Inflation is pseudoscience.

kaneda said:
I think it is possible that after trillions of interactions with atomic material at 2.7K that light might lose energy. Some people however believe it is magic and that light cannot lose energy.

What is the temperature of space away from the sun's heat? 2.7K. Yet we see the CMB as it was over 13 billion years ago before expansion should have made it cool down at the same temperature.

You have countless trillions of stars pouring out matter and energy for billions of years and some think it all just vanishes. Why not a haze visible due to distance? I have similar hazes here some mornings where I can see no haze close up but there is a wall of mist a mile away.

Space seems to be tied in with light speed as in EMR and gravity. I suspect that superluminal expansion for space is impossible.

I am doubtful on expansion but I am also doubtful on steady state too so am open minded on it, testing ideas rather than just READing ONLY.
Click to expand...
There is a small proportion that refuses to acknowledge that photons can lose energy by traversing space, even though the loss of energy of the photon is the basis of the final outcome of BBT, i.e. complete equilibrium as the energy density approaches zero. But let’s put that on the back burner for now and concentrate on dark energy and does it exist or doesn’t it.

It certainly is pointed to as another phenomenon to add to BBT to keep up with observations and so BBT continues to evolve. You say you are not sure about expansion, inflation, or steady state.

Why don’t you like the idea that expansion, which is another way of talking about observed inflation, is just an attribute of arenas or patches of space like our observable universe relative to the greater universe? And that the greater universe is not characterized by eternal inflation but is the home to a continual process of arena renewal where inflation and expansion are local, temporary characteristics that enable the steady state that characterizes the greater universe?

That way expansion, inflation, dark energy, and steady state all work together.
 
kaneda said:
There are some who believe that light can have endless collisions, endless interactions and never lose energy.
Click to expand...
In a gas of electrons etc which is 2.7K it will emit photons of energy which equates to it's thermal signature of 2.7K. The photons which are hotter will be absorbed by the gas and then reemitted at the thermal signature of the gas. The hotter photons will heat the gas slightly but the expansion of the gas will constantly cool the system.

So the photons do lose energy but that's because the energy is constantly shifting between the gas and the photons and the gas is cooling as it expands.

Yet another simple physical system (ie basic statistical physics, taught in high school) you fail to understand and you make it clear you've made no attempt to learn or find out about.

Obviously you are inferior to a 10 year old when it comes to using a search engine...
 
snake river rufus said:
Umm, not quite. Sound does not travel through space, light does.
Click to expand...

nor does light.

Light does not move through empty space. That is an error of the idea of a 'perfect vaccum'.... which does not exist!


i.e..... if we stood on the edge or last body of mass, on the very edge of the universe; where is the light going?

What is of that line of sight beyond the edge of the last particle of mass?

Nothing! Then nothing can exchange beyond the boundaries of the system.


Ever notice no system can be perfected without the environment between point a and b?

With simple comprehension that no exchange can occur without the parameters of 2 points to the exchange, then step one to observing how energy exchanges can begin.
 
Stryder said:
Not "Pseudoscience" but "Protoscience".
Click to expand...

While at the same time, the member kaneda IS Pseudoscience or "non-science" (or nonsense) in action and in thought. Why? because he views all scientific education (and information) as nothing but brainwashing. Man!:bugeye:
 
Actually I refrained from mentioning "Junkscience" in regards to their thoughts as it would likely make them Tetchy.
 
Read-Only said:
While at the same time, the member kaneda IS Pseudoscience or "non-science" (or nonsense) in action and in thought. Why? because he views all scientific education (and information) as nothing but brainwashing. Man!
Click to expand...
He considers anyone who knows science as either brain washed, a sock puppet, lying about what they do or simply quoting from websites and having no knowledge themselves.

His delusions go so far as to think I lie about completely innocuous things. For instance, he posted a lot on PhysOrg up to about May or June 2007. He then left for a couple of months. During that time I took a 5 week holiday to Canada and Alaska. Was great, had a wonderful time. After I got back, he returned a few months later. I mentioned in one of our 'discussions' I'd gone on holidays and he said "You're a liar! You just pretended to! You didn't really go!". As if, for some reason, I'd set up an elaborate lie to fool him when it seemed he'd left PhysOrg and I'd stopped posting for about a month to give the lie some justification.

Then there's his claim that he was the sole reason I posted outside of a particular forum, to the tune of about 1000 posts! Despite my instant citing of more than 300 posts, in just two threads, which weren't in conversation with him. There were more, but 2 threads was easy to link to. And yet he ignored that. :shrug:

He keep claiming I lied about my qualifications and what I do. Despite my posting of my degree certificate, which he claims is a fake because it's quite bland. Not that he checked with anyone what a Cambridge degree looks like. And he's never attempted to debunked all the evidence I provided I am doing a PhD. He just repeated "You can't do anything original!" without evidence. And refuses to go to the maths and physics section to discuss my work, despite multiple offers to discuss it from me. Of course he just says "String theory is wrong so your work, if you do any, is a waste of time". So he complains I don't provide original work because he won't discuss it! :shrug:

Then there's the claim I'm a moderator on PhysOrg because he got 3 warning in quick succession for insulting behaviour, which he thinks was because he 'proved me wrong and I didn't like it". Despite me having 3 warnings and being infinitely more disgusted with people like Farsight. StevenA, Precursor and DavidD on PhysOrg than I ever was with Kaneda. But it's all a cover story, apparently, because I banned him and an even more incoherent, delusional wacko called Nick. Of course the fact noone ever agreed with Kaneda, here or there, doesn't phase him. He keeps maintaining he proved me wrong by saying all the things he gets wrong here.

Then there's that inflation is a model which is the result of people finding errors in previous models. As if that isn't how science works. We found Newtonian theory was insufficient. Relativity was developed. We found classical electromagnetism was insufficient, quantum electrodynamics was developed. We found quantum electrodynamics was insufficient, electroweak theory was developed. The SM and GR are insufficient, string theory, LQG and Euclidean QG are being developed. It's as if he's complaining scientists update their work as new understanding and evidence is found.

Then there's the predictions of a theory which hasn't been observed. We're never seen strings, therefore it's stupid to research them. We've never seen the Higgs but it fits everything else so well it's taken very seriously by a lot of physicists. In 1915 we'd never seen evidence for GR but, on it's predictions, experiments were done and in 1919 we got some evidence. Dirac predicted antimatter in 1928, effectively doubling the number of particles in the universe. Surely that was crazy?! Then in 1932 we saw a positron for the first time. Again, it's as if Kaneda thinks the a theory which makes predictions is unscientific?

Then there's the claim I just Google for all my posts, even going so far to copy and paste from other websites, but cleverly editing enough to prevent people finding where I Googled it from. The fact I'm able to give direct answers to people's questions, do the quantitative stuff people ask, even going so far as to write lengthy code for someone's specific problem doesn't register with him. Somehow, if I haven't lied about doing a PhD, I've managed to fool professors and examiners for 6 years now. Apparently everything I say can be found by a "10 year old with a search engine" but Kaneda still has to ask me to provide evidence for inflation, as if he couldn't find it. So is he less capable than a 10 year old with a search engine? Why doesn't he understand things he should have found in textbooks, if he's well read in relativity and cosmology? Why does he make claims that things like models of perturbations in homogeneity in cosmology don't exist when it's something taught to undergraduates? Every one of these threads he starts has a misconception, omission or flat out lie in which he could easily correct if he bothered to look. But he doesn't, but then tells me, when I correct him, the information is easy to find. So why didn't you find it Kaneda? You say that because you didn't mention it doesn't mean you didn't know it, but when you ask "So where's the evidence/model for that then?" it implies that you don't think/know it exists. Like evidence for inflation in this thread.

No doubt he'll see this and just say I'm 'babbling' and that he proved me wrong and I banned him and it's all an elaborate conspiracy and I'm a website quoting liar. But all he does is just repeat his claims. Like his claim that inflation cannot explain light elements, despite that being one of its strongest and best predictions(!), but he cannot do the numbers to prove it, he never shows a post of his where he's worked through quantitative things or listed the string theorists who he claims fled the sinking ship of string theory (he said I was 'babbling' when I listed big string theorists who are still in the field, including Witten, so he didn't have to retort it properly) or that inflation should have never occured because it cannot expand the very dense early universe.

But despite having, supposedly, all this knowledge about physics being wrong, he won't enter in a £500 bet with me that he cannot get his work published in a reputable journal. Surely it's free money to him? Unless he's worried he won't win....
 
AlphaNumeric said:
He considers anyone who knows science as either brain washed, a sock puppet, lying about what they do or simply quoting from websites and having no knowledge themselves.

His delusions go so far as to think I lie about completely innocuous things. For instance, he posted a lot on PhysOrg up to about May or June 2007. He then left for a couple of months. During that time I took a 5 week holiday to Canada and Alaska. Was great, had a wonderful time. After I got back, he returned a few months later. I mentioned in one of our 'discussions' I'd gone on holidays and he said "You're a liar! You just pretended to! You didn't really go!". As if, for some reason, I'd set up an elaborate lie to fool him when it seemed he'd left PhysOrg and I'd stopped posting for about a month to give the lie some justification.

Then there's his claim that he was the sole reason I posted outside of a particular forum, to the tune of about 1000 posts! Despite my instant citing of more than 300 posts, in just two threads, which weren't in conversation with him. There were more, but 2 threads was easy to link to. And yet he ignored that. :shrug:

He keep claiming I lied about my qualifications and what I do. Despite my posting of my degree certificate, which he claims is a fake because it's quite bland. Not that he checked with anyone what a Cambridge degree looks like. And he's never attempted to debunked all the evidence I provided I am doing a PhD. He just repeated "You can't do anything original!" without evidence. And refuses to go to the maths and physics section to discuss my work, despite multiple offers to discuss it from me. Of course he just says "String theory is wrong so your work, if you do any, is a waste of time". So he complains I don't provide original work because he won't discuss it! :shrug:

Then there's the claim I'm a moderator on PhysOrg because he got 3 warning in quick succession for insulting behaviour, which he thinks was because he 'proved me wrong and I didn't like it". Despite me having 3 warnings and being infinitely more disgusted with people like Farsight. StevenA, Precursor and DavidD on PhysOrg than I ever was with Kaneda. But it's all a cover story, apparently, because I banned him and an even more incoherent, delusional wacko called Nick. Of course the fact noone ever agreed with Kaneda, here or there, doesn't phase him. He keeps maintaining he proved me wrong by saying all the things he gets wrong here.

Then there's that inflation is a model which is the result of people finding errors in previous models. As if that isn't how science works. We found Newtonian theory was insufficient. Relativity was developed. We found classical electromagnetism was insufficient, quantum electrodynamics was developed. We found quantum electrodynamics was insufficient, electroweak theory was developed. The SM and GR are insufficient, string theory, LQG and Euclidean QG are being developed. It's as if he's complaining scientists update their work as new understanding and evidence is found.

Then there's the predictions of a theory which hasn't been observed. We're never seen strings, therefore it's stupid to research them. We've never seen the Higgs but it fits everything else so well it's taken very seriously by a lot of physicists. In 1915 we'd never seen evidence for GR but, on it's predictions, experiments were done and in 1919 we got some evidence. Dirac predicted antimatter in 1928, effectively doubling the number of particles in the universe. Surely that was crazy?! Then in 1932 we saw a positron for the first time. Again, it's as if Kaneda thinks the a theory which makes predictions is unscientific?

Then there's the claim I just Google for all my posts, even going so far to copy and paste from other websites, but cleverly editing enough to prevent people finding where I Googled it from. The fact I'm able to give direct answers to people's questions, do the quantitative stuff people ask, even going so far as to write lengthy code for someone's specific problem doesn't register with him. Somehow, if I haven't lied about doing a PhD, I've managed to fool professors and examiners for 6 years now. Apparently everything I say can be found by a "10 year old with a search engine" but Kaneda still has to ask me to provide evidence for inflation, as if he couldn't find it. So is he less capable than a 10 year old with a search engine? Why doesn't he understand things he should have found in textbooks, if he's well read in relativity and cosmology? Why does he make claims that things like models of perturbations in homogeneity in cosmology don't exist when it's something taught to undergraduates? Every one of these threads he starts has a misconception, omission or flat out lie in which he could easily correct if he bothered to look. But he doesn't, but then tells me, when I correct him, the information is easy to find. So why didn't you find it Kaneda? You say that because you didn't mention it doesn't mean you didn't know it, but when you ask "So where's the evidence/model for that then?" it implies that you don't think/know it exists. Like evidence for inflation in this thread.

No doubt he'll see this and just say I'm 'babbling' and that he proved me wrong and I banned him and it's all an elaborate conspiracy and I'm a website quoting liar. But all he does is just repeat his claims. Like his claim that inflation cannot explain light elements, despite that being one of its strongest and best predictions(!), but he cannot do the numbers to prove it, he never shows a post of his where he's worked through quantitative things or listed the string theorists who he claims fled the sinking ship of string theory (he said I was 'babbling' when I listed big string theorists who are still in the field, including Witten, so he didn't have to retort it properly) or that inflation should have never occured because it cannot expand the very dense early universe.

But despite having, supposedly, all this knowledge about physics being wrong, he won't enter in a £500 bet with me that he cannot get his work published in a reputable journal. Surely it's free money to him? Unless he's worried he won't win....
Click to expand...

He's just a cranky old man (I can say that because I'm older also) who's head is filled with garbage and junk. He's NEVER in his entire life studied any real science and has nothing but disgust and disdain for those of us who have - and continue to do so.

One could actually feel sorry for him if it weren't for his HUGE ego and firm resistance to learning. And since he IS such a crank, I feel no pity for him in the least. He will just eventually die in his ignorance. So be it.:shrug:
 
Oh, and one thing I meant to mention and didn't. He's also a friend of Reiku's - and that one fact alone should tell everybody something! ;)
 
kaneda said:
Photons cannot lose speed but can lose energy. This is done by red shifting.
Click to expand...
Bullshit: light does not "lose energy" - who TF told you that?

It gets stretched by the expansion of the field it moves in, as a perturbation. The perturbation doesn't "get tired" or run out of quantum steam.
 
Vkothii said:
Bullshit: light does not "lose energy" - who TF told you that?

It gets stretched by the expansion of the field it moves in, as a perturbation. The perturbation doesn't "get tired" or run out of quantum steam.
Click to expand...

Heh! And even though he used the term "redshifted" he actually denies the existance of the Dopper effect. Just one more example of his dumb, talking out both sides of his mouth at the same time! Egad!:bugeye:

He'll resort to anything to try and promote whatever silliness he happens to be talking about at the moment. (I'm almost tempted to go back and search for where he denied the Doppler effect as being real - but it's not worth the effort. He'd just deny his own words again.)
 
quantum_wave said:
Why don’t you like the idea that expansion, which is another way of talking about observed inflation, is just an attribute of arenas or patches of space like our observable universe relative to the greater universe? And that the greater universe is not characterized by eternal inflation but is the home to a continual process of arena renewal where inflation and expansion are local, temporary characteristics that enable the steady state that characterizes the greater universe?

That way expansion, inflation, dark energy, and steady state all work together.
Click to expand...


I see things wrong with expansion. I may ultimately see it as right but not at the moment. The only way I can see it working is with a hypersphere, which I doubt.
 
Vkothii. Photons lose energy through interactions. That is how tired light works.

As far as I know, light always travels at light speed. The expansion idea has the medium light travels through in one second expand by about the diameter of a proton. Why TF should that make a difference since light is still going to travel at light speed? Duh!
 
Read-Only said:
Heh! And even though he used the term "redshifted" he actually denies the existance of the Dopper effect. Just one more example of his dumb, talking out both sides of his mouth at the same time! Egad!:bugeye:

He'll resort to anything to try and promote whatever silliness he happens to be talking about at the moment. (I'm almost tempted to go back and search for where he denied the Doppler effect as being real - but it's not worth the effort. He'd just deny his own words again.)
Click to expand...



You're gibbering.
 
Read-Only said:
He's just a cranky old man (I can say that because I'm older also) who's head is filled with garbage and junk. He's NEVER in his entire life studied any real science and has nothing but disgust and disdain for those of us who have - and continue to do so.

One could actually feel sorry for him if it weren't for his HUGE ego and firm resistance to learning. And since he IS such a crank, I feel no pity for him in the least. He will just eventually die in his ignorance. So be it.:shrug:
Click to expand...


Spot the loony.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top