Ah, I think I understand now. I looked at your other post. You believe you have (or someone has) proven that earth is the center of the universe. One of my degrees is in physics with an emphasis in cosmology (the study of the evolution and formation of the universe) so I feel I have enough knowledge to speak on this topic.
There being an organization to the universe is interesting, even exciting, but it does NOT point to the Earth as the center of the universe. Rather, the more likely conclusion (by Occam's razor) is that there is a preferential spin to the universe that causes our solar system to be oriented along that plane. Indeed this preferential spin shows itself in other ways across all the known universe, such as Kaon decay, and in the existence of time itself (only flows one way outside of large bending of space).
There are many solar systems (infinite amount perhaps) that would have the same orientation as ours just by chance. Given this preferred universal orientation the more likely scenario is that solar systems PREFER to align along the same plane. If true, this would make our solar system the norm, rather than the exception.
Given that our models of universe evolution are just that, models, and that those models are drastically changing constantly (and never agreed upon), there is no way that this evidence is sufficient to prove that Earth is the center of the universe, or come to the conclusion that humans are something special cosmically speaking. In fact, I find that to be the ultimate arrogance to even attempt to prove such a thing without substantially more evidence than a pulling out the less likely reason for an observation than the more likely reason (Occam's razor).
"The fact that this has been known for years but even you haven't heard about it - having an academic background in cosmology should be proof enough for you that it's been covered up, a quick google of 'axis of evil' turning up nothing is further confirmation. The cabal is hiding this... wonder why?"
Who said I haven't heard of it? I learned about it a long time ago. This is not being hidden by the Cabal in academia. It is not talked about as "proof" of anything because there is simply not enough information to come to a meaningful conclusion. As I said, our models of cosmology are changing all the time.
"It proves that the isotropic theories of a random beginning are false, yes."
Isotropic theories of the origin of the universe have not been seriously entertained in physics for almost 100 years.
"The most likely conclusion (by Occam's razor) is that you want there to be some made-up 'preferential spin to the universe' - I hate to be mean but that's a ridiculous idea. Solar systems are fairly Randomly orientated throughout the universe."
No, there obviously IS a preferential spin to the universe. This has been known for several decades, before the CMB thing. We do not know why. It is a great mystery. Our solar system apparently (but not proven sufficiently) having an alignment with the universe as a whole while interesting, is not proof of anything. Again, the MOST LIKELY explanation is that the SAME FORCE that aligned the universe aligned our solar system with it. The only way to know if that is MEANINGFUL statistically speaking is to measure all the other solar systems and see if our alignment is special. To the best of my knowledge that is currently an impossible experiment to conduct (technologically speaking).
Of interest, I think the Milky Way is aligned almost exactly perpendicular to the same plane, which is even more evidence that it is some force that is causing a preferential alignment.
"Big Bang cosmology is a gold standard in science, and CMB with it."
I'm sorry man, nothing could be further from the truth, or at least, nothing could be more misleading from the truth. The Big Bang model of universal origin is actually MANY models starting from the same axiom (point like spread of spacetime). The debate of cosmological expansion, and which Big Bang model we should use (IF ANY) is huge and heated. It has been debated for 100 years, and likely will be debated for many more.
"Sorry for being tough on you"
Not a problem! Debate is healthy. Different ideas help us mere humans get closer to the truth of things. This is the way.
Ah, I think I understand now. I looked at your other post. You believe you have (or someone has) proven that earth is the center of the universe. One of my degrees is in physics with an emphasis in cosmology (the study of the evolution and formation of the universe) so I feel I have enough knowledge to speak on this topic.
There being an organization to the universe is interesting, even exciting, but it does NOT point to the Earth as the center of the universe. Rather, the more likely conclusion (by Occam's razor) is that there is a preferential spin to the universe that causes our solar system to be oriented along that plane. Indeed this preferential spin shows itself in other ways across all the known universe, such as Kaon decay, and in the existence of time itself (only flows one way outside of large bending of space).
There are many solar systems (infinite amount perhaps) that would have the same orientation as ours just by chance. Given this preferred universal orientation the more likely scenario is that solar systems PREFER to align along the same plane. If true, this would make our solar system the norm, rather than the exception.
Given that our models of universe evolution are just that, models, and that those models are drastically changing constantly (and never agreed upon), there is no way that this evidence is sufficient to prove that Earth is the center of the universe, or come to the conclusion that humans are something special cosmically speaking. In fact, I find that to be the ultimate arrogance to even attempt to prove such a thing without substantially more evidence than a pulling out the less likely reason for an observation than the more likely reason (Occam's razor).
"The fact that this has been known for years but even you haven't heard about it - having an academic background in cosmology should be proof enough for you that it's been covered up, a quick google of 'axis of evil' turning up nothing is further confirmation. The cabal is hiding this... wonder why?"
Who said I haven't heard of it? I learned about it a long time ago. This is not being hidden by the Cabal in academia. It is not talked about as "proof" of anything because there is simply not enough information to come to a meaningful conclusion. As I said, our models of cosmology are changing all the time.
"It proves that the isotropic theories of a random beginning are false, yes."
Isotropic theories of the origin of the universe have not been seriously entertained in physics for almost 100 years.
"The most likely conclusion (by Occam's razor) is that you want there to be some made-up 'preferential spin to the universe' - I hate to be mean but that's a ridiculous idea. Solar systems are fairly Randomly orientated throughout the universe."
No, there obviously IS a preferential spin to the universe. This has been known for several decades, before the CMB thing. We do not know why. It is a great mystery. Our solar system apparently (but not proven sufficiently) having an alignment with the universe as a whole while interesting, is not proof of anything. Again, the MOST LIKELY explanation is that the SAME FORCE that aligned the universe aligned our solar system with it. The only way to know if that is MEANINGFUL statistically speaking is to measure all the other solar systems and see if our alignment is special. To the best of my knowledge that is currently an impossible experiment to conduct (technologically speaking).
Of interest, I think the Milky Way is aligned almost exactly perpendicular to the same plane, which is even more evidence that it is some force that is causing a preferential alignment.
"Big Bang cosmology is a gold standard in science, and CMB with it."
I'm sorry man, nothing could be further from the truth, or at least, nothing could be more misleading from the truth. The Big Bang model of universal origin is actually MANY models starting from the same axiom (point like spread of spacetime). The debate of cosmological expansion, and which Big Bang model we should use (IF ANY) is huge and heated. It has been debated for 100 years, and likely will be debated for many more.
"Sorry for being tough on you"
Not a problem! Debate is healthy. Different ideas help us mere humans get closer to the truth of things. This is the way.