Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigS
Hi Guys;
(I'm new to this forum so I thought I'd better say a friendly 'Hello').
Ok, so Inflationary/acceleration theory (now supported by WMAP data, Hubble's research etc) tells us that the universe originally 'inflated' and is now accelerating. So I've been completely baffled about how Galaxies can collide, if this is so.
I asked this question recently of a research astronomer at the Syd Observatory and got the standard 'Gravity' and different scales/dimensions answer (ie: gravity overcomes the driving 'force' behind cosmic acceleration and anyway, this operates at a different scale ie: 100's to 1,000's of light years separation).
So, wouldn't the original kick in the early stages of the big bang (Inflation) and the subsequent acceleration (due to 'dark energy'), have given all matter and spacetime an 'outwards' inflationary trajectory -ie: separating everything from everything else, both initially and into the future and hence preclude any co-incidence of trajectories at all inter-galactic scales?
I can't quite see how a theory such as this can work in some parts of the inter-galactic scale but not in other parts. Your comments would be much appreciated, as I am perplexed.
Cheers
|
Perplexed by BBT? Join the ever growing club. You have not yet asked about large scale structures?
Which astronomer at Syd Uni...? You should have a look at Gaensler's work on intergalactic magnetic fields. It is clear "gravity only" is not sufficient answer.... unless yes of course as Alex post#2 has pointed out some mathamagical entities are invoked, FAR FAR beyond any empirical or intuitive experience.... aswell as flat out ignoring the mapped magnetic fields and charge separation.
As far as WMAP supporting BBT? Well it depends on who is presenting it to you...Ned Wright? WMAP has been plagued by processing errors and is very contested...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Alex
We interperete our data on the basis that the big bang theory is fact and in doing so we eliminate any opportunity of alternatives and perhaps supporting an unsupportable view of the universe.
|
All too true Alex. Although if you want a career in astronomy, you better not upset the boys who wrote the text books.
I recommend "The Big Bang Never Happened" by Eric Lerner, for an analysis of WMAP, redshift anomalies and more.
contrary to the view of
"Without mathematical tools firmly under control and fully understood, discussions like this one are pointless."
I lean towards experiments, repeatability and natural philosophy... since mathematical tools can and do describe any amounts of realities... Ptolomey and his epicycles?
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.” Nikola Tesla
The irony in all of this, is the LHC... what do you think accelerates these particles? yep, giant electro magnets...
Regarding galaxy collisions.... Have you read up on the works of Halton Arp "Seeing Red"? and galaxy (quasar) ejection? I'd also recommend this we are now measuring quasars to be both quantized in relation to their parent Seyfert galaxies... and positioned along minor axis..... and also... totally devoid of all Time Dilation as required by hubble law.... all flying in the face of BBT requirements.
Each to their own realities,