13 Things That Don't Make Sense

[Dave]

13 Things That Don't Make Sense - Science article for the 'New Scientist' magazine.

http://www.newscientistspace.com/article.ns?id=mg18524911.600

 

[ErikB]

Because of the debunked Big Bang Theory much of what is baffling the author of this article concerning the universe at any rate is simply due to the ongoing scientific farce of expanding universe and an "age" of the universe. Plasma Theory has long since debunked so much of the nonsense many still cling to as fact. Static understanding allows for much of the "odd" findings to make sense.

As for a 10th "sweeper planet" making a clean edge to the Kuiper belt, it would have to be so large that it would be easy to detect. I wonder how much if any common sense there is in the astronomy community these days? Its mind blowing how many are still postulating so many ridiculous ideas.

 

[Brian G Turner]

This is what I love about science - the inherent mystery about it. This is why I become bemused when people start dismissing some science fiction as "unrealistic" because it doesn't fit within existing scientific ideals - even though anyone with any actual academic experience in science will know just how limited our understanding of even basic principles currently is. The process of scientific discovery demands that we constantly change and revise our ideas, not cling onto old models and resist change.

 

[2DaveWixon]

This is what I love about science - the inherent mystery about it. This is why I become bemused when people start dismissing some science fiction as "unrealistic" because it doesn't fit within existing scientific ideals - even though anyone with any actual academic experience in science will know just how limited our understanding of even basic principles currently is. The process of scientific discovery demands that we constantly change and revise our ideas, not cling onto old models and resist change.

And this makes having a "sense of Wonder" so important: if you have that, you are more open to the notion that the Universe is larger and more wondrous than anyone knows...because if you have that "sense of Wonder," you are less likely to be frightened by the realization that there's a lot you don't know (such fear leads to denial).

 

[mosaix]

Because of the debunked Big Bang Theory

Debunked by who? Links please.

 

[tinkerdan]

Yes and at the same time they claimed they were going to prove there are parallel universes.

Because of the debunked Big Bang Theory much of what is baffling the author of this article concerning the universe at any rate is simply due to the ongoing scientific farce of expanding universe and an "age" of the universe. Plasma Theory has long since debunked so much of the nonsense many still cling to as fact. Static understanding allows for much of the "odd" findings to make sense.

Oddly enough still today::
ALICE detects quark-gluon plasma, a state of matter thought to have formed just after the big bang
:: So I'm not sure debunk is the right word. More like they are still questioning the many seeming inconsistencies that have long puzzled us regarding the Big Bang. It's obvious that we still use it as a jump point for research with the hope of coming out on one side or the other; although we mostly demonstrate that there are still enough inconsistencies that prove the Big Bang does not live up to our expectations.

It has always been in question.

 

[ErikB]

Debunked by who? Links please.

I once listed the various sources of this the over 20+ different ways and scientists that had debunked it and tried to explain and share more.

However in that thread because some of the explanation involves some of the astronomy community actively perpetuating false information to support their own research and tenure (and I did not say ALL of the astronomers) I had apparently offended one of our members who was a physicist and took umbrage at the implication as if it were directed toward him.

My post was removed and even though remarks were made insinuating that I knew nothing concerning this area, I was the only person edited.

Consequently to avoid upsetting or offending any physicists or Big Bang believers, I will simply reference you to a YouTube documentary titled "The Big Bang Never Happened Part 1" and from there you can follow along with the scientists and researchers sharing the reality behind the situation as well as why mainstream astronomy still attempts to protect and perpetuate this well disproved bit of misinformation. It will also showcase the origins of why the Big Bang was even postulated in the first place.

Cheers!

 

[Dave]

I once listed the various sources of this the over 20+ different ways and scientists that had debunked it and tried to explain and share more.

My post was removed and even though remarks were made insinuating that I knew nothing concerning this area, I was the only person edited.

So, I've checked and you didn't list any sources in the only post by you that was removed. It was removed because you made an attack on another member. If you have a problem with the moderating here then make a complaint.

There was also no insinuation. YouTube videos are not peer reviewed scientific research.

Can I also point out that my original post here is 12 years old? Next, you'll be telling me that the Aether isn't necessary to propagate radio waves.

 

[mosaix]

Unwittingly, I seemed to have opened an old wound. Apologies.

YouTube wouldn't be my go-to place for scientific information any more than Wikipedia would be. Any links to peer reviewed info?

Edit: okay I've found the old thread. My 70 year old brain had completely forgotten about it. Please don't both replying to this post. I don't want to open the old wound any further. The old thread provides me with all the information that I need to know.

 

[ErikB]

I did not "attack" anyone. I resent that implication. No I have no problem with the staff but did not wish to inadvertently be seen as offending other members. I was answering a question here and explaining why I did not wish to discus the matter in detail.

As to the date, that makes the post no less interesting.

And as for peer reviewed, this documentary mentioned has THE top scientists involved and scientists that are world famous and among the top in their field. I don't know where you got the peer review stuff, but if you watch the entire documentary you would never make such a rash statement.

Sorry you got upset over this. Never the less this is precisely why I seldom discus this. Big bang support is pervasive here. Anything discussed to the contrary is somehow seen as an "attack".

Forgive me for my rudeness if you can. I am done discussing this subject on this site. I will censor my information on it from now on.

Apologies for offending you. Not my intent.

 

[2DaveWixon]

To claim that any scientific theory has been "debunked" is largely meaningless, anyway -- it only says that there's another theory that seems to give contrary results. And since both are only theories, such an argument is pointless.
As was said in the section of the linked feature that spoke about dark matter, "It's an embarrassing hole in our understanding." That alone should convince us all simply that we don't know enough about the universe either to deeply believe in any theory/hypothesis -- or to claim that any one such has been "debunked" simply on the basis of other theories...

 

[Nick B]

Also - the internet. Pick any theory or conspiracy that fits your world view and you can find untold numbers of 'experts' who will prove it or reinforce your world view for you. Thats why we call it the echo chamber.

 

[Overread]

Science advances are often WAY behind the media and the common persons understanding. In general this is because the average person can't read an academic journal and in many cases can't even afford one (some journal subscriptions are hundreds of pounds a year to buy; whilst some academic books hardly appear for sale outside of specialist suppliers and still also have a high price tag on them).

There is a huge disconnection which means old theories can persist for a very long time; even through education systems when they present the very basics of a theory (there was nothing - it blew up). There's also all the old media and studies that persists for a long while as well.

It takes a lot of effort and work to actually change the view of science when that science itself has no direct relation to a persons daily life or work. The internet even hampers this because there's no moderation of content and thus old websites or misinformed individuals can write pages and make videos and everything on old theories and present them as new; or even totally incorrect facts (even of pretty well known subjects). Some even perpetuate the misinformation deliberately because it gives them a marketing edge that garners easy google hits and attention,.



It's no surprise to me how confusing it all gets and we've not even touched on the fact that many theories are held alongside other theories; but one or two might be the only ones that get real attention. Evolution theory is an ideal one to present; there are alternative theories to it, however they get far less attention or at least "marketing" outside of specific scientific circles. So you end up with people understanding this one theory (and often poorly miss understanding "fittest" within the basics of the theory); they'll even read the original "origin of life" even though the facts presented within it have often been disproved or changed since.


We live in an age of information; we have yet to hit the age of organised information

 

[Boneman]

Let me get this right: first there was nothing. Then it exploded. Big bang theory explained.

 

[Overread]

I thought it was

First there was nothing; then there was something that exploded

 

[Nick B]

Last I heard, was there were these membranes of reality, that were also waves, and if they touch - BOOM, the universe is suddenly a 3d space, time starts and much of the energy from the moment of connection became matter. Hydrogen in fact.

Thats a theory at least.

 

[Overread]

Honestly science has trouble working out what the environment was like a few measly thousand years ago - trying to predict the state of the whole universe billions of years ago - yeah I think there's a lot of information missing that leads to theories that will likely have holes bashed in them for generations.