A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 19th 13, 10:54 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Sam Wormley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,966
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On 2/19/13 3:50 PM, kenseto wrote:
On Feb 19, 11:59 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/19/13 10:47 AM, kenseto wrote:





On Feb 19, 9:55 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/18/13 11:27 PM, John Gogo wrote:


On Feb 18, 11:22 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/18/13 2:58 PM, kenseto wrote:


1. The observed accelerated expansion of the far reached regions of
the universe disagrees with the predictions.


How so? What is the prediction? What are the observations?


Our mathematics is useless without our ability to predict.


Give me an example.


Falied to predict accelerated expansion of the universe.
failed to predict the galactic motion correctly.


See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda-CDM_model-


Cosmological constant and cold dark matters are add on
epicyles....that is post-diction not prediction.


You mean like Ptolemy?


  #22  
Old February 19th 13, 10:55 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Sam Wormley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,966
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On 2/19/13 3:52 PM, kenseto wrote:
On Feb 19, 11:57 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/19/13 10:45 AM, kenseto wrote:

On Feb 19, 12:22 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/18/13 2:58 PM, kenseto wrote:


1. The observed accelerated expansion of the far reached regions of
the universe disagrees with the predictions.


How so? What is the prediction? What are the observations?


Current theories do not predict the accelerated expansion of the
universe.


There is a version of General Relativity, that does indeed model the
accelerated expansion of the universe.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda-CDM_model-


Post-dictions don't count.


Says you?

  #23  
Old February 19th 13, 10:57 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
kenseto[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On Feb 19, 12:46*pm, Absolutely Vertical
wrote:
On 2/19/2013 10:45 AM, kenseto wrote:

On Feb 19, 12:22 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/18/13 2:58 PM, kenseto wrote:


1. The observed accelerated expansion of the far reached regions of
the universe disagrees with the predictions.


* * How so? What is the prediction? What are the observations?


Current theories do not predict the accelerated expansion of the
universe.


yes they do. what makes you think they don't?


If they do then they would not award Nobel to those astronomers who
discovered the accelerated expansion. The discovery was a surprise and
not predicted by current theories.
  #24  
Old February 19th 13, 11:10 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Sam Wormley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,966
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On 2/19/13 3:57 PM, kenseto wrote:


If they do then they would not award Nobel to those astronomers who
discovered the accelerated expansion. The discovery was a surprise and
not predicted by current theories.


That's a really lame argument, Seto.


  #25  
Old February 19th 13, 11:26 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
kenseto[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On Feb 19, 4:54*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/19/13 3:50 PM, kenseto wrote:





On Feb 19, 11:59 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/19/13 10:47 AM, kenseto wrote:


On Feb 19, 9:55 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/18/13 11:27 PM, John Gogo wrote:


On Feb 18, 11:22 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/18/13 2:58 PM, kenseto wrote:


1. The observed accelerated expansion of the far reached regions of
the universe disagrees with the predictions.


* * * How so? What is the prediction? What are the observations?


Our mathematics is useless without our ability to predict.


* * *Give me an example.


Falied to predict accelerated expansion of the universe.
failed to predict the galactic motion correctly.


* * See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda-CDM_model-


Cosmological constant and cold dark matters are add on
epicyles....that is post-diction not prediction.


* *You mean like Ptolemy?


Yes.
  #26  
Old February 19th 13, 11:28 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
kenseto[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On Feb 19, 5:10*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/19/13 3:57 PM, kenseto wrote:



If they do then they would not award Nobel to those astronomers who
discovered the accelerated expansion. The discovery was a surprise and
not predicted by current theories.


* *That's a really lame argument, Seto.


No wormy....that's a logical arguement.
  #27  
Old February 20th 13, 12:09 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Absolutely Vertical
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On 2/19/2013 3:57 PM, kenseto wrote:
On Feb 19, 12:46 pm, Absolutely Vertical
wrote:
On 2/19/2013 10:45 AM, kenseto wrote:

On Feb 19, 12:22 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/18/13 2:58 PM, kenseto wrote:


1. The observed accelerated expansion of the far reached regions of
the universe disagrees with the predictions.


How so? What is the prediction? What are the observations?


Current theories do not predict the accelerated expansion of the
universe.


yes they do. what makes you think they don't?


If they do then they would not award Nobel to those astronomers who
discovered the accelerated expansion. The discovery was a surprise and
not predicted by current theories.


oh, i don't know about that not-awarding-a-prize business. einstein was
awarded a nobel prize for the theory accounting for the photoelectric
effect, which was something that had been observed (again a surprise)
decades earlier. same thing for the nobel prize awarded to bardeen and
cooper for the theory of superconductivity, years after
superconductivity was observed experimentally. on the other hand, awards
were given to the fellas that found a planet neptune experimentally,
even though it was predicted using newtonian gravity from two centuries
previous.

maybe you just don't have a clue how science works.
  #28  
Old February 20th 13, 02:42 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
kenseto[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On Feb 20, 6:09*am, Absolutely Vertical
wrote:
On 2/19/2013 3:57 PM, kenseto wrote:





On Feb 19, 12:46 pm, Absolutely Vertical
wrote:
On 2/19/2013 10:45 AM, kenseto wrote:


On Feb 19, 12:22 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 2/18/13 2:58 PM, kenseto wrote:


1. The observed accelerated expansion of the far reached regions of
the universe disagrees with the predictions.


* * *How so? What is the prediction? What are the observations?


Current theories do not predict the accelerated expansion of the
universe.


yes they do. what makes you think they don't?


If they do then they would not award Nobel to those astronomers who
discovered the accelerated expansion. The discovery was a surprise and
not predicted by current theories.


oh, i don't know about that not-awarding-a-prize business. einstein was
awarded a nobel prize for the theory accounting for the photoelectric
effect, which was something that had been observed (again a surprise)
decades earlier. same thing for the nobel prize awarded to bardeen and
cooper for the theory of superconductivity, years after
superconductivity was observed experimentally. on the other hand, awards
were given to the fellas that found a planet neptune experimentally,
even though it was predicted using newtonian gravity from two centuries
previous.

maybe you just don't have a clue how science works.


The point is:
Current theories don't predict accelerated expansion....you scientists
fudged by adding
the repulsive CC to make the current theories fit observations.
  #29  
Old February 20th 13, 09:23 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Absolutely Vertical
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On 2/20/2013 7:42 AM, kenseto wrote:

If they do then they would not award Nobel to those astronomers who
discovered the accelerated expansion. The discovery was a surprise and
not predicted by current theories.


oh, i don't know about that not-awarding-a-prize business. einstein was
awarded a nobel prize for the theory accounting for the photoelectric
effect, which was something that had been observed (again a surprise)
decades earlier. same thing for the nobel prize awarded to bardeen and
cooper for the theory of superconductivity, years after
superconductivity was observed experimentally. on the other hand, awards
were given to the fellas that found a planet neptune experimentally,
even though it was predicted using newtonian gravity from two centuries
previous.

maybe you just don't have a clue how science works.


The point is:
Current theories don't predict accelerated expansion....you scientists
fudged by adding
the repulsive CC to make the current theories fit observations.


the point is:
your arguments are full of **** and reveals that you don't know how
science works. things have happened historically that you say shouldn't
be possible to happen.
  #30  
Old February 20th 13, 10:00 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
kenseto[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default A Theory on the Origin of Our Universe

On Feb 20, 3:23*pm, Absolutely Vertical
wrote:
On 2/20/2013 7:42 AM, kenseto wrote:





If they do then they would not award Nobel to those astronomers who
discovered the accelerated expansion. The discovery was a surprise and
not predicted by current theories.


oh, i don't know about that not-awarding-a-prize business. einstein was
awarded a nobel prize for the theory accounting for the photoelectric
effect, which was something that had been observed (again a surprise)
decades earlier. same thing for the nobel prize awarded to bardeen and
cooper for the theory of superconductivity, years after
superconductivity was observed experimentally. on the other hand, awards
were given to the fellas that found a planet neptune experimentally,
even though it was predicted using newtonian gravity from two centuries
previous.


maybe you just don't have a clue how science works.


The point is:
Current theories don't predict accelerated expansion....you scientists
fudged by adding
the repulsive CC to make the current theories fit observations.


the point is:
your arguments are full of **** and reveals that you don't know how
science works. things have happened historically that you say shouldn't
be possible to happen.


The point is you are a piece of ****. A new theory does not require to
follow history.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Chapt22 Dirac new radioactivities would also prove this theory #228Atom Totality (Atom Universe) theory Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] Astronomy Misc 0 December 31st 09 04:48 AM
Nebular Dust Cloud theory has contradictions #146; 3rd ed; AtomTotality (Atom Universe) theory Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] Astronomy Misc 0 August 15th 09 08:17 AM
MECO theory to replace black-hole theory #41 ;3rd edition book: ATOMTOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY [email protected] Astronomy Misc 8 May 20th 09 01:17 AM
Farm Theory, Also Called, Spring Theory, Yard Theory And TheEvolution Of Our Universe [email protected] Amateur Astronomy 3 September 29th 08 01:11 PM
Origin of the universe. G=EMC^2 Glazier Astronomy Misc 0 December 31st 06 08:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.