Back to Home

Blackholes Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes I | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Renormalization Math Tells You Anything You Want To Hear.

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics
Posted by J Raymond Redbourne on March 12, 2001 17:44:43 UTC

“Renormalization” is another mathematical dodge around awkward facts. The physicist/cosmologist comes up with a pet theory to which he/she is emotionally attached, because it’s his/her baby. Then this person starts to work on the certifying mathematics. Well, if it turns out the mathematical answer is nowhere near where the mechanics say it should be, no problem. This is what “constants” and “factors” were invented for. To juxtapose the mechanics and mathematics, we need only throw a “correction” factor into the math. This lines them up quite nicely. And for back check, we find the correction factor is obviously correct, because it justifies the math with the obviously correct theory. The concept is easily grasped, like subtraction being checked by addition, or the Bible being correct because it says it is. That the wrong numbers may have been generated in the first place, is taken care of by the correction factor, which avoids embarrassment by certifying the original theory to 10 place accuracy. Then the computer model is built to further consolidate. It astounds, mystifies and keeps the trash out of the trade. On the other hand, as Mr. Spock said: “When logic fails, check your premises”. Ehh! What did he know about renormalization?
So what about the Cosmological Constant and the Hubble Constant? They are needed to bring the bizarre Theory Train of: Singularity, Big Bang, Inflation, Expansion, Acceleration and Burnout Death by Entropy, into a satisfying state of respectability; a bit like a whore wearing a long dress with a high collar, so no one suspects she has the clap when she’s out shopping for new panties. In fairness tho’, there are some professionals who do not like the application of Silly Putty to plug holes in their theories. They prefer to keep working to solve the disparities legitimately. They don’t make much money tho’, because fund providers want answers, not problems.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins