Plack results came out

So the results from Planck (a satellite from ESA) came out today. Here's a small summary with what they found with links to the papers inside.

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2013/03/21/what-the-entire-universe-is-made-of-thanks-to-planck/
Now, you can go and check the papers with the data they have and how the measurements were made (it's all available for free). There's a huge amount of data, not just from Planck but from every satellite up there for scientific purposes, and the data can be cross-checked with the others missions to confirm source coordinates and a lot of other stuff, and every now and then something new is discovered. Since there are a lot of missions from different space agencies and the alleged conspiracy is known to a selected few, how can they coordinate all this to make it look like they are actually taking data from satellites? I'm not talking just about Planck, I'm talking about Planck, WMAP, COBE, Swift, FERMI, AGILE, WISE, Suzaku, Chandra, XMM...(the list goes on and on).

I don't see a problem here. Astrophysicists have a new, more detailed CMBR map. Ho does this conflict with FET?

I don't think he did.

I don't think he did.

You don't think he did what?

Quote from: A Doubter on March 21, 2013, 12:41:23 PM

I don't think he did.

You don't think he did what?

He doesn't think he did.

Who didn't do it?

Who didn't do it?

He didn't.  At least he doesn't think so.

He did, then he didn't. But now he does.

Quote from: rooster on March 21, 2013, 12:42:30 PM

Quote from: A Doubter on March 21, 2013, 12:41:23 PM

I don't think he did.

You don't think he did what?

He doesn't think he did.

He thinks that he doesn't think what he thought he does. But I don't think so.

Of course they're going to claim to have found something interesting that would rock the foundations of science. That's how they make money.

Of course they're going to claim to have found something interesting that would rock the foundations of science. That's how they make money.

That's actually really true.

Of course they're going to claim to have found something interesting that would rock the foundations of science.

I don't think that's what they're claiming.  If anything, it seems that the new data pretty much just confirms and refines the previous observations and conclusions.  From what I saw in the article, pretty much all of the Planck data was within the error bars of the previous HST and KOBE observations.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on March 21, 2013, 04:52:20 PM

Of course they're going to claim to have found something interesting that would rock the foundations of science.

I don't think that's what they're claiming.  If anything, it seems that the new data pretty much just confirms and refines the previous observations and conclusions.  From what I saw in the article, pretty much all of the Planck data was within the error bars of the previous HST and KOBE observations.

I would suggest reading the article again. This data told us that the universe has "more matter and is expanding more slowly than previously thought" and that the universe is younger than previously thought.

I heard about this on talk radio this morning. It's little more than another NASA/ESA promotional piece making the rounds.

From the article:

So yes to inflation, no to gravitational waves from it.
Yes to three very light, standard-model neutrinos, no to any extras.
Yes to a slightly slower-expanding, older Universe, no to spatial curvature.
Yes to more dark matter and normal matter, yes also to a little less dark energy.
And as far as anything bizarre goes? The fluctuations are still very, very much in agreement with what inflation and all known physics predicts, but there’s still that very bizarre alignment of the CMB on the largest angular scales with the plane of our Solar System, known as the axis-of-evil.

I don't see anything in these conclusions that would cause significant changes in current theories.  I would think that relatively minor tweaks would be about it.

Agreed, the information only seemed to narrow error bars and tweak values in physical models. None of the findings strayed outrageously from predictions, and the blogger seems excited by that saying, "It's a great time to be alive as we're understanding the universe better and better."

No foundations are shaking it seems.