Re: [asa] Collins' book is reviewed by the Arizona Origins Science guys

Thanks. I tried google but didn't have the magic words.

Some of the usual suspects are there - Arp, Bondi, Gold, e.g. I'm surprised
the Burbidges didn't sign up.

I also note Lerner, who wrote a pop book on plasma cosmology, _The Big Bang
Never Happened_. But there's no reason to think that such models (i.e.,
ones with equal amounts of matter & anti-matter) avoid a big bang-like
state - I published a couple of counterexamples some years ago.

& this paragraph is false: "What is more, the big bang theory can boast of
no quantitative predictions that have subsequently been validated by
observation. The successes claimed by the theory's supporters consist of its
ability to retrospectively fit observations with a steadily increasing array
of adjustable parameters, just as the old Earth-centered cosmology of
Ptolemy needed layer upon layer of epicycles."

Alpher & Herman, following Gamow, predicted a temperature of 5K for the
remnant radiation from a hot big bang in 1948 - not an exact prediction of
the correct result but hardly just "qualitative." It's those who reject a
big bang who've had to come up with contrived explanations for the MWB.
Ditto for the He/H ratio.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Greaves" <pgreaves@surewest.net>
To: "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Collins' book is reviewed by the Arizona Origins Science
guys

>I think this is it (google is a wonderful thing):
>
> http://cosmologystatement.org/
>
> Funny thing is that after reading it, I would not have a serious problem
> with adding my name to the list, even though I am certainly an adherent to
> big bang cosmology. It is really only asking for continuing investigation
> into alternatives. I wonder how many on the list might feel similarly?
> In any case, it appears that many behind the composition of this statement
> might feel more comfortable with some sort of steady-state theory, and
> that probably motivated them to create it. For example, the following
> quote is from the statement: "Yet the big bang is not the only framework
> available for understanding the history of the universe. Plasma cosmology
> and the steady-state model both hypothesize an evolving universe without
> beginning or end." Hardly compatible with YEC!! I bet most of them would
> be horrified to know their statement was being used to support any form of
> creationism!
> -Paul
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>
>
>> Does anyone know where to find the "open letter" referred to in this
>> sentence of the review which Bob posted?
>>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Sep 20 22:42:45 2006