It is sometimes evident that such comments made by Peter Woit would have to have enormous amounts of data to back up the reasons why research should not be moving in the direction it is. I do not have alot of time right now so I will just put up this for now.
Planck was selected as the third Medium-Sized Mission (M3) of ESA's Horizon 2000 Scientific Programme, and is today part of its Cosmic Vision Programme. It is designed to image the anisotropies of the Cosmic Background Radiation Field over the whole sky, with unprecedented sensitivity and angular resolution. Planck will provide a major source of information relevant to several cosmological and astrophysical issues, such as testing theories of the early universe and the origin of cosmic structure. The scientific development of the mission is directed by the Planck Science Team.
How would such information force us to consider the subject of gravitational wave generation in microscopic avenues, and all of a sudden dismiss quantum geometrical considerations as revealled on topological forms? Would it?
Max Tegmark and others, current working in this area, will have been provided with a deeper look at what they have been postulating in regards to "topological forms," in the cosmos. As many know, this relationship is part of my attempts at comprehension of what happens at such quantum levels and why quantum geometry is not relevant to cosmolgical scales for considerations.
For such comments, that would have implied Higher Dimensions to be revealled in the Spacetime Fabric, would have been verified? But like the Cyclical Universe, I could go the way of any model that does not follow the current established trends of thinking.:)It would be consequential, if such speaking is not backed up, but as we know any ear that is lent to discussion, the reasons why before hand, would always be a important one to consider?:)
No comments:
Post a Comment