|« BrainAge||Hello Yourself, Moto »|
Well, I thought I'd put my Googling skills to the test again. I didn't find the source, unfortunately, but I was appalled at what I did find: dodecahedral universes - coming out through mainstream channels. Oh boy, the universe could be a soccer ball connected to an infinite number of other soccer balls!
It's funny that alternative cosmology is even called that, when it so often pushes for a rather ordinary view of the cosmos, and considering what passes muster for non-alternative these days
Anyhow, these folks in the Alternative Cosmology Group started out with this Open Letter which was published in New Scientist. Their newsletter isn't much of a newsletter in and of itself: it's mostly links to scholarly papers.
If you can't read a regular astronomy paper, you won't be able to read these either. The papers are interesting, though, if you can slog through them. This one by Glushkov has some strange pieces to it, but the general idea is that if quasars, according to Big Bang Theory, are supposed to be galaxies in the earlier universe, if the Big Bang was smooth, as is also asserted, then the distribution of quasars should be isotropic, that is, basically equal any direction you look. However, they are not.
And so on...
Anyhow, I haven't heard much out of mainstream Big Bang Theory of late. There's one group rehashing Big Bang/Big Crunch. There's another reading more into WMAP data. *sigh* Stagnation punctuated by craziness.
|<< <||> >>|