|
Panel 5 - Methods for Selecting Alternative Cosmologies
[previous page] . . . . . . . .
. . This is Page 5 . . . . . . . . . .
[next page]
| Authors |
Affiliation |
Title |
Abstract |
|
Farzad Mahootian & Timothy E. Eastman -
Eastman presenting |
Arizona State U., Tempe AZ, USA |
The Observational-Inductive Framework and Implications
for Cosmology |
The observational-inductive framework is inspired by
revolutionary advances in computers and knowledge
discovery systems. The earlier hypothetico-deductive
framework is often used to distinguish “real science”
from “pseudo-science.” As used in cosmology, this
framework is sometimes deployed as an arbiter of
“acceptable” data; e.g., effectively shielding the Big
Bang from falsification. In contrast, we conclude that
both frameworks are needed and are complementary and
synergistic. |
|
David Dilworth |
Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA, USA |
Cosmological Physics Ground Rules & How to Evaluate
Cosmologies |
When we evaluate cosmological theories which fundamental
physics laws are in control? How can you determine when
a hypothesis meets the minimum for a scientific claim;
if evidence is observed, calculated or theorized; if a
claim is quantitative or dimensionless? Which definition
of space does a theory use? Who bears the burden of
proof for theories and challenges? |
|
Tom Van Flandern |
Meta Research, Sequim
WA, USA |
Deduction vs. Induction for Selecting a Cosmology |
The standard model and most alternative cosmologies are
products of inductive reasoning: We observe how the
universe is and make an educated guess about how it came
to be that way. But there is another way: Use only the
principles of physics (derived from reason alone) as
starting premises, and from them, deduce the origin and
nature of the universe. |
|
|
|
|
|
| 
