Abstract
A criticism of cosmological methodology and achievements by Disney (l2000) is assessed. Some historical and epistemological fallacies in that article have been highlighted. It is shown that—both empirically and pistemologically—modern cosmology lies on sounder foundations than it is portrayed. A brief historical account demonstrates that this form of dissatisfaction with cosmology has had a long tradition, and rather meager results in the course of the 20th century.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
REFERENCES
Barnes, E. W. 1933, Scientific Theory and Religion: The World Described by Science and its Spiritual Interpretation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
Bondi, H. 1962, Observatory 82, 133.
Bondi, H. 1967, Assumption and Myth in Physical Theory (Cambridge University Press, London).
Bondi, H. 1961, Cosmology (2nd edition, Cambridge University Press, London).
Bondi, H. and Gold, T. 1948, Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc. 108, 252.
Borges, J.-L. 1970, The Book of Imaginary Beings (Avon, New York).
Deliyannis, C. P. and Demarque, P. 1991, Astrophys. J. 379, 216.
Deliyannis, C. P., King, J. R., Boesgaard, A. M. and Ryan, S. G. 1994, Astrophys. J. 434, L71.
Dingle, H. 1937a, Nature 139, 784.
Dingle, H. 1937b, Nature 139, 1011.
Dingle, H. 1953, Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc. 113, 393.
Dingle, H. 1956, Sci. Am. 192 (September), 224.
Disney, M. J. 2000, Gen. Rel. Grav. 32, 1125.
Fang, Y. and Crotts, A. P. S. 1995, Astrophys. J. 440, 69.
Giallongo, E., D'Odorico, S., Fontana, A., McMahon, R. G., Savaglio, S., Cristiani, S., Molaro, P. and Trevese, D. 1994, Astrophys. J. 425, L1.
Gunn, J. E. and Peterson, B. A. 1965, Astrophys. J. 142, 1633.
Hu, W., Sugiyama, N. and Silk, J. 1997, Nature 386, 37.
Jakobsen, P. 1997, in Structure and Evolution of the Intergalactic Medium from QSO Absorption Line Systems, ed. P. Petitjean and S. Charlot (Paris: Edition Frontie´res), p. 57.
Kragh, H. 1996, Cosmology and Controversy (Princeton University Press, Princeton).
Krauss, L. M. and Turner, M. S. 1999, Gen. Rel. Grav. 31, 1453.
Penrose, R. 1989, The Emperor's New Mind (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
Phillipps, S., Davies, J. I. and Disney, M. J. 1990, Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc. 242, 235.
Price, H. 1996, Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
Steckline, V. S. 1983, Am. J. Phys. 51, 894.
Sunyaev, R. A. and Zeldovich, Ya. V. 1980, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 18, 537.
Zeh, D. 1992, The Physical Basis of the Direction of Time (Springer-Verlag, Berlin). Editor's note: In sct. 2 of the paper by M. Ribeiro: The Apparent Fractal Conjecture: Scaling Features in Standard Cosmologies, to appear in Gen. Rel. Grav. in vol. 33, october 2001, the samepaper by Disney is also commented.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ćirković, M.M. Comment: Laudatores Temporis Acti, or Why Cosmology Is Alive and Well—A Reply to Disney. General Relativity and Gravitation 34, 119–130 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015270522659
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015270522659