More cool-sounding but probably crap science needs debunking

[East Coast Hustle]

http://www.space.com/21335-black-holes-time-universe-creation.html

Neat idea, but the guy's answers to the interview questions don't pass my sniff test, and I'm just a layman.

but then, I AM a layman. So maybe what sounds kinda bunk to me is actually legit.

this part especially bugs me:

SPACE.com: How does your theory of the dynamical evolution of the universe work?

Smolin: The idea is that the universe evolved in a way which is very analogous to natural selection in a population, say, of bacteria. To do this the universe needs to reproduce itself, and I took over an older idea by John Wheeler and Bryce DeWitt, who were pioneers of quantum gravity. Their idea was that black holes become the seeds of the birth of new universes. [5 Reasons We May Live in a Multiverse]

John Wheeler had already speculated that when this happens, the laws of nature are reborn again, in the new baby universe; he called it reprocessing the universe. What I had to add to this to make it work like a model of natural selection, was that the changes passed form parent to child universe are very slight so there can be an accumulation of fitness. This hypothesis leads to the conclusion that assuming our universe is a typical member of this population of universes as it develops after many, many generations, that the universe is going to be finely tuned to produce many black holes. That leads to the next hypotheses that if you change the laws, and the numbers that specify the laws, then typically you're going to make a universe that makes less black holes, and that's something that leads to predictions that can be tested.

That's the theory that I call cosmological natural selection.

SPACE.com: How would these universes pass on their traits to daughter universes?

Smolin: At the level in which I propose this theory I didn't answer that question, just like Darwin had no idea how inherited traits were inherited, because he didn't know anything about the molecular basis of genetics, which was only discovered with DNA. So I was able to make those predictions without specifying the microscopic basis of inheritance in cosmology.

but the stuff he talks about at the start, about time being "real" as opposed to just a "persistent illusion" is pretty interesting. Well, SOUNDS interesting, anyway.

[Doktor Howl]

Lee Smolin is a Goddamn genius, and while he may be wrong about something, he does not bullshit.  I have nothing but respect for that man.

[East Coast Hustle]

So this is serious shit? I mean, if it is it's pretty goddamned far-the-fuck-out. In a really cool way.

[East Coast Hustle]

Just realized Twid posted the same thing earlier.

Then I realized that I read the article BECAUSE I clicked on the link in twid's thread.

Then I realized I should maybe have eaten HALF of one of those special chocolates that Southend Vic left in my fridge.

[Doktor Howl]

So this is serious shit? I mean, if it is it's pretty goddamned far-the-fuck-out. In a really cool way.

If Lee Smolin is involved, it's at least worth looking into.  He's not Stephen Hawking, but he IS a solid scientist with decades of rock-solid work under his belt.  He also encouraged me to ask questions (on usenet) when all the fuckers with itchy sheepskins were shouting me down because I was just an undergrad.

Nothing but respect for that man.  Doesn't mean he's right, but he is never a sensationalist.

[Doktor Howl]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Smolin

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Just realized Twid posted the same thing earlier.

Then I realized that I read the article BECAUSE I clicked on the link in twid's thread.

Then I realized I should maybe have eaten HALF of one of those special chocolates that Southend Vic left in my fridge.

I skimmed the article, it looked pretty awesome but all my brain cells are currently in a state of rebellion so...

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Just realized Twid posted the same thing earlier.

Then I realized that I read the article BECAUSE I clicked on the link in twid's thread.

Then I realized I should maybe have eaten HALF of one of those special chocolates that Southend Vic left in my fridge.

It's ok dude, lol, I'm still mulling over it. Mainly because... well some of the stuff is old hat but the other bit is, wuthuh?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

One of the things that got me in the article that does somewhat pique my sniff test is that his ideas (which are beyond me, because time gets all mungly) make predictions, some of which I had heard about in my just now astronomy class. For example, the neutron star mass limit. Ok. Cool. I know about that. Past that limit, black hole. But tell me more about that prediction. That's where the article fails. Tantalizing but no detail.

Bear in mind that I read this shit when I'm at work. I can safely look at science articles, but choose not to post on PD, except through my phone. So, yeah, I typed that URL out on T9 because my phone sucks, while snarfing down lunch. Because of all of the science specifically astronomy articles that I browse at work, this one struck me as important.