Section IV: Scientific Proof Is A Myth

Forbes magazine (2017) 

You’ve heard of our greatest scientific theories: the theory of evolution, the Big Bang theory, the theory of gravity. You’ve also heard of the concept of a proof, and the claims that certain pieces of evidence prove the validities of these theories. Fossils, genetic inheritance, and DNA prove the theory of evolution. The Hubble expansion of the Universe, the evolution of stars, galaxies, and heavy elements, and the existence of the cosmic microwave background prove the Big Bang theory. And falling objects, GPS clocks, planetary motion, and the deflection of starlight prove the theory of gravity.

Except that’s a complete lie… when it comes to science, proving anything is an impossibility…

All we have to guide us, from an empirical point of view, are the quantities we can measure and observe. Even at that, those quantities are only as good as the tools and equipment we use to make those observations and measurements…No matter how good our measurements and observations are, there’s a limit to how good they are.

A]ll the forces that we experience every day (and many that we don’t realize we experience every day) can be whittled down to just four fundamental forces:

  1. Electromagnetism.
  2. The strong force.
  3. The weak force.
  4. Gravity.

These are called the four fundamental forces of nature, and they govern everything that happens in the universe…

But while science describes activity from the smallest subatomic particles to cosmic size masses, even the most advanced scientists of our time can’t explain what those forces are.

There is no theory of gravity that fully explains the observed effects of gravity.

Sir Isaac Newton’s explanation [from the 18th century] of how it works was based on the observations that were available at his time, including the falling of objects of mass as apples on or near to the Earth’s surface, and the orbits of the Planets and the Moon. He assumed that there was a force from the Sun and the Earth and other large bodies…

Professor Albert Einstein…produced a General Theory of Relativity that described the movement of bodies in an energy field causing gravity effects. It does not cover all observed gravity and has to be tweaked…by a Cosmological Constant.

The latest theory, by a Professor Verlinde, is being studied and shows some promise, but it is strictly theoretical and will be difficult to understand since it is based on the existence of energy not proven to exist. 

During the mid-20th century, physicists developed the Standard Model, which has been called the “theory of almost everything.” It describes the inter-actions of all known subatomic particles and three of the four fundamental forces:

  1. electromagnetism
  2. the strong and
  3. weak nuclear forces…

the weak nuclear force is highly interesting.The weak force or weak nuclear force is the only fundamental force that is aware [isn’t awareness an aspect of intelligence?] of the spin of the [subatomic] particle and can categorise [i.e. direct] the particles into either particle or antiparticle…[isn’t categorizing a intelligent intervention?]

  • We know that while studying the weak nuclear forces the parity of the particle plays a very important role. But the weak nuclear force violates the parity….

  • The weak interactions also violate CPT conservation.

The strong force was first proposed to explain why atomic nuclei do not fly apart. It seemed that they would do so due to the repulsive electromagnetic force between the positively charged protons located in the nucleus…..

Are we all straight on what the physicists don’t know?

Great. Moving on, let’s review what physicists know the most about – the first unified force that was discovered – the electromagnetic force, AKA Light.

The Enduring Mystery of Light 

[D]efining light is a bit of a philosophical quandary. It doesn’t help that light continue to surprise us, with novel materials that alter light’s speed and trajectory in unexpected ways.

[I]t might be better to concentrate on what light does. Light shakes, twists and shoves the charged particles (like electrons) that reside in all materials.

These light actions are wavelength-specific. Or to say it another way, each material responds only to a particular set of wavelengths.

Take an apple, for instance. Radio waves and X-rays go essentially straight through it, whereas visible light is stopped by various apple molecules that either absorb the light as heat or reflect it back out.

If the reflected light enters our eyes, it will stimulate color receptors (cones) that are specifically “tuned” to either long, medium or short wavelengths. The brain compares the different cone responses to determine that the apple reflects “red” light.

Here are some other examples of light’s specific activities.

  • Radio waves from a local station cause the free electrons in a radio’s antenna to oscillate. Electronics tuned to the station’s frequency (or wavelength) can decode the oscillating signal into music or words. 
  • A microwave oven heats food from the inside out because microwaves penetrate the surface to rotate water molecules contained in the food. This molecular shuffling generates heat.
  • Standing next to a camp fire, infrared light vibrates molecules in our skin to make us warm. Conversely, we constantly lose heat when these same molecules emit infrared light.
  • In sunlight, several visible and ultraviolet wavelengths are missing, or dark. These “shadows” are due to the capture of photons by atoms, like hydrogen and helium, that make up the sun. The captured photon energy is used to boost the atoms’ electrons from one energy level to another.
  • An X-ray image of a skeleton is due to the fact that X-rays pass through soft tissue but are blocked by dense bone. However, even when just passing through, X-rays and gamma-rays ionize molecules along their path, meaning they strip electrons from the molecules. The ionized molecules can directly or indirectly damage DNA in a cell. Some of these genetic alterations may lead to cancer.

All this shows that light wears many different hats in its manipulation of matter.

It is perhaps fitting then that light’s true identity…is unanswerable.

Astronomers use many types of instruments to sense the electromagnetic spectrum, AKA Light.

Radio telescopes 

We are familiar with receivers that convert electromagnetic radio waves to mechanical vibrations in the speaker to create the sound waves we can hear.

Naturally occurring radio waves are extremely weak by the time they reach us from space. A cell phone signal is a billion billion times more powerful than the cosmic waves our telescopes detect.

Because radio waves are so long and cosmic radio sources are extremely weak, radio telescopes are the largest telescopes in the world.

looksouth

[T]he Very Large Array, 27 huge, white radio antennae arranged in a massive Y off US Route 60. Each dish is 230 tons and 82 feet in diameter, and by electronically combining all the data from the 27 dishes, astronomers can simulate the sensitivity of a dish with a diameter of 422 feet: bigger than any single dish in the world. Since its construction in the late 1970s, research has been conducted here on supernovae, black holes, dark energy and SETI, the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Life.

Microwave telescopes

[M]icrowaves…are very similar to radio waves but with a shorter wavelength and higher energy...

Microwaves efficiently deposit their energy directly into…the molecules.

The Cosmic Microwave Background radiation, or CMB for short, is a faint glow of light that fills the universe, falling on Earth from every direction with nearly uniform intensity. It is the residual heat of creation [Newspeak Alert! Misappropriating concept-specific terms!] –the afterglow of the big bang–streaming through space these last 14 billion years like the heat from a sun-warmed rock, reradiated at night.

The CMB is the oldest light we can see--It is a relic of the universe’s infancy, a time when it was not the cold dark place it is now, but was instead a firestorm of radiation and elementary particles. The familiar objects that surround us today–stars, planets, galaxies and the like–eventually coalesced from these particles as the universe expanded and cooled.

Are you picking up on what this article is presenting as “facts”?

1) Hubble’s data is being interpreted to claim support the Big Bang model. It is not being studied to discover what is unknown.

2) Since microwaves are outside the visible spectrum, this is sloppy reporting at the least, certainly flagrant disregard for scientific accuracy, to report “CMB is the oldest light we can see.” Later on in the article there is an acknowledgement of sensing not by sight, but by “temperature”, but can we recognize the subtle but persistent indoctrination going on?

The CMB  represents a temperature of about 2.7 Kelvin [or -460 degrees Fahrenheit]. Astronomers consider that diffuse temperature as microwave radiation and use the minor fluctuations in the “temperature” of the CMB to learn more about the origins and evolution of the universe.

3) This article states that the instruments are picking up heat. Not when it comes to CMB, they aren’t. -460 degrees Fahrenheit is not heat. It is beyond cold. 

4) Astronomers consider that diffuse temperature as microwave radiation. Remember, microwave are sensed by their activity of directly depositing themselves into matter which causes the matter to then heat up. How do you know your microwave did its job? When the potato is baked, not by the diffuse temperature throughout the microwave oven. That’s exactly what’s unique about microwaves.

5) Astronomers are going to use the minor fluctuations in the CMB to learn more about the origins and evolution of the universe? The entire Cosmic Microwave Background is a Wizard of Oz magic show! It is not light, it is not heat and yet it is presented as the “relic” of the “firestorm of radiation” present at the Big Bang which itself has never been proven and for which there is much evidence to disprove.

Gamma rays are the shortest wavelength of light and deadly to humans. They sense violent explosions, cosmic radioactive decay, and even the destruction of antimatter. 

The Cosmic Origins Spectrograph reads ultraviolet light. This spectrograph studies how galaxies, stars and planets formed and changed…

The name alone of this device is unscientific. It is not gathering raw data to examine uncritically. It is presenting support for an a priori claim. And how does ultraviolet light at one point in time, or even decades of Hubble activity, show how galaxies, stars and planets form and change over billions of years? Do you see how you’re expected to admit you’re too ignorant to understand the big words, and simply place your trust in the astrophysicists’ claims? 

The Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer, or NICMOS, sees objects in deep space by sensing the heat they emit.

From NASA’s website: Imagine the Universe!

Parrot in visible light Parrot in infrared light

Image of a parrot in visible light (right) and infrared light (left). Infrared shows us where things are warm or hot. (Credit: NASA/IPAC via the Cool Cosmos site)

Seriously? Since when does temperature correlate with all the detail of three dimensional objects with texture, weight, color, solid to gaseous state? Can the most experienced fireman make out the details inside when he looks at a blazing house fire? And Hubble is looking from just HOW FAR AWAY?

Ultraviolet telescopes hunt out the most energetic of stars.

A pillar composed of gas and dust in the Carina Nebula is…shown below in the visible light image from the Hubble Space Telescope….when the pillar is viewed using the infrared portion of the spectrum (right), it practically disappears, revealing the…stars behind the column of gas and dust.

Two images showing the Carina Nebula in different wavelengths. The Visible Light image reveals a brilliant display of yellow and gold dust lit up by stars. The Infrared image only shows the bright stars that were behind the dust.

But hold on! That “visible light image” on the left has been, as NASA frankly states, IMAGINED. 

And ultraviolet sensors reveal heat, which then have been interpreted as stars by NASA.

Do you grasp the application of what that LiveScience article is reporting as a FACT from KNOWN PHYSICS? 

Physicists KNOW that astrophysicists scanning the entire range of the electromagnetic spectrum are ONLY PICKING UP DATA.  

This data CANNOT be interpreted visually with any certainty.

Dark matter discovered: Scientists believe they have found elusive particle that makes up 90% of Universe

The COSMOS survey (artist's impression)

Dark matter is believed to make up 90 per cent of the mass of the Universe. We can’t see it but scientists think it is there due to the gravitational force it exerts…

1355884699_pie-chart

What Is Dark Energy?

it is a complete mystery. But it is an important mystery…The rest – everything on Earth, everything ever observed with all of our instruments, all normal matter – adds up to less than 5% of the universe…

We are much more certain what dark matter is not than we are what it is. First, it is dark, meaning that it is not…visible…Second, it is not in the form of…normal matter…Third, dark matter is not antimatter, because we do not see the unique gamma rays that are produced when antimatter annihilates with matter. Finally, we can rule out large galaxy-sized black holes…

Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs)…are thought to make up dark matterThe Cryogenic Dark Matter Search (CDMS) is using 30 ultra-cold germanium and silicon detectors far away from the hail of cosmic rays that strike Earth every day. It is believed the crystals will vibrate if struck by a WIMP.

2009: Head of CDMS Dan Bauer said they have spotted two particles with all the expected characteristics of dark matter.

2020: We’ve never been able to directly detect dark matter in any form,but we know it exists through its effects on the universe

2022: Scientists have discovered dark matter around galaxies that existed about 12 billion years ago, the earliest detection yet of this mysterious substance that dominates the universe. 

How…? 

To ‘see’ dark matter at all, astronomers must rely on its interaction with gravity. 

Oh, but we know that gravity is not understood, so this isn’t a reliable analysis of a substance that, furthermore, is invisible and “existed 12 billion years ago.” 

The Large Hadron Collider

April 7, 2022, scientists at the [Large Hadron Collider] lab calculated that the W boson, a fundamental particle of physics, weighs a bit more than their theoretical rulebook for the universe tells them it should…

“It’s not just something is wrong,”…It literally means something fundamental in our understanding of nature is wrong.”

The result is so extraordinary it must be confirmed by another experiment, scientists say. If is confirmed, it would present one of the biggest problems yet with…the standard model.

About 13.8 billion years ago, the universe sprang into existence in an event known as the big bang.The early universe was…extraordinarily dense. In fact, scientists think that at one point the entire observable universe would have been about the size of a soccer ball.

As the universe expanded, it became vastly larger…

board-exam-memes-8[Dating] methods use the universe’s expansion rate to determine the age. Hubble and the European Space Agency’s Gaia space observatory calculate this rate by…studying the local universe… 

The European Space Agency’s Planck mission uses a different method, mapping the newborn universe…with microwaves…However, those predictions don’t exactly match Hubble’s and Gaia’s measurements of our nearby contemporary universe…

Almost everyone has heard the story of the Big Bang. But if you ask anyone, from a layperson to a cosmologist, to finish the following sentence, “In the beginning, there was…” you’ll get a slew of different answers. One of the most common ones is “a singularity,” which refers to an instant where all the matter and energy in the Universe was concentrated into a single point…

But this picture isn’t just wrong, it’s nearly 40 years out of date! We are absolutely certain there was no singularity associated with the hot Big Bang

The stars and galaxies we see today didn't always exist, and the farther back we go, the closer to... [+] an apparent singularity the Universe gets, but there is a limit to that extrapolation.

if this were correct…there would be a number of clear signatures of this we could observe today…

And yet, the temperature fluctuations are…thousands of times smaller than a singular Big Bang predicts…

In the early 1980s, it was theorized that, before our Universe was hot, dense, expanding, cooling, and full of matter and radiation, it was inflating. A phase of cosmic inflation would mean the Universe was:

  • filled with energy inherent to space itself 
  • which causes a rapid, exponential expansion, 
  • that stretches the Universe flat, 
  • gives it the same properties everywhere, 
  • with small-amplitude quantum fluctuations,
  • that get stretched to all scales (even super-horizon ones),
  • and then…converts that energy…into matter and radiation… 

If you want to ask the question of how long inflation lasted, we simply have no idea…whether it lasted a little longer, a lot longer, or for an infinite amount of time is not only unknown, but unknowable.

So what happened to start inflation off? There’s a tremendous amount of research and speculation about it, but nobody knows. There is no evidence we can point to; no observations we can make; no experiments we can perform. 

One thing that we can mathematically demonstrate, in fact, is that it’s impossible for an inflating state to arise from a singularity… 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s