Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ken G
All observations are interpreted in the context of the expectations of some theory, the issue is whether the observations are needed to help confirm the theory or if the theory is already on a strong enough foundation that you can use it to draw other inferences. I'd say the theories of nucleosynthesis and general relativity are in the latter category, so it is acceptable to consider light element abundances to be observational constraints on baryonic densities. There are always a few details to hammer out, and big surprises are also possible, but what else is new.
|
I agree with this. My only caveat is that sometimes researchers may forget that the census of baryonic matter is another test of nucleosynthesis. If observations showed that molecular hydrogen (for example) existed in sufficient amounts to cover the DM budget, that would contradict the current predictions of nucleosynthesis theory.
__________________
"The scientist who asks the right question reconnoiters a new patch of the unknown, and may, with luck, bring it within the constricted but expanding boundaries of the known."
~Timothy Ferris (The Red Limit) 1982
|