Is the Steinhardt-Turok Cyclic Model Gaining Support?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Descartz2000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cyclic Model
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Steinhardt-Turok cyclic model, exploring its acceptance, current support, and whether it has been superseded by newer theories. The context includes theoretical implications and the speculative nature of cosmological models.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested, Exploratory, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the level of acceptance of the Steinhardt-Turok model, noting it may not be widely supported or upgraded.
  • Others argue that all such models, including the cyclic model, are currently viewed as exceedingly speculative, with no clear preference for one model over another.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the reliance of the Steinhardt-Turok model on string theory, which itself is considered theoretical and controversial.
  • One participant acknowledges the cyclic model as reasonably conceived but emphasizes that it remains speculative, similar to other models like LCDM and MOND, which also have significant unresolved issues.
  • There is a call for the continuation of new theories, suggesting that future developments may lead to improvements over existing models.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a general consensus that the Steinhardt-Turok model, along with other cosmological models, remains speculative and lacks widespread acceptance. However, there is no clear agreement on the model's viability or potential for future support.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the speculative nature of cosmological models and the dependence on theoretical frameworks like string theory, which are not universally accepted. There are also references to unresolved issues within established models.

Descartz2000
Messages
138
Reaction score
1
I typically post in the QM section, but I was reading an article about the cyclic model and wanted input on if this model of Steinhardt–Turok is widely accepted, is gaining support, has been upgraded, or replaced by something more current?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Descartz2000 said:
I typically post in the QM section, but I was reading an article about the cyclic model and wanted input on if this model of Steinhardt–Turok is widely accepted, is gaining support, has been upgraded, or replaced by something more current?
All such models are at present considered exceedingly speculative, with no real reason to favor anyone particular model over any other.
 
The problem with the Steinhardt-Turok model is that it bases many of it's ideas off of string theory which remains theoretical. So in a way it's controversial cosmology based on controversial physics.
 
I give the guys credit, they take a stab at it based on string theory - which is itself open to debate. It's a reasonably well conceived theory with the usual addon speculations. Right now, I know of no model that is less than speculative. LCDM is a fine model, but, still has some bus sized holes. Heck, even MOND is still sticking needles in that balloon. The more important thing is to keep new theories flowing. One of them might actually improve on what we now have.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K