This is honestly the best channel for astrophysics. You explain everything well, you summarize and make sure we are all good with the understanding and you present the latest and most interesting studies. The fact that your channel is not bigger is a crime.
I've been watching your videos since your axis of evil video. The quality has always been outstanding. I can't wait until youtube catches on to how incredible this channel is!
I have two questions that have major implications for the LCDM: One is that it is my understanding that Vacuum Birefringence was positively demonstrated, I believe just this year, 2024, via two heavy ionized gold particles in a vacuum. And the result was that the interactions of photons in a vacuum caused polarization of the photons. Unlike Faraday Rotation, this did not require a medium of any kind. That has major implications for GR, as well as our interpretation of Redshift, and would even produce effects equivalent to Gravitational Lensing. Isn't the confirmation of Vacuum Birefringence an extremely significant result for Cosmology, even though it has been ignored since publication? The other question goes to the CMB. And that is the not-so dark secret regarding the so-called "Axis of Evil", which refers to the fact that, upon data analysis, while performing a power function, an axis is present that precisely aligns with the axis of our solar system. And this is extremely problematic because, should it not be true that our solar system should exhibit zero relationship with the CMB, because our solar system did not exist for another nine billion years after the emission of the CMB radiation? And this implies that the CMB is not the "first light" that everyone claims it to be? And what is even worse is that this is not the only such troubling relationship. There are two other examples in which an axis arises that is parallel to the axis of our galaxy. And another that isn't parallel, but is exactly perpendicular. And like our solar system, should it not call into question the legitimacy of the CMB, as it should be equally unrelated to our Milky Way galaxy? Why is it that no one is the slightest bit perturbed by the presence of such disqualifying data? No one even mentions it? So if Vacuum Birefringence could essentially negate our assumptions about Redshift, implying that light is being polarized over vast distances - as if it was in a medium, but instead just by the vacuum itself - this would lead us to conclude that the expansion of the universe is an optical effect. It would also follow that the effect would increase as distance increases, which would have the appearance that not only that the universe is expanding, but that the expansion is accelerating. These effects also increase as mass increases. And we already know that the Faraday Rotation effect, caused by the presence of plasma, also increases as mass increases. So between Faraday Rotation and Vacuum Birefringence, these phenomena could easily account for the appearance of what we currently refer to as Gravitational Lensing. And if the CMB is nullified as a competent representation of the release of the first photons, aren't there major questions for the very foundations of our model? I was born in the late sixties. I studied maths and physics, and a year of EE. The Standard Model is all I have ever known. But now it appears that there are major, major holes. No one ever really "liked" Dark Energy or Dark Matter, but we were excited to learn what it was. I absolutely hated Cosmic Inflation. This was the worst "get out of jail, free" card I have ever seen in science. I don't respect Guth. I think that he was rewarded for saving jobs and Grant money, not for good science. But in the intervening sixty years, we are not one millimeter closer to uncovering Dark Energy or Dark Matter. The mechanism for Cosmic Inflation has never been explained or justified. And in the last thirty years, there has been a trend, increasing like the acceleration of the universe, to wallpaper over inconsistencies, with the primary focus on preserving the model. And I am aware of this because, although not my primary field, I have always taken pleasure in the advancements and discoveries in Astrophysics and Cosmology. So this trend is something that I have witnessed, slowly, over decades. But aside from that troubling observation, I genuinely inquire about the two issues that I have raised. Am I misinterpreting the research, are the issues correct, but not of great significance, or are these major issues that are being purposely ignored due to the implications within the field? Those are my questions. Thank you. And truly remarkable video, by the way. I subscribed immediately. I look forward to enjoying your content. I have no doubt that your channel will be huge...
Why not to consider that the theory can be improve or revise rather than to deny the fact of gravity........; Since not only dark matter which is not harmonious with the standard theory; There are many others, like dark energi, dark flow, asymmetry of CMB, many of Jwst's discoveries ........I humby thank you..🙏🙏
Dark Matter was a placeholder for the missing mass which could be multiple things or a miscalculation placeholder, not a single thing in and of itself. Modern physics does treat vitage physics with the type of reverence similar to a religion.
This is honestly the best channel for astrophysics. You explain everything well, you summarize and make sure we are all good with the understanding and you present the latest and most interesting studies.
The fact that your channel is not bigger is a crime.
Thank you! That's exactly what I'm trying to do! Just a couple of my videos got some traction...but...)Hope they will
Here due to Fraser Cain's recommendation. Good stuff, thank you! Subscribed.
Welcome!
Same!! Happy to be here too. Excellent content.
I have just seen in the comments that you have done an "Axis of Evil" video. I genuinely had no idea. Going to watch it right now...
I've been watching your videos since your axis of evil video. The quality has always been outstanding. I can't wait until youtube catches on to how incredible this channel is!
Thank you for sticking around! Yeah, I hope that will happen someday
I have two questions that have major implications for the LCDM:
One is that it is my understanding that Vacuum Birefringence was positively demonstrated, I believe just this year, 2024, via two heavy ionized gold particles in a vacuum. And the result was that the interactions of photons in a vacuum caused polarization of the photons. Unlike Faraday Rotation, this did not require a medium of any kind. That has major implications for GR, as well as our interpretation of Redshift, and would even produce effects equivalent to Gravitational Lensing.
Isn't the confirmation of Vacuum Birefringence an extremely significant result for Cosmology, even though it has been ignored since publication?
The other question goes to the CMB. And that is the not-so dark secret regarding the so-called "Axis of Evil", which refers to the fact that, upon data analysis, while performing a power function, an axis is present that precisely aligns with the axis of our solar system.
And this is extremely problematic because, should it not be true that our solar system should exhibit zero relationship with the CMB, because our solar system did not exist for another nine billion years after the emission of the CMB radiation?
And this implies that the CMB is not the "first light" that everyone claims it to be? And what is even worse is that this is not the only such troubling relationship. There are two other examples in which an axis arises that is parallel to the axis of our galaxy. And another that isn't parallel, but is exactly perpendicular.
And like our solar system, should it not call into question the legitimacy of the CMB, as it should be equally unrelated to our Milky Way galaxy? Why is it that no one is the slightest bit perturbed by the presence of such disqualifying data? No one even mentions it?
So if Vacuum Birefringence could essentially negate our assumptions about Redshift, implying that light is being polarized over vast distances - as if it was in a medium, but instead just by the vacuum itself - this would lead us to conclude that the expansion of the universe is an optical effect.
It would also follow that the effect would increase as distance increases, which would have the appearance that not only that the universe is expanding, but that the expansion is accelerating.
These effects also increase as mass increases. And we already know that the Faraday Rotation effect, caused by the presence of plasma, also increases as mass increases. So between Faraday Rotation and Vacuum Birefringence, these phenomena could easily account for the appearance of what we currently refer to as Gravitational Lensing.
And if the CMB is nullified as a competent representation of the release of the first photons, aren't there major questions for the very foundations of our model?
I was born in the late sixties. I studied maths and physics, and a year of EE. The Standard Model is all I have ever known.
But now it appears that there are major, major holes. No one ever really "liked" Dark Energy or Dark Matter, but we were excited to learn what it was.
I absolutely hated Cosmic Inflation. This was the worst "get out of jail, free" card I have ever seen in science. I don't respect Guth. I think that he was rewarded for saving jobs and Grant money, not for good science.
But in the intervening sixty years, we are not one millimeter closer to uncovering Dark Energy or Dark Matter. The mechanism for Cosmic Inflation has never been explained or justified.
And in the last thirty years, there has been a trend, increasing like the acceleration of the universe, to wallpaper over inconsistencies, with the primary focus on preserving the model.
And I am aware of this because, although not my primary field, I have always taken pleasure in the advancements and discoveries in Astrophysics and Cosmology.
So this trend is something that I have witnessed, slowly, over decades. But aside from that troubling observation, I genuinely inquire about the two issues that I have raised.
Am I misinterpreting the research, are the issues correct, but not of great significance, or are these major issues that are being purposely ignored due to the implications within the field?
Those are my questions. Thank you. And truly remarkable video, by the way. I subscribed immediately. I look forward to enjoying your content. I have no doubt that your channel will be huge...
Here because Fraser Cain's recommendation-you keep up the great job
Thank you!)
Why not to consider that the theory can be improve or revise rather than to deny the fact of gravity........; Since not only dark matter which is not harmonious with the standard theory; There are many others, like dark energi, dark flow, asymmetry of CMB, many of Jwst's discoveries ........I humby thank you..🙏🙏
Dark Matter was a placeholder for the missing mass which could be multiple things or a miscalculation placeholder, not a single thing in and of itself. Modern physics does treat vitage physics with the type of reverence similar to a religion.