Cosmology

Perhaps there is no field where the narrow focus of proving preconceived notions causes problems than in what I call (collectively, and – with apologies – probably imprecisely) cosmology. That is, the attempt to explain this universe at the largest magnitudes. The devotion to validating one set of precepts continues to cause no end of problems and inventive excuses. I will repeat my admission from the outset that I am not a mathematician or a physicist, so I only know what I read about their work and conclusions. Frankly they have become something of a priesthood (and I use that term intentionally) with its own language that increasingly seems to resent having to even try to communicate with the rest of us.

Let us begin with the basics: As I understand it, Einstein grew up and lived in a world where the assumption was that the universe existed in a steady state without beginning or end. That would have been the framework he hung his thought processes on, although he is said to have tried to adapt them to later discoveries about the age and beginning of this universe. Even at that he had to invent something called the “cosmological constant” to make his equations balance, although he reportedly never liked it. (I will return to that concept later.) I have begun to speculate that that may be why he erroneously incorporated the assumption that space and time were one thing, but that’s just me. When Einstein was formulating his theories astronomy had not yet advanced to the point where it understood that there were any other galaxies, let alone many billions of them. While that does not invalidate his discoveries, it does speak to the predisposed mindset he was capable of using and the viewpoint that would be reflected in his results.

I now regularly read that his theories can explain 5% (or at the most generous 15%) of the observable universe. In any other field that would be considered abject failure. I don’t know about you, but if I had ever held a job where I was only 5% accurate I would not have had that job the next day, and I certainly would not have had multitudes of people trying everything to justify my performance 100 years later.

I read somewhere that Newton’s physics worked just fine until they didn’t. Perhaps it is time to admit that Einstein’s physics worked just fine until they didn’t, and that his formulas work just fine in a universe of one galaxy that has no beginning and no end. Unfortunately that is not the universe you are living in. Instead, many “scientists” double down on the infallibility of Einstein and will do anything to prove it. That is one of the main reasons why I have come to think of them as a priesthood and refer to The Prophet Einstein, who they believe was inspired to reveal the unassailable Truth to the world. It has become an article of faith, not science.

His acolytes cannot tolerate that the big ol’ meany universe just does not obey all the math of The Prophet Einstein, so they are determined to beat it into submission. I knew mechanics who told me that for situations where something almost but wouldn’t quite fit they used a BFH, which stood for a “bigger f***ing hammer.” Well it takes a really huge hammer to beat the universe into Einstein’s math, so they have enlisted a couple of goons called dark matter and dark energy to wield it. I have heard at least one reference to the fact that at this point dark matter and dark energy are equal to the late, unlamented cosmological constant that was always needed to make it work, so in over 100 years they are back at square one. You know, even a moderately bright toddler can soon learn that a square peg won’t fit a round hole no matter how big a hammer you use.

A few years ago I got so fed up reading about dark matter and energy that I came up with a new theory, Giant Invisible Unicorns. They shove matter back into galaxies because they like to run in empty space and they keep multiplying so that puts pressure on the universe to expand. More recently, I decided that theory was just silly and abandoned it in favor of one that can be supported by practical experience. Now I am espousing that the galaxies are being held together by transparent duct tape and the universe expands faster than it should because someone keeps spraying it with WD-40. This is based on extrapolating from the dictum that many modern mechanics recognize: “If it doesn’t move and it should then apply WD-40; if it moves and it shouldn’t use duct tape.” There you go, theoreticians, show me proof your position is better than that explanation. (And I will not accept you usurping it and saying it is just other words for your hypothetical and mathematical dark matter and dark energy, that is just a cop-out.)

Before I leave cosmology, I have one other question to which I would like an answer. Within the past several years I have read serious accounts that stated they have discovered objects that are as much as 47 billion (and I believe one was over 90 billion) light years away. Now I understand that this universe is approximately 14 billion years old (give or take a few hundred million years.) I also understand that current faith in The Prophet Einstein says that there is no center of this universe and that light obeys His speed limit. So, how the hell do they rationalize that they believe something is over three times (or even 6 times) as far away as is possible to detect in that time frame? (And if you respond that it is expansion caused by dark energy you may hear my scream no matter where you are in the world.) On the other hand, if they claim that it is because this universe is a sphere of some sort, see my previous objections to using anything dependent on π applied to physical reality. I feel like they are just screwing with my willing suspension of disbelief.

Gort, berenga.