[circumpolar (Matt)]

Originally Posted by higginsdj

What evidence/proof is there that Newtonian physics should be scrapped in place of Relativity? There is the theory itself and assumptions made about light and it's behaviours and it appears to fit so I do not argue that it is a valid theory but people tend to ignore all else because we have a 'valid theory'


The CMB is a theory - what evidence is there? What actually supports the theory behind the interpretation of the CMB? The nature of light. Now we have made assumptions about the behaviour of light over time and distance. Again it is a valid theory but nothing more.



What proof is there of this? As you have said, it holds only as long as there is no evidence to refute it. So the theory holds based on the assumption that it doesn't change with distance.

My whole point is that cosmology is nothing but theory. There is no direct evidence, no proofs just data that supports a theory based on a theory supported by other data. The whole thing stands on so much theory and theory of theory's that it really is not much more than a philosophical debate at present. I am not saying it is wrong and that we haven't found the correct path - but like Newtonian Physics - we might not be playing the in the right ballpark!

Cheers

David, I'm curious as to why you have a problem with the term 'Theory'?
as I'm sure you know when the scientific community says 'Theory', they are refering to the best explanation of an observable or experimental phenomena that they can give at present time. It seems as you are interperating the word 'theory' to mean 'Hypothesus' (unproved/provisional idea).

I've noticed that you seem to take 'Ockhams Razor' to the n'th degree. I realise that the conclusion with the least assumuptions is prefered but your view is boardering on denialism.

I would like it if you could please clearly state your affirmative views/position on the on the nature of cosmos? That is, what you think is actually going on?