Fundamental Ideas in Cosmology: Scientific, philosophical and sociological critical perspectives

245 Pages·2022·27.983 MB·English

by  Martin Lopez-Corredoira

Fundamental Ideas in Cosmology
Scientific, philosophical and sociological critical perspectives

Fundamental Ideas in Cosmology
Scientific, philosophical and sociological critical perspectives
Mart´ın L´opez-Corredoira
Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias (IAC), Canary Islands, Spain
IOP Publishing, Bristol, UK
ªIOPPublishingLtd2022
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem
ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recording
orotherwise,withoutthepriorpermissionofthepublisher,orasexpresslypermittedbylawor
undertermsagreedwiththeappropriaterightsorganization.Multiplecopyingispermittedin
accordancewiththetermsoflicencesissuedbytheCopyrightLicensingAgency,theCopyright
ClearanceCentreandotherreproductionrightsorganizations.
PermissiontomakeuseofIOPPublishingcontentotherthanassetoutabovemaybesought
[email protected].
MartínLópez-Corredoirahasassertedhisrighttobeidentifiedastheauthorofthisworkin
accordancewithsections77and78oftheCopyright,DesignsandPatentsAct1988.
ISBN 978-0-7503-3775-5(ebook)
ISBN 978-0-7503-3773-1(print)
ISBN 978-0-7503-3776-2(myPrint)
ISBN 978-0-7503-3774-8(mobi)
DOI 10.1088/978-0-7503-3775-5
Version:20220501
IOPebooks
BritishLibraryCataloguing-in-PublicationData:Acataloguerecordforthisbookisavailable
fromtheBritishLibrary.
PublishedbyIOPPublishing,whollyownedbyTheInstituteofPhysics,London
IOPPublishing,TempleCircus,TempleWay,Bristol,BS16HG,UK
USOffice:IOPPublishing,Inc.,190NorthIndependenceMallWest,Suite601,Philadelphia,
PA19106,USA
Coverimage:Cosmologyresearch,conceptualimage.Imagecredit:NicolleRFuller/Science
PhotoLibrary.
Contents
Abstract ix
Acknowledgement x
Author biography xi
1 Historical and conceptual introduction to the standard 1-1
cosmological model
1.1 Fundamental ideas in cosmology 1-1
1.2 Cosmology in western culture before the twentieth century 1-4
1.3 Origin and evolution of the standard cosmological model 1-10
1.4 Pillars of the standard model 1-18
1.4.1 General relativity and basic equations of the standard 1-18
cosmological model
1.4.2 Observational pillars 1-23
1.5 Towards a sceptical position on cosmology 1-24
References 1-27
2 Some examples of alternative cosmologies 2-1
2.1 Variations on the standard model 2-2
2.2 Quasi-steady state cosmology 2-7
2.3 Plasma cosmology 2-11
2.4 Universe as a hypersphere 2-12
2.5 Static models and/or non-cosmological redshifts 2-13
2.6 Caveats/problems in the alternative approaches 2-16
References 2-19
3 CP violation, inflation, dark matter, and dark energy 3-1
3.1 Antimatter and CP violation 3-1
3.2 Inflation 3-2
3.3 History of the idea of dark matter 3-4
3.4 Dark matter and inconsistencies of the theory on galactic scales 3-5
3.5 Dark matter particles 3-8
3.6 Scenarios without non-baryonic cold dark matter 3-9
3.7 Dark energy and the cosmological constant or quintessence 3-11
3.8 Grey… neither dark nor luminous 3-14
References 3-15
v
FundamentalIdeasinCosmology
4 Redshift and expansion 4-1
4.1 Does redshift mean expansion? 4-1
4.1.1 Alternative redshift theories 4-2
4.2 Conceptual problems of expansion 4-6
4.3 Expansion on small scales 4-6
4.4 Hubble–Lemaître constant 4-7
4.5 Observational tests for the expansion of the Universe 4-8
4.6 Anomalous redshifts 4-15
4.6.1 Periodicity of redshifts 4-18
4.6.2 Proposed tests 4-20
4.6.3 Anomalous redshift in the laboratory and in the solar system 4-22
4.7 So … is the Universe expanding or not? 4-22
References 4-23
5 The cosmic microwave background radiation 5-1
5.1 Early predictions and observations 5-2
5.2 Alternative explanations for the temperature of 2.7 K 5-2
5.3 Alternative origin of the CMBR 5-3
5.4 Microwave background radiation anisotropies 5-6
5.5 Some doubts on the validity of the foreground Galactic contribution 5-10
subtraction from microwave anisotropies
5.6 Anomalies in the anisotropies 5-15
5.7 Other background radiations 5-19
5.8 How sure can we be of the standard interpretation of the CMBR? 5-19
References 5-20
6 The abundance of light elements 6-1
6.1 Basic aspects of primordial nucleosynthesis 6-1
6.2 Helium-4 6-3
6.3 Lithium 6-5
6.4 Deuterium and helium-3 6-6
6.5 Abundances of other elements 6-6
6.6 Baryon fraction 6-7
6.7 Light element abundance without primordial nucleosynthesis 6-7
6.8 Light elements, weighty problems 6-8
References 6-9
vi
FundamentalIdeasinCosmology
7 Large-scale-structure and the formation and evolution 7-1
of galaxies
7.1 Reionization epoch 7-2
7.2 Formation and evolution of stars and galaxies in the 7-3
early Universe
7.3 Large-scale structure 7-6
7.3.1 Theories 7-6
7.3.2 Departures from homogeneity and isotropy 7-8
7.3.3 Oversized structures 7-9
7.3.4 Clusters of galaxies 7-10
7.3.5 Oversized voids 7-11
7.3.6 Streaming velocities 7-12
7.3.7 BAO peak 7-12
7.3.8 Different cosmological parameters for CMBR analyses 7-13
7.4 Large-scale problems for the standard model 7-13
References 7-14
8 Sociological factors that hinder the development of 8-1
alternative cosmological models
8.1 Deduction and induction in modern cosmology 8-2
8.1.1 The methodology of science 8-2
8.1.2 The methodology of cosmology 8-4
8.2 Cosmological models and free parameters: new epicycles? 8-6
8.3 Social dynamics of an N-cosmologist system 8-9
8.3.1 The prestige of orthodoxy 8-9
8.3.2 Funding of cosmology 8-11
8.3.3 Telescope time 8-14
8.3.4 Rejection of papers and lack of citation 8-16
8.3.5 Censorship at arXiv.org 8-18
8.3.6 Conferences 8-19
8.3.7 Groupthink 8-20
8.4 Optimism and conservatism 8-22
8.4.1 Epistemological optimism 8-22
8.4.2 Conservatism and consensus cosmology 8-23
8.5 Pluralism 8-25
References 8-27
vii
FundamentalIdeasinCosmology
9 Cosmology and culture 9-1
9.1 The influence of religion 9-2
9.1.1 Creation versus eternal Universe in western culture 9-2
9.1.2 Some authors connecting religion and modern cosmology 9-3
9.2 God, multiverse, or neither 9-5
9.2.1 Anthropic principles 9-6
9.2.2 God of the gaps 9-6
9.2.3 Fine-tuning 9-8
9.3 Binggeli’s Primum Mobile 9-11
9.4 Politics and the democratisation of cosmology 9-12
9.4.1 Prestige and entertainment 9-12
9.4.2 Cosmology influenced by the economy and social structure 9-13
9.4.3 Doctors of a new faith 9-14
9.4.4 Amateurs 9-14
9.5 Anglo-Saxon cultural colonialism 9-15
9.5.1 Analytical philosophy 9-16
9.5.2 Anglo-Saxon philosophy of cosmology 9-17
9.6 Cosmology as cultural expression 9-20
References 9-21
10 Epilogue 10-1
10.1 Cosmology: science or myth? 10-3
10.1.1 Is a science of cosmology possible? 10-3
10.1.2 Is cosmology a pure myth? 10-5
10.2 Desiderata for broadened perspectives in cosmology 10-5
10.2.1 Openmindedness 10-5
10.2.2 Modesty 10-7
10.2.3 Patience 10-8
10.2.4 Funding and professionalism 10-9
10.2.5 Broad scientific and philosophical outlook 10-10
10.3 Some closing personal remarks 10-11
References 10-11
Appendix A A-1
viii
Abstract
Cosmological hypotheses should be very cautiously proposed and even more
cautiouslyreceived.Thisscepticismiswell-founded.Therearescientific,philosoph-
ical and sociological arguments to support this claim. Cosmology is not a science
likeotherssinceitcontainsmorespeculativeelementsthanisusualinotherbranches
ofphysics,with thepossibleexception ofparticlephysics. Thegoalofcosmologyis
alsomoreambitiousthanroutinetheoriesinphysics:cosmologyaimstounderstand
everything in our Universe without limit.
Physicalobservations(redshifts, cosmic microwavebackground radiation, abun-
dance of light elements, formation and evolution of galaxies, large-scale structure)
findexplanationswithinthestandardmodel,althoughmanytimesafteranumberof
ad hoc corrections. Nevertheless, the expression ‘crisis in cosmology’ stubbornly
reverberates in the scientific literature: the higher the precision with which the
standardcosmologicalmodeltriestofitthedata,thegreaterthenumberoftensions
thatarise.Moreover,therearealternativeexplanationsformostoftheobservations.
Only the standard model is considered by most professional cosmologists, while
the challenges of the most fundamental ideas of modern cosmology are usually
neglected, owing mainly to sociological factors. Funding, research positions,
prestige, telescope time, publication in top journals, citations, conferences, and
other resources are dedicated almostexclusively tostandard cosmology.Moreover,
religious,philosophical,economic,andpoliticalideologiesinaworlddominatedby
anglophone culture also influence the contents of cosmological ideas. Nonetheless,
the Universe is no mere social construct (a typical postmodern notion). Quite the
contrary: the Universe exists independently of our human affairs. Although its
globaldescriptionmaybemisrepresentedbyourmodels,someofitspropertiesand
partial truths are derivable through scientific analysis.
ix