PSI Blog 20240318 Big Bang Theory and the “Bandwagon Fallacy”

 

Cosmogony is afflicted with a logical disease formally known in philosophy as Argumentum ad Populum.

 

Photo Credit: Dr. Douglas Giles, Philosopher

Just because an idea is popular does not mean it is correct. In science, we are supposed to determine truth through observation and experimentation on the external world—not by the popularity of the conclusions. Prof. Giles has this excellent short bit on truth (which may not be popular) and lies (which might make us feel socially acceptable):

 

 The Most Pernicious Logical Fallacy

 

 

Humanity has jumped from one myth to another throughout history. Even those who believe in acausality, still seek answers, the causes for events, such as: Why did I get a stomach ache? Could it have been something I ate? Any popular myth must build on a previous myth. As I explained in my book, "Religious Roots of Relativity,[1]" Einstein was a genius at doing so, suggesting light was a massless particle containing perfectly empty space traveling perpetually through perfectly empty space. Without the magical photon and the four dimensions of General Relativity Theory, the expanding universe misinterpretation would have been impossible. There would have been no “Last Creation Theory” that became ever popular and supremely durable.

 

Paradigm Shift

 

The Argumentum ad Populum is especially important for understanding paradigms. It was not until the 20^th Century that the word “paradigm” “began to be used in the more specific philosophical sense of ‘logical or conceptual structure serving as a form of thought within a given area of experience,’ especially in Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" (1962).[2]” Kuhn famously pointed out that the popularity of a paradigm prevents its practitioners and promoters from making revolutionary changes to it. They are ipso facto inevitably unqualified to do so.

 

Again, scientific conclusions are not supposed to be based on popularity. Unfortunately, that is not always true. For instance, the testimony of expert witnesses can be disregarded if it flies in the face of “scientific consensus.” New forensic techniques need confirmation by other scientists before they can be accepted in court. The “scientific consensus” is that the universe is expanding. Unfortunately, that is not true even though it is extremely popular.

 

Being on the outside looking into the cosmogonical paradigm does not generate much popularity. The incessant propaganda in favor of relativity and the Big Bang Theory makes the 10,000 of us who question the dogma highly unwelcome. None of that is a conspiracy or some kind of nefarious plot. It is simply a result of traditional choices favoring certain unprovable fundamental assumptions that always have opposites according to Collingwood.[3]

 

Neither Kuhn nor Collingwood said what those assumptive choices were. As a curious scientist, I got busy discovering them and found all were centered on the choice between infinity and finity.[4] That went right to the heart of cosmogony, with its surreptitious, unacknowledged assumption the universe was finite and had a beginning. Some have demurred, saying that if neither of opposed assumptions are completely provable, then it does not matter which one you choose. But that is definitely not the case. It makes all the difference on whether you assume the universe exploded out of nothing and had a beginning or you assume the Infinite Universe is everywhere and has existed forever.

 

The ultimate paradigm shift from the Big Bang Theory to Infinite Universe Theory is a really big deal—the biggest humanity will ever undergo. In view of the current popularity of religious Dreams and Imaginings™ I predict it will be at least another three decades before theoretical physics and cosmology questions and acknowledges the underlying assumptions that are becoming more clear by the day. Falsifications of the BBT continue to be ignored by regressive physicists and cosmogonists even as the James Webb Space Telescope shows no evidence for a beginning. Great shifts in science and philosophy like this one depend on a global crisis. You can see that coming with the rise of fascism and the desperation with which so-called “traditional values” are being promoted—even violently. The struggle over the world’s resources will intensify as global population growth slows and its associated economic growth declines. My guess is that the old assumptions and traditional ways of thinking, including the ones that brought us the Big Bang nonsense, will be replaced by those concordant with Infinite Universe Theory.

 

 

PSI Blog 20240318

 

Thanks for reading Infinite Universe Theory! On Medium.com you can subscribe for free to receive new posts and be part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”  There you can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your questions.

---

[1] Borchardt, Glenn, 2020, Religious Roots of Relativity: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 160 p. [https://go.glennborchardt.com/RRR-ebk]

[2] https://www.etymonline.com/word/paradigm [See especially: Kuhn, T.S., 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 210 p.]

[3] Collingwood, R.G., 1940, An Essay on Metaphysics: Oxford, Clarendon Press, 354 p. [https://gborc.com/Collingwood].

[4] Borchardt, Glenn, 2004, The Ten Assumptions of Science: Toward a New Scientific Worldview: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 125 p. [https://gborc.com/TTAOS; https://gborc.com/TTAOSpdf].