“There is No Alternative to the Big Bang Cosmology” – a closed-minded argument of Big Bang Supporters

Supporters of Big Bang Cosmology often come up with this argument. Recently, a Philosopher of Science, Dr. Bjørn Ekeberg (PhD) published a Philosophic themed book from the platform of a reputed University that pointed out some problems of Big Bang Cosmology. The first response from the Big Bang Supporters that he faced was this title […]

Cosmologists are finding new problems in their model yet they are not ready to accept that Universe is not Expanding

The latest story is that after finding that expansion rate of Universe is 9% faster than previously thought now they recalculate the age of Universe and say it must be one billion years younger than previous estimate of 13.8 billion years. The new estimate is around 12.5 billion years. The universe may be a billion […]

Does Philosophy teach us anything?

Basically supporters of modern official science frequently raise this question only to make a point as if Philosophy actually cannot teach anything. The answer is that Philosophy teaches us our right limits. We do not claim to have hard knowledge of things beyond of our limits. With philosophy we find the logical boundary of any […]

Some indications of Pseudoscience in Theoretical Physics

Official Theoretical Physicists always blame any non-official stance on science matters as pseudoscience. However following clear indications of pseudoscience are common in official Theoretical Physics. 1- Out of proportion claims – We see redshifts and say “Universe is expanding”. 2- Claim to have sort out all the reality – like GR has the claim that […]

Newton, Theoretical Physics, Rationalism Philosophy and Natural Philosophy

Newton was Theoretical Physicist … (a point of view) Well, basically Newton was Natural Philosopher. English Translation title of his Principlia Mathematica is “The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy”. Newton was not Theoretical Physicist. He was greatest Natural Philosopher however. While every Science or Philosophy must have to start from a point, The unique sign […]

If Doppler’s Effect is not the reason of Cosmological Redshifts then what is the Reason?

First thing is that it is not due to Doppler’s Effect. Now suppose we have no alternative explanation. So should we accept Doppler’s Effect as winner simply because there is no contestant? Doppler’s effect is “redshift-speed” relationship. Cosmological Redshift is “redshift-distance” relationship. It is possible that a car is receding from us at uniform speed. At […]

Theoretical Physics is a form of Rationalism Philosophy:

Theoretical Physics is a form of Rationalism Philosophy. Rationalism is all about ‘deducing’ details of reality from first principles. In today’s Theoretical Physics, certain ‘first principles’ or ‘frameworks’ (GR and QM) have been worked out. Here ‘logical deduction’ part has been replaced by ‘Mathematical Derivation’. There is no essential difference between deduction and derivation. Essentially, […]

Philosophical Approach Vs. Contemporary ‘Scientific’ Approach

Present day science — specifically Theoretical Physics is based on body of knowledge and rigid frameworks already worked out by various scientists during the last hundred years. New scientist is required to take start from the point where previous scientists had reached. This system, by and large, works on trust that overall body of knowledge […]

de-Sitter effect and the actual ‘prediction’ of redshift-distance relationship in year 1917:

Fritz Zwicky (so called father of dark matter) had proposed various alternative mechanisms to explain redshifts in those early days but he himself accepted that they did not work as expected. Since all other ‘mechanisms’ failed … so only the ‘velocity’ mechanism survived. But that was not just the survival of fittest thing. Hubble was skeptical of […]