What do you think they do now? How do you propose they do it differently? What evidence do you have that what they are doing now doesn't work, and does the al

What do you think they do now? How do you propose they do it differently? What evidence do you have that what they are doing now doesn't work, and does the all the evidence of how they work support your hypothesis? Be detailed, because your comment just has some motivational speaker nonsense but no depth. For example, in the last 20 years cosmology has: + Refined its model of stellar formation based on observational data of the number of planets found observationally, and used this to validate and invalidate several model adjustments. + Observed galaxies that appear not to have dark matter, and by their existence and behavior validate some theories of dark matter, and validated others, which predict such galactic behavior. (e.g. some theories attempting to update gravity). + Run simulations of stellar and glactic formation that predicted structures in the universe that were later observed. Everywhere they look they are finding things the models don't explain well, and refining the models - that is literally using the data to improve the models. If you think you can come up with something better, then do it - all you gotta do is make up some mumbo jumbo and write down any old equation. It probably should: - provide the same results as were observed when the plugging in the experimental parameters of existing experiments. - explain "wierd stuff" in the data that existing models couldn't. - predict future observations of the known phenomena with the same or better accuracy as the old model - predict currently unobserved and unpredicted phenomena Go ahead and take a stab real quick - I'm sure you can do it. I mean Gallieo did it, so did Newton and Einstein. Next up is willis936.