Inflationary cosmology is real science
On this thread, it is not just a matter of claiming that inflationary cosmology is deficient, or even just plain wrong. It is a matter of Michael Mozina claiming that inflationary cosmology does not qualify as science at all, by any standard. I find that to be a preposterous notion. So here I present just a few examples of the recent, valid scientific literature on inflationary cosmology. Read the papers for yourself, to the extent that you can, and decide for yourself if this is a valid scientific undertaking. And do note that by "valid" I do not mean to imply "correct" in any way. I mean
only that the methodology employed constitutes a valid exercise of the scientific discipline. We all know that it is quite possible to be eminently scientific but at the same time quite wrong.
Lectures on inflation and cosmological perturbations
David Langlois
56 pages, 5 figures; Lectures given at the
Second TRR33 Winter School on cosmology, Passo del Tonale (Italy), December 2008
Abstract - "The purpose of these lectures is to give a pedagogical introduction to inflation and the production of primordial perturbations, as well as a review of some of the latest developments in this domain. After a short introduction, we review the main principles of the Hot Big Bang model, as well as its limitations. This motivates the study of cosmological inflation induced by a slow-rolling scalar field. We then turn to the analysis of cosmological perturbations, and explain how the vacuum quantum fluctuations are amplified during an inflationary phase. The next step consists in relating the perturbations generated during inflation to the perturbations of the cosmological fluid in the radiation dominated phase. The final part of these lectures gives a review of more general models of inflation, involving multiple fields or non standard kinetic terms. Although more complicated, these models are usually motivated by high energy physics and they can lead to specific signatures that are not expected in the simplest models of inflation. After introducing a very general formalism to describe perturbations in multi-field models with arbitrary kinetic terms, several interesting cases are presented. We also stress the role of entropy perturbations in the context of multi-field models. Finally, we discuss in detail the non-Gaussianities of the primordial perturbations and some models that could produce a detectable level of non-Gaussianities."
Topics in Inflationary Cosmology and Astrophysics
Matthew M. Glenz
Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2008 (
Center for Gravitation and Cosmology)
Abstract - "In this dissertation, we introduce a general way of modeling inflation in a framework that is independent of the exact nature of the inflationary potential. Because of the choice of our initial conditions and the continuity of the scale factor in its first two derivatives, we obtain non-divergent results without the need for any renormalization beyond what is required in Minkowski space. The second part of this dissertation deals with a post-Minkowski approximation to a binary point mass system with helical symmetry. The third part of this dissertation discusses the detection sensitivity of the IceCube Neutrino Telescope for observing interactions involving TeV-scale black holes produced by an incoming high-energy cosmic neutrino colliding with a parton in the Antarctic ice of the South Pole. We also include in this dissertation a brief summary of relevant cosmology and an appendix giving a parameterized, exact radiation-reaction solution."
An introduction to inflation and cosmological perturbation theory
L. Sriramkumar (
Harish-Chandra Research Institute, Allahabad, India)
Invited review for
Current Science
Abstract - "This article provides an introductory review of inflation and cosmological perturbation theory. I begin by motivating the need for an epoch of inflation during the early stages of the radiation dominated era, and describe how inflation is typically achieved using scalar fields. Then, after an overview of linear cosmological perturbation theory, I derive the equations governing the perturbations, and outline the generation of the scalar and the tensor perturbations during inflation. I illustrate that slow roll inflation naturally leads to an almost scale invariant spectrum of perturbations, a prediction that seems to be in remarkable agreement with the measurements of the anisotropies of the cosmic microwave background. I describe the constraints from the recent observations on some of the more popular models of inflation. I conclude with a brief discussion on the status and certain prospects of the inflationary paradigm."
And I do point out that, although inflationary cosmology is the majority opinion, alternative theories are certainly on the table for serious consideration. The minds of the community of scientists are not as closed as some might want you to believe.
Alternatives to Cosmological Inflation
Robert H. Brandenberger
to be published in the proceedings of
CosPA08
Abstract - "The inflationary paradigm, although very successful phenomenologically, suffers from several conceptual problems which motivate the search for alternative scenarios of early universe cosmology. Here, two possible alternatives will be reviewed. - "string gas cosmology" and the "matter bounce". Their successes and problems will be pointed out."
Furthermore, see my post from June 2009,
Inflationary Cosmology and Falsifiability, quoting my earlier post
Testing Inflation from February, 2009, nearly a year ago already. I provide published papers demonstrating valid tests of inflationary cosmology against astronomical observations, a theme also represented in the papers shown above. But Mozina rejects all of this without even bothering to read the papers, because they are not controlled laboratory experiments. By Mozina's standards, anything that is not a controlled laboratory experiment does not qualify as valid science, leaving a host of practitioners of astronomy, zoology, geology, archaeology & etc. evicted from science altogether.
One must understand the ultimate & obvious truth here: Mozina is driven by a religious & philosophical compulsion that rejects all scientific reasoning that does not conform to his personal preconception of the way the world should be. To do this he will go to any length including inventing his own redefinitions of words & concepts, and the elevation of personalities to divine status, such as his demigod Alfven, who cannot have ever said or done anything regarding plasma physics which could possibly have been wrong.
Until & unless Mozina changes, there is no real value in this entire conversation except one: Pay close attention to the positions Mozina advocates and assume that the opposite is the real truth. Do that and you are not likely to go wrong.
) not the solar wind.
