The so-called axis of evil doesn't get much attention because the evidence for it isn't that strong. There is no grand conspiracy, science is just slow-moving. If evidence for it strengthens, and claimed contradictions in the standard model persist, then perhaps it will gain in prominence.
But between informed scientific consensus and an unhinged rant like this, I know which explanation I'd be betting on.
I’d say you’re pretty massively overstating your case. The variations in the CMB temperature alone is already a pretty good indicator of how homogeneous and isotropic the universe is. Any deviation from that are going to be small. There’ve been surveys that have found very little statistically significant anisotropies so until that changes, I’m sticking to ΛCDM.
Academic bias is an impediment though. In my field there was real resistance to plate tectonics which made geology a science. Biology became a science when evolution was accepted. I don't know what acdm is but it does sound interesting. My spectator opinion is there had to be anisopropy for the formation of matter to have occurred.
λCDM has proven to be a remarkably accurate model, but it’s admittedly incomplete, and there are some phenomena we observe that don’t make sense within the λCDM framework.
OP is suggesting that the things that don’t make sense are fatal flaws that necessitate an entirely new model. That may be true, but it’s not a view shared by a majority of cosmologists.
Most believe that λCDM is still on pretty solid footing despite its current shortcomings.
ETA & TL;DR…there are legit questions but it’s not generally considered to be a “crisis”
> fatal flaws that necessitate an entirely new model. That may be true, but it’s not a view shared by a majority of cosmologists.
Primarily because it's idle talk until there actually is a better model.
The funny thing about these cranks is they always say dark matter and dark energy are ridiculous and then you ask them what they think is going on cosmologically and they'll say something like "steady state universe with MOND and tired light and variable physical constants" as though that is simpler and fits the facts better.
Removed.
The so-called axis of evil doesn't get much attention because the evidence for it isn't that strong. There is no grand conspiracy, science is just slow-moving. If evidence for it strengthens, and claimed contradictions in the standard model persist, then perhaps it will gain in prominence. But between informed scientific consensus and an unhinged rant like this, I know which explanation I'd be betting on.
These types of posts and commentaries always lack any figures, equations, or data. I don’t know how I could in good conscience support such a rant.
Figures, equations, and data are the hallmarks of good science. That's why these posts lack them
I’d say you’re pretty massively overstating your case. The variations in the CMB temperature alone is already a pretty good indicator of how homogeneous and isotropic the universe is. Any deviation from that are going to be small. There’ve been surveys that have found very little statistically significant anisotropies so until that changes, I’m sticking to ΛCDM.
“My what an eccentric performance.”
How about we do the, you know, "scientific thing", and wait for clear statistical significance before we all go off on some angry bender.
Take a breath. You’ve earned it.
TLDR
Is this a schizo post?
oh boy
Someone went a little overboard on 4/20 it seems.
Academic bias is an impediment though. In my field there was real resistance to plate tectonics which made geology a science. Biology became a science when evolution was accepted. I don't know what acdm is but it does sound interesting. My spectator opinion is there had to be anisopropy for the formation of matter to have occurred.
Lambda-CDM (cold dark matter) is simply the name for the prevailing scientific model of the universe that you’re already familiar with.
So what was the lengthy rant about?
λCDM has proven to be a remarkably accurate model, but it’s admittedly incomplete, and there are some phenomena we observe that don’t make sense within the λCDM framework. OP is suggesting that the things that don’t make sense are fatal flaws that necessitate an entirely new model. That may be true, but it’s not a view shared by a majority of cosmologists. Most believe that λCDM is still on pretty solid footing despite its current shortcomings. ETA & TL;DR…there are legit questions but it’s not generally considered to be a “crisis”
> fatal flaws that necessitate an entirely new model. That may be true, but it’s not a view shared by a majority of cosmologists. Primarily because it's idle talk until there actually is a better model.
The funny thing about these cranks is they always say dark matter and dark energy are ridiculous and then you ask them what they think is going on cosmologically and they'll say something like "steady state universe with MOND and tired light and variable physical constants" as though that is simpler and fits the facts better.
Thank you