What is the worst mistake ever made in sciences?

by Bruce Camber, New Orleans, January 2017

The adoption of Big Bang Cosmology as fact and not just theory is the worst mistake in science today. Newton’s confident definition of absolute space and time is the all-time worst. A higher level of generality for Newton but with more meaningful specificity would be order-continuity (time) and relations-symmetry (space).[1]

Big bang cosmology puts blinders on the the entire theoretical physics community and limits the creativity of people like those at CERN labs in Geneva. It has shut down discussion and openness to other theories and that stunts the growth of science.[2]

First, there are a growing list of questions[3] that big bang cosmology has not addressed. More background can be found on Wikipedia. There are also many highly-respected scholars, academics, scientists and researchers who object to its dominance.[4] Big bang cosmology has survived only because there has not been a stronger, more compelling alternative theory.

But, that seems to have changed.

In 2012 a simple and totally predictive theory began to emerge.[4] It uses base-2 exponentiation, a natural inflation, that begins with the original three Planck base units (time, length, mass) at the first moment of creation and goes up to the current time in just over 200 notations.[5]

This model is a virtual script that defines each of the big bang epochs more precisely than big bang cosmology, yet it requires no “big bang.”[6]. The time function is pivotal; the first second of this scale of the universe falls between notations 143 and 144[7]. The first day is between notations 160 and 161. And, the first year is between notations 168 and 169. Large structure formation at 150 million years is within notations 196 to 197.

What happens in that first second of creation will go a long way to answering key questions about isotropy-and-homogeneity and about dark energy and dark matter. It brings into question the roll of geometry, simple math and simple logic. It also reopens the Leibniz-Newton debate about the nature of space and time and the infinite.

Of course, the particle people will say that notations 2 to 65 have no physical significance. They should. Things within that range are not physical by any standards or conventions that they follow. This is the domain for systems theory, ontology, Langlands programs, pointfree geometries, scalar field theory, computer automaton, and more.

This response was entered as an answer to a Quora question on January 24, 2017. That entry will be reviewed often and updated as we learn more. The most recent update will always be on this research-and-development website. More…

[1] This quest began in 1972.
[2] Letters to a scientist: Fabiola Gianotti, Directeur Général, CERN
[3] The open, unanswered questions are mounting up as the failures and contortions of big bang inflation become self-evident to more and more.
[4] Initially considered to be just an excellent Science-Technology-Engineering-Mathematics (STEM) tool, further study of the first 67 notations demanded, and still requires, out-of-the-box thinking.
[5] The most recent chart with five Planck base units.
[6] Precision ontology can work with Hubble/Planck precision cosmology.
[7] Over two-thirds of the universe is well-defined within the first second.