Subir Sarkar, Emeritus Professor at the Rudolf Peierls Centre for Theoretical Physics, University of Oxford, offers arguments against the Standard Model in cosmology:
Cosmological data are now routinely corrected by a special-relativity boost transforming the measured redshift and magnitudes of distant objects to the presumptively isotropic cosmic rest frame. In the cosmic microwave background frame, the large-scale averaged distribution of matter is also assumed to be isotropic. The Friedmann–Lemaître equations can then be applied to the transformed magnitudes and red shifts…
These assumptions are no longer tenable. Several independent data sets now argue against the existence of a cosmic rest frame. At low redshift (z ≲ 0.1), all matter in our local supercluster of galaxies has a coherent bulk flow approximately aligned with the direction of the cosmic microwave background dipole: no convergence to the cosmic rest frame is seen on scales as large as ~300/h Mpc. At high redshift (z > 1), the observed dipole in the sky-distribution of distant radio sources and quasars is significantly larger than expected according to the kinematic interpretation of the cosmic microwave background dipole. Phenomena are in conflict with the cosmological principle. They directly challenge the claim that the universe is dominated by vacuum energy, which rests on its assumed large-scale homogeneity and isotropy. These are potentially paradigm-changing developments.
Subir Sarkar, “Heart of Darkness” at Inference Review (March 2022)
People whose views are otherwise disparate are saying the same thing:
Rob Sheldon On The New Evidence Against The Standard Model In Cosmology: “The Party’s Over.”
and
Sabine Hossenfelder: New evidence against the Standard Model of cosmology
as to:
And here is their referenced paper (44):
Ashok K. Singal weighs in with this paper from July 2021
To translate all this into English, the kinematic interpretation of the cosmic microwave background dipole held that the dipole anomaly observed in the CMBR was due to the motion of the observer through a frame in which the cosmic microwave background was held to be at rest.
Yet as Subir Sarkar stated in his article, “The anomalously large dipole is not of local origin”.
In short, the anomalous dipole of the CMBR is a real, tangible, feature of the CMBR and is not simply the result of our motion through space.
And what is so interesting about the anomalous dipole being a real and tangible feature of the CMBR is that the CMBR dipole ‘unexpectedly’ aligns with the earth’s equator,
The following illustration and article highlights this ‘unexpected’ dipole anomaly that lines up with the Earth’s equator.
And here is an excellent clip from “The Principle” that explains these ‘anomalies’ in the CMBR in an easy to understand manner.
Moreover, in 2013 and 2015 Ashok K. Singal also authored two other papers studying the distribution of quasars and other radio galaxies in the universe. He found odd alignments with the earth that directly implied a violation of the Copernican principle.
In fact, in his 2015 paper Singal asked, “Are these alignments a mere coincidence or do they imply that these axes have a preferential placement in the larger scheme of things, implying an apparent breakdown of the Copernican principle or its more generalization, cosmological principle, upon which the standard cosmological model is based upon?”
Moreover, these large scale structures of the universe, (i.e. the distribution of quasars and other radio galaxies in the universe), combined with the CMBR anomalies, (via supplying us with proper x, y, and z coordinates), ‘unexpectedly’ overturn the Copernican principle and support the antiquated, and quaint, ‘medieval’ Theistic belief that the earth should be considered ‘central’ in the universe.
As the following article and illustration make clear,
In short, the anomalies in the CMBR, and the large scale structures in the universe, combine with each other to ‘unexpectedly’ reveal teleology, (i.e. a goal directed purpose, a plan, a reason), that specifically included the earth from the start of creation. ,,, The earth, from what our best science can now tell us, is not simply the result of some random cosmic fluctuation as atheists had erroneously presupposed within their chaotic inflation model.
Further notes that, (unambiguously), overturn the Copernican Principle and/or the principle of Mediocrity.
Hopefully atheists will soon get over their ‘disappointment’ that they are not to be considered merely ‘chemical scum’ in short order,,
Verse:
From the referenced essay:
It seems to me that the cosmological principle was the result of erroneously accepting without question the Copernican principle “i.e. the Earth is not special”. After much cosmological investigation, it turns out that the Earth truly is very special, as every living thing on it testifies every second of every hour of every day.
Tycho Brahe’s view that the sun revolved around the earth and the planets around the sun didn’t need to be jettisoned by Kepler. Kepler could just as well have used his easier math and ellipses on all of the other planets plus the sun and come up with a model that was mathematically equivalent in predicting motion, AND would serve as an even better physical basis than the heliocentric model once Newton came along. If Kepler had done so, a neo-Tycho-Geocentric model would easily support all that has been actually observed and measured ever since. Such as: Hard to find stellar parallax, Michelson-Morley’s null — BUT NOT ZERO — aether flow, the Sagnac effect, Hubbel’s red shift, CMB dipole alignment, and everything else BA points to in the first two comments.