We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
It is tempting to think that the CMB, a remnant of the primordial fireball event, was conceived as smoking gun (or rather the smoke of a firing gun) evidence of the Hot Big Bang. Certainly, the work of some cosmologists was predicated on this assumption, but a number of others developed explanations based on variations on the Big Bang, and those who devised substantially different alternative explanations had various other motives. Moreover, the explanations involved both an historical (including the smoking gun) and a regular experimental mode of inquiry. This is, strictly speaking, even true of contemporary particle physics. Finally, although in principle, experimental and observational approaches to physical phenomena may be on a par epistemically, the physical limitations of studying the entire and unique universe puts cosmology in a far more challenging position than experimental fields of physics. The chapter argues this should prompt an especially cautious attitude to our understanding of the role of the alternatives.
This chapter generalizes Van Evera’s typology of process tracing tests to a fully probabilistic context, introducing measures of anticipated test strength that will also be used in Chapter 11.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.