• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Classic failed science predictions and a faulty cosmological model exposed

dad

Undefeated
It looks like they admit the standard cosmological model is wrong these days.

"All indications are that the standard model needs revision"

"
Determinations of the Hubble Constant based on the standard candles and the gravitationally-lensed quasars have produced figures of 73-74 kilometers per second (the speed) per megaparsec (distance in units favored by astronomers).

However, predictions of the Hubble Constant from the standard cosmological model when applied to measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) -- the leftover radiation from the Big Bang -- produce a value of 67.4, a significant and troubling difference. This difference, which astronomers say is beyond the experimental errors in the observations, has serious implications for the standard model."
New distance measurements bolster challenge to basic model of universe

One humorous aspect of this latest fail is that they may need to tweak what dark energy is! (they invented dark stuff in the first place to try and explain what we see)

same link "Astronomers have various ways to adjust the model to resolve the discrepancy. Some of these include changing presumptions about the nature of dark energy"

Hilarious. Hard to believe some folks still take this junk seriously.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
20200608_112218.jpg
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
It looks like they admit the standard cosmological model is wrong these days.

"All indications are that the standard model needs revision"

"
Determinations of the Hubble Constant based on the standard candles and the gravitationally-lensed quasars have produced figures of 73-74 kilometers per second (the speed) per megaparsec (distance in units favored by astronomers).

However, predictions of the Hubble Constant from the standard cosmological model when applied to measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) -- the leftover radiation from the Big Bang -- produce a value of 67.4, a significant and troubling difference. This difference, which astronomers say is beyond the experimental errors in the observations, has serious implications for the standard model."
New distance measurements bolster challenge to basic model of universe

One humorous aspect of this latest fail is that they may need to tweak what dark energy is! (they invented dark stuff in the first place to try and explain what we see)

same link "Astronomers have various ways to adjust the model to resolve the discrepancy. Some of these include changing presumptions about the nature of dark energy"

Hilarious. Hard to believe some folks still take this junk seriously.

As opposed to claims of inerrant accuracy without evidence? Meh...give me a changing landscape and a willingness to learn.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
I guess in biblical terms they are called prophecies so perhaps a thread on

Classic failed biblical prophecies exposed

Would be interesting, if only the world was not going to end again before someone started one
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
It looks like they admit the standard cosmological model is wrong these days.

"All indications are that the standard model needs revision"

"
Determinations of the Hubble Constant based on the standard candles and the gravitationally-lensed quasars have produced figures of 73-74 kilometers per second (the speed) per megaparsec (distance in units favored by astronomers).

However, predictions of the Hubble Constant from the standard cosmological model when applied to measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) -- the leftover radiation from the Big Bang -- produce a value of 67.4, a significant and troubling difference. This difference, which astronomers say is beyond the experimental errors in the observations, has serious implications for the standard model."
New distance measurements bolster challenge to basic model of universe

One humorous aspect of this latest fail is that they may need to tweak what dark energy is! (they invented dark stuff in the first place to try and explain what we see)

same link "Astronomers have various ways to adjust the model to resolve the discrepancy. Some of these include changing presumptions about the nature of dark energy"

Hilarious. Hard to believe some folks still take this junk seriously.
Yes this is rather interesting news. It provides independent corroboration of the actual value of Hubble's constant being 74 km/sec/Mpc, instead of the 67.4 predicted by the ΛCDM model from the CMBR. It looks as if it may be connected to the puzzle of "dark energy", which is just a placeholder term for something we don't yet understand.

However it is worth pointing out that none of this challenges the basics of Big Bang cosmology. The new measurements remain consistent with an expanding universe. It is just that the explanations for the rate of expansion need further work.

We knew this already, as nobody has any real idea what "dark energy" is. The new data is a positive step, in the sense that the discrepancy between model and measurement seems to be real. So there really is a problem to be solved. That's helpful.

Science often moves forward by an accumulation of elements that don't fit, until someone finds a new theory that accounts for them. Classic examples from the end of the c.19th are the problems with the "aether" before relativity, and the "ultraviolet catastrophe" before quantum theory.

Those among us with scientific curiosity about nature find such news exciting rather than depressing.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Hilarious. Hard to believe some folks still take this junk seriously.

Not only does this contrast your blind faith despite all the evidence, with the scientific approach of going wherever the evidence leads us, but also, in no way does it call into question the basics of big bang cosmology. We still have lots of evidence that the universe as we know it emerged from a hot dense state about 14 billion years ago.
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
It looks like they admit the standard cosmological model is wrong these days.

"All indications are that the standard model needs revision"

"Determinations of the Hubble Constant based on the standard candles and the gravitationally-lensed quasars have produced figures of 73-74 kilometers per second (the speed) per megaparsec (distance in units favored by astronomers).

However, predictions of the Hubble Constant from the standard cosmological model when applied to measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) -- the leftover radiation from the Big Bang -- produce a value of 67.4, a significant and troubling difference. This difference, which astronomers say is beyond the experimental errors in the observations, has serious implications for the standard model."
New distance measurements bolster challenge to basic model of universe

One humorous aspect of this latest fail is that they may need to tweak what dark energy is! (they invented dark stuff in the first place to try and explain what we see)

same link "Astronomers have various ways to adjust the model to resolve the discrepancy. Some of these include changing presumptions about the nature of dark energy"

Hilarious. Hard to believe some folks still take this junk seriously.
Judging cosmic distances beyond our galaxy via a single luminous type of star IS indeed bad science. One cannot descide distances by light only as all stars varies electromagnetically and the measured light can have been dispersed and slown down in cosmos towards the telescope.

No surprise that scientists are surpriced. And this false mesurement may also have influences in the Standard Model aging of the universe
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Quote from the linked article:
"The more distant a galaxy is, the greater its recession speed from Earth".

This statement suggests a huge cosmological measuring problem. If distances are measured via electromagnetic impulses (light etc.) this impulse should be constant and reveal the correct distance and not an increasing recession at all.
 
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Yes this is rather interesting news. It provides independent corroboration of the actual value of Hubble's constant being 74 km/sec/Mpc, instead of the 67.4 predicted by the ΛCDM model from the CMBR. It looks as if it may be connected to the puzzle of "dark energy", which is just a placeholder term for something we don't yet understand.

However it is worth pointing out that none of this challenges the basics of Big Bang cosmology. The new measurements remain consistent with an expanding universe. It is just that the explanations for the rate of expansion need further work.

We knew this already, as nobody has any real idea what "dark energy" is. The new data is a positive step, in the sense that the discrepancy between model and measurement seems to be real. So there really is a problem to be solved. That's helpful.

Science often moves forward by an accumulation of elements that don't fit, until someone finds a new theory that accounts for them. Classic examples from the end of the c.19th are the problems with the "aether" before relativity, and the "ultraviolet catastrophe" before quantum theory.

Those among us with scientific curiosity about nature find such news exciting rather than depressing.
Oh, you apologists for science!
Try as they might, scientists have been working for centuries to
provide us with perfect precision in answers to all questions.
And they continually fail. Not only that, they keep finding new
questions they cannot answer. Clearly, science does not work.
We need an alternative.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Judging cosmic distances beyond our galaxy via a single luminous type of star IS indeed bad science. One cannot descide distances by light only as all stars varies electromagnetically and the measured light can have been dispersed and slown down in cosmos towards the telescope.

No surprise that scientists are surpriced. And this false mesurement may also have influences in the Standard Model aging of the universe


Light speed in vacuum is a constant, as the universe expands the space it occupies expands, this causes the frequency of the
Iight passing through to change towards the red spectrum. Is is the frequency of the light measured from specific type 1a stars that is measured to calculate distance. And fairly accurate it is within known limits?

Fyi. Interestingly i was watching a program on space time yesterday, it reminded me that space time is not smooth but, at the quantum level, more like a foam. This unevenness in its texture means light can have further to travel (at a constant speed) when taking one path than when taking another path. (Imagine a small pebble moving along a road surface)

This means that there can be a difference in measuring the time it takes two photons to travel a set distance if one passes close to a gravity well.

Some light from type 1a supernovae some 9 billion light years away that passes close to a gravity well (altering space time) can take up to a whopping 5 seconds more to travel more than half the age if the universe than light that did not pass close to the gravity well.

Methinks 5 seconds in 9 billion light years is a pretty accurate measurement which blows your last paragraph out of contention
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Religion has given us some inventions though....
- The auto da fe
- Ducking stools
- The Crusades
- Stoning
- Crucifixion
- The Inquisition

Not precisely diseases eradicated though.

I would much prefer a smallpox vaccine injection than a jolly good stoning
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
One of the conceptual problems in cosmology is connected to how we measure the universe. We use the sense of sight, enhanced with various types of telescopes. Einstein showed us that this approach will create the problem of relative reference.

Relative reference cannot be used to create a universal energy balance since the amount of energy in the universe has to be the same for all references since there is only one universe. Relative reference can make it different for each reference.

As a simple example, say we have a man standing at a train station. A train is approaching the station. If we use only visual data, the man can see the train moving, or he can assume he is moving and the train is stationary. Both ways will see the same velocity since reference is relative to the observer.

If we do an energy balance, each relative reference will assume a different amount of system energy, since a moving train has more energy than a moving man. If we knew that 500 gallons of fuel was used to create the relative velocity of 10MPH, we know the train was moving and the relative reference of the moving man was a visual illusion that can be supported by math. The relative reference illusion is giving the wrong energy numbers. Dark energy is needed to compete the energy balance required by other observations.

Another, but parallel explanation, is connected to entropy. Although entropy is a hard to conceptually explain, it is nevertheless a measurable quantity. It can be measured in the lab. Entropy was first discover during the development of the steam engine. After doing their best energy calculations, the developers always ended up with missing energy. This missing energy, noticed by experimenters, was termed entropy. The new data shows that there is missing energy, based on what we know. This is the steam engine problem of cosmology and is connected to the second law.

The second law says that the entropy of the universe has to increase. While an increase in entropy will absorb energy. The net affect is the entropy increase of the universe, is making energy unusable. The energy absorbed by entropy, gets tied up into entropy, and does not net reverse for its reuse. There is less and less reusable energy in the universe as time propagates to the future.
 
Last edited:

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Relative reference cannot be used to create a universal energy balance since the amount of energy in the universe has to be the same for all references since there is only one universe

Do you have evidence for this bold statement because as far as i know not one single cosmologist would make such a statement without evidenced data to back him,/her up.


As i hinted in post 13, light is not a serious problem.

What is more of a problem is space time and other lensing effects.
 
Top