- The cosmic microwave background (CMB, CMBR), in Big Bang cosmology, is electromagnetic radiation as a remnant from an early stage of the universe, also known as "relic radiation". The CMB is faint cosmic background radiation filling all space.
But there are views contesting the "consensus" adopted by the Prize Committee, claiming that CMBR is nothing but (black body) radiation from "cosmic dust" at 2.7 K surrounding the Milky Way.
What to believe? Let me seek an answer in the analysis of blackbody radiation presented at Computational Black Body Radiation based on a model of radiative heat transfer as a resonance phenomenon between a material source and material receiver transmitted by (standing) electromagnetic waves connecting source and receiver.
In this model there are waves connecting source and receiver, but no "ocean of photons" filling space as a "remnant" of a disappeared Big Bang source. Instead, the model is compatible with the presence of cosmic dust.
What do you think? Is it possible that there is some form of "remnant radiation" filling all of space even though the source of the radiation disappeared 15 billion years ago?
In any case, maybe this gives some incentive to review conceptions of black body radiation.
And what is even more unbelievable than relic radiation? Right, Big Bang. Utterly improbable and impossible. How is it possible that this has become the highest wisdom of the Nobel Committee in Physics? A Committee that never gave the Prize to relativity theory.
And what is even more unbelievable than relic radiation? Right, Big Bang. Utterly improbable and impossible. How is it possible that this has become the highest wisdom of the Nobel Committee in Physics? A Committee that never gave the Prize to relativity theory.
Inlägg
Hi Claes,
SvaraRaderaI couldn't agree with you more:
-The hohlraum is missing, and
-why should the endpoint of thermal death--thermal radiation--be the starting point for the creation of structure in the cosmos through minute thermal fluctuations in the background radiation? That's like running the second law backwards!
As Fred Hoyle said, they are attempting to explain the nature of blackbody radiation by examining the geometry of the coals in the furnace....A complete waste of time.
Regarding your book on blackbody radiation, you might like to checkout my book "Statistical Physics: A Probabilistic Approach", Ch. 2 where blackbody radiation is given a probabilistic basis.
Best regards,
Bernard
Hi Bernard! Yes, we agree, and I will take a look at your book. There are many things which can be questioned. Best regards, Claes
SvaraRadera