... I'm pretty sure any psychologist would layterm your reaction as "Scrambling" You're defending too hard
You are showing fear, calm down dude
I haven't had time to look deeply into this discovery, but from what I gather it's been confirmed and is arguably one of the greatest scientific discoveries of all... I feel I'm right in saying that instead of saying that we have models and mathematics that predict... we can now say we actually have something that came directly from the Beginning of the Universe... I'm excited
Anyone wishing to debunk it, please do, I'm quite certain those in the know would love to hear it because as we know... Scientists kind of want to be wrong because they love questions over answers.... the only good answers are the ones that lead to more questions
If they actually discovered gravitational waves, that's great.
It's no skin off my nose one way or the other.
It still has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with inflation theory.
This line is actually pretty funny IMO.
You don't even know if "space" does any magical expansion trick in the first place.
You certainly don't know if "space expansion" can "accelerate either.
You have a dead body with a knife wound it's it back and he died of photon redshift.
Instead of assuming the cause of death was a knife.
(movement/inelastic scattering)
you claimed an invisible knife (space expansion) was the cause of death. When the invisible knife theory wouldn't work, you added an invisible slingshot to speed up the invisible knife?
That SN1A data actually *falsified* your oversimplification fallacy about the cause of photon redshift. You couldn't however just let your claims about the invisible cause be falsified, so you *added a new invisible cause as a sidekick! Wow!
Nothing can falsify your beliefs about the cause of redshift, not lab results, and not "tests" done by observation either.
Likewise nothing can falsify your claims about long lived forms of exotic matter. That failure at LUX literally went in one ear and out the other
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?