In an effrot to confine my thinking to astronomy related matters, the weather and human thinking consider this statement of "fact"
..
No two snow flakes are the same.
How many times have we all heard this and being human repeat it as a fact?
I seize upon such a statement to suggest so much of science (and any other thing you care to mention really) is built sometimes upon an unsupported "fact"... having moved past the original premise all that follows icauses all the facts to be suspect.
So rather than accept the statement “that no two snow flakes are the same” one could suggest that evidence in support be offered... How many snow flakes were inspected and by whom to make this observation? Given that there are many snow flakes not inspected I find it curious that such a statement can firstly be made and secondly be universally accepted as a fact.
One could conclude that as physical laws dictate the formation of a snow flake that the same conditions will produce identical snow flakes...would we say no two helium atoms are the same I wonder.. Yet such a reasonable proposition has not been raised when the statement is made “no two snow flakes are the same”
It is of little consequence other than to draw attention to the human condition that it will demand absolute proof of some matters yet let others past without scrutiny.
When reading on cosmology it alarms me that such an approach can be found in many areas. Reading about background radiation I find similar approaches that although I notice it seems goes un noticed by folk one would expect to be absolutely critical of information that comes before them. It is very alarming but because of the dictates of the presentation of a “theory” calls for predictions any following analysis of data leans to fitting it to the theory.
Such an approach is letting us down
.
Big bang theory fits into this criticism
. It is most unfortunate that our view of our Universe must fit this model rather than minds kept open as to what other explanations the data may suggest.
Reading about background radiation tells me that all are convinced "no two snow flakes are the same" and from here they seek to establish the facts to suit the premise. Why is this so I ask and can only answer that humans like to be right about what they put forward and therefore find "the facts"suit their case.. (I do it myself I suspect
)
Data is being interrupted merely to support the theory and adjusted to suit the theory.
I feel that if such an approach was not universal we would learn more about this Universe we know so little about
.
Yes it is cloudy here so what do you do? Hang on Sun is out (showing) going to grab some
.
Alex