326KiB, 600x520, TIMESAND___n2zy65seg3y65seg3y65seg3cf5vb6byy65seg3bybyb.png
Planck evidence for a closed Universe and a possible crisis for cosmology
Lubos writes
>Di Valentino, Melchiorri, and Silk point out that the 2018 Planck data show a surplus of lensing, relatively to the Lambda-CDM model's prediction.
and
>In the light of this bold claim, this self-confident proposition may also be interpreted as mirage – one big fiction whose only justification was one consistency check in the measurement of the basic cosmological observables, and that precise consistency check could have been a coincidence.
Jon goes on to point out: Since no one has ever found dark matter despite dozens of experiments which have ruled all but the most contrived and silly models of dark matter, the CDM part of Lambda-CDM ought not necessarily be taken as the absolute truth about what is happening in the universe. Furthermore, if the underlying source of the "surplus" galactic rotational velocity is not understood but is apparently gravitational in nature, then the "surplus" of gravitational lensing on which this non-flat universe result is (((based))) might be more related to our ignorance about the source of the surplus galactic rotational velocity than it is related to the global topology of the universe.
Jon closes his critique with:
And then when they say "This disagrees with the Lambda-CDM prediction at 99%, which is less than three sigma," they do not adequately give attention to the fact that the prediction itself is not even 50% sure, and that the prediction is basically a guess, and that the new result found at less than 3 sigma is predicated on a guess that can't even be expressed in terms of sigmas.
Lubos writes
>Di Valentino, Melchiorri, and Silk point out that the 2018 Planck data show a surplus of lensing, relatively to the Lambda-CDM model's prediction.
and
>In the light of this bold claim, this self-confident proposition may also be interpreted as mirage – one big fiction whose only justification was one consistency check in the measurement of the basic cosmological observables, and that precise consistency check could have been a coincidence.
Jon goes on to point out: Since no one has ever found dark matter despite dozens of experiments which have ruled all but the most contrived and silly models of dark matter, the CDM part of Lambda-CDM ought not necessarily be taken as the absolute truth about what is happening in the universe. Furthermore, if the underlying source of the "surplus" galactic rotational velocity is not understood but is apparently gravitational in nature, then the "surplus" of gravitational lensing on which this non-flat universe result is (((based))) might be more related to our ignorance about the source of the surplus galactic rotational velocity than it is related to the global topology of the universe.
Jon closes his critique with:
And then when they say "This disagrees with the Lambda-CDM prediction at 99%, which is less than three sigma," they do not adequately give attention to the fact that the prediction itself is not even 50% sure, and that the prediction is basically a guess, and that the new result found at less than 3 sigma is predicated on a guess that can't even be expressed in terms of sigmas.
