Earth not center of the universe, surrounded by 'dark energy'
Yousuf Khan
obvious question in the most complicated and convoluted way possible.
Who was disputing the Copernican Principle, seriously? It is so absurd
that the fact that somebody decided to commission a study to disprove
it, makes it even more absurd.
Yousuf Khan
Earth not center of the universe, surrounded by 'dark energy': UBC
cosmologists
"In 1998, studies of distant explosions called "type Ia supernovae"
indicated that the expansion of the Universe is accelerating, an
observation attributed to the repulsive force of a mysterious "dark
energy." However, some scientists put forward an alternate theory: They
proposed that the Earth was near the centre of a giant "bubble," or
"void," mostly empty of matter, and strongly violating the Copernican
Principle. If this were the case, gravity would create the illusion of
acceleration, mimicking the effect of dark energy on the supernova
observations."
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-12/uobc-enc121808.php
Sam Wormley
dlzc
On Dec 19, 1:51 pm, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> This seems like one of those useless studies designed
> to answer an obvious question in the most complicated
> and convoluted way possible. Who was disputing the
> Copernican Principle, seriously?
A scientist would do that, once. They keep testing Special and
General Relativity in different ways, to be sure that Nature wasn't
being misinterpreted.
> It is so absurd that the fact that somebody decided to
> commission a study to disprove it, makes it even
> more absurd.
If you make your postulates, sometimes it is good to see if they don't
cause problems from different perspectives. Remember, we don't have
access to truth, just to our models.
David A. Smith
Lofty Goat
> Earth not center of the universe, surrounded by 'dark energy': UBC
> cosmologists
But Earth *is* at the center of the Universe, just like everything else
in the Universe is.
... Just like everything on the surface of a Ball is at the center of the
surface of the Ball.
Ptolemy rules!
Craig
> This seems like one of those useless studies designed to answer an
> obvious question in the most complicated and convoluted way possible.
> Who was disputing the Copernican Principle, seriously? It is so absurd
> that the fact that somebody decided to commission a study to disprove
> it, makes it even more absurd.
"Somebody decided to commission a study..." Makes it sound so ominous
and Machiavellian. In greater likelihood, the post-doc and his
professor probably talked about the "void" models at lunch or a
journal club, and maybe got a little interested to see if the void
model could make a testable prediction about microwave data. Then
maybe the post-doc cranked away for a few days, came back with some
semi-interesting results, and they tidied up the results and wrote a
paper about it.
CM
Uncle Al
>
> This seems like one of those useless studies
Sufficient unto the day.
idiot
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Bluuuue Rajah
At what rate is the radius of the universe currently increasing, in peta
light years per second.
Sam Wormley
>
> At what rate is the radius of the universe currently increasing, in peta
> light years per second.
Are you needing some attention this morning?
Bluuuue Rajah
news:LSt4l.438799$TT4.105124@attbi_s22:
What's your problem?