Re: [A-List] Solving Fermi's Paradox

["Tony B." <tal1@xxxxxxxxx>]

I've been away from the console for  a few days..So, to add to the 'debate':

Chris, Carrol, You're not entirely right - or wrong - on the Big Bang vs 
infinity thing. The 'state of the art' cosmological notions posit a big, 
fat, "We just don't know". For instance, Chris, it's true that Hannes Alfven 
& Co. have been given the short end of the stick when it comes to having 
their views fairly, or even publicly, aired and debated (and, of course, 
*some of their ideas have, of late, been independently 'discovered' - 
without any credit accruing. *These mostly having to do with the 
galactic-wide sculpting effects of magnetic/electric forces). But even 
within mainstream cosmological circles there is plenty of room for supposing 
that the observable universe is precisely that, i.e. merely what we can 
observe, and which may well be a tiny, very tiny, expanding spec of a much 
larger whole (perhaps infinite, who the hell knows). Modern inflationary 
theory has, indeed, run into some real problems and one of them is that for 
it to work at all, then the 'universe' we see must be merely an unimaginably 
small component of a larger inflated whole. Again, however, all of this is 
wide open to speculation at this point, speculation which is now informed by 
extra spatial dimensions and the 'multiverse' concept etc. (i.e. not just a 
possibly infinite universe, but an *infinity* of (finite?) them! ...Which 
sort of lends new colour to Cantor's transfinite cardinalities)

I think a further point worth making here is that, just as in other fields 
of academic research, there is a tremendous jostling and play of both 
internal (to the field) and external socio/political forces, all of which 
determine to a large extent what ideas are allowed to come easily to the 
fore or not (Canada's own Lee Smolin delineates the former in his recent 
book, 'The Problem With Physics'). So whatever, the ultimate outcome (should 
we ever actually 'know') of the finite vs infinite debate, Eric Lerner's 
book, "The Big Bang Never Happened" (which champions Alfven's work), has the 
merit at least of discussing upfront the historical, political and 
philosophical contexts that shape  - and have shaped over millenia - 
cosmological thinking, and on that ground alone represents a remarkable 
breath of fresh air on the subject.

By the way...What *is* interesting (for those who despair that perhaps 
nothing solid is accreting from all this cosmological theorizing) is that a 
rough consensus has now emerged on at least two fronts regarding the notions 
of space and time. To wit: 1) 'space' and 'time' are emergent, i.e. not 
primary, but composed of more primordial 'stuff'; 2) 'space' and 'time' are 
discrete, i.e. not continuous. There is a smallest size and briefest time. 
The latter is open to experimental validation since it implies that the 
speed of light is variable dependent upon frequency (an effect which is tiny 
but which should be detectable by analyzing light coming the other 'end' of 
the observable universe).

These results have arisen as the result of three independent fields of 
cosmological inquiry: black hole thermodynamics, loop quantum gravity and 
string theory..and are considered quite..well sort of quite..firm.

Tony


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <bar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "The A-List" <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: [A-List] Solving Fermi's Paradox


> Carrol
>
> No idea what you mean by "this weird idea". Except to think you are an
> adherent of the totally discredited Bing Bang theory. The only theory that
> makes sense is that of plasma cosmology as develpoed by many scientists
> beginning with Hans Alven that the universe is infinite in space and time.
> Explain. And I do not like my " ideas" being labelled "weird" without any
> statement as to why.
>
> Chris
>
> > bar@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > Tony,
> > >
> > >  the universe is infinite and has an infinite
> > > number of galaxies let alone stars and planets
> >
> > Where in the world (!) did you dig up this weird idea?
> >
> > Carrol