- #1
Egregious
- 8
- 0
Preface: I am not a physicist, but I do tend to accept the theories of an expanding and accelerating universe. I am not inquiring to dispute these ideas, but it recently occurred to me that there is an obvious fallacy in the arguments for these ideas as presented in the popular media. I wish to navigate this logical flaw.
Fallacious template: If A, then B. B; therefore A.
From the popular media:
(1) If (A) [light sources] are moving away, then (B) there is red-shift.
(2) (B); therefore (A)
(1) is well established, but I also understand the following to be false:
(A) is the only thing that causes (B)
----
This fallacy first appeared for me while I was considering the idea of an accelerating universe. An accelerating universe is consistent with a further red-shift of light sources that are farther away. I wondered, though why there could not be a feature of space that would also cause red-shift in a way that is proportional to the distance to the light source. In other words, (asking myself) why is the accelerating universe theory the only/best explanation for this observation?
---
If someone would kindly fill in the missing pieces for a lay-enthusiast to logically establish that for light sources at cosmological distances (A) is true, your efforts would be greatly appreciated!
Many thanks,
~Egr
Fallacious template: If A, then B. B; therefore A.
From the popular media:
(1) If (A) [light sources] are moving away, then (B) there is red-shift.
(2) (B); therefore (A)
(1) is well established, but I also understand the following to be false:
(A) is the only thing that causes (B)
----
This fallacy first appeared for me while I was considering the idea of an accelerating universe. An accelerating universe is consistent with a further red-shift of light sources that are farther away. I wondered, though why there could not be a feature of space that would also cause red-shift in a way that is proportional to the distance to the light source. In other words, (asking myself) why is the accelerating universe theory the only/best explanation for this observation?
---
If someone would kindly fill in the missing pieces for a lay-enthusiast to logically establish that for light sources at cosmological distances (A) is true, your efforts would be greatly appreciated!
Many thanks,
~Egr
Last edited: