The validity of theories isn't decided by what people think-but by what can be calculated and measured. For the moment it seems that the inflationary scenario can describe, by calculations, certain features of early Universe cosmology that have been measured. Of course this doesn't mean that this is the only way such features can be described; but, in that case, which way one chooses involves personal taste and doesn't affect the end results, any more than choosing a coordinate system for performing a calculation does.

I must admit I am not an expert in inflationary models, but they seem to be next on the list of questionable strays of physics due to lack of predictability and moreover lack of testability, right after string theory which ranks number one.

An interesting discussion is going on here, which one might use to build up on:

http://backreaction.blogspot.de/2017/10/is-inflationary-universe-scientific.html

http://backreaction.blogspot.de/2017/10/i-totally-mean-it-inflation-never.html

It is only a blog of course, so the discussions and texts are provocative at times, but one might be able to get the gist of it.

No

Pl read Attachment

Thanks

Dr Das

So far I do know, it is an Hypotese revealed to our knowledge in particle Physics.

The first signals and information we did get from BB is about 300.000 Years after BB.

It is still a big mystery but of very big importance in relation to the 4 basic forces.

It means it is "allowed" to play with Your fantasy and imagination .

Kurt Wraae

This scenario is useless. Indeed a comobile frame is not

an inertial one. It is a very big mathematical mistake.

For more see :

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01629125

Michel

A reasonably good guess at the time it was made.

The validity of theories isn't decided by what people think-but by what can be calculated and measured. For the moment it seems that the inflationary scenario can describe, by calculations, certain features of early Universe cosmology that have been measured. Of course this doesn't mean that this is the only way such features can be described; but, in that case, which way one chooses involves personal taste and doesn't affect the end results, any more than choosing a coordinate system for performing a calculation does.

Definitely no.

Article The Infinite Distance Horizon and the Hyperbolic Inflation i...

to Salah A. Mabkhout, I read your paper, it is a good path, very well; you take the flat de Sitter model; it exists also many open de Sitter

models; see the wonderful paper : W. de Sitter, "On the curvature of space", in : KNAW, Proceedings, 20 I, 1918, Amsterdam, 1918, pp. 229-243. With each of these de Sitter models, no need of infation. See also my recent paper as cited before : Preprint What is our Universe now ?

No question the inflationary scenario is at least partly correct.

However, it is best to consider that it was to remove the phenomenon of Magnetic MONOPOLES.

Having said that, it does not mean that the Inflationary scenario is the whole truth. I.e. Multiverse models, and the Cyclic Conformal cosmology hypothesis of Penrose point to the likelihood of significant addendiums later on. And revisions.

Advent of theory of universal gravitational attraction necessitated that all three-dimensional matter accumulate at one point. This is against common sense and observation. Hence, it was necessary to invent some kind of inflationary theory to keep the bodies in their positions as observed.

If only stable galaxies had some mechanism to keep distances between them steady and prevent relative motions, inflationary theories would not be necessary. Kindly see: http://vixra.org/abs/1101.0016 , ‘MATTER (Re-examined)’, www.matterdoc.info

Cosmic inflation is a concept born by lack of better ideas. It very simply explains red shift.

An alternate concept, that a static closed and constantly curved space leads to an isotropic gravitational potential without gravitational force but with impact on dislocation, is too sophisticated!

Assuming a miraculously accelerated space inflation, exactly fitting to some observations, is much simpler.

There is no question that we have a dynamical universe whose boundaries are changing over time. The inflationary scenario though does need to be backed by data. Here is an example of where people's enthusiasm gets the better of them

https://www.space.com/28423-cosmic-inflation-signal-space-dust.html

Quote

It is the announcement no one wanted to hear: The most exciting astronomical discovery of 2014 has vanished. Two groups of scientists announced today (Jan. 30) that a tantalizing signal — which some scientists claimed was "smoking gun" evidence of dramatic cosmic expansion just after the birth of the universe — was actually caused by something much more mundane: interstellar dust.

In the cosmic inflation announcement, which was unveiled in March 2014, scientists with the BICEP2 experiment, claimed to have found patterns in light left over from the Big Bang that indicated that space had rapidly inflated at the beginning of the universe, about 13.8 billion years ago. The discovery also supposedly confirmed the existence of gravitational waves, theoretical ripples in space-time.

But in a statement today, scientists with the European Space Agency said that data from the agency's Planck space observatory has revealed that interstellar dust caused more than half of the signal detected by the Antarctica-based BICEP2 experiment. The Planck spacecraft observations were not yet available last March when the BICEP2 science team made its announcement. [Cosmic Inflation and the Big Bang Explained (Infographic)]

End of quote

I am not disputing the existence of inflation, in some variant. I DO remember being in Rencontres De Moriond when the BICEP announcement was made by their team, and then the climb down as to why this was not acceptable a year later.

Again, the preponderance of the data suggests Inflation. We do though need to contain our enthusiasm.

Needless to say though, we HAVE confirmed Gravitational waves, but NOT due to INFLATIONARY signals, YET.

As to what Hoyle et al posited, I disagree with their analysis.

It is not so much that Hoyle is wrong , he is not going to remove this one, i.e. the CMBR evidence as to the Cosmic microwave 3.4 degree Kelvin background, but that partisans have to curb their enthusiasm.

As to the cosmic dust fiasco shows, and the Bicep II story ( which I witnessed both promotions of, and the take down a year later in Rencontres De Moriond), it is fiendishly easy to get seduced by the apparent coincidences

The Cosmic dust fiasco shows where that leads.

But Hoyle is NOT going to get rid of the 3.4 Kelvin background data either.

End result, some theory of a dynamically oscillating and changing universe will emerge, and that is FINAL.

Lemaitre in the 1920s postulated the existence of a primordial atom at the start of the universe and his thesis as to why the primordial atom decayed was allegedly due to COSMIC RAYS from the big bang.

It did not survive (this theory) although a very different variant, i.e. quantum gravity is very much a contender.

As in the case of the BICEP II cosmic dust fiasco, there was/is no surviving data which supports relic cosmic rays from a big bang.

An idea though, which is not incommensurate with production of Sterile Neutrinos, as an origin from DM is being investigated NOW, as a partial successor to the much earlier LeMaitre theory of relic cosmic rays.

Presentation, is, as Hoyle stated, important, but data analysis is even more important.

Cosmic inflation has various serious shortcomings.

Its nature has the quality of "and then a miracle occurs" whithin inconsistent theories.

It is something which seems to describe the current state, but inappropriate for describing all future.

The consequences of cosmic inflation are devastating for the very long term evolution of life in the universe, because it will end in nearly eternal darkness...

Instead we should assume, that our observations are caused by an isotropically curved, finite, non expanding space. In opposition to the cosmic inflation theory, we have a chance to verify that kind of theory .

But we really should try such a verification without being blinded by a dogmatic, widespread and popularly fixed theory.

Readers flock to read Stephen Hawking's PhD thesis, crash Cambridge University website The abstract of his PhD begins: "Some implications and consequences of the expansion of the universe are examined". The renowned cosmologist has recently been in the news for his views on contacting extraterrestrial life.

http://zeenews.india.com/science/readers-flock-to-read-stephen-hawkings-phd-thesis-crash-cambridge-university-website-2051757.html

Dear Sir Pl Evaluate Two thesis

1. Properties of Expanding Universe - That advocates that universe started with singularity . It has no boundary and supports Big Bang Model of Universe .

2. Atomic Genetics and Origin of the Universe ( HO = 72 km/sec/Mpc) Volume-1 - That advocates that universe is made up of infinite Tachyon particles ( Symmetry phase ) ( Dark Energy ) . It has made up of boundary called Cold dark matter Layer ( CDM layer - Dark Matter ) , It supports continuous creation of Matter from Quasar - Hoyle Narlikar continuous creation Theory .

​ PR-PHD-05437_CUDL2017-reduced.pdf​

Further reading Pl See

1.Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe ( Ho= 72 km/sec/Mpc ) volume 1, International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR), volume 16 , number 1 ( 2014), p 311-338.

2. Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe volume 2 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2014) Volume 16, No 2, pp 274-309

3. Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe volume 3 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2014) Volume 17, No 1, pp 148-185

4. Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe volume 4( part 1) International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2014) Volume 17, No 1, pp 259-291

5. . Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe volume 4( part 2) International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2014) Volume 17, No 1, pp 292-324

6. Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe volume 5 IOSR Journal of Research Method in Education (IOSR-JRME) e-ISSN: 2320–7388,p-ISSN: 2320–737X Volume 4, Issue 5 Ver. I (Sep-Oct. 2014), PP 72-105 www.iosrjournals.org

7. Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe volume 6 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT August, 2014 Vol 3 Issue 8p 194- 210

8. Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe volume7 Social and basic sciences and research review( SBSRR) Volume 2, Issue 4Pages: 197-255

9. Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe volume 8 IOSR Journal of Research Method in Education (IOSR-JRME)e-ISSN: 2320–7388,p-ISSN: 2320–737X Volume 4, Issue 5 Ver. V (Sep-Oct. 2014), PP 57-98

10. Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe volume 9 IOSR Journal of Research Method in Education (IOSR-JRME)e-ISSN: 2320–7388,p-ISSN: 2320–737X Volume 4, Issue 5 Ver. III (Sep-Oct. 2014), PP 76-116

Conclusios -- Flaws in Hawking's Thesis - Mathematics does not have thought of Mind and Thought of Creator . Hence Marks Allotted ZERO Out Of TEN - PhD - ? Dr Das UOG

Very interesting and importance question.

We absolutely dont know the right answer yet and what is causing the expansion. It could be dark Energy or something else , I question myself if dark Energy is responsible for the ekspansion.

We are working on another theory but announce later our hypothesis.

Kurt Wraae

This scenario predicts (among other predictions) a cosmic gravitational wave background which is similar to the cosmic microwave background radiation. It is believed that detection of gravitational wave background is within the reach of future GW detectors, such as advanced LIGO, advanced Virgo, Einstein telescope, Cagra, LISA. In future if such a gravitational wave background is detected, it will provide crucial tests of theories of high energy physics well beyond the energy scales accessible in particle accelerators.

I recall the answer of

Wolfgang Konle

Cosmic inflation has various serious shortcomings. Its nature has the quality of "and then a miracle occurs" whithin inconsistent theories.

I agree with this answer; The

inflationary scenario is wrong, I explained this before.

An article, by Patchen Barss, 19th January 2020, appeared on bbc.com, called What if the Universe has no end? Its lead reads: The Big Bang is widely accepted as being the beginning of everything we see around us, but other theories that are gathering support among scientists are suggesting otherwise.

Link:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200117-what-if-the-universe-has-no-end