Abstract
It is argued that some of the recent claims for cosmology are grossly overblown. Cosmology rests on a very small database: it suffers from many fundamental difficulties as a science (if it is a science at all) whilst observations of distant phenomena are difficult to make and harder to interpret. It is suggested that cosmological inferences should be tentatively made and sceptically received.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Hu, W., Sugiyama, N., and Silk, J. (1997). Nature 386, 37.
Rees, M. (1995). Perspectives in Astrophysics and Cosmology (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
Condon, J. (1998). In Proc. IAU Symposium 179, B. J. McLean, ed. (Kluwer, Dordrecht), p. 19.
Disney, M. J. (1976) Nature 263, 573.
Impey, C., and Bothun, G. (1997). Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 35, 367.
Disney, M. J. (1998). In IAU Colloquium 171, J. I. Davies, et al., eds. (Kluwer, Dordrecht), p. 1.
Ellis, G. F. R., Perry, J. J., and Sievers, A. W. (1984). Astrophys. J. 89, 124.
Mateo, M. G. (1998). Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 16, 435.
Harwit, M. (1981). Cosmic Discovery (Harvester Press, UK).
Craig, I. J. D., and Brown, J. C. (1986). Inverse Problems in Astronomy (Adam Hilger, Bristol/Boston).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Disney, M.J. The Case Against Cosmology. General Relativity and Gravitation 32, 1125–1134 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1001981929727
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1001981929727