There are many problems with this paper. They are easy to see.
The paper claims to have shown that the partitioning of the composition of the Universe into Baryonic Matter, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy arises from geometric projections.
He then puts his finger on the balances by calculating the values of rho that would yield the "observed" universe composition.
That is called "Postulating the Conclusion: Circular Volume Partitioning".
In addition, the Landau-Lifshitz metric is debunked by astronomical observations. The universe at the farthest point observable (the surface of last scattering) is not curved.
In addition, one cannot calculate accelerations and velocities from a model that includes time.
Time is not part of the Landau-Lifshitz metric. There is no possibility of deriving dynamics from it.
Marco Pereira
hi mate, my two cent's worth:
Unless a full spacetime analysis (including the FLRW scale factor) and a physically motivated energy‑density distribution are supplied, the stereographic model cannot claim to account for the observed matter–energy composition.
cheers
H
Harri Shore
How many parameters does FLRW use to explain the Supernova Data, Harri?
Harri Shore
You can count. The number is seven. One might say that there is another equation forcing the sum of omegas to be 1, or w equal to minus 1.
Well, many people propose models where the sum is not one and w is not minus 1.
In other words, this model has seven parameters, and NONE has been confirmed (Omega_c, Omega_DE, and w). They have been fitted, but there has never been an independent observation supporting the values.
So, FLRW is a model with seven parameters, where there isn't a single shred of evidence supporting the existence of three of them.
It should have only one parameter, which is H0. That is the inverse of the age of the universe, and no theory should be able to predict it.
If I were to tell you that I have a theory that models the Pantheon Supernova Survey, where the only parameter is H0, what would be your reaction?
I am providing the pantheon data, the plot, the Python notebook, and Friedmann's equations.
Why would you ever talk about FLRW, Dark Matter, or Dark Energy again?
Don't you know Occam's Razor? What does it tell you?
The number is up to 7
and there are many ways to reach Valhalla mate
we all struggle with some funds problems here, I’m keeping al avenues open to some degree ( except God, that is a terrible theory…)
It isn't the best one, the one with just one parameter, Harri...:)
Are you close to that?
I don't know about you, but in my mind, before I opened my mouth, I had to be sure the theory passed the basic tests... Mercury Perihelion, Gravitational Lensing, Gravitational Time Dilation, Spiral Galaxy Rotation Curve Conundrum...etc..
That is basic.
I never wrote anything about Cosmology, Relativity, Supernova, Galaxy Formation, etc.. until I had a real model. I think that is how it should be done.
By the way wasnt Lematre a catholic priest?
How on Earth did he reconcile these …
In the good old times, Jesuit Priests were better educated... I just checked and learned that he was a Diocesan Priest (whatever that means).
There are all kinds of priests. I expect that some of them are quite well educated and smart.
The best of them navigate reality and fiction and make fiction to accommodate reality.
The dumb ones (or craven ones) do the opposite.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Thermal Engineering
- Thermofluid
- Fluid Mechanics
- Fluid Dynamics