Fake Banner
Can An Unstable Vacuum Drive The Expansion Of The Universe?

Is the expansion of the Universe a natural effect due to the internal dynamical properties of the...

Matter Can Potentially Accelerate The Expansion Of The Universe

How well established are current cosmological dogmas? What do we really know about the fundamental...

Henri Poincaré Predicted The Existence Of Gravitational Waves As Early As June 5, 1905

In recent releases announcing the forthcoming publication of new results on the detection of gravitational...

Superbradyonic Vacuum And Quantum Entanglement

I was at the ICNFP 2015 Conference, spending two nights to prepare updated versions of two posters...

User picture.
picture for Hank Campbellpicture for Vladimir Kalitvianski
Luis Gonzalez-MestresRSS Feed of this column.

Staff researcher at CNRS (France) in 1972-2013. Now leading the Cosmology Laboratory of the John Naisbitt University (Belgrade and Paris). For my work since 1995, see : Read More »

What can be really said about the physical origin and the ultimate nature of the properties of matter described by Quantum Mechanics?
After the joint analysis by Planck, BICEP2 and Keck Array has been made public (arXiv:1502.00612) invalidating the March 2014 announcement by BICEP2 (arXiv:1403.3985v1), a Forbes contributor writes « When Science Gets It Wrong: Gravitational Waves ». Obviously, scientific institutions should be more careful before launching or supporting certain kinds of propaganda.
My post of July 22 « BICEP2 Data, CMB B-modes, Inflation, Alternative Cosmologies... (II) » already discussed the situation after the publication (19 June 2014) of the Physical Review Letters 112, 241101 version of the BICEP2 article « Detection of B-Mode Polarization at Degree Angular Scales by BICEP2 ».
It is now generally admitted that the BICEP2 Collaboration has not yet produced an evidence for the existence of primordial B-modes in the measured polarization of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation. Contrary to the claim contained in the initial  (March 2014) version of their article arXiv:1403.3985v1 and to the strong media coverage that followed this announcement, the Physical Review Letters 112, 241101 version (June 2014) explicitly recognizes that the experimental and phenomenological situation is not so simple.
Two months after the controversial BICEP2 announcement, The Washington Post writes « Big Bang backlash: BICEP2 discovery of gravity waves questioned by cosmologists » and National Geographic emphasizes « Big Bang Discovery Comes Under Fire.
Do BICEP2 data provide a proof of cosmic inflation? As early as March 17, a Stanford report asserted « New evidence from space supports Stanford physicist's theory of how universe began ».