Reconstructing Edward Teller

First see this post: Hilary Putnam, then listen to this interesting little cul-de-sac in the history of modern physics which Freeman Dyson recounts.

Is this experimental observation really sufficient to 'demolish Teller'? Isn't it also necessary to 'examine the record' and check that in fact Teller's hypothesis, if true, would not have any effect on the observation, say, of the age of the rocks used, or of the Universe? But whether or not it demolishes Teller, does it follow that it demolishes Dirac's hypothesis? I don't think so. These questions require a detailed examination of all the experimental data and the theories that were used to derive that data from the information produced by measurement apparatus.

Here's Sabine Hossenfelder with some of the evidence that has been used to support the hypothesis of dark matter.

Here is Sabine again on the discrepancy between the observed and calculated values of the cosmological constant:

Modified gravity is one idea that has been proposed to explain the flat rotation speed of galaxies. The data are consistent with a dependence on the cosmological constant.

The distances of galaxies are calculated using a complex web of theory, dating back to the early 20th Century with the discovery of Cepheid variable stars by Henrietta Leavitt at Harvard:

Here is some of the theory that lies behind the crucial correlation of the Cepheid variable stars' average luminosity and period of fluctuation.

Here's Wendy Freedman on how the age of the Universe is determined experimentally:

The connection to the fine structure constant is through the spectral shift in the emission lines of molecules in a gas, by which we deduce velocities of distant objects such as the stars in the arms of spiral galaxies, or the galaxies in a cluster. The distance of the galaxy is related to the spectral shift by something called the Hubble constant.

Here is an interview with Subir Sarkar on difficulties with some of the anomalies in the observed anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background radiation, which is one of the crucial data points in calculating the size of the visible universe, and is therefore also crucial in calculating its large scale structure in terms of solutions to Einstein's field equations in his theory of General Relativity.

But there are many other conditions which could possibly affect the atomic spectra. For example, in gas nebulae we observe lines in the Oxygen spectrum which are not seen except in very low-density states of gas:

Here is another anomaly in the calculation of the age of the Universe. It seems to contain stars that are older than it is!

Supernovae are another type of standard candle used to determine the distances of stars. These are created when white dwarf stars collapse and then explode under the gravitational pressure induced by an increase in their mass, most often through collision with another white dwarf. But recently a relatively nearby binary white dwarf seems to have undergone an unusual evolution and ejected a g eat deal of matter in the form of gas, but without the massive supernova explosion. This star too, appears to be one of the oldest in the galaxy.

There are many other potential causes of anisotropy in determining the Hubble constant and the age of the Universe  Here are two of them. Plasmoids, which are violent ejections of ionised gas from stars and planets caused by topological changes in the magnetic field structure, ...

... and violent quasars formed in the centre of galaxies:

These and other thermal effects, such as tidal friction, are not accounted for by the mechanics of Lagrange and Hamilton, because they all involve a non-zero derivative of acceleration with respect to time, as does the variation of gravity with time. That, I think, is the idea behind Putnam's aside at 1 hour 1 minute 15 seconds. See Hilary Putnam.

On measuring the density, or the total mass of normal matter in the Universe: the earliest data came from an Apollo 11 experiment.

There is a dearth of intermediate mass black holes.

At 32 minutes 1 second in 2002 (eighteen years ago) Lee Smolin saying that a sensible theory of Quantum Cosmology needs to be described from the point of view of an observer inside the Universe. He doesn't seem to find this necessary for a theory of Classical Cosmology, for some reason! I suppose it is is so that God can have a place of His own in which to not play dice.

So you're going to need Poro-centric models of your vector-fields like this

Now, ...

Yeah yeah yeah. I wouldn't have quite so much to say if there weren't so many people around doing the wrong things for the wrong reasons!! See Lara Fabian with Lifestyle Advice.