From PBS:
Could the Universe Be Lopsided?
Physicists call a universe that appears roughly similar in all directions “isotropic.” Because the geometry of spacetime is shaped by the distribution of matter and energy, an isotropic universe must posses a geometric structure that looks the same in all directions as well. The only three such possibilities for three-dimensional spaces are positively curved (the surface of a hypersphere, like a beach ball but in a higher dimension), negatively curved (the surface of a hyperboloid, shaped like a saddle or potato chip), or flat. Russian physicist Alexander Friedmann, Belgian cleric and mathematician Georges Lemaître and others incorporated these three geometries into some of the first cosmological solutions of Einstein’s equations. (By solutions, we mean mathematical descriptions of how the three spatial dimensions of the universe behave over time, given the type of geometry and the distribution of matter and energy.) Supplemented by the work of American physicist Howard Robertson and British mathematician Arthur Walker, this class of isotropic solutions has become the standard for descriptions of the universe in the Big Bang theory.
However, in 1921 Edward Kasner—best known for his coining of the term “Googol” for the number 1 followed by 100 zeroes—demonstrated that there was another class of solutions to Einstein’s equations: anisotropic, or “lopsided,” solutions.
Known as the Kasner solutions, these cosmic models describe a universe that expands in two directions while contracting in the third.
Then there is the Mixmaster Universe (no, really), the Axis of Evil, and tilted universes.
Even if the preponderance of evidence today points to cosmic regularity, who knows when a new discovery might call that into question, and compel cosmologists to dust off alternative ideas. More.
Actually, the best evidence is that the universe is shaped like a leprechaun’s hat. I have equations; they just don’t make any sense.
But, according to one of the above theories (Mixmaster), the universe exhibits “deterministic chaos.” Which means that my equations may not have to make sense.
In other words, as long as it’s fun, it’s fine. But when people start to take this stuff very seriously, they underestimate the storm they are unleashing.
See also:
In search of a road to reality
The bill arrives for cosmology’s free lunch
If ID theorists are right, how should we study nature?
I might be misreading here, but if the implication is that “deterministic chaos” is an oxymoron, I don’t think that’s the case. Deterministic chaos is the only kind of chaos I’d heard of until now.
This also seems cryptic. Cosmologists take their work seriously, just as we all do. I’m not aware of any storms being unleashed in the process.
News,
From reading other comments in this thread, one could tell that some people seem to take all that funny cosmology stuff a little too serious. 🙂
Keep posting. Some of us here like your refreshing sense of humor.
Maybe I missed the joke? I don’t know…
The new cosmologies are not shedding much light, except on the sheer power of the human imagination. Whatever they were supposed to explain has been rendered by their own rules unexplainable. What follows?
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....80961.html
Referring to the linked article, certainly the discovery of the Higgs particle was a triumph for the Standard Model of Particle Physics, which is a “good” thing, no? One more prediction confirmed.
I gather it’s still unclear what the implications of this discovery are for the Standard Model of Cosmology (Lambda-CDM), or any of the other cosmologies.
News, What Is Evil About The Axis Of Evil?
as to:
“the Higgs particle was a triumph for the Standard Model of Particle Physics, which is a “good” thing, no? One more prediction confirmed.”
The confirmed prediction of the Higg’s boson is indeed good news. Good news for the Theist that is!
I have no idea why an atheist would dare to think the confirmed prediction of the Higg’s boson supported his naturalistic position. (that is if there were any such ‘persons’ as atheists to even think given naturalism in the first place (Nancy Pearcey; Finding Truth):
podcast – Are Humans Simply Robots? Nancy Pearcey on the “Free Will Illusion”
http://www.discovery.org/multi.....more-30001
It is interesting to note that Dr. Craig used the example of Peter Higg’s mathematical prediction of the Higg’s boson itself, which Peter Higg’s had made 3 decades ago before it was discovered by the LHC, as a philosophical proof for Theism:
It is a shame that atheists, (if they even existed as real persons 🙂 ), always have to try to steal from God in order for them to try to make it seem they are even sane in their rejection of God.
supplemental note:
at 37:51 minute mark of following video, according to the law of identity, Richard Dawkins does not exist as a person: (the unity of Aristotelian Form is also discussed) i.e. ironically, in atheists denying that God really exists, they end up denying that they themselves really exist as real persons.
What should be needless to say, if raising your arm, or opening a door, is enough to refute your supposedly ‘scientific’ worldview of atheistic materialism, then perhaps it is time for you to seriously consider getting a new scientific worldview?
Also of note, When the agent causality of Theists is rightly let ‘back’ into the picture of physics, as the Christian founders of science originally envisioned, (instead of the self refuting ‘blind’ causality of atheists), then a unification between Quantum Theory and Relativity is readily achieved in the resurrection of Christ from death:
http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-548425
“Higg’s”. lol
A triumph for the atheist Peter Higgs as well!
It seems to favor the casinos.
Whether Higgs was an atheist or not in his personal beliefs has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that Higgs, and every other atheist on the face of God’s green earth, has to steal Theistic presuppositions in order to rationally practice science in the first place.
It is not an accident that there weren’t any atheists at the Christian founding of modern science.
If you truly believe there is no reason why anything exists in the universe, and that everything in the universe is all ultimately an accident, then that belief certainly prevents a ‘person’ from ever investigating to see the reason(s) behind why anything exists in the universe.
In fact, it is impossible for atheists to live their own personal lives as if atheism is true. Moreover, to the extent that an atheist is able to live his own personal life consistently within his worldview, he would be considered psychopathic.
It would be nice to see an atheist be honest and openly admit their reliance on Theistic presuppositions, but then again, I guess that makes me a fool for ever expecting thieves to be honest about their blatant intellectual theft from God.
Quote of Note:
Perhaps you should send Professor Higgs a sharply worded letter.
daveS, that’s your response to the complete epistemological failure inherent within your atheism? that I should write a sharply worded letter to Higgs?
Seeing as that is a pathetic response to the points raised, I’ll take that response to be your concession that ‘you’, (if there even were a real ‘you’ in atheism), have no real defense against the valid points raised in my post against atheism.
The failure is that atrocious argument by WLC that you summarized. I doubt it keeps Professor Higgs up at night.
Anyway, Nobel laureate Higgs doesn’t need a lecture on how to do science from WLC.
That’s my last word on this off-topic diversion.
daveS, ‘That’s my last word on this off-topic diversion.’
translation, “I have nothing except a fallacious appeal to authority to try to counter your argument with thus I wish this discussion to end since I’m getting the crap beat out of me’
🙂
“talk to the hand”
So, besides my Theistic presuppositions, you steal my line as well! 🙂
Atheist Scientists come up with so very very few big ideas – Dr Higgs deserves some credit. Kudos good Dr.
He certainly isn’t a Militant Atheist by any stretch. http://www.theguardian.com/sci.....amentalism
BTW, guess what – the God Particle is extremely fine tuned. Sitting right on the edge.
Has scientists perplexed. Surprised. What else is new lol:)
Some physicists are calling for a revolution in physics. Here’s a surprising call to simplify physics from physicist Neil Turok: To Explain the Universe, Physics Needs a Revolution [Scientific American].
The universe is “lopsided” is one way to put it. A gentle politically correct way to put it.
How about the Universe is freaking aligned with the conscience specks that have emerged to measure it. How about that?
Copernican Principle has to be careful not to trip over Darwinism as it rushes to the exit. See ya.
Thanks ppolish,
A few more quotes along that line: