Examples of theoretical proofs overturned by evidence?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around theoretical proofs in cosmology and astrophysics that may have been challenged or overturned by empirical evidence. Participants explore examples of such proofs, particularly focusing on the singularity theorems proposed by Hawking and Penrose, and the implications of dark energy and inflation on these theories.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references a paper by Hawking and Penrose discussing the initial cosmological singularity, noting that its predictions have not been experimentally tested.
  • Another participant mentions the composition of dark matter and the evidence surrounding various dark matter theories.
  • A historical perspective is provided on how early estimates of the Earth's age were revised with the discovery of radioactivity, indicating a shift in theoretical understanding based on new evidence.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of dark energy and inflation on the energy conditions stipulated by Hawking and Penrose, suggesting that these phenomena may violate key premises of the singularity theorems.
  • There is a query about whether all three energy conditions proposed by Hawking and Penrose are violated by dark energy and inflation.
  • One participant proposes a counterfactual scenario regarding the Bicep2 findings and its implications for the validity of the singularity theorems.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the nature of the Hawking-Penrose theorems as mathematical rather than empirical claims about the universe.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the implications of the theorems and whether they were intended to describe physical reality.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the implications of dark energy and inflation on the singularity theorems. There is no consensus on whether these phenomena definitively overturn the theorems, and the discussion remains unresolved on several points.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the distinction between mathematical theorems and empirical claims, highlighting that the validity of the singularity theorems depends on the truth of their premises, which may not hold in the context of current cosmological models.

  • #31
pinball1970 said:
I assumed he published his papers then put out a pop Science book to make some of the ideas accessable to the general reader as Hawking did.

And if your assumption is correct, then there will be published peer-reviewed papers by him that can be used as references. That doesn't change the fact that his pop science book is not a valid PF reference.

pinball1970 said:
It was more of an invite for someone to explain what the papers were outlining and what the current experimental data has done to support or refute them.

And if you can reference particular papers, then that is a valid subject for discussion. But his pop science book is still not.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32
PeterDonis said:
And if your assumption is correct, then there will be published peer-reviewed papers by him that can be used as references. That doesn't change the fact that his pop science book is not a valid PF reference.
And if you can reference particular papers, then that is a valid subject for discussion. But his pop science book is still not.
Ok trying to find them. I'll feedback
 
  • #33
Cerenkov said:
My reason for starting this thread is exactly this - a burning desire to know just how the H - P theorems work. What they are saying and what they aren't saying. What they can do and what they can't. Where they apply and where they don't. That is why.

Then that's what you should have asked in the OP of this thread. And the thread title should have been something like "How do the H-P theorems work" or "What do the H-P theorems say and when do they apply". Basically we've wasted more than 30 posts finding out that what you're actually interested in has nothing to do with the title or OP question of the thread.

Cerenkov said:
Dogged persistence in the face of difficulty is simply a hallmark of my character.

Dogged persistence is fine, but it's not the only skill you need. You also need to be able to ask what you actually want to ask.

Since the title and OP question of this thread are not what you actually wanted to ask, I am closing this thread. If you want to know about the H-P singularity theorems, then you can ask a specific question about those theorems in a new thread. I would strongly recommend thinking carefully about framing a specific question rather than just something like "How do the H-P theorems work?"
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
8K
  • · Replies 119 ·
4
Replies
119
Views
11K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K