2 ms·

Thank you. It's good to know I'm not the only one who feels disrespected from people on the sidelines who clearly never opened a cosmology textbook. It's one t

Thank you. It's good to know I'm not the only one who feels disrespected from people on the sidelines who clearly never opened a cosmology textbook. It's one thing to ask curious questions, but "why don't you just do the thing that was ruled out 100 years ago" and expecting a detailed rebuttal is a bit rich. It's like asking "why don't they cure cancer by cutting it out of the body". Or "why don't you just apply basic set theory to P=NP". It's always the same on these HN threads about cosmology. Even worse with dark matter, probably because you can understand rotating curves with high school physics. No one ever invents or roots for fringe theories on baryonic acoustic oscillations in the angular power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background.

raattgift 3y ago
> No one ever invents ... fringe theories on baryonic acoustic oscillations BAOs are clearly the sucker-marks made when the great and mighty Kroll <https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Kroll https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Kroll> seized the walls of the universe! https://insidetheperimeter.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Baryon-Acoustic-Oscillation-v1-scaled.jpg https://insidetheperimeter.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Bar... I'm not nearly as bothered by people typing out what they themselves admit are essentially physics fantasies (especially when prefaced with "I'm not a physicist" or the like), as by people who try to convince readers with even less exposure to physics that some alternative to good theories is clearly better but that the powers that be of theoretical physics are somehow suppressing it, and then clearly have little understanding about how the good theories work. There's a lot of that, especially in DM threads.