First, a reiteration of the problem:
"These observations suggest a violation of the
cosmological principle and might indicate that one needs a revision of the Big Bang cosmology."
Second, a reference to the proposed solution from within the assumptions of consensus "Big Bang" cosmology:
"It has been suggested that the anisotropic
modes, generated during the pre-inflationary phase might re-enter the horizon before the current
time [15–18]. Hence these might explain the observed anisotropy even within the framework of the
inflationary Big Bang model. "
Third, the bad news for the Copernicans:
"This suggests that the
hemispherical anisotropy found in [7–12] cannot be consistently attributed to the dipole modulation
model, Eq. 1.1. The true anisotropy model is likely to be more complicated and might contain higher
order multipoles."
Blood in the water, folks.
Young scientists are beginning to put things together.
Watch for "The Principle", almost complete now with incredible new animations, superb narration by Kate Mulgrew, and the first-ever high-definition visuals incorporating the observational evidence that our place in universe is very, very special......indeed, in important ways, very much like what we would have expected to see if the Scriptures and the Church had been right all along!
Oh Brother...why?
ReplyDeleteThis is not solely directed at you personally but to this bankrupt idea--I think I detect your comment was in jest but...
Why dig this embarrassment up?. Leaders of the C church used flawed logic, zero biblical support, and the pathological bias that atheists themselves use when they insisted the earth was the center of the universe.
Being in the center means virtually nothing in design. Do you plant a tree smack dab in the middle of your lawn, put your couch precisely in the middle of the room, is the most important part of your house the center, do we drive from the center of the car, does the judge sit in the center of the court? I am shocked people could be so ill informed to think that in the past and even more today.
I challenge anyone to name a single instance where to the center means anything in design but a power system. Earths center, solar systems center sun, galaxy's center black hole--but that is from the nature of gravity. No one who knows anything about design considers the center a place to put anything but nothing. You avoid the center in paintings, landscapes--just about everything is off to the side. It is not where you put the most important thing in any building plan.
The C leaders had no concept of design and from this immature notion they sided with Aristotle and they're own deficient ideas mixed with bias.
Plus, it mean nothing anyway. Tell me what unbeliever is so shallow that he just needs us to be in the center to love Christ. Come on, they would then say God wouldnt have picked the center for the reasons I stated above. Its a meaningless venture. It takes all of 3 seconds for humans to come to the conclusion that there is a God. Thats never been a serious obstacle. Its..who is God...and these types of so called proofs are just lame in the face of that question.
The same goes for the size of the universe. These are just excuses by the lost. If it was small they say God would have more power. They make themselves God.
1 Billy would put the earth in the center of the universe if he were God
2 The earth is not in the center
3 Billy is not God
That all it amounts to.
Anyway thanks for putting up with my tirade. ha... As I said it directed at the illogic of the whole premise.
Oh, brother- you ask- why?
ReplyDeleteHmmm. The answer is so obvious that I assume you ask it in jest.
The answer, of course, is that this question- what is our place in the cosmos- is fundamental to the human experience.
It is the beginning of faith.
It is the beginning of science.
It remains, to this day, the most profoundly impactual question in the history of physics.
You see, Joe, either the Earth is insignificant, or else it is the center of the cosmos.
What is, truly, embarrassing in a sense, I suppose, is that five hundred years after Copernicus, we are still unable to establish by direct scientific experiment, which is the case.
However, the obserrvations which you dismiss above are profoundly important.
They indicate that the foundational assumption of our modern scientific world view- the Copernican Principle- is wrong.
I am sure you have wonderful notions concerning design, Joe, but with all due respect, you are not the Designer of relevance here.
The Designer of relevance has told us that we are very significant.
The Catholic Church believed for a millennium and a half that the cosmos was Cathoicl; that is, it was Designed as the setting for the Incarnation of the Son of God for the redemption of the children of Adam.
Science counter-proposed an astonishingly persuasive alternative, and has pursued it triumphantly, right to the shocking, large-scale observations of the cosmos which suddenly throw us back into the middle of the controversy which you call an embarrassment, but which instead is the ground upon which the world view of the coming generations will be established.
Come see "The Principle", Joe.
Perhaps your desuetude can be overcome, your intellectual curiosity can be re-ignited, and you can learn to think like the geniuses who would be astonished to learn that there exist folks like you today, who are completely unable to grasp the significance of these questions.