Culture and Religion

A world view where the guide for society is based on human nature,
 not on ancient scriptures.  Home  or Topic Groups

Cosmology Tolerance for Deviation

Cosmology is not managed to be a testable science for its scope of the entire universe.
As a reference:
Many modern CNC machine tools can repeat to 0.0001 inch or 0.001 mm (1 micron), and 0.001 degree. For additional cost these can be improved.
It is impossible even with such precision to guarantee a perfect part every time.
Each machine must have a defined tolerance for deviation, like 1 micron.

From Wikipedia:
'
Engineering tolerance is the permissible limit or limits of variation in a physical dimension.

Dimensions, properties, or conditions may have some variation without significantly affecting functioning of systems, machines, structures, etc. A variation beyond the tolerance (for example, a temperature that is too hot or too cold) is said to be noncompliant, rejected, or exceeding the tolerance.
'

Very expensive machines still require a definition for their performance - so the customer can hold their supplier accountable for their claims of expected performance.


Cosmologists have selected a career to improve our understanding of the universe.
Cosmologists have few rules for their efforts.  A science involves predictions to be confirmed or denied.


For example, in our solar system we should be able to predict planet or satellite or TNO positions within 100 km and within 1 minute. With whatever numbers I make up we might already be there. We must be honest about what we can do now or there is no credibility for future claims.

Cosmologists must have a goal so when it is achieved success can be claimed and subsequent goals are defined to establish milestones for future progress in our understanding.

For example, observations have shown our Sun does not follow an ellipse in the Milky Way. It has a 'disturbed' orbit. We must understand our closest star.
As far as I know there is no individual star in the universe with a precisely predictable orbit.

Even knowing this limitation, cosmologists have a model for a spiral galaxy rotation. Repeated observations are apparently always finding individual stars deviating from prediction.
The cosmologists claim dark matter is the reason for the deviation.
This is bad science for 2 reasons: 1) when a test does not confirm the theory's prediction  the theory is wrong and must be fixed.
2) dark excuses must never be tolerated.
Dark matter must be discarded.

However the test rules resulting in failure must be reasonable given the scope of the our current knowledge base.
The prediction must have a defined tolerance for deviation.
If the initial deviation is substantial then of course the model must be fixed. As deviations reduce with model revisions and subsequent tests then other predictions and tests of the model reveal the overall progress of our understanding.

This will take time given our current status of relying on dark matter as a place holder inhibiting any actual progress. Electromagnetic forces must be measured and included or their omission in the model will require a lucky coincidence for a confirmation of a prediction, or no repeatability.

An initial milestone could be X% stars within Y% of prediction.
We must know what we can do now so we can describe when we improve.
The important first step is get rid of dark matter and alternately check predictions and fix a model to suit observations. Model predictions must approach observations.

The cosmologists currently claim dark energy is the reason for the observed positions and red shift velocities of distant galaxies. 

After we understand the stellar motions in our Milky Way then we can pursue its globular clusters and satellite galaxies. After that basis we can address the motions in the local group. Until that foundation is established it is simply idiotic to make any claims or predictions at the scale of galaxies. Dark energy must be disposed of as the garbage it is.

Cosmology requires predictions that measure our progress.
Right now predictions are worthless because failures are excused with dark stuff.

Perhaps after first removing everything black or dark (or hot), with a bit of time I could identify cases where cosmology has a demonstrated clear understanding of something outside our solar system, but it might take awhile.

Only published  academic papers with sensational news stories offer no accountability on their efforts. I dislike the analogy but this context is like artists and musicians. Either the group polices itself or it becomes irreparable, eventually a worthless endeavor for others to pursue. Astronomy is known as one of the oldest sciences but collectively it is certainly not behaving with maturity.

 Sensational news stories having no justifiable basis must result in ridicule eventually. Perhaps it is only a matter of time before an 'intrepid reporter' unveils this travesty of false certainty.

Perhaps this diatribe is utter nonsense but I leave a judgment to the reader.


Hit back to go to previous page in history.

Here is the list of topics in this Cosmology Topic Group .

Ctrl + for zoom in;  Ctrl - for zoom out ;  Ctrl 0 for no zoom;
triple-tap for zoom to fit;  pinch for zoom change;  pinched for no zoom