What I don't understand about the Big Bang Theory

[adrenalynn]

How can we make any cosmological prediction upon earth without math?<br /><br />As I mentioned earlier, pure observation had us living under a piece of black construction paper with holes poked in it...<br /><br />And again - is it better to have a working theoretical model or no model at all? Are you contending that no mathematical model representing off-planet science has been successful? <br /><br />And how can we so easily verify any prediction made on earth? How many of us have seen a quark? Ever put a cat in a box, opened the box and found a giraffe and a bathtub full of brightly colored machine tools?<br /><br />[you edited your post, and it changes my response to the first.] <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>.</p><p><font size="3">bipartisan</font>  (<span style="color:blue" class="pointer"><span class="pron"><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size="2">bī-pär'tĭ-zən, -sən</font></span></span>) [Adj.]  Maintaining the ability to blame republications when your stimulus plan proves to be a devastating failure.</p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000"><font color="#ff0000">IMPE</font><font color="#c0c0c0">ACH</font> <font color="#0000ff"><font color="#c0c0c0">O</font>BAMA</font>!</font></strong></p> </div>

 

[emperor_of_localgroup]

Sorry I had to edit it. <br /><br />In (1) I meant if a theory predicts a new elementary particle, experimental physicists search for it, and find it in a few decades. But if they dont find the particle, do you think that theory would be pursued for long? <br /><br />Well, we can reach many points in our solar system, as a result many things in our solar system are verifiable. My main objection lies against theoretical prediction of objects in deep space.<br /><br />Here is another example. If Saturn and a few other planets haven't had 'Rings' around them, do you think any theory would have ever predicted 'Rings' around planets in other solar systems? <br /><br />Our theories are shaping the rest of the universe in the form of the solar system we see. I wont say that's totally wrong, but probability is very high.<br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Earth is Boring</strong></font> </div>

 

[adrenalynn]

No worries - I edited mine too to reflect your edit.<br /><br />A quark here on good ol' earth isn't anything but a mathematical construct. We can't touch, taste, see, hold, or smell 'em. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>.</p><p><font size="3">bipartisan</font>  (<span style="color:blue" class="pointer"><span class="pron"><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size="2">bī-pär'tĭ-zən, -sən</font></span></span>) [Adj.]  Maintaining the ability to blame republications when your stimulus plan proves to be a devastating failure.</p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000"><font color="#ff0000">IMPE</font><font color="#c0c0c0">ACH</font> <font color="#0000ff"><font color="#c0c0c0">O</font>BAMA</font>!</font></strong></p> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

I aso agree.But we need to discuss general theory of relativity to have a good discussion.