Quote:
|
I just know from things I have read that the "Big Bang" doesn't answer everything (at least the "skeptics" are saying that; I don't know if the "believers" are saying that), and if that is true, then that leaves room for alterations, whether it be in the theory or in our understanding of the theory or in our understanding of the ancient universe or something else.
|
It not only 'leaves room' for alterations, it demands it. Made a post on the old BABB about the "Ekpyrotic Universe" just a little over a year ago. (
Do me get any points for that?) Was so excited by it's potential, just couldn't wait till the heavies here, the ones that really understood the ramifications, waded into it. Didn't really get much of a response, and even made a couple more feeble attempts of baiting them, before me gave up. Well, duh.., those guys at the time, were astronomers, not cosmologist. What BB is this, again? They tended to be more pragmatic, physical proof types of scientists, than theorist, in their search for reality.
From that Brane Storm, we have now moved to the Cyclic Model of the Universe. Pretty fast for a
theory, that could upset and replace, the accepted model of cosmology for the past forty or more, years, the big bang theory. And like a Phoenix, a new and improved "Steady State" model for this universe, that we find ourselves within, rises. Which believe was the estabished theory, the Big Bang theory usurped. The scientic method is self-correcting, that is it's wonder and strength. Still it is exciting to witness the possibility of such a major upheaval within the ivory towers. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_cool.gif[/img]