Re: Big Bang: How widely accepted?
Andrew Cooke (ajc@reaxp01.roe.ac.uk)
28 Aug 1995 13:13:37 GMT
what would you say if we found conclusive evidence that the
big-bang model was incorrect?
i didn't realise that people had made attempts to experimentally
disprove the norse legends (from within the culture that
`believed').
or is it not a creation myth in that sense?
andrew
p.s. do you think that to understand the norse myths you need to
understand either the language they were told in, or at least have
a good translation?
i presume that people who study the anthropology of physics
understand the language used - mathematics. is that the case
here? i wouldn't presume to post statements to sci.anthropology
saying that some model used in anthropology was a myth unless
i had a reasonable understanding of the subject.
p.p.s. on a similar subject, i was supposed to be reading a
book by someone who argued that theory and observation were
inseparable. i think he died recently. does that ring a
bell with anyone? if so, please could you email me his name?
thanks - the work seemed interesting, but i forgot the name...
In article <DE0AnD.Aq7@crash.cts.com>,
Robert Roosen <roosen@crash.cts.com> wrote:
> Cosmology in the anthropological sense is the creation myth that
>a society promotes.
> For instance, in the Norse legends, two brothers killed the frost
>giant and built the earth out of his body.
> The Big Bang cosmology is the creation myth of the
>Military/Industrial Complex.
--
A.Cooke@roe.ac.uk work phone 0131 668 8357 home phone/fax 0131 667 0208
institute for astronomy, royal observatory, blackford hill, edinburgh
http://www.roe.ac.uk/ajcwww
|