Cosmology Quest 2 - Plasma Cosmology - Part 2 of 5

I guess you are not familiar then with the myriad published papers that highly question the results of the original WMAP analysis?

It's not even an issue of interpreting WAMP data.

You can't interpret any WMAP data without assuming a big bang. At least not currently.

The idea that the CMB is scattered starlight is really stretching it a lot. Scattered starlight looks completely different from a black body spectrum.

For the CMB to be anything else really new data or really new ideas need to be proposed first.

Then how could that system ever evolve into a system where conservation of energy and matter are true. How does one go from one to the other? Can two systems be integrated if their fundamental laws contradict each other?

There is no principle that states that fundamental laws of nature are 'inherited' in a way you describe.

If there is a system or process that creates universes then the only property that system must have is that it indeed has laws that result in it being able to create universes.

It would be a true contradiction if creating a universe would violate conservation while that system wouldn't allow such a violation. Then the universe-creating process wouldn't be allowed to create them.

No.

We don't know if those laws apply nor if they are broken.

If the test of a good theory is its predictive power then BBT performed badly on this score. Its predictions for the temperature of the CMB were wrong - sometimes wildly. Predictions from many non-expanding universe theories on the other hand were accurate to within a few tenths of a degree Kelvin - far closer to the measured value than any BBT prediction.

It's the only theory that can account for the CMB. It even predicted it.

So everything else you say is meaningless.

Prometheus: There is no need at all to resort to a BBT to explain the CMBR. In 1926 Sir Arthur Eddington calculated the minimum temperature any body in space would cool to, given that it is immersed in the radiation of distant starlight. His result? ... 3°K. The exact measured value of the CMBR.

Doesn't matter. What Eddington did has nothing to do with the CMB.

And he calculated 3.18 while CMR is 2.75. That's a difference of 15%.

What Eddington did was add up all the energy earth receives from stars, then spread it out in an equilibrium and then get the average temperature.

What Eddington did isn't even scattered starlight, which requires dust particles to scatter it uniformly.

CMB is microwave. It's everywhere. It's uniform. It's a 'black body'.

Don't act like if you can ignore these facts.