Critique of relativistic cosmology

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wolram
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cosmology Relativistic
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion critiques R. K. Thakur's paper titled "A Critique of the Relativistic Cosmology," which examines the relationship between matter and the structure of space-time as described by Einstein's equations. The author asserts that if matter is expanding, space-time must also be expanding, a concept that has been established since the 1920s. However, the discussion highlights the need for Thakur to engage with more contemporary research to enhance the validity of his arguments. The critique emphasizes the importance of integrating modern findings into discussions of general physics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's equations in general relativity
  • Familiarity with the concept of space-time structure
  • Knowledge of cosmological expansion theories
  • Awareness of historical and contemporary physics literature
NEXT STEPS
  • Research recent advancements in cosmology, focusing on papers published after the 1920s
  • Explore the implications of space-time expansion in modern physics
  • Study the latest critiques and analyses of general relativity
  • Examine the role of matter in shaping the universe according to current cosmological models
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, cosmologists, and students of general relativity who are interested in the evolution of cosmological theories and the integration of historical and contemporary research in physics.

wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,411
Reaction score
551
arXiv:0901.1956 [ps, pdf, other]
Title: A Critique of the relativistic cosmology
Authors: R. K. Thakur
Comments: 8 pages, Comments welcome
Subjects: General Physics (physics.gen-ph)
 
Space news on Phys.org
On the left hand side of Einstein's equations is the structure of space-time. On the right hand side is matter. If the matter is expanding, then so is space-time. Simple as that.
 
It's interesting to see the list of references - most of them are back in the 1920's. I think the author really needs to read some more up to date papers
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K