Semantics, Not Science

1. Hiranya Peiris, a cosmologist at University College London, and her team claim to have evidence of other universes.
2. A multi-verse setup is posited by some cosmologists in order to get around questions like "Why are things the way they are instead of some other way?" In a multi-verse, they can simply assert that things are that way in some other universe.
3. Dr Peiris and team are using background microwave radiation as evidence that they've found another universe.

Ignoring the questions of whether we might be in one universe among many, and whether these folks have actually interpreted their data correctly, the real question is this:
What do you mean we have radiation - and therefor information - coming here from another universe? If we are connected enough to communicate, what sense does it make to call it another universe? Clearly just not touching isn't adequate, or Earth and Mars would be separate universes - in fact, why not New York and London? They don't touch, but they can communicate, just as in these supposed trans-multi-verse broadcasts.

Frankly it sickens me to see purported scientists simply redefining terms in order to garner attention, publication, and funding. Frankly, I'd like to see a cosmologist come up with some experiments to test their hypotheses, if they want to be considered scientists rather than philosophical observers.

Posted by Procrustes 17

Related Posts:

Travels in Space and Time

CERN, Cosmic Rays, and Cover-Ups

Radiation and Antibiotics