Modern Day Science ... Fiction

Modern Day Science ... Fiction

I'm a great fan of science. However, a lot of modern day science has little to do with good solid scientific rigor.

Take this article for example in a magazine called ScienceAlert - it should be renamed BullshitAlert:

A Physicist Quantified The Amount of Information in The Entire Observable Universe, ScienceAlert, 20th of October 2021.

Apparently, some scientist has worked out that the amount of information in the Universe is of the order 6e80 bits. Before such an analysis was undertaken if you would have asked me what the result would be I'd have said a really big number. You'd have to take all the mass in the Universe (which is already a big number) and multiple it by another big number, and guess what - I'm right that you end up with a really big number. OK, not very rigorous but here's the thing - what difference does it make if the number is 6 to the power 80 or 6 to the power 50 or 6 to the power 200? It makes no difference because the original task of trying to determine how much information is flawed to begin with and inherently unanswerable. Also, and here's the key, whatever the number arrived at no one can really question and take to task the so-called scientist because at the end of the day no one will ever know the true answer.

This is the kind of reasoning that covers a lot of modern day science. It borders on science fiction and a variant of religious faith. Whereas science of the days gone by was interested in the here, now and experimentally verifiable, unlike much of what is undertaken by these peddlers of pseudo-science. Parallel universes - you'll never leave this one. Black holes - you'll never encounter one. What happened within the first second of the Big Bang - you'll never know. What came before the Universe - you'll never know. What lies outside the observable and expanding Universe - you'll never find out. Is there alien life on a star 420 light years away - you're never going to know. And so on and so on. This is not science but science fiction.

Cox

One of the worst peddlers in this kind of horse manure is Brian Cox:

Prof Brian Cox: “I want to launch Boris Johnson into space”, Science Focus, 19th of October 2021.

I'd like to launch him on a one way trip into deep space - I can't stick the man. In this article he waffles on about his latest TV show about the unprovable. He states:

"...I say right at the beginning that the value of astronomy and cosmology is not so much about the things we discover. It’s the fact that it challenges us. ..."

Nah, it's about what is discovered and proven!

"...we are a tiny speck in a vast and possibly infinite Universe ..."

Give us a break!

"...I think the most valuable thing about science is that it forces us to, first of all, recognise what reliable knowledge is. ..."

Hold on a minute, I thought it was about challenging us and not reliable knowledge!

"....The stuff we don’t know now is fairly profound and fundamental. And that’s ultimately what the series is about. ..."

Wrong again - science is about what we do know. How far would Newton or Einstein have gone if they'd have said "There's lots of things I don't know the answer to." Not very far. But the bullshitters love this kind of non-quantifiable aspect.

Just listen to this nonsense:

"...I’ve made loads of films about stars. Lots of people have made films about stars. And so we thought, what does the story of the stars really tell us? We realised that we don’t know where it was or what it was like, but there was a time before the stars. ..."

He's made films about stars - right. Other people have made films about stars - right, I think I'm with you. And so what does the "story" [this is not fiction] tell us? "we don’t know where it was or what it was like" - what??

Honestly, the guy is impossible. He's full of crap, endlessly regurgitating verbal diarrhea.

It would appear that I am not alone in seeing through Cox's bullshit:

Universe, episode 1 review: Brian Cox is slow-talking himself into self-parody, Telegraph, 27th of October 2021.

Did You Know the Universe is the Work Not of BigG But Of Aliens?

Here's another bullshit study that wasted taxpayers money [yes, the taxpayer funds academic institutions] by someone called Avi Loeb who goes by the title of Professor and was a member of the department of astronomy at Harvard University, no less:

Was Our Universe Created in a Laboratory?, Scientific American, 15th of October 2021.

He writes:

"... A less explored possibility is that our universe was created in the laboratory of an advanced technological civilization. Since our universe has a flat geometry with a zero net energy, an advanced civilization could have developed a technology that created a baby universe out of nothing through quantum tunneling. This possible origin story unifies the religious notion of a creator with the secular notion of quantum gravity. ..."

That's enough of that dribble. I emphasised the key word in the text in bold.

I could submit an article to Scientific American claiming that the Universe is the byproduct of the baking of a very large Victoria sponge cake, and the journal editor would have just as much chance verifying my speculation as that of this so-called scientist.

Stop the Press

Stop the press! Maybe there wasn't a Big Bang after all:

Surprise: the Big Bang isn’t the beginning of the universe anymore, Big Think, 13th of October 2021.

When the Universe is Going to Stop Expanding

Another piece of modern day science bullshit was the study by Cosmin Andrei from Princeton University and Co as to when the Universe is going to stop expanding:

The Universe's Expansion Could End Surprisingly Soon, Say Cosmologists, Discover, 26th of January 2022.

You could fill a book with this kind of non-science. They state that the minimum time before the acceleration ends is “strikingly soon, cosmologically speaking”. “In fact, they can be compared to geologic timescales,”. And so what would that be exactly? The article informs us:

"In one scenario they say the minimum time remaining before the end of expansion is roughly equal to the period since life has existed on Earth. That’s 3 or 4 billion years. In another scenario, they calculate that “the time interval remaining before the end of acceleration is less than the time since the Chicxulub asteroid brought an end to the dinosaurs.” That’s just 65 million years—the blink of an eye in cosmological terms."

Right, we've got some numbers to work with. The Universe will stop expanding anywhere between 65 million years and 4 billion years. Do you think you could narrow it down a little guys? Let's say the Universe is 14 billion years old. So, they are saying that it will stop expanding between 0.5% and 29% of the Universe's existence. It's bullshit isn't it! What kind of analysis gives lower and upper bounds 3,935 million years apart?

Let's have a down to Earth analogy. You stop me on the railway platform and ask "Excuse me for bothering you, but do you know when the next train will be arriving?", to which I reply "Yes - it will be anytime between the next 5 minutes and 18 years.".

I could write articles or go on TV and say that the Universe will stop expanding anywhere between 50 million years and 5,000 million years, and guess what - readers and viewers would think I was a nutter, and rightly so.

Dark Side of the Moon

Consider this New Scientist article:

Double-shadowed moon craters may be coldest place in the solar system, New Scientist, 14th of March 2022.


It states that there are cratars on the Moon that "may be the coldest" in the solar system. Later it changes this to "some of the coldest". Which is it to be? "may" or "some"?


"may be" and "some of" are not scientific terminology. "Is the coldest" or "Is not the coldest" are definitive. Science doesn't deal in ifs and buts, as some people would like to make you believe. Imagine a world in which people walked around saying things like "2 + 2 may equal 4", "1 - 1 is sometimes equal to 0", ... It would be a bullshit world.


Thus, after reading an article such as this that states "may be the coldest" and "some of the coldest", you are left with no additional information than when you began reading the dross. You are still in doubt as to whether these are or are not the coldest places in the solar system. Also, the solar system is a big place and has every dark shadow been investigated? No, and until it is we'll never know the answer. Thus, we conclude this article is pure bullshit and adds nothing to our scientific understanding of the coldest places in the solar system.

Anti-Universe

We've all heard of the bullshit that is anti-matter, well the pseudo scientists have now come up with the anti-universe:

Our universe may have a twin that runs backward in time, Live Science, March 2022.

It states; with bullshit in bold:

"An anti-universe running backwards in time could explain dark matter and cosmic inflation. A wild new theory suggests there may be another "anti-universe," running backward in time prior to the Big Bang."

Some people don't understand the difference between theory and conjecture.