Arkadiusz Jadczyk - Open system: Reflections on the current model of cosmology

Saturday, July 13, 2024

Reflections on the current model of cosmology - By Thomas Görnitz

Reflections on the Current Model of Cosmology

Now, let me be clear—the title isn’t mine. It belongs to the brilliant Thomas Görnitz and his latest paper. We’ve crossed paths a few times before (he’s dropped by Wroclaw, and I’ve made my way to Leipzig), so his knack for clear and profound writing doesn’t surprise me one bit. What did surprise me was the joyful depth and sparkling clarity of his new paper.

Here’s a little teaser from the introduction. I even attempted to illustrate it, though I’m still on my journey to becoming the next Picasso of the science illustration world. Hang tight and enjoy this cosmic ride!

Abstract:
With the JWST, observational cosmology has entered an exciting new stage. The new quality of its observations and the fact that there are problems with the theoretical concepts of cosmology requires a renewed reflection on the theoretical foundations and may be seen as a call for a “new physics”.
....
1 Introduction
With its standard model, the ΛCDM cosmology in its various forms, today's cosmology occupies a prominent position in the natural sciences. (Lambda is the cosmological constant, CDM stands for cold dark matter) With regard to the current situation in cosmology, we would like to refer briefly to an interview with the CERN Courier. A leading cosmologist and theoretical physicist stated with a certain pride regarding the ΛCDM cosmologies:
»It is a model that has only six parameters, most constrained at the percent level, which explains most of the observations that we have of the universe.«
In my youth, a report by Freeman Dyson about a conversation with Enrico Fermi was still known. Dyson had created a fit for Fermi's theory of pseudoscalar mesons and wanted to present it to Fermi. Fermi pointed out:

“There are two ways of doing calculations in theoretical physics,” he said. “One way, and this is the way I prefer, is to have a clear physical picture of the process that you are calculating. The other way is to have a precise and self-consistent mathematical formalism. You have neither.”

Dyson then asked Fermi what he thought of the fitted curves.

“In desperation I asked Fermi whether he was not impressed by the agreement between our calculated numbers and his measured numbers. He replied, ‘How many arbitrary parameters did you use for your calculations?’ I thought for a moment about our cut-off procedures and said, ‘Four.’ He said, ‘I remember my friend Johnny von Neumann used to say, with four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.’
With that, the conversation was over.”

From the section 2.4 The “Hubble constant” :

In contrast to the first measurements by Edwin Hubble in 1929 10 , this value can now be recognized as the reciprocal of the current age of the universe 11 , in no way being something else – neither with regard to the dimension nor the numerical value.
Even if the "dynamic age of the universe" is occasionally mentioned 12 , it is difficult to understand at a certain distance from the citation cartels why this time is still referred to as a fundamental constant.