Big Bang Goes ‘Boom!’
Carl Sagan didn’t smoke weed for nothing. As every stoned imbiber knows, thinking about
‘infinity’ just gets you higher. Sagan
pointed out that humans are made of ‘star dust’ – which is quite a poetic way
of saying that all that matter isn’t going anywhere, it is just changing its
form. We might not be eternal, but the
movement of matter is.
To that point, a little-noticed story crossed the wires February
12, 2015. Published on the left-liberal
site “Salon.com,” it publicized the fact that there is a countervailing view
among some scientists who realize the ‘big bang’ theory is full of holes. And not black ones either. Salon in other articles has considered the
‘big bang’ to be as truthful as evolution or climate change – making fun of
those who do not hold to it. But given
the manifold scientific problems with the theory that are even obvious to
laymen, the tide may be turning.
As Salon puts it, “the universe has no origin point at all”
based on a ‘new’ theory of cosmology.
They point to the truthfulness of simplicity in science and infer that
the most simple theory is that “the universe has been around since, well,
forever.” The correlation to that is
that it won’t be going anywhere – ever. It is. Its not expanding into nothing. It's not contracting into nothing. It's just metamorphosizing. And we are part of that. Star dust.
Salon continues: “Ahmed Farag Ali of Benha University and
the Zewail City of Science and Technology in Egypt, together with Saurya Das at
the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have presented their research
in a paper called “Cosmology
from quantum potential” published in Physics Letters B.” Notice that both these people probably did
not grow up being spoon-fed Christian origin stories.
The
three most obvious scientific problems with the ‘big bang’ is that something
cannot come from nothing – the 1st law of thermodynamics. The second is - what ‘caused’ the ‘big bang?’ Or what existed before it? The theory cannot answer these questions, and
it will not go there – confirmed by Stephen Hawking himself. The third is - can an
‘infinite dimensionless singularity’ exist?
That also defies the laws of physics.
The
Ali/Das model avoids these problems. Nor does it involve shaky theories of ‘dark’ energy and giant black holes. They claim it explains parts of quantum theory that do not jibe with the ‘big bang.’
(“BB”) Ali thinks that it helps unify quantum mechanics and general
relativity, something scientists have been trying to achieve for many
years - but that is a very large claim. These scientists interpret
“Hubble’s law’ in a way different from prior analyses – a way which doesn’t
rely on ‘space-time.’ On a side note, Hubble
himself actually didn’t believe what he had observed – the ‘red’ shift - proved
that the whole universe was expanding. (It isn't. And not
from the Earth, the alleged ‘center’ of the universe.)
As Salon puts it: “…in
a science where the current standard visions of the universe involve
concepts like anti-matter, super-strings, 10 dimensions (or more), membrane
universes and multi-verses, a theory like this one seems refreshingly like a
return to the basics.” Yeah. It puts 'time travel' to bed too.
Some Marxists have been criticizing the ‘BB’ theory for years as
more derivative of Abrahamic origin religions and idealist mathematics than consistent and observable science. Which is why it figures that the Catholic Pope is so on-board with the BB. There are actually
about 5 different theories of the BB, which illustrates that there are so many
problems with it they have to come up with a new one to patch up the old ones. Sort of like a paper Maché boat floating on
water. Ali and Das are not the only
scientists who have examined the weaknesses of the BB – a significant minority
of cosmologists have been on the same track.
If this view is eventually born out among the larger scientific
community, it will prove that observation and actual science can win out over
idealism and propaganda. It will also
prove that a dialectical-materialist approach to nature is superior to lazy pragmatism or the various varieties of religico-idealism that sometime permeate
the sciences. Not to mention the
most obvious distorter of science - corporate money.
Prior examination of this issue are all below: Mike Gimbel’s talk at Mayday Books (video), my
commentary and his pamphlet on the issue, “Dialectics and the New Physics,”
reviews of the books “Reason in Revolt,“ and the “Ten Assumptions of
Science.” Use blog search box, upper
left.
Red
Frog
February 19, 2015. In Memory of Brien Link.
The period of Valentine’s Day, Mardi Gras, Lunar New Year and the day Malcolm X was assassinated.
The period of Valentine’s Day, Mardi Gras, Lunar New Year and the day Malcolm X was assassinated.
No comments:
Post a Comment