Dmitri wrote:Is there another (testable/falsifiable) way for humans to understand it?

What I'm saying is that there will be one in the future.

How will you know it's better without math? There's little doubt there'll be more methods, just none without math --to confirm any theory.

Dmitri, re: math and physics, the most important book in physics before the 20th century was written by a bloke named Newton. It described the laws of gravity, etc., developed "calculus," etc. Well, people call that book "the Principia," but the title is "The mathematical principles of natural philosophy." Newton used math because he wanted to avoid the bullshit.

Btw, Einstein was good at math, but depended on Emmy Noether to do the proofs of his theories. None of his theories has been disproven, even though many -like time dilation- are still counter-intuitive. It's only math that proves it. If the math comes out wrong for any Einstein theory, it is automatically disproven.

https://galileo.ou.edu/sites/default/fi ... 000-tp.jpgIn cosmology, you are free to come up with your own explanation of the universe. And, you can deny anyone's explanation. If you can't prove/disprove it with math, it's ... nice to have an opinion.