Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked,
... why spend any time at all trying the patch the theory up with
fantastic ideas like inflation and dark matter?
But that was not the question. The question was more basic. There
were two hypotheses:
1. the universe did not begin
2. the universe began
(People observed that the universe existed, at least for themselves.)
As far as I can see, the two hypotheses covered all possibilities.
The question was which hypothesis is true?
It seems like by the time you need to invent stuff out of whole
cloth that it might be time to step back and entertain some new
ideas.
But there were no other possibilities, at least none that I can see.
Other questions, like how to explain the rotation of galaxies came
after deciding which of the two hypotheses is more likely. Galaxies'
`anomolous rotation' was discovered in the 1930s, but did not become a
central issue until better observations and more concern in the late
1960s or 1970s.
Help in judging which of the two hypotheses is more likely came from
several sources, one of which was observations which can most readily
be understood as the echo of a beginning. (The results of the
observations were predicted more than a decade ahead of time by Gamow,
I seem to remember, although his predictions were ignored until
re-predicted at the same time as the actual observations.)
Please tell me of other hypotheses besides `no-beginning' and `a
beginning'.
--
Robert J. Chassell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
http://www.rattlesnake.com http://www.teak.cc
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
