Karl observed...
"I would say it is a specialisation. Most of the scientists are too specialised and they don’t see what is happening next door".
I think that is a valid observation Karl if there is one thing I have learnt about humans from my various careers humans become specialists and as such seem to find it difficult to intergrate their ideas with those of others, not an unexpected result. However information is shared so well now I am hopeful we are on a new dawn of understanding the Universe.
I have been spending a lot of time looking at maps of the observable Universe
(example here...
http://www.anzwers.org/free/universe/universe.html)
trying to imagine how small we are... It is amazing so much has been observed but it sure makes me question the inflation theory.. which I think should not be called a theory in the strict sense. I dont care how many sums support it the suggestion that all we can observe could have grown in a split second needs revision and rather than try and make it right with tweaking formuleas simply seek a more acceptable alternative.. in so doing we may move forward. However specialisation means that as a non specialist and therefore ignorant of the "deeper" knowlegde on the matter such a suggestion is regarded by specialists in the field as silly made without the knowledge they enjoy.They can look down all they like but the concept seems unreasonable unless you add God... which they avoid. Specialisation in a species often leads to its demise because it is unable to adapt.
But it is wonderous that humans can even look into such things.
I fall back to the proposition that just because one can imagine something and prove it with sums that may have little bearing on the reality. Lately I have thought a lot about a black hole.. an object born of theory without physical observation, only inferrence yet such an object is now excepted as real... I say in the absence of seeing one "close up" and in the absence of tangible proof perhaps it may not exisit at all. How specialists would jump on me for that..to suggest they could be wrong would be seen only as impertinent... yet I see little as being unreasonable with such a statement.
There are many "theories" presented as an unquestionable fact yet the subjects of so many theories lay beyond physical proof.
mmmmm I think I best stop looking at those maps they only make me question things more than is necessary in my small world.
alex