[dbqer4life]

Shoots. Way over my head.

[thomaswest]

Uh, oh. This is real science; muaibowwow, lonelyranger, and other IDists are not going to like it.

[FlingWingFlyer]

I guess my paper on "The Sex Life of a Golf Ball" didn't make it. Oh well. I'll try again next year. If Jimmah and Yassir can win one of these Nobel things, anybody can.

[decal]

"Smoot told Reuters the Nobel committee called him at 2:45 a.m. Pacific Time after first dialing the wrong number."

Whoops.

George Smoot works at Cal-Berkeley. Just think, Kate Raphael-Bender nearly won the Nobel Prize for Physics!

[decal]

"The radiation they looked at, so-called blackbody radiation, allowed the laureates to show the universe had cooled from its initial fiery state of 3,000 degrees centigrade (5,000 F) to a chill 2.7 degrees above absolute zero, which is minus 273 degrees centigrade."

3000C doesn't seem all that hot; the sun is much hotter.

Did the article leave off a few aughts?

[Nonstatist]

this is the only scenario that predicts the kind of cosmic microwave background radiation measured by COBE

This is the kind of science NASA should be focusing on; not political boondoggles like the Space station..

Its good to see" theory" backed up by scientific discovery...

[SunkenCiv]

Big Bang's afterglow fails intergalactic 'shadow' test
University of Alabama in Huntsville | 01 September 2006 | Staff (press release)
Posted on 09/01/2006 11:10:03 AM EDT by PatrickHenry
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/1693816/posts

[SunkenCiv]

Nobel Prize awarded to Big Bang proponents as evidence vanishes
by Tom Van Flandern
Meta Research

Our regular members and readers will recall that the simplest explanation of the microwave radiation is the "temperature of space", as correctly calculated by Eddington in 1926 and verified with greater accuracy by later authors: 2.8°K. This is the minimum temperature that anything bathed in the radiation of distant starlight can reach. No Big Bang proponent ever came close to predicting the correct temperature of this radiation, its dipolar asymmetry, or the tiny size of its fluctuations... The blackbody character of the microwave radiation was an important observational finding, and its discoverers deserve credit for that (despite trying to attach religious significance to it themselves)... [T]he following new results about the microwave radiation were just released in September... "In a finding sure to cause controversy, scientists at the University of Alabama in Huntsville found a lack of evidence of shadows from 'nearby' clusters of galaxies using new, highly accurate measurements of the cosmic microwave background. … Taken together, the data shows a shadow effect about one-fourth of what was predicted - an amount roughly equal in strength to natural variations previously seen in the microwave background across the entire sky... [B]ased on all that we know about radiation sources and halos around clusters, this kind of emission is not expected, and it would be implausible to suggest that several clusters could all emit microwaves at just the right frequency and intensity to match the cosmic background radiation." ...Just over a year ago, published results of another study using WMAP data looked for evidence of "lensing" effects which should have been seen (but weren't) if the microwave background was a Big Bang remnant.