There’s plenty of evidence. Science has made a number of predictions about the universe based on an ‘inflation model’ that have been empirically verified by observation in five out of six important cases:
1. The Universe should be perfectly flat. (We observe this).
2. There should be an
almost scale-invariant spectrum of fluctuations. If quantum physics is real, then the Universe should have experienced quantum fluctuations even during inflation. These fluctuations should be stretched, exponentially, across the Universe. When inflation ends, these fluctuations should get turned into matter and radiation, giving rise to overdense and underdense regions that grow into stars and galaxies, or great cosmic voids. For perfect scale invariance, a parameter we call
n_s would equal 1 exactly;
n_s is observed to be 0.96.
3. There should be fluctuations on scales larger than light could have traveled since the Big Bang. This is another consequence of inflation, but there's no way to get a coherent set of fluctuations on large scales like this without something stretching them across cosmic distances. The fact that we see these fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background and in the large-scale structure of the Universe — and didn't know about them in the early 1980s — further validates inflation.
4. These quantum fluctuations, which translate into density fluctuations, should be adiabatic. Fluctuations could have come in different types: adiabatic, isocurvature, or a mixture of the two. Inflation predicted that these fluctuations should have been 100% adiabatic, which should leave unique signatures in both the cosmic microwave background and the Universe's large-scale structure. Observations bear out that yes, in fact, the fluctuations were adiabatic: of constant entropy everywhere.
5. There should be an upper limit, smaller than the Planck scale, to the temperature of the Universe in the distant past. This is also a signature that shows up in the cosmic microwave background: how high a temperature the Universe reached at its hottest. Remember, if there were no inflation, the Universe should have gone up to arbitrarily high temperatures at early times, approaching a singularity. But with inflation, there's a maximum temperature that must be at energies lower than the Planck scale (~1019 GeV). What we see, from our observations, is that the Universe achieved temperatures no higher than about 0.1% of that (~1016 GeV) at any point, further confirming inflation.
6. And finally, there should be a set of primordial gravitational waves, with a particular spectrum. Just as we had an almost perfectly scale-invariant spectrum of density fluctuations, inflation predicts a spectrum of tensor fluctuations in General Relativity, which translate into gravitational waves. The magnitude of these fluctuations are model-dependent on inflation, but the spectrum has a set of unique predictions. This sixth prediction is
the only one that has not been verified observationally.
right now there is no alternative that has displayed the same predictive power that the inflationary paradigm brings.
Source for all the above:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswith ... af79e18e50
From the PNAS website (with my bolding):
Many of the predictions of inflation fit our observations of the universe, but a key prediction remains unverified. Inflation should have roiled spacetime, generating gravitational waves that would have rippled through the cosmos ever since. Evidence of these waves would be concrete proof of inflation and provide clues to how it happened.
Gravitational waves from merging black holes and neutron stars have already been detected by the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO). But the waves from inflation would be much weaker and have much longer wavelengths, putting them outside LIGO’s range of sensitivity.
Instead, our window for seeing signatures of primordial gravitational waves is the cosmic microwave background (CMB): the universe’s first light emitted when the cosmos was about 380,000 years old. If there were ripples in spacetime caused by inflation, they would have affected the photons of the CMB, and the signature of that interaction would be discernible today.
BICEP2 was looking for this signature. A photon has a property called polarization, the orientation of its electric field, and the average polarization of CMB photons at each point on the sky can be shown as a line matching that orientation. If primordial gravitational waves polarized the photons, these lines today should have a characteristic swirl known as the B-mode polarization signal. This is what BICEP2 saw. Unfortunately, dust in our galaxy can create a similar pattern.
Do you think science is a ‘one-time deal’? The fact that the first experiment wasn’t successful doesn’t disprove the theory. And guess what? If BICEP3 successfully detects inflationary gravitational waves, that doesn’t mean the science stops and inflation is ‘true’. We just acknowledge that our confidence in inflation got that bit higher, make further predictions and test those - and so on.
Your approach appears to be the very opposite: as soon as you get one negative result, you stop looking and conclude that the science is wrong.
That’s just antithetical to proper science.
You then said:
The best answer to the creation of the universe is God.
Well, I can use exactly the same methodology as you did to state “There is still no evidence of God�.
