Hmm. Apparently this model requires superluminal excitations. That makes it seem rather unlikely.Chronos said:See http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.0027, Galilean Genesis: an alternative to inflation.
This is a different idea. It's a recent alternative to inflation that relies upon a big rip-like scenario.rootone said:Galilieo was probably trying to explain things in a manner which would not irritate the inquisitors too much.
Sounded like they were pretty unavoidable to me. If you read the last paragraph in their conclusion, they basically say, "Well, maybe they can be avoided. We don't know how, but maybe."Chronos said:Superluminal excitations are discussed, but, not deemed unavoidable under the Galilean Genesis model.
"New Life for Galilean Creation" is a theory proposed by scientist and theologian Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. It suggests that the universe is constantly evolving and that all living beings are part of a grand cosmic process of becoming.
Unlike traditional creation theories which focus on a singular event or deity creating the universe, "New Life for Galilean Creation" emphasizes the ongoing process of evolution and the interconnectedness of all living things. It also incorporates scientific discoveries and theories, such as the Big Bang and evolution, into its understanding of creation.
Some evidence that supports "New Life for Galilean Creation" includes the fossil record and scientific discoveries about the age and development of the universe. Additionally, the theory aligns with the concept of emergent complexity, which suggests that new and more complex forms of life arise from simpler ones over time.
"New Life for Galilean Creation" suggests that humans are not the end goal of creation, but rather a part of the ongoing process of evolution. It also emphasizes the interconnectedness of all living things, highlighting the importance of caring for our planet and all its inhabitants.
While "New Life for Galilean Creation" has gained some popularity among scientists and theologians, it is not widely accepted in the scientific community. Some critics argue that it lacks empirical evidence and does not align with traditional scientific methods. However, others believe that it offers a valuable perspective on the relationship between science and spirituality.