Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ferrel_hadley t1_j4c0olv wrote

Reply to comment by Youdontknowmypickles in The multiverse by Manureofhistory

> The advent of the Big Bang theory stemmed from Hubble work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann_equations

But Cosmology as a philosophy goes back to Aristotle and thinking about it led to ideas like Oblers Paradox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olbers%27_paradox

This was a step towards it being a scientific question. It is a process from abstract musings to solid physics.

41

Youdontknowmypickles t1_j4c1an7 wrote

I disagree intuitively but let me actually think about this for a bit and come back to it. You might have a good point, I just haven’t ever thought of it

27

jinqsi t1_j4crw1t wrote

Luckily we’re on the internet so you can just come back to it without announcing your intentions to come back to it.

−12

CheeseItTed t1_j4cspks wrote

Personally, I appreciate someone saying out loud, "I have a kneejerk reaction but let me examine it." Reinforces good thinking habits for me. So maybe let people write how they want?

43

jinqsi t1_j4cyvnc wrote

Imagine the forum where everyone informs the rest that they have thoughts and opinions but are taking into account other people’s thoughts and opinions? It would be mostly that, wouldn’t it?

−10

Youdontknowmypickles t1_j4cuiaj wrote

Ok I’m back lol. And I do agree: the night sky should be bright if the universe was static, as was assumed in 1900. But we looked for explanations and stumbled upon the expanding universe, which then led to the creation of the Big Bang hypothesis. I don’t know if we can say that philosophy drove the gear for the explanation, but it certainly set about something that then had to be explained, so I see where you’re coming from

13

InterminableAnalysis t1_j4czh60 wrote

I think there's a good sense in which philosophy drives the gear for the explanation, in that the big bang theory eventually comes, at least partly, from a metaphysical consideration of the universe (e.g., importantly, a consideration of the nature of space).

4

Manureofhistory OP t1_j4c37f1 wrote

Then again I think there as many abstract ideas that never go anywhere. I don’t know what makes the multiverse more credible than anything like, say, panspermia

2

danielravennest t1_j4dqdfe wrote

There are way more theories than experiments, because theory only needs a blackboard, or a pad and pencil, while experiments cost real money. Science makes progress when experiments invalidate theories until there can be only one.

5