4 ms·

There's renewed debate about the Big Bang theory now that JWST is beginning to return images of earlier times than we've seen before. Eric Lerner has been maki

There's renewed debate about the Big Bang theory now that JWST is beginning to return images of earlier times than we've seen before. Eric Lerner has been making the case that there was no BB for a long time now. I think these are valid criticisms and he's now updated them wrt to JWST https://youtu.be/ZlFpq49Ri8Y https://youtu.be/ZlFpq49Ri8Y

eurasiantiger 4y ago
Perhaps the entire universe is like a Game of Life space in which the observable universe has emerged as ongoing complex activity, with patterns of stable and chaotic oscillations forming emergent functional parts, which then interact and join to create more emergent functional assemblies now with more features to interact by, such as mass and gravity. This would explain the apparent expansion of the universe, as the observable universe could still be forming new ”massy assemblies” at its periphery, thus increasing the gravitational pull towards the outer limits of ”our bubble”.
roywiggins 4y ago
I don't think anyone at the JWST thinks so. https://www.space.com/james-webb-space-telescope-science-denial https://www.space.com/james-webb-space-telescope-science-den...
- pmayrgundter 4y ago
  Yep. I don't think that article you linked is fair to Lerner though. Casting him as a pseudoscientific denier is a recognizable trope, but is incorrect by their own criteria: - Published in reputable sources? Yes, well-published on this topic in journals and leading newspapers[scholar,wiki] - Associated with a University, with related credentials? Yes, has a BS in physics from Columbia[wiki], some grad work at UMD. More importantly, he's a notable plasma physics theorist/engineer (most of his career and publications). - Anyone else agree? Yes, he's following in Alfen's plasma cosmology[alfven]; Alfven is a Nobel Prize winning physicist who also criticized the BBT. - Cited references? Yes, the video I linked is well-cited, e.g. the 16 failed predictions of BBT vs 1 correct. See 23m45s for citations of this claim. - Follow the logic? Well, Lerner's video is pretty straight forward and extensively reviews the primary lit, but the space.com article is mostly a string of ad hominem, comparing him to "people who deliberately peddle anti-science narratives" and flat-Earthers, and that "the tactics employed in Lerner's article are classic misdirections used by science deniers". Which.. is bad journalism but to me signals its own bias and likelihood he's saying something important. I'm very much looking forward to the next few years on this! [scholar]https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=eric+lerner+big+bang&btnG=&oq=eric+lerner https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=eric... [wiki]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Lerner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Lerner [alfven]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannes_Alfv%C3%A9n https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannes_Alfv%C3%A9n, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_cosmology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_cosmology
  - judahmeek 4y ago
    Just wanted to say that I like your citation method & will certainly be using it in the future. Thanks!
    - pmayrgundter 4y ago
      Thanks :) switched to it recently to avoid renumbering after reorganizing text and helps as a mnemonic too!
lolinder 4y ago
I've seen this brought up, but I'm unimpressed with Lerner. He follows pretty slimy tactics, taking quotes by other cosmologists completely out of context to try to claim they're saying things that they aren't. For example, this discussion: [0] It seems to me like he's a guy who has a theory he's held onto for decades and takes every opportunity to bring it up again. He tries to make it sound like there's new doubt, but the actual people that he misquotes deny they meant what he claims, and if you read the original quotes it's clear that he's cherry-picking. That's not to say that he's wrong, just that his arguments are very unpersuasive to me because they rely on misleading the audience. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32475958#32476256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32475958#32476256

eurasiantiger 4y ago

Perhaps the entire universe is like a Game of Life space in which the observable universe has emerged as ongoing complex activity, with patterns of stable and chaotic oscillations forming emergent functional parts, which then interact and join to create more emergent functional assemblies now with more features to interact by, such as mass and gravity. This would explain the apparent expansion of the universe, as the observable universe could still be forming new ”massy assemblies” at its periphery, thus increasing the gravitational pull towards the outer limits of ”our bubble”.

roywiggins 4y ago

I don't think anyone at the JWST thinks so. https://www.space.com/james-webb-space-telescope-science-denial https://www.space.com/james-webb-space-telescope-science-den...

pmayrgundter 4y ago
Yep. I don't think that article you linked is fair to Lerner though. Casting him as a pseudoscientific denier is a recognizable trope, but is incorrect by their own criteria: - Published in reputable sources? Yes, well-published on this topic in journals and leading newspapers[scholar,wiki] - Associated with a University, with related credentials? Yes, has a BS in physics from Columbia[wiki], some grad work at UMD. More importantly, he's a notable plasma physics theorist/engineer (most of his career and publications). - Anyone else agree? Yes, he's following in Alfen's plasma cosmology[alfven]; Alfven is a Nobel Prize winning physicist who also criticized the BBT. - Cited references? Yes, the video I linked is well-cited, e.g. the 16 failed predictions of BBT vs 1 correct. See 23m45s for citations of this claim. - Follow the logic? Well, Lerner's video is pretty straight forward and extensively reviews the primary lit, but the space.com article is mostly a string of ad hominem, comparing him to "people who deliberately peddle anti-science narratives" and flat-Earthers, and that "the tactics employed in Lerner's article are classic misdirections used by science deniers". Which.. is bad journalism but to me signals its own bias and likelihood he's saying something important. I'm very much looking forward to the next few years on this! [scholar]https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=eric+lerner+big+bang&btnG=&oq=eric+lerner https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=eric... [wiki]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Lerner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Lerner [alfven]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannes_Alfv%C3%A9n https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannes_Alfv%C3%A9n, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_cosmology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_cosmology
- judahmeek 4y ago
  Just wanted to say that I like your citation method & will certainly be using it in the future. Thanks!
  - pmayrgundter 4y ago
    Thanks :) switched to it recently to avoid renumbering after reorganizing text and helps as a mnemonic too!

lolinder 4y ago

I've seen this brought up, but I'm unimpressed with Lerner. He follows pretty slimy tactics, taking quotes by other cosmologists completely out of context to try to claim they're saying things that they aren't. For example, this discussion: [0] It seems to me like he's a guy who has a theory he's held onto for decades and takes every opportunity to bring it up again. He tries to make it sound like there's new doubt, but the actual people that he misquotes deny they meant what he claims, and if you read the original quotes it's clear that he's cherry-picking. That's not to say that he's wrong, just that his arguments are very unpersuasive to me because they rely on misleading the audience. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32475958#32476256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32475958#32476256