Proposal for a Degree of Scientificity in Cosmology

Abstract

In spite of successful tests, the standard cosmological model, the ΛCDM model, possesses the most problematic concept: the initial singularity, also known as the big bang. In this paper-by adopting the Kantian difference between to think of an object and to cognize an object-it is proposed a degree of scientificity using fuzzy sets. Thus, the notion of initial singularity will not be conceived of as a scientific issue because it does not belong to the fuzzy set of what is known. Indeed, the problematic concept of singularity is some sort of what Kant called the noumenon, but science, on the other hand, is constructed in the phenomenon. By applying the fuzzy degree of scientificity in cosmological models, one concludes that cosmologies with a contraction phase before the current expansion phase are potentially more scientific than the standard model. At the end of this article, it is shown that Kant's first antinomy of pure reason indicates a limit to our cosmological models.

New evidence and analysis of cosmological-scale asymmetry in galaxy spin directions

“…As the evidence of cosmological-scale anisotropy are accumulating, theories that provide alternatives or expansions to the standard cosmology model are being proposed (Arun et al, 2017;Nadathur et al, 2012;Narlikar et al, 2007;Perivolaropoulos, 2014;Bull et al, 2016;López-Corredoira, 2017;Scott, 2018;Tatum et al, 2018;Neves, 2020;Nojiri et al, 2019;López-Corredoira, 2017;Freedman, 2017;Fiscaletti, 2018;Tatum et al, 2018;Guo et al, 2019;Li, 2021). Such cosmological-scale alignment between galaxies can also be related to alternative gravitational theories that shift from the Newtonian model (Bekenstein and Milgrom, 1984;Milgrom, 2009;Deser and Tekin, 2007;Alkac ¸and Tekin, 2018;Sivaram et al, 2020Sivaram et al, , 2021b, where gravity span is far greater than assumed by the existing models of gravity (Amendola et al, 2020;Falcon, 2021).…”

Special theory of regularity

“…But here we are talking about laws of nature, that is to say, the theory of regularity is a philosophical perspective, however laws of nature are subject of science. And there is no science beyond the observable universe, that is, if there is a degree of scientificity as defined in Neves (2020), no data will mean zero degree of scientificity for "things" outside the observable universe. As time passes the observable universe grows, because of the universe expansion, and as light reaches us new objects and structures get inside the field of view of our most advanced telescopes.…”

“…As laws of nature are descriptions of phenomena, according to the theory of regularity, thus it is reasonable to look for descriptions just inside the observable universe, which is the set of all phenomena. This part of discussion is based on the degree of scientificity proposed recently in Neves (2020). According to that degree, in which fuzzy sets were adopted in order to quantify a notion of scientificity, without data or phenomena the degree of scientificity of any statement is zero.…”

Bumblebee field as a source of cosmological anisotropies

“…As we said, the cosmological principle is a cornerstone in today's cosmology. We can define it by saying the cosmological principle is the belief according to which any observer or freely falling observer (like us), no matter where he/she is, describes the same universe, the same physics laws or, philosophically speaking, the same phenomena [1,2]. That is to say, freely falling observers would describe the same world, our universe would be homogeneous and isotropic for those observers.…”