Subir Sarkar - Dominik J. Schwarz : Challenging the cosmological principle

Online seminar in the "Newton 1665" series.

[@hanswurst2490]

What I like very much is "scepticism". Too few of such topics. Is may be not popular to admit not knowing. But it makes things much more "scientific" and thrilling. At least me would like to see more such things; even if I am a complete amateur. Those guys are very well 8n explaining it understandable!

[@SubirSarkarOxford]

Correction to what I say at 10:00 - Milne was *not* the Savillian Professor of Geometry ... rather he was the Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics. There is now a "E.A. Milne Centre for Astrophysics" at the University of Hull.

[@SubirSarkarOxford]

Also at 34:25: James Bradley was the Savilian Professor of *Astronomy* (not Geometry) at Oxford.

[@jimsteen911]

Subir I love your work and it’s regrettable that many have failed to admit the glaring problems with ΛCDM - even it’s assumptions of homogeneity and isotropy, our being copernican observers are incorrect. Furthermore it is these assumptions that lead to the famous FL- metric and which rewinds our universe to a single point. If these were incorrect, which they are, it would disrupt the foundations on which cosmology rests and many people careers/Nobel prizes would be re-examined. Not to mention these assumptions makes the GR math much easier - we would need to develop drastically the math of a metric that is lumpy and asymmetric. This is why your papers aren’t the front news stories they should be. As an outsider looking in with no skin in the game and no biases, I must say that even before your revelations became known to me there were still many discrepancies in this so beloved model that’s taught to our children as cold hard fact. I look forward to the day cosmology joins the ranks of serious science without so many crutches and assumptions once again. Thank you sir!

[@pedrosura]

“this expansion breaks down at high red shifts” Halton Arp pointed out reasons why we should question whether or not red shift can be solely be explained by recessional velocities. I think these resutls should put into question this assumption.

[@NuisanceMan]

Superb and disturbing!

[@naimulhaq9626]

I am not a cosmologist, I wonder if cosmology should incorporate fine tuned parameter space to describe the universe, conjectured by Maldacena to be a quantum computing function (algorithm unknown), but deterministic, eliminating randomness/chance?

[@lepidoptera9337]

You are wasting your time on too much bullshit.

[@frun]

How does this affect the big bang theory?

[@NuisanceMan]

Yes, I'd LOVE to hear someone informed expound on this!

[@pholzman2918]

Near the end he states we need new physics and also that we need a new standard model. Since the big bang is an integral part of the current standard model, my interpretation is that the B.B. also needs to be seriously questioned rather than just be assumed.

[@frun]

@@NuisanceMan I believe there is a "center of the universe" after all, as the metric is not that symmetric.

[@dragossorin85]

@@pholzman2918 What do you mean by B.B?

[@pholzman2918]

@@dragossorin85 B.B. is big bang.

[@SubornaKhatun-b5k]

Martin Scott Davis Susan Hall Scott

[@scenFor109]

Too many abusive, sovereign *cult,* advertiser interruptions. Abusive advertisers offer no way to say 'NO' without a monopoly payoff. Abusive advertisers profit from militarily enforced Exclusive Economic Zones, monopoly currency, and Apartheid concentration camps commonly known as My Country or My Nation. Remember that a statement of sovereignty is not secular.

[@mrknesiah]

Modern physics is rife with circular arguments. You can get people out of religion but you can’t get religion out of people.