
Has Cosmology Run into a Creative Crisis? - benbreen
http://aeon.co/magazine/science/has-cosmology-run-into-a-creative-crisis/
======
robinsloan
This is fantastic:

"When you read that word cosmos, you might begin to imagine the most expansive
physical world your mind can build. Deep fields of glittering, star-filled
galaxies stretching out in every direction, and maybe into forever. But even
that image represents only the barest sliver of what is meant by ‘cosmos’. To
build a cosmos, you have to extend your imagination to all of space and all of
time. Only one of Earth’s creatures can pull off that cognitive trick. All
living things are attuned to their environment: bacteria can sense chemical
shifts in their immediate surroundings; migrating birds know our planet well
enough to wing annually across its whole face; dung beetles navigate by the
light of the Milky Way. But only the human being lives inside a cosmos, and
only recently."

Nobody writes about this kinda stuff better than Ross Andersen.

(Also worth noting: he conducted what is probably the best interview to date
with Elon Musk => [http://aeon.co/magazine/technology/the-elon-musk-
interview-o...](http://aeon.co/magazine/technology/the-elon-musk-interview-on-
mars/))

~~~
drzaiusapelord
Personally, I dislike this stoner-esque "whoa man," type writing. Its cheap
and also dismisses the possibility of alien life elsewhere. I also don't think
we fully understand animal intelligence to make grand claims like this. It
just seems... egocentric.

~~~
kenbellows
I'll take your point on animal intelligence, but to the author's credit, he
does specify "only one of _Earth 's_ creatures", so no ruling out of alien
life there

------
smeyer
> At the moment, there is no alternative theory of the early Universe that
> explains more.

I thought this was a very important point that the author just sort of brushed
aside. There are serious flaws with inflation and real concerns to address
with recent measurements, but it still remains the best available theory. It's
not like everyone is latching on for purely sentimental reasons or something.

~~~
alchemism
>Among today’s physicists, there are some who still believe the cosmos cycles
in and out of being in this way.

It may take science some time to grudgingly test hypotheses drawn from
mysticism and metaphysics. So perhaps not so much due to sentimentality as
pride?

~~~
Retric
What other test would you suggest?

Right now we can collect light from the distant cosmos and run local
experiments, but it's really hard to test for large scale effects at the local
level. Which means detecting photons and making predictions about what they
suggest is the only real option.

