Louis Marmet 🇨🇦Peter Woit’s comments on string theory.
đź”— https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=15647
I can't wait for someone to write the same about the Big Bang model, which must be right because it's the only cosmology we have.
Daniel Fischer@redshiftdrift But one which - in stark contrast to string theory - makes numerous predictions. Which have been tested and found correct - remember 2013 when Planck bored us with a CBR power spectrum that was exactly as expected? It's only the various large and small tensions - and that we still have no clue what DM and DE are :-) - that keeps cosmologists awake at night
Amber BlakleyIn my studies Dm and De are "not" necessary when you equate pressure with mass. Once you open your mind up to the idea of knowing we walk through atoms everywhere. Yet no one calls them "invisible". We just simply cannot "see" that with the naked eye. Now take "space" diffuse at 1.4 trillionths of a pascal spaced out at ppm cubic squared. Then, the idea of invisible "anything" becomes humorous. Because then you realize how "one-sided" the standard model is.
@cosmos4u The extreme uniformity of the CMB was not predicted, but initially considered a major anomaly for the standard Big Bang theory because it lead to the horizon problem.
'Inflation' was hypothesized to fix the problem, but "it is yet another idea invented to explain what we see" (Burbidge [1]) "Inflation has no basis in fundamental theory," it was not predicted.
The CMB power spectrum was never predicted either, it was obtained as a fit to observations made by Planck. The alignment of CMB multipoles with the ecliptic was a surprise, the Big Bang model does not make any predictions for that (or any of the numerous coincidences that appear in the model).
Even the best 'prediction' (made before the measurement by P&W) of the CMB temperature, 5 K, was too large by a factor 11 in power density.
Like string theory, the Big Bang model is a construction built on fictitious elements (DM, DE, inflation, singularity, ...) with an adjustable parameter for each fictitious epicycle.
Looks like I'm the one who will have to write the eulogy of the Big Bang...
[1] G. Burbidge, “The state of cosmology,” in Current Issues in Cosmology, J. Narlikar and J.-C. Pecker, Eds., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, p. 9. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511607028.002.