by paladin17 » Mon Jul 19, 2021 1:33 pm
antosarai wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:21 pm
Well, many people here and on other EU sites predict/hope LCDM will crumble for many different reasons
Paradigm cannot crumble. It is just an idea, after all (or rather a set of ideas). In a way, it is immortal.
I guess what you mean by "crumbling" is that
less people would by default appeal to this paradigm to describe the world. Then the statement makes sense. But I wouldn't rely on it, as there are simply no reasons for them to do so - at the moment.
antosarai wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:21 pm
I wonder was it considered should such change come to be, from a scientific point of view what would be gained, what would be lost? Say, considering the mainstream and electric model of the sun, causes of redshift, and so on?
I believe, you're considering the process backwards. In reality one should first show how much more would be gained (in comparison to what would be lost) with the alternative paradigm for it to become popular (gain political resource) in the first place.
And currently, there isn't much. Aside from isolated works of people like Alfven, Peratt, Verschuur etc. the alternative paradigm is way under-developed.
[quote=antosarai post_id=5420 time=1626697315 user_id=29433]
Well, many people here and on other EU sites predict/hope LCDM will crumble for many different reasons
[/quote]
Paradigm cannot crumble. It is just an idea, after all (or rather a set of ideas). In a way, it is immortal.
I guess what you mean by "crumbling" is that [i]less people would by default appeal to this paradigm to describe the world[/i]. Then the statement makes sense. But I wouldn't rely on it, as there are simply no reasons for them to do so - at the moment.
[quote=antosarai post_id=5420 time=1626697315 user_id=29433]
I wonder was it considered should such change come to be, from a scientific point of view what would be gained, what would be lost? Say, considering the mainstream and electric model of the sun, causes of redshift, and so on?
[/quote]
I believe, you're considering the process backwards. In reality one should first show how much more would be gained (in comparison to what would be lost) with the alternative paradigm for it to become popular (gain political resource) in the first place.
And currently, there isn't much. Aside from isolated works of people like Alfven, Peratt, Verschuur etc. the alternative paradigm is way under-developed.