In order to understand the world,
we develop models ( theories), by the means of which we try to depict natural
processes in such a way that they become accessible to our intellect. We
must, however, content ourselves with the fact our intellect, at
least from the state of development we are living in, never can comprehend
the true reality, the principle of things per se. There still prevails
Kant’s insight: “ intellect dictates its limits to nature, instead of
integrating the pictures of things into itself.” [1].
But if we must rely on models
to describe the reality, they should , on one hand, be as simple and on
the other hand, as comprehensive as possible.
What we demand from a good theory
are:
- inner consistency
- aesthetics
- ability to clarify as many questions
unsolved so far as possible
- doubt- free confirmation by observations
- accordance with proven knowledge
- Whoever is concerning himself
intensively with the development of our universe is faced with many questions
which science presently cannot answer:
- Has the big bang really happened?
Or does it appear to us as a “bang” only when we look back into the past
through the glasses of that time perceptible by us today?
- Why do we live in a “plane” universe
which, according to the valid theories, would be highly instable and, according
to the laws of probability, either would have collapsed long ago, or would
have dissolved into a structure- less space in which neither stars
nor planets nor live beings could exist?
Do we have the proper theories at
all to interpret the latest astronomical observations correctly?
This catalog of questions could
be continued at choice.
Many cosmologists meanwhile have
reached the conviction the big bang model describes the birth and development
of the universe essentially correctly [2], p.11:
„Meanwhile, it (the big bang
model) has, by ever more exact rechecks, become one of the best confirmed
paradigms of natural science...”
But even the protagonists of the
big bang theory must admit this model has certain weaknesses which cannot
simply be ignored. In section 2, this will be deliberated further.
 |
|
3
|
 |