
A debate over the theory of cosmic inflation - jonbaer
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/a-cosmic-controversy/
======
TheCowboy
Unrelated to article content:

This site's progress bar that correlates to scrolling down on the page is one
of the most pleasing 'new' web ideas I've seen in awhile. I'm surprised I
haven't seen it before. It's unobtrusive, clean, and ideally could provide a
nice idea of the length of the article.

It would be even better if the bar represented the length of the article
instead of the full page which you already derive from the scroll bar.

~~~
Nadya
The scrollbar of your browser already does this - also it _has_ been done
before and was a common trend a few years ago (2014-2015) dictated by the
_article length_ rather than an arbitrary length (this one seems to be article
+ recommended articles below). It was used because on infinite scrolling pages
you couldn't tell the length of your next read based on your scrollbar.

[0] [https://digiday.com/media/designers-hate-article-progress-
ba...](https://digiday.com/media/designers-hate-article-progress-bar/)

[1] [https://css-tricks.com/reading-position-indicator/](https://css-
tricks.com/reading-position-indicator/)

[2] [https://www.designernews.co/stories/61326-whats-up-with-
all-...](https://www.designernews.co/stories/61326-whats-up-with-all-the-
added-progress-bars)

------
SubiculumCode
I don't think it fair to say that inflationary models aren't empirically
testable. It would be more accurate to say that inflationary models cannot be
subjected to experiemental manipulation. It is not my field, but it seems to
be of the sort where the model gives you an idea what you might see, then you
go see if you find what you predicted.

~~~
infradig
No, the article claims the opposite of what you just said.

------
effie
Concise statement of the trio's point:
[http://physics.princeton.edu/~cosmo/sciam/index.html#faq](http://physics.princeton.edu/~cosmo/sciam/index.html#faq)

------
Khaine
PBS SpaceTime have an awesome episode on cosmic inflation[1]

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZTb6sfHEX8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZTb6sfHEX8)

------
kpil
Probably a stupid question: if the average mass density is agreeing perfectly
with everything and all that, what is all this 'dark' matter and energy
necessary for?

~~~
contravariant
Those are included in the mass density.

~~~
kpil
Ok, then I don't understand the claim that the measurement plus a fudgefactor
matches perfectly.

Well, I don't know shit about the topic, I'll go back to my code editor now...

~~~
acqq
Just one example why it's actually more than a "fudge factor": When you have
an alternative hypothesis (like, "it's not really the energy") it's not that
you just have to say so, you have to model your assumption with the formulas,
the formulas then can be calculated and compared with the measurements, just
like the calculations of the hypothesis "it's a real energy" can. The result
is that the formulas that are described to those who just want the description
as "it's a real energy" match the best with the measurements:

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/04/11/no-d...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/04/11/no-
dark-energy-isnt-an-illusion/)

See the "Ned Wright, based on the latest data from Betoule et al."
illustration in the text.

It's significantly more than "I say, he says."

