Fine but there is a conceptual difference between these two types of problems, regardless of which one you prefer. The former one is a genuine physics problem while the latter is a learning disorder. Learning disorders are subjective while physics is about objective laws of physics which is why physicists don't even talk about the latter. Instead of WTFing, they just learn it. The question behind your learning disorder is completely irrational. Resident Evil 2 Ps1 Gameshark Codes. You can 'ask' the same thing about every concept in science.

WTF is evolution and where it came from, for example. What's the difference between these two questions? Or what's the difference between 'WTF is inflation and where did it come from' and 'I, Aran, am a complete imbecile', for that matter? A very good question.

I think the answer is No. First of all, we don't really know whether the Big Bang is a one-off event; in eternal inflation, 'big bangs' are repeating indefinitely.

But even if we knew that, it's not unnatural because numbers such as 1 are the most natural numbers one may get.;-) If there's a formula in the fundamental equations that determines the number of big bangs, then it's natural that the result is either infinity or a number close enough to one.;-). Reader Dilaton said. Thanks Lumo for this very nice reminder about inflation and the issues it solves, this was very enjoyable to read:-) Some time ago I read this book in German It was a lot of fun with all these autobiographic notes etc but therein Alan Guth did not mention that he used to sleep during your string theory lectures neither was a nice picture of his office included:-D What were they discussing when the younger italian physicist showed Alan Guth the finger.? Now a look forward to the still outstanding 7 articles about the other FPP winners.;-). Reader David Nataf said. Aran, It may take a while to convince yourself that the flatness and horizon problems are actually problems. I didn't see the problem at first, it's the sort of thing you might take a while to recognize as being a problem.

With respect to where inflation comes from, Guth didn't invent particle physics, he was applying particle physics. Finally, inflation makes scientific predictions. Guth didn't know that the cutvature was 0 in 1980, some people were thinking it might be 0.8 because the cosmological constant was ignored. Inflation will be further tested if NASA builds the gravitational wave detector LISA. Reader Simple Astronomer said. True story about Alan Guth.

The Inflationary Universe. The pioneers of the inflation theory—Alan Guth and Andrei Linde—calculated that this process happened at million times the speed of. The Inflationary Universe. Alan Guth Alexei Starobinsky. We are here We seek information about very early times. Amazonfr the inflationary universe guth livres. Board Member Resignation Letter Example Ebooks Pdf Dangertribulation Aheada Novel About Survival At The End. Amazonfr the inflationary universe guth livres. Board Member Resignation Letter Example Ebooks Pdf Dangertribulation Aheada Novel About Survival At The End.

When I was in grad school, I admitted to the graduate adviser that I was not sure if I had what it took to be a professional scientist and that I also thought that maybe the other grad students would turnout to be better scientists. The graduate adviser told me not to worry and said that he had the very same thoughts when he was a graduate student, except for one difference. He said that there was one grad student with whom he was sure would be less successful than himself and that student was Alan Guth. Reader Aran said. I am surprised that you can't see the extreme difference between explanatory power and supporting evidence of inflation and evolution Lubos. One explains pretty much all life on Earth by postulating a simple mechanism and is supported by everything from laboratory experiments to fossils.

The other explains barely anything beyond the 2 problems it was invented to explain and has very little to support it. Making up explanations is trivial, the trick is to invent ones that explain much more then they postulate. Inventing a completely novel and utterly different state of the whole damn universe just to explain uniformity and flatness doesn't cut it. It's too much like inventing god to explain where the universe came from. Your comment is pure propaganda.

A person with the opposite bias than yours may equally say that inflation is a framework without which nothing in cosmology makes sense while evolution is just an idea trying to find a reason for the diversity of life forms, but evolution is still unnecessary to understand how any individual organism lives. The reason why I don't admit that I don't understand evolution is that I do understand evolution - and you know it very well. I also understand inflation and I understand that you don't understand inflation and you are a giant obnoxious arrogant demagogic asshole trying to mask your stupidity, too. Force Op 1.5.2 No Survey. Paradise Kiss Movie Eng Sub. Thanks for the history lesson! It's still important that a competent theorist was able to understand those problems 'from a different field', take them seriously, and find a likely explanation. If I were on the committee of Nobel, I would probably also say Yes, it's demonstrated by WMAP and eligible for that prize, too. Still, the acoustic peaks are only 'softly linked' to modes in the inflationary Universe; there isn't quite a proof of 'uniqueness' of the inflationary explanation of them.