new fringe cosmology idea

[Cuetek]

Boys, Boys! If you don't settle down, I'm going to turn this forum around and go right back the the Static Universe!

 

Okay, for real now! You guys want a new Cosmology, but don't like all that tacky idiocy? Have I got the theory for you. It's not a whack job, so the purists will be piqued, yet it's still heretic enough for even the likes of Fripro to feel like he's delivered a blow for academic freedom everywhere (or everywhen, or whatever).

 

So first let's get the hard part out of the way: It's based on Bayes Theorem. I know, I know, every time someone wants to bust some scientific chops they pull out some sorta convoluted probability theorem. But this is pretty straight forward, and heck, if probability is good enough for quantum theory it's good enough for the Big Bang.

 

Basically this theory refutes the first two axioms of the cosmological principal as an artifact of scale in favor of an ongoing potentially infinite material hierarchy. Instead of the first to axioms of the cosmological principal --(1) the homogeneous and (2) isotropic universe)-- it suggests the following two axioms:

 

1) The Finite Rule: All material phenomena are finite in extent and constituent to a larger structures.

 

2) The Plurality Principal: All material phenomena are multiply manifest.

 

In this way the universe is considered to consist of an ongoing, potentially

infinite material hierarchy in both directions of scale.

 

 

If the big white area is a finite, normally expanding Big Bang phenomenon, and distance "D" is 100 times the diameter of "a" and "A" is 100 times the dia. of "b" and "B" is 100 times "c" and "C" represents the span of the visible universe then the evidence of the shape of the Big Bang as a finite phenomenon would be less than one part per million in the CMB radiation temperature variation from one side of the sky to the other. (WMAP data only goes to about 25 parts per million resolution.)

 

This video poses the rationale for the above two rules:

 

This video offers the improvement of the Cosmological Principle:

 

And this video is a stab at how we might imagine the large scale

structure of the Big Bang under the constraints of the two rules:

 

The theory allows inflation to be accommodated by finite (no singularity) initial condition and the curvature of the universe (flat, open, closed) to be dictated by asymmetric mass distributions at extra-Big Bang scales. It doesn't refute the Big Bang so much as limits it's scope.

 

It ain't rocket science. It's just a philosophical adjustment of the Cosmological Principle whose time has come.

 

Pretty good, huh?

 

-Cuetek

[geodugdale]

Hi, I was about to write another blog to my 11 grandchildren updating our "new" cosmology theory. The blog will be called "Cosmology: Geniuses & Crackpots". When I began looking into cosmology in 1998 as a hobby I read a NYTimes article about the fact that there were so many crackpots out there with "new" cosmology theories that the geniuses had to find ways to hide from the crackpot questions. I started a blog nearly 2 years ago to the grandchildren only ... with the rule that there was no sense in trying to get any answers from experts to our questions The whole object of my blog is to develop an interest in science by the grandchildren.

I went to the Internet today and typed in "cosmology crackpot & geniuses" and found your website. As it turns out your three videos fit our little cosmos adventure so well I thought it would be a good idea to sign up for this forum.

Our concept of suggesting three nested universes, with our universe in the middle of a larger universe and smaller universe fits so well with your three video presentation. Hope you don't mind us touching base with you once in awhile. George Dugdale

[Cuetek]

Hope you don't mind us touching base with you once in awhile. George Dugdale

 

Talk to me any time you like George. It's your reputation. (snork!)

 

-Mike Harmon (m2lucid@gmail.com)

[William H. Depperman]

Boys, Boys! If you don't settle down, I'm going to turn this forum around and go right back the the Static Universe!

 

Okay, for real now! You guys want a new Cosmology, but don't like all that tacky idiocy? Have I got the theory for you. It's not a whack job, so the purists will be piqued, yet it's still heretic enough for even the likes of Fripro to feel like he's delivered a blow for academic freedom everywhere (or everywhen, or whatever).

 

So first let's get the hard part out of the way: It's based on Bayes Theorem. I know, I know, every time someone wants to bust some scientific chops they pull out some sorta convoluted probability theorem. But this is pretty straight forward, and heck, if probability is good enough for quantum theory it's good enough for the Big Bang.

 

Basically this theory refutes the first two axioms of the cosmological principal as an artifact of scale in favor of an ongoing potentially infinite material hierarchy. Instead of the first to axioms of the cosmological principal --(1) the homogeneous and (2) isotropic universe)-- it suggests the following two axioms:

 

1) The Finite Rule: All material phenomena are finite in extent and constituent to a larger structures.

 

2) The Plurality Principal: All material phenomena are multiply manifest.

 

In this way the universe is considered to consist of an ongoing, potentially

infinite material hierarchy in both directions of scale.

 

 

If the big white area is a finite, normally expanding Big Bang phenomenon, and distance "D" is 100 times the diameter of "a" and "A" is 100 times the dia. of "b" and "B" is 100 times "c" and "C" represents the span of the visible universe then the evidence of the shape of the Big Bang as a finite phenomenon would be less than one part per million in the CMB radiation temperature variation from one side of the sky to the other. (WMAP data only goes to about 25 parts per million resolution.)

 

This video poses the rationale for the above two rules:

 

This video offers the improvement of the Cosmological Principle:

 

And this video is a stab at how we might imagine the large scale

structure of the Big Bang under the constraints of the two rules:

 

The theory allows inflation to be accommodated by finite (no singularity) initial condition and the curvature of the universe (flat, open, closed) to be dictated by asymmetric mass distributions at extra-Big Bang scales. It doesn't refute the Big Bang so much as limits it's scope.

 

It ain't rocket science. It's just a philosophical adjustment of the Cosmological Principle whose time has come.

 

Pretty good, huh?

 

-Cuetek

 

Boys, Boys! If you don't settle down, I'm going to turn this forum around and go right back the the Static Universe!

 

Okay, for real now! You guys want a new Cosmology, but don't like all that tacky idiocy? Have I got the theory for you. It's not a whack job, so the purists will be piqued, yet it's still heretic enough for even the likes of Fripro to feel like he's delivered a blow for academic freedom everywhere (or everywhen, or whatever).

 

So first let's get the hard part out of the way: It's based on Bayes Theorem. I know, I know, every time someone wants to bust some scientific chops they pull out some sorta convoluted probability theorem. But this is pretty straight forward, and heck, if probability is good enough for quantum theory it's good enough for the Big Bang.

 

Basically this theory refutes the first two axioms of the cosmological principal as an artifact of scale in favor of an ongoing potentially infinite material hierarchy. Instead of the first to axioms of the cosmological principal --(1) the homogeneous and (2) isotropic universe)-- it suggests the following two axioms:

 

1) The Finite Rule: All material phenomena are finite in extent and constituent to a larger structures.

 

2) The Plurality Principal: All material phenomena are multiply manifest.

 

In this way the universe is considered to consist of an ongoing, potentially

infinite material hierarchy in both directions of scale.

 

 

If the big white area is a finite, normally expanding Big Bang phenomenon, and distance "D" is 100 times the diameter of "a" and "A" is 100 times the dia. of "b" and "B" is 100 times "c" and "C" represents the span of the visible universe then the evidence of the shape of the Big Bang as a finite phenomenon would be less than one part per million in the CMB radiation temperature variation from one side of the sky to the other. (WMAP data only goes to about 25 parts per million resolution.)

 

This video poses the rationale for the above two rules:

 

This video offers the improvement of the Cosmological Principle:

 

And this video is a stab at how we might imagine the large scale

structure of the Big Bang under the constraints of the two rules:

 

The theory allows inflation to be accommodated by finite (no singularity) initial condition and the curvature of the universe (flat, open, closed) to be dictated by asymmetric mass distributions at extra-Big Bang scales. It doesn't refute the Big Bang so much as limits it's scope.

 

It ain't rocket science. It's just a philosophical adjustment of the Cosmological Principle whose time has come.

 

Pretty good, huh?

 

-Cuetek

Astophysics Send-Out.doc