badseed
- 13
- 0
PeterDonis said:He didn't regret it because it was "wrong". He regretted it because, if he hadn't postulated it, but had taken the simplest cosmological model based on his original field equation (without the CC), he might have predicted the expansion of the universe more than ten years before it was discovered. That has nothing to do with whether or not the CC is a "natural" part of the field equation; it's simple to show that it is by deriving the EFE from a Lagrangian.
(It's also worth nothing that the implicit argument you are making here is an argument from authority, i.e., not a valid argument. Even if the authority is Einstein. Einstein made mistakes, just like all humans do.)
EFE - Euler Fluid Equations? lol
I see, "his original field equation (without the CC), might have predicted the expansion of the universe" but the CC " is a natural part of the field equation"
This cool thing?
PeterDonis said:Models which attribute the redshift to anything other than expansion of the universe don't fit the data.
Yet redshift has been demonstrated in experiments independent of expansion - could be a problem.
OK, I give up ( I have work to do) - Dark matter and dark energy are real, they where discovered in 1933 or something; gravity is the only fundamental force that effects galaxy scale motion and redshift is only caused by expansion (someone should tell Chen, he thinks it was a result of electron density in his experiments).