Pipes Magazine » General Discussion

Search Forums  
   
Tags:  No tags yet. 

Was Copernicus Wrong? Is Our Solar System the Center of the Universe?

(38 posts)
  1. numbersix

    numbersix

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 5,695

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    This is so cool that I had to share it here - many thanks to Brian64 for bringing it to my attention. Mind you, this is another "out there" topic, so bear with me.
    I will try to be brief. Basically, scientists have discovered the potentially earth shattering possibility that our very own solar system is "cosmically" aligned with the entire universe.

    Here is a PDF written by Dragan Huterer, a theoretical cosmologist and a professor in the department of physics at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor that outlines the discovery:

    http://www-personal.umich.edu/~huterer/PRESS/CMB_Huterer.pdf

    This was written back in 2007 and basically states that through the study of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), scientists have noticed something that shouldn't be - namely that our entire universe seems to be split into a "cold" portion and a "warm" section and that this split is miraculously aligned with our very own solar ecliptic.

    According to our current theories of a "random" universe filled with countless galaxies, this simply should not, could not be. If true, it implies that our little solar system is cosmically very significant. This is an image from the PDF:


    Picture Credit: Astronomy: Roen Kelly; multipole map: Dragan Huterer

    There's a new documentary coming out this month on the topic - check out the trailer:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfHPSH-PGw4
    The Principle

    And here is a shorter article that sums things up:

    https://medium.com/we-are-in-a-special-place/the-principle-movie-8b99ee2d3466

    What's especially interesting is that in the PDF linked at top, Huterer states that once we have a newer detailed map from the Planck Telescope, we should be able to prove whether or not this anomaly is really there. As mentioned, this article was written in 2007 and we now do have new information back from the Planck telescope and it actually confirms the earlier findings.

    Scientists have labeled this the "Axis of Evil" because it has the potential to destroy our current understanding of the universe.

    "Be seeing you"


    Posted 4 years ago #
  2. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Anonymous

    Unregistered

    Posts: 926

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Thanks for this very interesting post. Fill your pipes boys and girls 'cause there's gonna be some cosmic discussions here.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  3. kcghost

    kcghost

    Preferred Member
    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 2,385

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    How does this show that Copernicus is wrong? All he said was that the earth circled the Sun not vice versa.

    It has only been proposed in the last 30 years that the Universe has no Center.

    I thought the WMAP satellite study pretty much showed a uniform dappling of heat through the universe.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  4. dryseason91

    dryseason91

    Senior Member
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 387

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Where's Starcat when you need him...

    Tenants of the house,
    Thoughts of a dry brain in a dry season.
    - 'Gerontion'
    Posted 4 years ago #
  5. numbersix

    numbersix

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 5,695

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    How does this show that Copernicus is wrong? All he said was that the earth circled the Sun not vice versa.

    lol - sorry, I was being a bit over dramatic for the title.

    To be honest, this whole subject is not proven one way or the other - but so far, from the multiple articles and abstracts I've read, scientists cannot dismiss it - though many would like to because it challenges current models of the universe.

    I thought the WMAP satellite study pretty much showed a uniform dappling of heat through the universe.

    Yes, that is the basic idea, until [they say] one takes a step back for a bigger picture. Read the PDF for a fuller description, its an interesting read.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  6. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,650

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    As of two days ago center of the universe is my brand new, low mileage, single owner, grandson! No theories or scientific gobbledygook required as this just is the current state of life as I know it! No arguments brooked!

    Fascinating information. Seems something is always popping up to unsettle the accepted scientific "facts" and theories.

    A man without a shillelagh is a man without an expedient.
    Posted 4 years ago #
  7. natibo

    natibo

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Nov 2013
    Posts: 649

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I am the center of the universe and since I'm currently on Earth, this makes sense.

    Bo
    Posted 4 years ago #
  8. numbersix

    numbersix

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 5,695

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I am the center of the universe and since I'm currently on Earth, this makes sense.

    lol!

    Posted 4 years ago #
  9. drwatson

    drwatson

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 1,806

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    This is a great topic to watch. Think of the ramifications if we are the center of the universe. Hmmmmm! makes one think, now I'm going to have pipe and think on it.

    John
    Posted 4 years ago #
  10. alex87

    alex87

    Member
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 197

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I love this kind of subject. Thank you for posting. Now to sit back with a bowl and think about it all.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  11. anthonyrosenthal74

    anthonyrosenthal74

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2013
    Posts: 7,493

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    A single bowl of tobacco to contemplate this subject simply is not enough. This is, I think, a three pipe problem.

    Arrrrr, shiver me timbers! International Talk Like a Pirate Day is September the 19th!!!
    Brothers Of The Black Frigate
    Posted 4 years ago #
  12. cobguy

    Darin

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 3,938

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Thanks for the post numbersix ... I'll be looking for that documentary.

    Last night I watched a show on the Cosmos and they showed the Super-Kamiokande Neutrino Detector.

    It's 1/2 mile underground, contains 50,000 tons of pure water and has over 11,000 photomultiplier tubes.

    Google up some videos of that place if you haven't seen it!

    Posted 4 years ago #
  13. cosmicfolklore

    Cosmic

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Aug 2013
    Posts: 18,233

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    It's this sort of stuff that keeps getting us made fun of at the Galactic Empire. Why just the other day, a Wookiee wouldn't hold the transporter for me.

    Michael
    Posted 4 years ago #
  14. numbersix

    numbersix

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 5,695

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Thanks guys - glad to know that others here like this type of stuff too.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  15. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Anonymous

    Unregistered

    Posts: 1,080

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    The earth and America are only the center of the universe if you are a Republican...

    Posted 4 years ago #
  16. lucky695

    lucky695

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Apr 2013
    Posts: 800

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Dude I sooooo have the munchies right now... far out man...

    "A pipe gives a wise man time to think and a fool something to stick in his mouth." - C.S. Lewis
    Posted 4 years ago #
  17. woodsroad

    woodsroad

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 8,497

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Yank that chain a little harder, Patrick, it doesn't hurt enough yet! Actually, I think the same can be said of isolationists in general, and they run the political gamut.

    What is so cool about this theory is that it pulls the rug out from under scientific dogma. And I just love it when the proven is proven to be possibly not proven. It's better than being proven to be wrong,only to be replaced with something else that is proven, because it injects a butt load of doubt into the world, something we can always use more of.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  18. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,650

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I doubt that!

    Posted 4 years ago #
  19. mso489

    mso489

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Feb 2013
    Posts: 26,379

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    That's an interesting iconoclastic revision of the current prevailing concept of the universe. By this scheme, is the earth at the
    center of the big bang? It seems unlikely. Or is it only aligned with some conceptual center of the universe. This cosmologist
    sounds like his tenure may be going to his head. However, a lot of revolutionary concepts start out as crackpot ideas. The
    Nobel Laureate Barbara McClintock started out as the laughing stock of genetics meetings, with her cock-and-bull studies of
    jumping jeans, until gradually she was proven correct. No one was laughing when they awarded her the Nobel. She allowed as
    how she might get herself, with the money, a new pair of sneakers. She was pulling everyone's chain. She continued her work
    at Cold Harbor on Long Island, honored, revered, and quite eccentric.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  20. toby67

    toby67

    Senior Member
    Joined: Sep 2014
    Posts: 447

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Had to save that top PDF for later reading, this is a subject I think Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory would love.

    I like universal subjects as it makes for good contemplation, thank you for sharing.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  21. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,256

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    What is so cool about this theory is that it pulls the rug out from under scientific dogma. And I just love it when the proven is proven to be possibly not proven. It's better than being proven to be wrong,only to be replaced with something else that is proven, because it injects a butt load of doubt into the world, something we can always use more of.

    +1

    It is amazing how many cutting edge discoveries, from quantum physics to astrophysics, (and in literally every other field as well) have brought many long-standing dogmas of western science into serious question.

    The most fundamental question, imo, is whether consciousness is an artifact of matter, or matter an artifact of consciousness. From the former perspective, the case being made by the information in the OP makes little sense...but from the latter it makes much sense.

    “Bipartisan usually means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out.” – George Carlin
    Posted 4 years ago #
  22. philobeddoe

    Philo Beddoe

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Oct 2011
    Posts: 4,553

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    This looks like a shill for the "intelligent design" crowd. If you choose to believe in a higher being, then cool, go with that, just don't try to mix up your religion with science. I am tired of these so-called debates about established scientific knowledge. This is the evangelical right wing crowd trying to disprove science as just a theory. Just because we don't necessarily have all the answers to every conceivable physics question is no cause to add metaphysics into the discussion. If you cannot find the scientific answer to a question you keep searching, maybe for many years, you don't get to fill in the blank space in your equation with "and then a miracle happens" as a crutch to actual scientific research, or to try to prove your religious point of view!

    "So it goes." - K.V.
    Posted 4 years ago #
  23. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Anonymous

    Unregistered

    Posts: 926

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Just because we don't necessarily have all the answers to every conceivable physics question is no cause to add metaphysics into the discussion.

    Until relatively recently, metaphysics never needed to be added to any scientific discussion as it was an assumed by scientists and others that the universe was not solely material. From what I understand, metaphysics (or whatever you want to call it) was rather purposefully subtracted from scientific discussions rather late in the game. It seems worthy to question whether reductionist materialism has been a help or hindrance to our scientific imagination. I definitely think it's a hindrance.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  24. numbersix

    numbersix

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 5,695

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    This looks like a shill for the "intelligent design" crowd.

    Astute observation phil. I did some digging and the documentary is indeed made by a Christian and while he interviews everyone including atheists, he is also giving airtime to Christians.

    FWIW, I am not a Christian exactly, but I am okay with his interviewing Christians because an open minded discussion should include all sides, even if I don't agree with all of their conclusions.

    Nevertheless, the science is real and has been confirmed by the scientific community. What conclusions can be drawn is up for grabs, but to the more open minded of us, it does hint that there may be more to our existence than was previously believed, especially by the materialist mindset.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  25. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,256

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    It seems worthy to question whether reductionist materialism has been a help or hindrance to our scientific imagination. I definitely think it's a hindrance.

    +1

    @Tom: Good sleuthing. I know nothing about the documentary. It's important not to confuse it with the actual science involved.

    One of the greatest misconceptions many people have is that essentially all credible, credentialed, experienced scientists agree on the major tenets of their respective fields. This is simply not true. Many things that are commonly presented to the general public as established scientific facts are in reality just theories that are not fully supported by all of the known facts, and are not agreed upon by all credible scientists...only by those who are pushing the established agenda.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  26. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,650

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    brian64: Your considered response could be affixed to so many threads. Very well said!

    Posted 4 years ago #
  27. drwatson

    drwatson

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 1,806

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I love when we start using REALLY big words!

    Posted 4 years ago #
  28. puffdoggie

    puffdoggie

    Senior Member
    Joined: Dec 2013
    Posts: 420

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Every Labrador Retriever is the center of it's own universe. We have two. Seeing universes collide can be quite comical. Refute that.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  29. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,650

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    puffdoggie: I have but one who is now my constant companion. They never grow up and are always good for a laugh. And you are entirely correct: "It's all about the dog!"

    Posted 4 years ago #
  30. yaddy306

    yaddy306

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Aug 2013
    Posts: 1,217

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    One of the greatest misconceptions many people have is that essentially all credible, credentialed, experienced scientists agree on the major tenets of their respective fields. This is simply not true. Many things that are commonly presented to the general public as established scientific facts are in reality just theories that are not fully supported by all of the known facts, and are not agreed upon by all credible scientists...only by those who are pushing the established agenda.

    Brian64, I have quite a few problems with what you posted.

    First, you imply that "mainstream" scientists are somehow in cahoots to push some kind of agenda. While there may be some funding mechanisms that encourage certain results, a scientist gets very little reward for confirming the results of other scientists; a well conducted study that explodes a well-accepted view is much more likely to attract fame, further research dollars and a flurry of research by others.

    Second, you don't seem to understand what a scientific theory is, based on your phrase "just a theory". Scientific theories are not simply conjecture or wild-ass guesses; they are testable, reliable and well established explanations of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast array of evidence. For example, the atomic theory of matter and germ theory are not just "possible explanations" of nature, they are much much more than that.

    Third, scientists are often not the best communicators. Their work is oftentimes highly technical in nature and difficult to understand. Non-specialists gain their knowledge not from the original scientific article, but from a newspaper article, TV news bite, or Internet article. These are all written by members of the Media, which simplifies, condenses, and sensationalizes scientific papers for the purpose of selling magazines, newspapers, etc. So if a medical researcher investigating a cancer drug has some success in mediating a water channel molecule in t-cells, and concludes that more studies need to be done but not to extrapolate from in vitro to in vivo, the newspaper headline will read "Cure For Cancer Found!". Or "Oatbran Lowers Cholesterol!". The media often oversimplifies or exaggerates the study, or twists the scientist's words for their own purposes. Don't blame the scientist: blame the messenger.

    I'm not a cosmologist, and am not really interested in it, but my recollection is that in the last 30 years scientists have vacillated from "the universe is static" to "the universe is expanding but slowing down" to "the universe is accelerating in growth". I could be wrong, but I don't think there is an "established agenda" that is being "pushed" by scientists in this field.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  31. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,650

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Scientists, and there are many, who subsist on government grants are very much aware of from whom their salaries come, how the equipment is funded, and that those moneys are very dependent on arousing the public so that the politicians will keep the moneys flowing.

    This is not an indictment on all or, indeed, any research scientist. It is only pragmatic for people to look after the welfare of themselves and their families. Also, the research is important in and of itself and should have a level of public funding as the public will generally be the beneficiaries of the research.

    The media plays a part in the "spins" as do the Universities pushing for increased funding.

    This is, as so much in life is, a multifaceted problem and not easy to grasp. There are as many slip-shod scientists as there are slip shod auto mechanics or other incompetents in all levels of society. A theory is based on accepted ideas and facts, not necessarily proved. A theorem, by accepted definition, is a bit closer to fact. But, neither theories or theorems can be said to be absolutes. They are simply possible answers to questions which are usually based accepted data and knowledge. As new facts or data is uncovered theories must evolve. If the new "facts" or "findings" are skewed or altered to support a theory then . . . then, the big problems arise and scientists loose creditability. And the root of such behavior is most usually, not always as sometimes gaining or protecting a reputation is at stake, money.

    Or, have my many years made me too cynical.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  32. numbersix

    numbersix

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 5,695

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    First, you imply that "mainstream" scientists are somehow in cahoots to push some kind of agenda.

    I cannot speak for Brian, but there are scientists who actually make this claim. I will use climate change as an example. Mind you, I believe the climate is changing, I am just not convinced it's due to humans.

    My reasons are that the planets in our solar system are undergoing big changes as well. And there are stories like these (below) that make me question the man-made theory:

    A BBC report on the sun’s dimming: “Paradoxically, the decline in sunlight may mean that global warming is a far greater threat to society than previously thought.” bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/dimming_prog_summary.shtml

    “The amount of cosmic rays reaching Earth is largely controlled by the Sun, and many solar scientists believe the star’s indirect influence on Earth’s global climate has been underestimated.” news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2333133.stm

    There's plenty of scientists who don't go along with the official story, but some have admitted that if they do not go along, they may lose tenure or funding. This hints at an agenda.

    Here's some examples:

    “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” – U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

    “The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” – Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

    “I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” – Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

    And then there's this guy:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2630958/I-victimised-challenging-zealots-says-Professor-Poison-plots-battle-neuter-climate-change-critics.html

    "He said many scientists with dissenting views were having their research rejected by the editors of scientific journals, and young scientists were censoring their work out of fear for their careers."

    Posted 4 years ago #
  33. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,256

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    @ Warren and Tom: +1...well said. IMO, there is no greater example of agenda driven, junk science being peddled by the establishment as settled absolute fact than "anthropogenic global warming".

    @Yaddy: Also well said, but we will just have to agree to disagree. I only wish I could believe there is a high level of integrity in "mainstream science". Unfortunately, based on so many things that I have read and heard over the years, I am convinced that much of it is most definitely agenda driven, rising to a very high level of corruption in many cases.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  34. cortezattic

    Cortez

    A part of the problem since he ...
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 14,737

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    brian64 +1

    @Thomas,

    is the earth at the center of the big bang? It seems unlikely.
    As I understand it, the "center" of the Big Bang is everywhere.

    Thanks, SIX, for an interesting post. It's most interesting that the Planck measurements confirm the WMAP observations.

    With no explanation for the dark matter and energy that constitutes ~96% of the observable universe, it doesn't surprise me
    that there are serious gaps in our understanding. Our theories about the cosmic microwave background, and how to properly
    observe it, obviously need some revision.

    I find myself sitting idly on the line dividing past and future,
    as if I could kill time without injuring eternity. -- Thoreau
    Posted 4 years ago #
  35. sablebrush52

    sablebrush52

    The Bard Of Barlings
    Joined: Jun 2013
    Posts: 9,787

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Fun stuff! Coming from a family of scientists, one of them quite eminent in the field of lunar geology, I grew up around lively discussion and debate around scientific theories, claims, and agendas. The idea that the scientific community is a monolith is bunk, evident by the existence of wide debate. Agendas do exist, whether to score points to receive money for research, or to gain status as an outside contrarian by publicly decrying such practices, or any of a thousand different variations. Having an agenda is not synonymous with evil intent. Everyone has agendas. Skepticism is healthy. But willful rejection of proven data because it doesn't fit one's preconceptions isn't something that I personally find admirable. YMMV

    It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. - Mark Twain

    It is pointless to argue with a fanatic since a dim bulb can't be converted into a searchlight. - Jesse Silver
    Posted 4 years ago #
  36. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Anonymous

    Unregistered

    Posts: 3,311

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    This looks like a shill for the "intelligent design" crowd. If you choose to believe in a higher being, then cool, go with that, just don't try to mix up your religion with science. I am tired of these so-called debates about established scientific knowledge. This is the evangelical right wing crowd trying to disprove science as just a theory. Just because we don't necessarily have all the answers to every conceivable physics question is no cause to add metaphysics into the discussion. If you cannot find the scientific answer to a question you keep searching, maybe for many years, you don't get to fill in the blank space in your equation with "and then a miracle happens" as a crutch to actual scientific research, or to try to prove your religious point of view!

    I dont know...if you change a few words around in your rant, it could certainly be said about the left...The piltdown man, Margaret Mead, Climatic Research Unit email, etc...the left investgates itself, finds no wrongdong, and now we are suppose to jump back on the com-lib train of global warming.

    The left has been not just mixing their religion up with science, their core fundamentalist doctrines drive them.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  37. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Anonymous

    Unregistered

    Posts: 3,086

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    In the field I work in the rejection of proven data = Whore.

    It always makes me wonder when people use science as a weapon instead of a tool. The Scientific Method encourages the user to make aggressive hypotheses and then make even more aggressive attempts to disprove them. If they stand that scrutiny they are considered reliable IF THEY CAN BE PROPERLY PEER REVIEWED.

    Science matters deeply.......agendas and bias.......not so much.

    ****The above comment isn't a dig at the Threads Info......it's a comment on the proper use of science.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  38. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Anonymous

    Unregistered

    Posts: 3,311

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I agree..wherever the science leads us should be used for the betterment of mankind.

    I am tired of junk science mandating policies that are counterproductive to human life while they supposedly are in our best interests, and they either raid the treasury for their own nest feathering, payback to organizations like the Sierra club, or raid our wallets as the price of goods skyrockets...we are now in the process of bakrupting the coal industry...boldy proclaimed by idealogues...now that we have the cleanest coal burnng facilities ever. Rachel Carson's bs about DDT, lack of proper forestry management resulting in holocaustic fires, Planting wolf fur in forests to re-establish habitat, and the mythical dangers of second and thirdhand smoke....the list goes on and on.

    But if you are a leftist "researcher", the fact that they "care" is all we should be concerned with.

    Posted 4 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.

 

banner

 

    Back To Top  | Back to Forum Home Page

   Members Online Now
   jaytex969, elpfeife, 64alex, canucklehead, craig61a, oldtoby, trudger, yuda, gerryp, lightxmyfire, bluegrassbrian, rsobel993