Originally posted by stander
I made a remark about the standard model of cosmology. The standard model of the sun is an almost separate issue.
Quite the contrary stellar formation and evolution is crucial to cosmology.
When Alfen began to speculate in terms of "ambiplasma" back in 1960s, he went against iconic Albert Einstein. The result can be compared to Charles
Darwin trying to make appointment with pope Pius IX -- the mainstream science wasn't impressed. Alfen didn't know about or disregarded the existence
of cosmic microwave background that, when finally discovered in 1964, supported the Standard Model. That made plasma cosmology sort of a dead-end
street.
Whaaaa? The CMB was predicted by other theories and far more accurately.
Wikipedia right? Alfven didn't know about the CMB? never heard that before. Any proof?
Developing theories, such as the Standard Model, would always have competitors. The problem is that the counterpoints come from the guys who went to
the same school with the guys responsible for the challenged leading theory. They all undergo the same education and stand to make the same mistakes
in the way complex problems are approached. When Albert Einstein published his famous, groundbreaking theory, he was a patent office clerk; he was
isolated from the mainstream views and that enabled him to cast an independent look on the works. History will not repeat itself, because the present
requirements do not provide for an outsider to achieve academic sainthood. Also, cosmological stuff got very complex and an individual human brain may
not be able to handle this type of task.
Rubbish! much of Einsten's work as far as relativity goes is hardly original it's a direct rip off from the likes of Lorentz and Poincare.
To me, the critical alternative views sort of resemble those get-rich-quick schemes. But the way money is made is usually through a long, hard work.
So I think that the Standard Model must keep working the 9 to 5 shift and wait a bit longer.
Get rich quick?
www.cosmologystatement.org...
I also think that the biggest danger to the Standard Model are future observations of the universe through advancing technologies. The
astronomers may get the chance to see hitherto unknown effects that would defy the Standard Model.
Where have you been for the last 30 years? All observations seem to defy the standard model. The standard model cannot explain the spiral srtuctures
of galaxies or the filamentary structure of nebula.
The problem with gravity based theory, is that the entire thing is based on something we cannot explain, Gravity.
