I often say that about my approach.
However you seem to believe there is no need to respect the scientific method in respect of models and theory.
I believe in scientific method and I have tried to point that out to you.
Personally there are aspects of the current model that I do not like, and I have raised them in this forum for discussion.
I find the theory of inflation difficult to accept because it does not fit my experience however that does not mean I will criticize the model as I do not have something better in mind.
I don't like the idea that we need dark matter but that is our current position.
By investigating inflation and dark matter we will learn more.
Both ideas may be better confirmed or they may be replaced but they won't be thrown out because I (or you for that matter) have a personal dislike.
Regarding space time and inflation, read my last answer that I have shown some mistaked of scientists to paddoboy down above:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/th...-the-western-world.158483/page-9#post-3424869
We cannot investigate something that does not exist and cannot bve proven, this is like chasing ghosts, and none here believes in existence of ghosts-and you criticize people to believe in such nonsense, you are no different.
Inflation cannot be true because of the facts regarding space I wrote to paddoboy-click and read the link, it is the last post here.
This is not about experience it's about common sense and logic, and not taking into accounts all the facts, so scientists create their own pseudo-facts that are non-existent, that's the problem with mathematics and its models, they are not real, much like singularity is not, neither is dark amtter, dark energy, inflation or
universe expanding-and yet it does not expand into anything-that last one is simply not possible it completely beats the very core of the Big bang model-I cannot believe why you people cannot understand this, you are like Borg without even try to think and explain otherwise with more rationality and logic based on the real world explanations and not based on some abstract pseudo-explanations/pseudo-interpretations, just because they are scientists it doesn't mean they are right at all (and histoy is full of examples where all the dominanst scientific structures academics were 100% wrong), actually it is 100% irrefutable that they are wrong when they start to throw out abstract and imaginary pesudo-explanations that completely and absolutely exclude real-world explanations/interpetations-which are the only ones that that are truly correct ones, because the irrefutable facts are something material/physical/real cannot be explained with something abstract, only material/physical/real can explain material/physical/real phenomenons that are made/created of/out of physical/real influences of matter, energy, energy fields, forces and everyhting else that is physical and real.
Another reason is that I cannot understand how can you not question such explanations, I used to talk with scientists and with these open questions-and guess what although they wanted to answer me, they did not know the answer, basically they answered, physics is still trying to solve such problems, of course their ego and your own ego will not allow you to admit that you are wrong, when I know that I'm wrong, I admit it, but this I cannot admit something that is based on abstract mathematical fairy tale, again this is not a scientific method, it is pure mathematical religious movement without caring what holes were shown by people with critical thinking, it's like religion as simple as that.
I don't think.
I have not suggested your post be removed or that you be put under house arrest.
There is little parallel between Galileo presenting physical observations and you presenting an unsupported personal opinion.
You are being unnecessarily emotional.
I can entertain what you say without rolling over and accepting what you say as valid argument.
You have yet to present more than mere opinions in a manner that suggests you don't know what you are talking about.
Clearly you miss my point as to providing an alternative.
I would be happy to hear what you suggest as a model but all you do is criticize from a position that indicates a lack of understanding.
You say the maths is stupid in effect may I ask this?
Do you understand and competent in the math of GR or do you just know its stupid because you just think so.
And get it out of your head that I am attacking you because you are wrong.
Alex
That's the problem you think, you believe...., there is a great parallel between me or anyone else who is trying to penetrate the veil of scientific religion; you are forgetting the fact that also Galileo was put under the same crankism process in the same way I was on this forum, he had very little to start with and yet he was right after all.
What you don't understand is that I know and i do understand how exactly these experiments are explained, and I have shown that these explanations are simply wrong if you include abstract concepts as pseudo-explanations.
My opinion is not unsupported because it is bnased on facts that scientists often forget, you/scientists just don't want to accept alternative explanations that can be true as well as the offical, down-to-earth, logical and rational (based on what we can directly observe) explanations/interpretations, you only accept abstract pseudo-explanations/misinterpretations that have not place in reality, since they do not exist (like gravity "influencing" space abstract misinterpretations), you cannot explain physical phenomenons with abstract entities that do not exist, you can only CORRECTLY EXPLAIN THEM with explanations that are directly visible in physical reality-meaing they are real.
Part of these reason is r+simply realigion disguised as science, but part of this is the fact that scientists, who wants to say and give more correct explanations will lose their fundings if they start beating Big Bang hypothesis or all other scientific hypotheses for that matter.
Mathematics is stupid if you create abstract concepts that do not exist in the universe-I was posting about this the last 7 pages, what part you don't understand?
No model, just facts, evidences (real-world evidences, no mathematical stupidities), rational and sceptical and logical interpretations of experiments, and not some abstract explanations like space is influenced and time is influenced by gravity-which I have shown and 100% irrefutably 100% proven in the last answer to paddoboy that space is not influenced by gravity, by using real-world interpretations and not some abstract non-existent misintepretations that do not exist in a real universe.
Yes, I get emotional about thes eubjects often-and this is why I rarely post on forums, becaus eI general do not have time to post every single thing, since a half of what I write none wants to read-which is another form of religious totalitarism form the side of scientists, but that's because people do not think with their own head when scientists show them experiments, I ask a lot of time, ans scientists a lot of time cannot answer many of my questions, which ends up in undermining their own explanations which are abstract, not real.
If someone conducted experiment you would think the same as any other scientist, you cannot imagine that their pseudo-explanation which is too abstract is wrong and that is the problem, there is no progress in such uniformity of explanations, plus not to mention that they are wrong, since I always search for the holes in hypotheses such as the Big bang hypothesis.
That's all.
